"Alexandra's Project" played on TV in my country the other day I watched it since I had heard and read several praising things about it. Several of the reviews I encountered used the terms "sick" and "disturbing", and those type of films always grab my attention as a fan of horror and obscure cult cinema. Now, I wouldn't really describe the events of "Alexandra's Project" as sick or disturbing. It's merely a bleak and very unpleasant viewing experience. I'm not too familiar with the work of the Dutch born writer/director Rolf De Heer (apparently he emigrated to Australia at young age), but he doesn't exactly come across as the most cheerful and sociable person based on this film. In fact, the film tremendously reminded me of the earlier work of Michael Haneke; more particularly "Benny's Video" and "Funny Games". The stories of all these films are extremely basic and substantially void, but the slow and brooding atmosphere literally makes you feel uncomfortable. Most of the running time, there's practically nothing going on, but you just know drama and emotional agony will ensue at a certain point. Steve is having a fabulous birthday so far. He made another promotion at work and he can't wait to return home, because he suspect that his wife and loving children prepared a surprise party for him. His wife Alexandra occasionally suffers from depressions and insomnia, but generally speaking his marriage is successful and stable. Or so he thinks
The only surprises that await him are an empty dark house and a videotape message from his wife Alexandra. What begins as an exciting private striptease quickly escalates into a discomforting monologue full of hatred, condemnation, humiliation and domestic tragedy. I can't really say I found "Alexandra's Project" to be a good film. The narrative is compelling and the film definitely benefices from the marvelous performances of Gary Sweet and Helen Buday, but the material is too implausible and far-fetched. To label "Alexandra's Project" as a feminist statement or even a thought-provoking humane drama would be far too much honor.
Add a Review
-
Coventry4 July 2010
-
This movie is a fair attempt to be thought-provoking, but eventually it falls a bit flat because it lacks some true creativity. The idea of having a man's life fall apart right before his eyes through a video is good, but are the revelations in said video really that shocking? I thought they were all pretty predictable, you could just make a list and tick of the things she was going to do. She's cheating on him, well duh. The breast cancer scene was pretty effective though, I'll give it that. In between the video fragments the man walks around the house, which is about as riveting as it sounds. I suppose this is done to instigate the inevitable "play the goddamn video"-feeling you might have throughout. The plot attempts to be as conclusive as it can possibly be, but surely things can't be that simple. The massive holes in Alexandra's plan make it difficult to really believe Steve's sadness. The performances manage to save something though. Especially Helen Buday, who's had a rich career of this and "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome", gives a surprisingly good performance and stays compelling throughout. This can't really save the movie though.
-
chezlacome9 May 2003An ambitious film, which continues in the tradition of De Heer's fearless tackling of issues which began with the confronting "Bad Boy Bubby". Despite "Alexandra's Project's" interesting premise, the film fails to sustain emotional impact on the viewer, thanks to the scant nature of the plot. In what boils down to be one woman's tirade against her partner's sexual aggression, this film is so heavily weighted towards her own perspective, the viewer is never emotionally complicit, because the film fails to deliver a full and realistic portrait of the marriage. We briefly witness the family's interaction, but after that, we are left to consume Alexandra's bitterness - and believe it.
Gary Sweet delivers a raw and emotional performance, and Helen Buday as Alexandra is polished and convincing. Her character, however, is two dimensional, and, by the end, the viewer is left in a state of not caring about her actions. Add to this Alexandra's unbelievable and unjustified final torment, and you are left with a film which had a fantastic concept at its core, but sustains only a mildly successful delivery.
For a good De Heer film, get "The Tracker", which is more subtle, and a more accomplished piece overall. -
uds39 May 2003Whats wrong with this film isn't that de Heer has not lived up to the promise (or is that premise) that BAD BOY BUBBY offered. Its not Gary Sweet's lack of persuasive acting talents, its not even a directoral fault especially...its just that it doesn't damn well matter or even vaguely qualify as an "entertaining" near 2 hours!
Like, what's the point here? who cares about Alexandra's sexual dissatisfaction?...I can go to any suburb in Sydney and have this re-enacted. My question IS..with the wealth of talent this man HAS, why is he f------ around with a non-event of a storyline such as this?
It intrigues me....something the film had no hope of achieving! -
ikanboy11 December 2008An interesting attempt to show the depth of hatred engendered by a husband's oblivious abuse of his wife. A man comes home to what he expects to be a "surprise" birthday party only to find his family gone, his house trashed and all the security mechanisms turned against him, effectively making him a prisoner. He puts on a Video that is wrapped as a present and sits down to watch his wife cheerily greeting him with what starts off as a birthday greeting but turns into an ever more evolving and prolonged dismemberment of him as a callous misogynist.
The movie stays interesting for about an hour, but slowly the wife's bile spills over and righteous anger turns into venomous, sadistic rage, and becomes a Misandrous screed. She is not content to eviscerate his ego but to deprive him for ever of his children, and at this point it seems that the punishment no longer fits the crime, and the "victim" has become a soulless, sadistic, avenger. Is it intended for us to see her as much a victimizer as he is? From the final moments of the film it seems clear that the Director intends to simply present us with punishment not epiphany.
***************SPOILER******************************** I liked how the Video goes from "tape" to "live." -
vertigo_147 March 2006This is a very interesting Australian drama, one that hits hard (along with the short film about the fighting brothers contained on the American DVD version) because of the way the audience reacts to the characters on screen. With whom will they sympathize? Judging by the messageboards, some blame Alexandra's poor husband, Steve. It is on his birthday when she chooses to dispense with carefully planned and merciless revenge that even a promotion at the office couldn't help him ignore. At night, after work, he comes home to an empty, dark house and finds little more than a videocassette addressed to him from what looks to be his kids. This is the bulk of the film, him watching Alexandra's progressively more disgusting testimony of how miserable her life has been essentially since she married Steve. The movie becomes so emotionally charged as it moves along and Alexandra starts to explain her well-crafted web of deceit in her attempt to crush Steve's spirits as much as possible.
I would agree with one viewer that the there are parts of the film which are not so well developed and particularly, the introduction of the family and especially, Alexandra and Steve, at the start of the film. But nonetheless, the shock of the film can rock audiences pretty hard. And, at least as evident from some of the comments on the boards for this movie, leave people feeling bitterly angry about either gender. The power that this film has to separate its audiences to that extent is amazing because the film seems to, on the one hand, waver between its sympathies of its lead characters, essentially leaving the audiences to their own vices in deciding which character is to blame and which is really deserving of sympathies. In the end, is it better to view Alexandra in such a vicious light because of the she admits to doing when alone in the house or when she explains what she has in store for the man who consistently ignored her? Or are we supposed to be more sympathetic to Steve who, by some rationales of audience members, was acting by hormonal response and only needed a good talking to in order to get Alexandra's point about him using her strictly for sex. What results on the videotape as it moves along as Steve is watching in almost paralyzed helplessness by a particular point is certain, Alexandra is not the character we made our assumptions about at the beginning of the film. -
What a cruel demented movie this is, from the same distributors as "Wolves in the Snow", one of my favorite thrillers this year without a doubt. This Australian movie is much different, as it is about a man, Steve, celebrating his birthday. His morning starts with happy birthday stuff from his lovely family and his pretty wife Alexandra. But before leaving for work, his Wife tells him her main birthday present for him will be when he returns from work. He goes to work thinking everything is rosy, has a great day, they have a surprise party for him, and then he gets called in and receives a promotion. WOW, Steve is definitely having a great birthday, and he still has his lovely Wife's surprise gift to look forward to. When he arrives home, everything is dark, all the light bulbs have been removed, nobody is in sight, not his children, not his Wife, nobody. Furniture has been turned upside down, and Steve is still thinking Alexandra is playing a cute little joke on him and searches around his home, but finds nothing UNTIL!!!! In one room, he finds a package from his wife with a videotape inside, with a label that says "play me". His easy chair is all ready for him, with a VCR and television waiting. When he starts playing the tape, his Wife gives him a happy birthday message, and then goes into a slow strip tease for him, and Steve is smiles from ear to ear. BUT, things go rapidly downhill from there, and before long, Steve is starting to wish this whole thing is a bad nightmare. Steve gets subjected to remorse, deception and revenge, and then even a bigger shock, as the tape stops, but the video feed continues revealing that the next portion is indeed live, and he is locked in his house. This is a one of a kind psycho-sexual thriller, and I have never seen a movie like this before, and it had me mesmerized to say the least. It goes all the way from being highly erotic, to down right as mean spirited as hell. The studio that is putting these movies out, is the first to release award winning movies at theaters and on DVD at the same time. And based on the only two I have seen so far, the movies are remarkable. The subscription service is located at www.filmmovement.com , and definitely deserves attention.
-
-62810 June 2003This is a surprisingly good movie about an unpleasant - even nasty - subject. Given that the movie is essentially character driven and takes place mostly within the confines of one room, in lesser hands it could have had the potential to be rather slow. Not so! Because of the rising tension and the inability to read exactly where the story is headed, the movie maintains interest throughout, with very few flat spots. Not the movie for a light family day out. Rather, this is one for fans of the black psychological thriller. And the nudity? It is there for the plot and not for the erotica.
-
real_hiflyer22 January 2008First I have to say that the acting was nothing short of superb. But Steve takes it another notch higher when you realize he spends almost the whole movie reacting. His facial expressions while mostly spending the whole movie as a captive audience of one, portray as much, if not more, than had he been given the non stop dialog his wife was privy too. He is amazing and whether liking the movie or hating it this cannot be taken away.
As for Alexandra's revenge, I think it would have taken a lot more than a Prozac to cure. She unleashes years of repressed anger and lashes out with enough venom to poison Steve, the kids, and herself many times over. Of course neither party was faultless, but while Steve's faults reflect a sadly typical man's point of view; they're not vindictive. Nipped in the bud early on and some counseling and/or trying to educate Steve in what he's doing wrong is reasonable. But here she stores up all that anger, she prostitutes herself and blames the shame for that completely on her husband as well.
When a marriage self destructs who hasn't witnessed the worst in people brought to the forefront. But Alexandra is sick, a mental equivalent as dangerous as her faked cancer. The children are pawns in her revenge.
As for the last scene when he pathetically attempts masturbation to a movie scene that cuts him to the core? It speaks to his total pathetic devastation. Here is a man in the depths of depression, alternately engaging and failing in an act which will most likely drive his esteem lower, and at other times watching the children - family - he's been robbed of. Repeated replay of his children wishing him happy birthday pile-driving him further into utter repair.
His faults were those of omission. Hers were evil through and through. How much hate would you have to harbour to do that to a person? (Remember when he was trying to call her about the security bills for the re-keyed deadbolts etc. Salt in the wound when she apparently was providing payment to her neighbor for services rendered.)
And lastly, if at some point his neighbor had been sliced diced and served up in some sushi bar, I wouldn't have minded a bit! -
Wow! This one takes a page out of Takashi Miike's "Audition" and throws a little Lorena Bobbitt into the mix, Australian style. The film is undeniably well-made. The acting is superb by both leads, and the direction is taut and methodical with a distinct visual style. The contemporary, bitter female "man-hater" is redefined here. We get a very close look at an extremely disturbed woman, and extremely disturbed women can cause a lot of problems, even in reality! I admire the film for its inventiveness and risk-taking attitude. I always appreciate that in a film, whether I end up enjoying it or not. Guys, it might not be a good idea to watch this one with the ladies, but if you're a true cineaste like myself, I'd give it a try.
-
currie-652-93281418 April 2010It certainly is a thought provoking film, but it seems so mean spirited, and the characters so unlikeable, that it's hard to like it, even though it's undeniably interesting. Of course Steve, the husband, is a pretty clueless and clumsy character, but considering that Alexandra makes it pretty plain that she's been disgusted with their sex life and probably everything else since the honeymoon, her inability or unwillingness to articulate this, or to bring any of her real problems up until the event of the movie makes her long and carefully planned response viciously passive-aggressive, to the point of true craziness. To say that he drove her crazy, even if true in a way, doesn't make her any less crazy. To say, more or less, "I've gone through the last 14 years saying yes but meaning no, and because you didn't guess, now I'm going to ruin your life" is plum crazy even if the guy is a jerk.
I still give it a few points for good acting, a reasonable bit of tension, and for making me think a bit after it's over, even if only to reflect on why it bothers me. -
AppleBlossom27 November 2004A friend referred me to this Aussie film (strange I never heard of it before seeing I'm in Australia, don't think there was much publicity about it) not too long ago and I finally rented it on DVD. I was somewhat intrigued by reading the plot and viewing the trailer beforehand, but in no way did this prepare me for what I was going to see. This film isn't for the viewer who wants to see some light entertainment, it's a hard hitting and a very disturbing film. The main focus point to this film I feel is the relationship breakdown of two married people, especially the hidden anguish of Alexandra towards her husband. This entire film is being narrated solely by her and I feel this is a one-sided story. You only can see the torture on the husband's face and a few muttered words here and there from him, while watching a pre-recorded birthday tape.
A few reviewers have stated Alexandra is insane, but is she really ..a pretty elaborate plan for someone who's gone mad? She wanted her husband to suffer like she has suffered while married to him (does she really know the meaning of the word, how has she suffered???) .the point that gets me though, why such a ruthless and cruel way of showing her husband how much she despises him. You would expect something of this nature to manifest itself from feelings of pure hatred and revenge, not simply on the basis of 'feeling sad' or 'very sad' as she put it. She's blaming her husband for all his indiscretions about their sex life and not thinking about what she wanted or how she felt .but what about her, nothing said there??? I think there was more to the plot that the director couldn't show the viewer. A little more background information on both main characters would have been a bonus. I know it wasn't feasible to be more detailed otherwise it would have dragged on forever.
Another strange oddity was why she had to involve herself in prostitution to earn money??? This point actually disintegrates any credibility to feel any sympathy towards Alexandra at all ..how many of us would do that I wonder??? Using sex to acquire money, shaming and humiliating her husband .she's being such a hypocrite. The part where she was staring at herself in the mirror in the beginning of the film, saying ..'nothing to be sorry for', "never be sorry" .and then spitting on her reflection was a key moment. It showed the contempt within herself and her little performance to me was a reversed projection on how much she loathed herself. All I saw was a pitiful image of a woman, trying to avoid taking responsibility for her own obvious situation .indeed a person with little self-worth.
Trying to analyze every shred of character trait and film footage would need an expert ..nevertheless this film did have something to say whether people liked it or not. It's not a film you would watch over and over again (in my opinion), it's one where the viewer has to appreciate and try to comprehend the direction De Heer was implementing throughout the film. I must say to show my support . full credit to the director and the actor's efforts .well done!!! 8/10. (even though I don't condone Alexandra's actions). -
gradyharp9 December 2012Rolf de Heer both wrote and directed this strangely fascinating and equally disturbing 2003 film for a cast of two. It takes chances (both male and female full frontal nudity among them), relates a tale that will likely make the viewer cringe and have some bad dreams, depends solely (well, practically solely) on two actors to pull this off, and in the end brings to the table a story of a terminally dysfunctional marriage.
Steve (Gary Sweet) and Alexandra (Helen Buday) live a middle class existence with their two children in Australia. After a strangely cold beginning - today is Steve's birthday and his two children and Alexandra have plans for an evening's celebration. Steve seems to start the day in an amorous mood but Alexandra is surprisingly unresponsive: Steve's attention is disturbed by the fat, ugly security systems installer neighbor (Bogdan Koca) who is constantly watering his garden. Steve is off, and at work his colleagues present him with a surprise birthday party AND an advancement in his company. When Steve returns home, his house is deserted and darkened with almost all the light bulbs missing, all easy access outside cut off and a videotape waiting for him, a videotape labeled 'play me'. Plugging the tape in Steve is instructed to get a beer and sit and watch what is about to unfold. On the tape Alexandra lays out her complaints about their marriage - Alexandra's feeling of abandonment, lack of sexual fulfillment, lack of intimacy, no control over the direction of her life. One of her biggest complaints is that Steve 'married her body' and made love at her, not with her. In an attempt to regain control of her body and her life Alexandra does some sexually perverse things on the tape to humiliate both Steve and the 'body' he married. She explains her grievances with him, her reasons for disappearing with the children and her revenge for how he treated her in a way he would never forget. The proceedings on the tape become real-time and the result of how Steve and Alexandra cope forms the surprise ending to this little sour film.
Both Sweet and Buday give convincing performances and the progress of the tape watching keeps the viewer's attention. Much of the back story for the film is left to the viewer's imagination but as far as the experience the script offers, it is a tough and strongly acted experience.
Grady Harp -
"Alexandra's Project" begins masterfully, setting a dark and heavy mood long before the plot reveals itself. When the plot does reveal itself, it is done craftily, piece by piece, as if you were a bird being led into a trap one crumb at a time. This is exactly how the main character is trapped also.
For the first hour I loved this film and couldn't believe I had never heard of such an intelligent thriller before. This abruptly turned when the complex story quickly unravelled to a cheap rip off of every bad Hollywood cat-and-mouse flick ever made.
How did this happen? Because the lead character who, for the first half of the movie, was shown to be smart, resourceful and level-headed, turns into a whiskey swilling moron, gets drunk and spends the the last half of the movie soaking in self-pity while not taking the obvious actions to fix the situation.
That's what I mean in my title. You will be so aggravated at how dense the main character becomes that you will likely hurl your popcorn at the screen in disgust. Like in those cheap slasher flicks when the murderer is hiding in the house, and somehow the idiot victim decides it's a good idea to go into that dark room anyway. Cheap thrills are fun in cheap movies, but I was led to expect a bit more from this award-winning film.
The message of the film itself, offensive as it may be to some, wasn't what bothered me. The movie ridicules feminism by portraying the villain as a rabid, man-hating, feminist psycho. But my gripe isn't about that. My gripe is the fact that the villain's plan turned out to be totally half-baked, and only a total dolt would play into it. A simple call to the cops, and all the bad guys could've been traced, rounded up and punished. But no, instead let's get plastered on whiskey and feel sorry for ourselves until the end of time. As others have commented, the characters and their actions defy sensibility.
I actually recommend that you watch this film so you'll see how a great idea can come apart with shoddy writing. This movie will probably leave you feeling sickened, not by the plot or the director's message but simply by the director's ability to ruin an otherwise good idea. Four stars out of 10, only because it did keep me interested for an hour. -
mppullar13 May 2003I have to say, I'm a bit confused by the responses of so many people to "Alexandra's Project". Enough Australians have gone to see it for it to be one of the only art-house films in my living memory to make it into the Top 10 at the Box Office, but no-one really seems to like it, with the exception of a few critics. In fact, when I came out of the cinema after seeing it, I heard one woman say, "That was a really bad movie." And this intrigues me - in what way is this a "really bad movie"? I can understand that very few people will enjoy it. I personally cannot say that I did. But as to its technique, construction, delivery etc., how can you fault it? The only explanation that occurs to me is that audiences are so alienated by the material that they can't notice a) Gary Sweet and Helen Buday's amazing performances, b) tight direction, c) brilliant sound and film editing and d) eerily effective cinematography. Perhaps Australian audiences don't like to be provoked in this kind of way, and I can see how that could easily be the case. "Alexandra's Project" is a feel-bad movie to end all feel-bad movies. It makes "Leaving Las Vegas" look like "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood". But does that make it a "really bad" movie? Some have actually criticised the material for being mundane - I REALLY don't understand that. Rolf de Heer has come up with a phenomenally complex and thought-provoking story, which, with the benefit of an amazing cast and very skilled technical crew who don't seem at all affected by what was a ridiculously low-budget, has been made into one of the (technically) best Australian films in years. If you don't want your films to be challenging, then don't bother - you'll hate it. But if you DO go and see it, try to accept it for what it is, which is an unpleasant but brilliant film that will give you food for thought for the next year.
That being said, I don't think I could ever watch it again, and probably couldn't bear to watch a film that I thought would be anything like it. It's impossible to come out of with your emotions at all intact.
Objectively speaking, ten out of ten. Congratulations Rolf. But in terms of audience enjoyment? Impossible to assess. Just watch it for yourself and see. -
pepekwa13 November 2007if you didn't read a preview, this movie will probably shock you like no other and it definitely goes into areas where most mainstream films would be unable or too scared to go. Definitely an adults only film. For sheer originality great acting and an amazing, well thought-out concept this is a 10. I've never been a fan of Australian cinema, apart from mad max, Muriel's wedding and a few dodgy soaps, I've barely seen anything else of note from down under but i'm definitely going to try and get hold of some other work by the director De Heer.
However, I can only give this a 7 as the ending is just unrealistic. "Steve" seemed your average Aussie man's man sort of bloke, if his wife really treated him like that, he would either flip out and go crazy and would hunt her and the kids down or he would say f#*k it and be pleased he was no longer with such a nut case. I just can't see him sitting there w#*king over her feeling sorry for himself, that wasn't the character built up at the start of the movie.
That aside, a great concept and a real thought provoking movie that kept pushing the envelope more and more. It would be great if more movies could challenge the genre as this one has done. -
mckx11 November 2006I got this film from Netflix because of its synopsis, which was totally false. This is not the first time Netflix has done this, either. However, I thought the movie was a mystery because of what they said, and I am such a mystery devotee. Evidently the Netflix people either don't always view the movies or don't read other reviews very carefully. What they said in their comments was: "A British suburban husband is viewing a video that his wife has left for him as a birthday celebration when the camera pulls away and he sees a gun pointed at her head. I saw her pointing a gun at her own head, not quite the same. Did I miss something? Jody
-
larrylaca20 October 2019Fifteen+ years later, I still find this an amazing film.
The film is often knocked for not being realistic. The list of reasons is long, but I find them misleading. In my point of view, a film is captivating if there is enough realism to let me, with my imagination, be drawn into the world the director has intended. Scenes need to be well paced, vivid; particularly the character acting and dialog need to be well hewn. I don't waste my time trying to pick apart the realism flaws. This is art, not a 9 o'clock news report. I'd rather imagine the story that's trying to come to life
You can read the action summaries in the other reviews. The expectant husband blindsided by the dark side of his partner. The moody, brooding and vengeful wife trapped in crafting her own story. The mounting tension and cruelty as the story unfolds...
If you reach into the lives of Steve and Alexandra.. you are confronted with what you don't know, what the director has intentionally left untold between the lines. This is the real suspense in the storyline.
Is Steve a basically good husband? Has he been two timing his wife? Was he controlling and overbearing? There are few hard facts. Because of the wife's mostly smiling charade, is it his fault he was in the dark? Was there that much wrong that a few heartfelt, two-sided conversations couldn't have overcome?
Is Alexandra really abused? At the worst it's emotional abuse, which is agreeable wrong, but there is no evidence of force or forceful control. Is she agoraphobic or why can't she find the life she wants? If she is psychotic enough to put together the cruel hoax she carries out, how can one trust her view of Steve?
Whatever assumptions you fold into the plot, you are still left with a raw, crushing emotional tragedy for each of them. Both he and she are devastated by the tsunami effect of her wrentless barrage of escalations.
Yes, in reality, it would probably not play out as portrayed. But in the absurd world of domestic violence that is reality, it might come close. And in the shadow dance of issues stomping through our collective memory, there is more than enough to help us ask the hard questions of who we are and where does love and desire evaporate into exploitation.
As Alexandra asks: "Is desire an asset or liability?" (No, her reference to breasts and cancer, did not frame the question this broadly, but it's one more example of the meatier content thoughtfulness can unearth.) -
Asimovo16 October 2003Extremly suprising. With the age of digital shooting more movies are been made with a hight quality rating! Alexandra's Project is based on a solid written plot. On top on that good acting and by the hand of a very talented producer Rolf de Heer. His work, Dance Me to My Song (1998), Old Man Who Read Love Stories, The (2001), Tracker, The (2002), and recently Alexandra's Project (2003) all earned a plus 6 by the IMDB's visitors. And now I understand why.
Awfull low budget, Brilliant movie! -
'Alexandra's Project' is a perfect example of how you can make a masterpiece with next to no budget. All it takes is an utterly compelling story and a committed cast. This film has both of those things in spades. The concept is so incredibly simple, and yet it is far more captivating than the most convoluted storylines Hollywood could ever dream up. I was utterly hooked from start to finish. I never looked at my watch once during the runtime.
I couldn't write this review in good conscience without giving massive credit to both Gary Sweet and Helen Buday in the lead roles. The commitment they showed is quite remarkable. In particular Buday who had a tremendous amount asked of her during the shoot. Many actresses turned down the role and it would be hard to blame them once you've seen the film and know what the role entailed. Sweet also gets asked to bare all and willingly does so, but also his role was crucial to making the film what it was. He nailed it as well.
I wrestled over whether to give this a 9 or 10/10 and settled with the latter. The clincher for me was the conclusion of the film. I absolutely loved it. This film makes no apologies for being as dark as it is. And trust me this is one of the darkest films I've ever seen. The nature of it is savage. I can't recommend this film highly enough. More people need to see it immediately. -
bushtony2 October 2012Hard-hitting, resolutely twisted and unsettling low-budget psychological mind-bender from down under.
A housewife takes a catastrophic revenge on her callous husband who arrives home expecting a surprise birthday party and gets something very different instead.
It is cleverly constructed, paced to slow-burn, and acted with brave and impressive conviction by a very skilled and believable cast. Helen Buday is an absolute revelation and her unapologetic and naked (in more ways than one) portrayal is nothing short of electrifying. It is not exactly an enjoyable film to watch, but on a technical level alone it's very, very clever and it certainly stays in the memory long after.
Borderline pornographic, emotionally unflinching and potentially disturbing, this is not for the faint-hearted or those with delicate sensibilities. A feminist wet-dream? Maybe. But it has a unique style that sets it apart. -
bluecoltrane1 January 2010It's hard to say why I give this film a three...maybe just to compensate for feeling sorry for the effort put into it. The beginning was terribly weak as there was no exposition of the characters and many ends were left open only for the viewers' guesswork.
What I also found it initially odd that Steve hadn't any knowledge what was going on! He goes to work in the morning and comes home to an empty house with the locks changed on the doors, with a video set-up. This move couldn't have been made in a day without his knowledge?? Her being a prostitute in the same house also could not go on unnoticed. The children appeared loving and well adjusted, no problems there!
Her falling into, who knows what sexual situations seems absurd as she doesn't desire his needs but she will allow herself to be used by strangers and the grotesque fat slob next door.
When the film ends there isn't any resolution to the situation Steve is put into...and I thought I wasted a lot of time watching this. -
bob_meg17 April 2011I don't know what they have in the water down under, but chances are if you're watching an indie film that shocks you, arrests you, and amazes you with its innovation, at least over the past five years or so, it's come from Australia. From "Wolf Creek" to "Envy" to "The Square," one thing these films don't do is bore you with what you've already seen before. Props to the Australian Film Commission for backing such ballsy work.
"Alexandra's Project" begins with a nicely ominous tracking shot of a suburban neighborhood, eerily offset by Graham Tardif's dark ambient film score. You know something's not quite right with either bored suburban mom Alexandra (a fearless performance by Helen Buday) or her self-absorbed businessman/husband Steve (Gary Sweet) as he sets off for work on his birthday.
He plans to come home, share the fabulous news of his promotion with his wife and kids and instead...finds a vacant house with no power...except to the TV and VCR on which his wife has videotaped his birthday "present." To say more would be unfair, as this movie should be experienced with no expectations from the plot whatsoever...and trust me, you'll not expect what happens. It's sick, twisted, and yet oddly poetic in its justice.
The best way to summarize it would be that it's an extension of the Peter Gallagher Watching the Tape scene from Soderbergh's 1989 indie classic "sex, lies, and videotape." It shares a lot of sensibility with that film and much of its inherent power.
If you enjoy (way) offbeat thrillers and indie cinema in general, this one's a keeper. -
wentos24 October 2021Frankly I was not sure what I should rate it. The story is on one level seriously upsetting me. On the other hand it is how some relationship stories are. Quite some marriages go this way. Mine did. You recover eventually. What really disturbed me is not even the way the female character treated the male one i.e. With some sort of expectation to be mr right, the way the modern feminists want the man to be: strong and satisfying in bad, knowing what they want yet listening to feelings and views of the lady. All this is right of course only the expectation that the man only does want sex when the lady does is in a direct contradictions how sexuality works. No wonder that the characters ended up this way. But that did not really upset me this much. What really upset me is that the way the children were treated in this. I have seen what actions of a mother willing to sacrifice everything and everybody to achieve her own little pleasures did to mine. The only thing that made wonder in this hole thing was the BDSM suggestion. I felt this is too much but maybe this fits into the complex and confused main character - which this time is female. In reality most of the marriages go through problems while original excitement dissipates in the everyday life.
The good part in this all is that a traditional these days woke elements were possibly there but were not really there. The story is drastic, convoluted and as I mentioned before upsetting. But is not compromising by trying to justify the actions of neither side. Not too much anyway. The ending with the man humiliated and alone was a bit of a stretch but it is a shock when you find out that you shared life with somebody who is completely alien to you. At the end I had a bit of sympathy for the lost man and especially for the kids. None of this was shown but they would go through hell with such mother. I suspect the woke audiences would not like it too much. The story is complex enough not to give simple answers and this confuses them.
I would wish better production values but then again maybe that is made so on purpose.
In some sense this is a story about where our societies go and why it is not good for anybody but maybe I over interpret things. -
celr28 March 2011This film is skillfully made: good acting and a setup that allows for some some suspense and surprises. Otherwise it's a piece of garbage. I say that because I can't divine any intent or purpose for what is little more than a tale of psychological torture.
Steve is a married guy with a wife and two children and after receiving a promotion at work he comes home to find his wife and kids gone and him locked in his apartment without means of escape or communication. Conspiring with a swinish technician neighbor his wife has contrived to imprison him in the house. She has left him with a videotape of herself. He plays the tape. At first she does a strip tease for him and then abruptly changes course and launches into a hate-filled rant about how she's been abused by him for their entire marriage and that she's taken the children to parts unknown and he'll never see them again. There are a few more twists, but that is the essence of it. Steve, who thought he had a loving family is reduced to a wreck, tearfully having to listen to his wife's raving accusations. According to her he is an insensitive pig, and she the helpless victim.
But the entire setup is false. First of all, in the beginning we don't see Steve as anything but a loving father and husband. And what really does she accuse him of? Of being insensitive to her needs and making unwanted sexual advances. She complains that he's always trying to grope her. Evidently he wants her body but doesn't appreciate her mind. (From what we see of her mind, with its insane vengefulness and cruelty, maybe he was better off having nothing to do with it.) The whole thing doesn't make psychological sense. We are supposed to believe that for 12 years she submitted meekly to his clumsy and repulsive advances without complaint or protest then suddenly she becomes this aggressive, sadistic mastermind of a diabolical plot to humiliate and destroy him.
I know it is a fantasy of the feminist left that women are helpless to resist the abuses of their men and any sort of bizarre revenge on the offending males is justified. But it's impossible to believe that this woman was so unhappy and angry with her marriage and submitted for so long, then suddenly became a calculating, avenging Valkyrie. We aren't talking about a woman living under sharia law but a liberated Western woman who would have plenty of recourse in an unhappy marriage long before she had to go literally insane with hatred.
The movie gives no real sense of justice or balance. We see a man reduced to rubble, very likely a decent man for all his faults, but we see no moral resolution or even a moral center. The only justification for the wife's actions is her own self-serving, mentally warped rant, much of which may be pure fantasy. Some reviewers have suggested that the movie is actually a condemnation of the wife and her uber-feminist world view. But that isn't clear. That's why I don't think this is a good film. It reminds me of another movie, "Antichrist", a nasty European product in which a wife also goes off her rocker and tortures her husband. Neither movie makes any clear moral point except to fill some voyeuristic need in sick minds to see cruelty in action. In neither movie are we shown men who would by any means merit the cruelty inflicted on them.