User Reviews (115)

Add a Review

  • Alright yea its a mess, but going in KNOWING it is a mess allowed me to view this film with more forgiveness than the average film critic was willing to shell out.

    First off there's the acting which is all over the place, some people are doing great while others aren't allowed enough room. Casting Sienna Miller was a good call, its a difficult role to cast but if they felt they had to go with a "name" then Sienna was the right choice. As for Guy Pearce as Andy Warhol, that really worked and its a true shame that the film was such a mess you couldn't realize that Guy Pearce was turning in an excellent performance. Especially if you have seen his work in L.A. Confidential and Memento, I had to remind myself a few times oh yea thats Guy Pearce. Had Factory Girl functioned as a GOOD FILM Guy Pearce would have received much more acclaim.

    As for Hayden Christensen, I like him alright as an actor but his role as the Bob Dylan-esquire Musician just wasn't allowed much room. He was crammed into a corner spouting out cliché lines and trying his best to do an impression rather than an interpretation. This film was around 90 minutes long, and it should have been around 2 hours long considering all of the significant characters. You can't just brush by Andy Warhol and Bob Dylan (even though they don't officially call the Bob Dylan character Bob Dylan).

    What I did like about this movie was that Warhol was portrayed as a little bit cold and detached, but Sedgwick was portrayed as being equally messed up and responsible for her own downfall. So the blame wasn't placed anywhere. Having actors like Jimmy Fallon and one of the Olsen twins in this movie only made me go "what are they doing here?" Pearce and Miller really did give it there all, and even that wasn't enough to elevate this sometimes incoherent mess. Its a mess, but I was still interested thanks to the two leads. I can't wait until Sienna Miller is given a lead role in a GOOD movie.
  • It's not a documentary.

    Just in case you read some of the rather hysterical comments and garner the impression that it's supposed to be about real people, it's not. Andy Warhol was never a real person, just a performance.

    Guy Pearce presents Andy Warhol as the superficial creature he undoubtedly was. The original art-as-business creator, the very God at whose altar such modern day charlatans as Damien Hirst worship. Pearce's performance is riveting, his Andy Warhol is as empty as his crapulous art; just a two-dimensional diagram of someone who leaves no shadow. A cartoon.

    Sienna Miller's performance as Edie Sedgewick is the best thing she's ever done. Caught in the strobe lights of Warhol's strangely sterile world of non-sexual sex and sofas still in their plastic wrappers, Edie becomes the focus of his short attention span for a while. She flashes across the screen like a speeded up Holly Golighty, while Warhol's voyeuristic viewfinder traps her in it's leering stare. The camera loves her and so does Warhol. But we know it's going to end in tears.

    Nothing in the movie has much depth, none of the characters are developed beyond what we already know about them and the whole sixties New York scene is represented by a series of iconic "things". The Chelsea Hotel, the Velvet Underground, a soundtrack of songs that sound right but which actually don't fit at all. For instance, "Leavin' here" by The Birds, a British group in which Ronnie Wood was the guitarist, was recorded in 1966 but was never released in America. However, there it is on the soundtrack being played in the factory sometime in 1965.

    But no matter.

    The movie pretty much captures the shallow, transient and utterly facile world of Warhol in the sixties and in another way it sums up the emptiness and tragedy of the Hollywood dream machine too. But it doesn't ask any deep questions nor does it pretend to be something it's not. It's entertaining and worth watching for two very good performances by Guy Pearce and Sienna Miller.

    It's not art, it's just a movie, albeit a superficial one.
  • For the concerted effort Sienna Miller puts into her searing portrayal of Warhol protégé and underground celebrity Edie Sedgwick, it would have been rewarding to experience a film that matches her unbridled dramatic impact. Unfortunately, director George Hickenlooper, primarily a documentary filmmaker, seems more focused on eye-catching cinematic techniques - a deliberately artsy mix of overtly dramatic images, grainy film stock and slow-motion photography - than honest character development in this highly fictionalized 2007 account of her brief life. The result feels energetic but ultimately rather cursory in the way he depicts the Manhattan party scene in the mid-1960's, in particular, the Factory, where Warhol let his coterie of drug-addicted fame-seekers gather to make virtually unwatchable films that reflect their constant state of ennui.

    With her big raccoon eyes, pre-punk hairdo and flashing smile, Miller bears such a striking resemblance to the real-life Sedgwick that she carries much of the film by the sheer will of her character's Holly Golightly-like sense of exalted self-worth. But like Holly, Sedgwick lacked talent to sustain a film career, and the script leaves Miller to her own devices in connecting us with her character's tormented psyche amid her escalating drug use. On the upside, Guy Pearce accurately captures the discomfiting public image of Warhol down to the familiar narcissistic indifference and manipulative shyness, but his character gradually recedes into the background. At first, Hayden Christensen comes across as amateurish and unintentionally amusing as a Bob Dylan doppelganger, especially since he makes a feeble attempt at capturing the singer's recognizable speech cadences. Just as he manages to transcend the awkwardness of the character's intrusion into the story, he also disappears making his impact in Sedgwick's life feel rather fleeting.

    Even though the cryptic screenplay by Captain Mauzner, Aaron Richard Golub and Simon Monjack conveniently paints Warhol and the faux-Dylan as polarizing figures pulling at Sedgwick's soul, the story really comes down to her own inner demons. The problem is that she remains oddly elliptical throughout, and Hickenlooper seems satisfied with leaving us with an impressionistic view of a person who barely warrants our attention forty years later. Among the supporting players, there are quite a familiar faces - Ileana Douglas as Vogue editor Diana Vreeland, Jimmy Fallon as Sedgwick's confidante Chuck Wein, Tara Summers as fellow Warhol protégé Brigid Berlin, Mena Suvari as Brigid's sister Richie, Edward Herrmann as the family attorney, Mary Kate Olsen as a partygoer. However, none of them are given any opportunity to shine.
  • Greetings again from the darkness. Andy Warhol and The Factory poses quite the challenge to any filmmaker attempting to capture the look, feel and pain of that world unto itself. Director George Hickenlooper's best work has been "Mayor of Sunset Strip" and "Dogtown", neither of which drew much of an audience. "Factory Girl" probably has little hope of attracting much attention from movie-goers as well.

    While we do spend a good portion of the film in The Factory, this is more the tragic story of Edie, rather than an insightful look at Warhol's art. Edie was really the first to make being famous a job ... think Paris Hilton today. No real talent herself, her name, family money and looks got her inside the art world and exceptionally close to Warhol. Of course, those things were not enough to carve out any real territory and the ending, while tragic, is not at all surprising.

    The film is overly choppy in attempting to find the right look and feel and yet with Jagger, Velvet Underground and the Dylanesque Hayden Christensen, the importance and power of music for this era is clearly established. Aussie Guy Pearce does a nice impersonation of Warhol and Jimmy Fallon has his first serious role. Other support comes from Mena Suvari as Edie's friend, Beth Grant as Warhol's mom, Don Novello (Father Guido from early SNL), and Illeana Douglas as Diana Vreeland.

    By far the best part of this project is the performance of Sienna Miller as Edie Sedgwick. Even her vocal cadence is remarkable. The physical and emotional turmoil seems very real as Edie goes from top of world to desperation for life. Ms. Miller will at some point break out and become the film star she is destined to become. That role has just not quite happened yet. It could be later this year when she re-teams with her "Layer Cake" director. Let's hope so. Her talent is undeniable and although it is a pleasure to see her performance as Edie, she deserves a much wider audience.

    The weakness of the film is best shown by the interviews over the closing credits. Attempting to explain what we had just watched is a pure indication that the job had not been done well.
  • Not the best biopic I've seen recently (actually saw it on DVD last night). I have read "Edie" by Jean Stein about a million times, so I could figure out a lot about what was wrong in the movie. I also thought the use of the musician character was quite amusing, simply because he was supposed to be a portrayal of Bob Dylan, and from what I have read, Bob Dylan barely even remembers Edie Sedgwick.

    Another goof I caught in the movie was when Edie was listing all the popular drugs at the Factory, was that Adderall was mentioned. This drug did not come out until 1996. I was rather surprised it was mentioned, because if they had been on methylphenidate at the time, Ritalin was probably their drug of choice. It was available at the time. I myself have been on Adderall (for ADHD) for a very brief period in the 90s, and it was really horrible...I can't possibly imagine anyone wanting to be on that thing.

    In the 90s I knew a guy who had been Warhol's room mate in the 1950s and a very, very minor character in Andy's later life, I asked him once if he ever knew Edie, and he just groaned and said, "she was the MOST BORING girl I ever met in my life." End of discussion.
  • Better than I had expected. Is the story a bit aimless? Yes. Does it randomly introduce/evict characters for the sole reason that they were parts of Edie's life? Yes. Is it just an hour and forty minutes of Edie going to fabulous parties, meeting fabulous people and slowly declining into a complete wreck of drugs and poverty? Very much so. But I felt that the film did an accurate job of depicting Edie's life, since all that happened were parties, socializing and a terrible downfall. I mean her brother and widow have stated that it's an accurate portrayal, so I don't see how one could disagree. That being said, the film is clearly just a device to propel Sienna Miller's extraordinary performance. Her transformation into Edie Sedgwick is the most precise and utterly flawless portrayal of a real life person I've ever seen. It's quite easily the second best performance of last year (the first being Hard Candy's Ellen Page) and one of the top five female performances of all time. Guy Pearce is also quite fantastic, and Hayden Christensen was much better than I expected him to be. Overall, the film is nothing special. It's not necessarily bad, but it surely isn't great. It's all about Sienna.
  • During my brief stay at art school I only once produced anything my teachers thought worthwhile. It was a painting made under the influence of LSD, a psychedelic drug. I never did anything of equal quality before or afterwards, with or without chemicals. I didn't know it, but the drug had temporarily distanced my interfering conscious mind so some inner creativity could take over. The artist Andy Warhol would 'distance' himself as a way of life, with or without chemicals. In his own words, "The more you look at the same exact thing, the more the meaning goes away, and the better and emptier you feel." Not only did he direct attention to something till it lost its meaning, he brought a new 'meaning' out of the emptiness - an iconic and very memorable 'meaning'. He could do it with silkscreen prints, with cinema and, when they let him, with people. One of those people was Edie Sedgwick, the 'Factory Girl.' Edie (Sienna Miller) leaves her best friend and her art class to head off to the Big Apple. She gets herself noticed by rising artist Andy Warhol (Guy Pearce from Memento) who sees a certain something in her. For a while she holds an almost muse-like hold over him. He successfully launches her as a celebrity in underground films made at 'The Factory'. But her attention wanders to a Bob Dylan -like character who is artistic in a different way; articulate and heterosexual. Warhol loses interest. With no firm artistic anchor, she descends into a downward drug spiral, eventually blaming Warhol for her inability to get work. We see a magnificent performance by Miller, but only a sentimental hint of the star quality of Edie that Warhol developed. This artsy Sedgwick tribute could have been better served by using the insights and techniques of the Warhol Factory that it so trendily references, simultaneously bridging the acrimony that has blown out of proportion with her supporters and those of Warhol.

    Guy Pearce delivers a very acceptable performance. Hayden Christensen, playing a fictional character so obviously meant to be Bob Dylan, is ludicrously weak, having none of the self-containment and gravitas of a great musician and poet, even a young one. Sienna Miller is a revelation, and worthier of a much better film than this one, which is flawed by poor conceptualisation. Even before it was completed, Factory Girl alienates the people who could have helped to make it great.

    Some of the Factory denizens who bought into and eventually shared Warhol's artistic vision became products of his genius in a conscious way. They achieved independence and recognition in their own right. People like Paul Morrissey, the Velvet Underground (including Lou Reed, John Cale, and Nico). Edie Sedgwick, sadly, lost sight of the artist within her and never quite made it. She wanted to be famous - Warhol gave her that. She would have needed her own creative diligence to consciously realise what made her a star and so become autonomously successful.

    To be fair to the film, the complaints, lawsuits and criticisms of the likes of Lou Reed and Bob Dylan seem without substance. The film does not blame Warhol or Dylan for Sedgwick's demise. The panda-eyed, drug-abusing wash-out that is the Sedgwick nearer the end of the movie does, but the audience can hardly say anything except she brought about her own downfall: she ingratiated herself to Warhol and his world when she was a nobody without even a job, then moaned that she couldn't work when he dumped her, when in fact she was obviously unemployable because of her drug habit.

    The film's only real crime is perhaps that it celebrates the life of Edie rather than Andy, and that not particularly well. Seeing her at her height through the eyes of Andy Warhol would have achieved much more. Both 'sides' of the bitter split between the two of them agree she had, at one point, remarkable presence, charisma, and on screen talent. An occasionally more Warholian approach to the cinematography, while keeping the film accessible, could have emphasised such qualities with self-conscious camera-work and other devices. Instead, we have determinedly Hollywood-style continuity-editing. Warhol devices such as split-screen are used for window dressing rather than any discernible emotional impact. Similarly, variations in film stock pay lip service to a Warhol vibe rather than building an awareness of Edie's inner persona.

    Warhol was not only the most famous exponent of Pop art, but one of the most important exponents of New American Cinema. His techniques influenced both Hollywood and experimental film, and his style affected censorship laws and developed the 'camp aesthetic' (defined by Susan Sontag as, "the love of the exaggerated, the 'off', of things being what they are not"). Factory Girl capitalises on the name, but is mainstream through and through.

    If the producers had worked with people of real vision; if they had secured song rights for music by Velvet Underground and Bob Dylan (which would have helped establish historical and cultural context); if they had portrayed the beauty and sparkle of Edie Sedgwick through the eyes and genius of Warhol or someone like him; if they had made insightful recognition of her weakness and her greatness, then this could have been a work of art. For Warhol and Dylan enthusiasts it is full of Campbell's Soup Cans and shots reminiscent of album covers - but without depth. Some will see a slightly offensive depiction of Warhol as a bloodsucker (he didn't pay the experimental artists who gathered in his studio or appeared in his films). For more casual viewers it is a slightly poignant story of the rise and fall of a quintessential American IT girl in a Pop Art universe bursting with sex, drugs, art and rock 'n' roll. Factory Girl is Hollywood factory rather than Warhol Factory. But should it be decried because of that?
  • I knew a lot about Edie Sedgwick before seeing the film and was even prepared for inaccuracies but the major problem with this film is that it is inaccurate not for the purpose of making a point but that it is inaccurate for the purpose of making a one-dimensional film.

    Did Hickenlooper paint Edie as a perpetual victim (notice how throughout the film she is never injecting herself but is bent over while others inject her?) just so that he could show her as a victim of Andy Warhol and his drug fiend factory friends? Or that she was always a victim of people like her friend Chuck who did a complete turn on her for that villain Andy? Is Hickenlooper trying to say that the biggest mistake of Edie's life was not choosing Dylan over Warhol in that elevator scene where her future self voices over, "that was the biggest mistake of my life"? Edie Sedgwick came to the factory a sick person, she was already headed for a crash even before she set eyes on Andy Warhol. In reality, she was rejected by the factory friends and many others for the drugs she brought with her everywhere, she was not introduced to them at the factory as the movie shows.

    Hickenlooper seems to me to be trying to say that Edie Sedgwick, that fresh faced wasp in knee socks and pearls who left Cambridge with sketches tucked under her arms could have potentially had a wonderful and peaceful life, even a stable marriage with Bob Dylan had she only not met Andy Warhol and been subject of those movies.

    I have a problem with this film because I am so interested, most people are, in the real Edie Sedgwick and I agree with another poster who suggested you see Ciao!Manhattan to get a better sense of who she was. If you want a tragic love-story about a good girl who chose the wrong guy, watch Factory Girl.

    The real Edie Sedgwick was a person whose hystrionics and drugs were symptoms of a soul that was always trying to fly away, for her the world was always too small and her pain was always too big, and she lived her life as though she dreamed of having her wings singed flying too close to the sun.
  • (Possible spoilers, though unlikely)

    Okay, let me say that I enjoyed Factory Girl for what it is and think it is worth renting.

    The story stars Sienna Miller as the fated Edie Sedgwick and Guy Pearace as vapid pop culture icon, Andy Warhol.

    The movie isn't nearly as close to as bad as critics claim it is. The first 40 minutes is much ado about talk of cocks, Andy and Edie's irreverence, and a series of disjointed images. The first act is aimless. But it makes sense because Edie and Andy are aimless and so are the termites chewing Andy's wood at "The Factory".

    Enter Hayden Christensen as Billy Quinn and the movie develops its paper thin plot. Though, I should say it's unfair to characterize the story this way. Edie's life was a paper thin plot, so the director, Hickenlooper can't be blamed for that.

    Andy, who never says he is gay, though everyone else assumes (or knows) he is, is in love with the idea of Edie "The Superstar" and Billy Quinn simply wants to open her eyes. She becomes the rope in a tug of war. Billy's "soul" cries for the world in a time of upheaval versus the-devil-may-care, drug den world of Andy. And while the latter may be in "love" with his muse, Billy cares and wants Edie to know, if art is the food of the soul, then Edie is eating from an empty soup can.

    Edie is a sympathetic character. You get the sense that no one really knew her. Not because she was empty and vapid but that she was so shattered inside the only part of herself she allowed the world to see was the facade her Andy created. In Factory Girl we see Edie through the looking glass. Not as she was, but as she appeared. Warped.

    Edie is the cute girl you meet in passing at a party at some stranger's house. You like her, but never see her again. Though, over the years you hear the occasional rumor or two, until one day, you hear she's hit rock bottom and died. That's how it feels to watch Edie Sedgewick's story in The Factory Girl. On one hand, you want to mourn her. On the other hand, you wonder, what has the world lost? That in itself is the real tragedy.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This flick finally came to my hood, Feb 9. It's 87 mins long, and at the entrance I was handed a questionnaire, beamingly asked to fill it out on my exit. I had a hard time filling it out. I didn't know how I felt about the movie. I still don't. When I like a movie, I can watch it repeatedly. Do I want to see this again? Maybe, for posterity, if no other reason. I filled it out, but I'm sure my answers have changed back and forth several times since then. What seems apparent is that it is a coherent snippet in time about Edie, inaccurate or not. the story is a compelling one, and within what it did convey, the conveyance was adequate. I had no problems with any of the performances, the cast taking the material and giving what may indeed be a mere contour image of the film's denizens. True, it wasn't a full blown picture given, and maybe that was on purpose. This film could arguably be considered a cinematic paragon of one of Andy's works of art: something overtly commercial meant ultimately as a bit of tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, a private joke for those "privy to such griefs." Still, readers will, of course, take this comment with a grain of salt; after all, consider: I still haven't resolved how I feel about this film. standing in the lobby afterward, scratching in answers on the questionnaire, I overheard comments from other moviegoers about their take; one comment that stood out was about how horrible Hayden's acting was, with "fake Dylan" voice/mannerisms. I disagree. Despite his cumulative screen time of maybe five minutes, it was lovely to see him--his performance was complimentary to the whole film. On the other hand, when he referred to Edie as "baby," I wasn't convinced. What was credible was the character's (referred to as "Musician") style -- ie, his clothing, etc, conveyed pretty much anything verbal the character might want to say. Another way, perhaps, to abridge this story: one picture would convey 1,000 words. Sienna, I feel, did her part, and well. It's easy to discount any talent she has when one heeds all the tabloid fodder swirling about her, but the girl has skills. I saw Alfie, and do not recall her performance. Saw Layer Cake, in which her part was simple, but effective. Never saw Cassanova. Guy is easy, giving a most recognizable portrait of Andy, and making it look effortless. But I'm still grappling with my own feelings; at moments I feel the film is too short, then check myself: did I really want to sit thru more along this film's lines? would that make me feel better about spending $10.50? Was it worth it as-is? Tune in tomorrow......maybe I'll have answers. Don't bet on it.
  • "The Factory" was the entire fifth floor studio of 231 East 47th Street in Midtown Manhattan serving as artistic sanctuary for Andy Warhol and the place for artsy types in the mid to late 60's. It's also where Edie Sedgwick spent most of her time as Warhol turned her into a starlet on his silver screen and as the original Paris Hilton she became famous for being famous, complete with trust fund and a nasty drug habit courtesy of Andy and his "Warhol Superstars".

    Andy Warhol dove into most things artistic; shaping Pop Art, producing The Velvet Underground, and making his own films. Factory Girl took great advantage of the justification for using all manner of film-making formats cutting to point-of-view shots through grainy black and white 8 MM film camera viewfinders. Ask your grandparents... or SAIT instructor Philip Letourneau.

    The cameras take you through a real life tragedy as Sienna Miller portrays a charming and naive Edie Sedgwick. Conflicted, she's seduced into fame by a chilling Guy Pearce as Warhol while a painfully dull Hayden Christensen as "The Musician" attempts to rescue her. Denying a relationship with Sedgwick, Bob Dylan's lawyers refused his inclusion in the film but he represents the possible redemption for the spiraling "Poor Little Rich Girl".

    Overall, Factory Girl has trouble navigating it's plot shifting to and from Edie as the art that Andy creates, her personal journey, and the people around them both, all topped by a future Miss Sedgwick revealing the story to a psychiatrist in rehab.

    There's a great movie in here somewhere but Factory Girl is not it.

    C Matt Watterworth http://www.theweal.com
  • this film makes art out of artists. it is a beautiful, artful depiction of three people: andy warhol, edie, and bob Dylan (billy quinn).

    many will say that it is not the accurate, hard fact bio pic that many people rely on such to be; but like the doors, it paints artful depictions of such iconic legends.

    all performances are done well. andy warhol is portrayed beautifully and harshly by guy pierce. sienna miller does a wonderful job as a beautiful girl valued only for her beauty and quirks. billy quinn... or bob Dylan... is portrayed just like the arrogant youth he was at times... bob Dylan was never always this sage who had best intentions in mind. he was human. and too many people forget that when hayden christensen plays him, he's portraying the real person.

    beautifully crafted.
  • Interesting bio pic about Edie Sedgwick, a young woman from a well to do family who fell into Warhol's orbit.

    I saw this on broadcast TV, so the nudity, and even someone lighting up a joint, was blurred out -please we're all grown ups here.

    If anything, this is a cautionary tale of allowing cult hero worship and the promise of fame to cloud ones judgement. Edie Sedgwick, aside from her mental and emotional issues, was essentially a decent person lured by false promises into Warhol's "Factory." He and his soul sucking vampire entourage of hangers on basically destroyed this woman.

    The cast was good, not a bad movie all in all.

    Other related movies, "Ciao Manhattan" and "Basquiat."
  • lindaannemcevoy20 March 2007
    Warning: Spoilers
    It is utterly incomprehensible how this managed to make it to the big screen. The script fails to provide the background of any of the characters or the politics of the time in which they functioned, rendering the story superfluous. Guy Pearce is too "male" in every sense of the word to effectively portray the androgyny of Warhol. Hayden Christensen - a wonderful actor when he gets the chance - performs off the page as if he's still in front of the Star Wars green screen.

    Miller - so promising in "Alfie" - is abysmal. Her performance betrays a stark lack of acting experience. Granted, the script and direction give her nothing to work with, but her countenance displays no knowledge whatsoever of the historical time frame in which Edie lived or what made her tick. Granted these are matters on which an actor should have their own personal "take". But Miller doesn't even bother doing that. She looks happy in herself just to be walking across the screen and she strives for nothing else. It's no surprise at all that she lost out to the lesser known Lena Headey for the lead female role in "300".

    The screen lights up towards the end for 60 seconds, when Meredith Ostrom appears as Nico. Unfortunately she disappears just as quickly again.

    The final cut is an atrocious insult to Sedgwick, Warhol, Dylan, the Velvet Underground and the audience itself.
  • One senses that Edie Sedgwick deserves better than this. It's not that Sienna Miller doesn't throw herself into the role but the screenplay - a conglomeration of truth, half-truth, and fiction - lacks depth and the direction is just as shallow. Factory Girl hints at a greater tragedy than the one it presents. By adhering to surface details and never letting the audience get to know the title character, the movie comes across as a generic bio-pic about another lost girl of the 1960s whose 15 minutes of fame leads to a downward spiral. However Sienna Miller is good and if there's any reason to see this film its for her performance.
  • It seems that a lot of people were dissatisfied with portrayal of Andy Warhol and Bob Dylan in Factory Girl. The issues with the former might be in the eye of the beholder, yet the latter threatened legal action and prevented his name being mentioned in the movie. Therefore, at least one character in the movie might be labeled as fictional.

    Personally, i didn't expect absolute factual accuracy from a rather mainstream movie about Edie Sedgwick. Both aforementioned men are so prominent in the arts and culture of the twentieth century, that their depiction in a movie about a minor character in their lives won't change the viewers' opinion. Besides, it has all been seen in documentaries and other movies.

    But we are getting sidetracked by famous people who are supporting characters in a movie about the downfall of Edie Sedgwick. The easiest way to describe her would be spoiled rich child loosing grip on reality. In that sense Factory Girl would be one of many movies on the topic. However, it is obvious that she had been deranged before arriving to New York. One possible reason is electroshock treatment, prescribed back in the day even for minor mental problems.

    She meets Andy Warhol, a cold oedipal artist with suppressed homosexual desires. We might argue about the artistic merit of his work, yet in the movie he does what he does best: Connecting people and directing them according to his needs. The singer, the alter ego of Bob Dylan, apparently reaches out to Edie. He is more straightforward, interested in playing music, getting high and getting laid.

    This is not a healthy environment for anyone, especially not for a girl on drugs with a history of mental issues and considerable funds at her disposal. The outcome is predictable. However, the scary part is that in reality Edie Sedgwick managed to ruin herself in less than two years, not to mention the money spent to support the lifestyle.

    For me, Factory Girl is a movie about growing up and maturing in a very wrong way. It is an example how not to make choices in life. The influence of parents, friends and so-called friends is no excuse. The question is, of course, whether there had been other possibilities for Edie. Unfortunately, we'll never find that out.
  • Sienna Miller gives a surprisingly strong performance as Edie Sedgwick in 'Factory Girl' - she and Guy Pearce as (a rather sinister) Andy Warhol, are the main reasons to see the movie. The film itself does not rise above standard biopic fare and as such, there's a worrying amount of pop psychology. Considering the rich atmosphere with which its dealing (Warhol's Factory at its peak) you might be surprised at the grimness of mood. It's a shame, really, because it should be a lot more fun than it really is - perhaps Miller herself, who makes us feel a bit too much and by the end, the downfall is unpleasant to watch. Still, there are good scenes (the best being when Edie is replaced by Ingrid Superstar) and some strong performances but there are big problems. Jimmy Fallon's character accompanies Edie to New York - he's rather conservative when we see him, but then suddenly there he is as part of Warhol's entourage and never really says anything until he coaxes Edie during filming. No explanation is given - were scenes excised? He just droops around in the background rather strangely. Even worse is the Dylanesque character played by Hayden Christensen. It's a really lousy performance - amateurish with a couple of external mannerisms thrown in and it never convinces. The same can be said for his relationship with Edie that draws the action to a swift halt - it never recovers.
  • A long time ago, when I was going through my Velvet Underground period (i.e. I bought some cassettes - eeek! - of the first two albums, and played them incessantly for a couple of months), I purchased a book called "Up-tight: The Velvet Underground Story" by Victor Bockris and and Gerard Malanga (who is actually portrayed in the movie). On page 9 of the book there is a three storey still of Edie Sedgwick taken from an Andy Warhol movie "Screen Test #1".

    I'm looking at that picture now. Beautiful looking girl. Really stunning. To my eyes now she looks quite a bit like Melissa George. I think it's the jutting bottom lip that does it. In the book there is a little bit about Edie Sedgwick. She was a face at Warhol's Factory. She was a party girl. She appeared at some of Warhol's happenings and in some of his movies That is about all of knew about Edie Sedgwick.

    I saw a trailer for "Factory Girl". It's a period of time that I am interested in and the trailer indicated that it could be a good movie. I knew of Sienna Miller. She was good in "Alfie", even though it is an abomination of the original movie, and she was sexy in her little bit in "Layer Cake". Probably she is more famous now due to her tabloid activities and the whole Jude Law thing. I recognised Hayden Christensen, obviously because of the last three "Star Wars" movies, although he didn't particularly make an impression on me in those films. I didn't recognise the guy playing Andy Warhol. Not at all. I nearly fell off my seat when at the end of the trailer it said that it was Guy Pearce.

    (Jabber, jabber, jabber. Get on with it.) I thought that "Factory Girl" is a very good movie. I really enjoyed it. Very strong performances from Sienna Miller (surprisingly?) and Guy Pearce. Hayden Christensen is remote as (whisper it, because officially it is not him) Bob Dylan, but the character is supposed to be standoffish anyway, so maybe that works. The film is very evocative of time and place. It reminded me a lot of the chaotic nature of "The Doors" movie. The colours, the music, the drugs, the chaos, the pushing at the edges, the disintegration. Great soundtrack as well.

    Maybe the events didn't quite happen the way the movie presents them, but I certainly would recommend the movie.
  • The film is cliché after cliché, with two-dimensional characters and a flat, uninspired script. To be fair, Sienna Miller does a wonderful job with the material she's been given. Sadly, it's not a lot to work with.

    One of the major flaws in Factory Girl is that there is no character that you can like. I wasn't sure who I was supposed to care about, possibly because no character was ever developed enough to get past their surface. It's hard to portray Andy Warhol in film, after all of the versions that have been done, and his own status as more icon than man. This film only proved the point, by playing him in a way that felt more like a parody than a person.

    Over and over again, the film takes the easy road, from its After School Special depiction of drug use to the predictable dialogue, walks through Central Park, even the establishing shot of the Eiffel Tower to show "hey, look, they're in Paris!"

    New York looks like a studio set, and the filmmakers give the impression that they aren't even familiar with the city. A cab is told to go to "2nd Avenue and Fifth," where somehow a massive concert is taking place - despite the fact that the address is in the East Village, with only mom & pop stores and small bars in the area.

    The casting is nothing if not bizarre. Hayden Christensen as Bob Dylan, sorry, "Billy Quinn," comes off as an opinionated (though incredibly fit and Gentile) jerk with a guitar, Guy Pearce is too attractive for Andy, while Sienna Miller doesn't have Edie's soft beauty.

    The greatest crime is that this will be many people's first introduction to Edie Sedgwick, and they will go away with an impression of a simple, disposable girl - with none of her glamour, whose problems can be neatly wrapped up in a few lines about her father. Her entry into Andy's world is nothing more than an entrance to a party, and her fall is just a soap opera decline.

    If you have any interest in Edie Sedgwick at all, do yourself a favor and watch Ciao Manhattan, but by all means, avoid Factory Girl.
  • "Im not-i'm not trying to say anything, I sing about what i see." That line alone really explains how this movie is portrayed. The director's eye and camera work are so exceptional that there is no story-telling...only showing. We have to realize the exceptional talent at work here and awesome creativity on how the cast brings the hurt and pain to life; perhaps even hitting close to home to some.

    Accept the movie for what it is and not for what you think it should be, and you will find an amazing story, perhaps with some flaws (show me one without) and maybe at times even zooming by so fast your left trying to catch up, but it's clear that Sienna and Guy have simply made a tragic story come to life in a way that i believe only they could have; Hayden as well. Even though at first i was compelled to not see him as a fit for Dylan, he made it happen to the best of his ability.

    Not seeing this movie would be a tragedy. I'll have to admit though, i only wanted to see this movie because of Sienna, because i saw her raw talent previously and was ready to be astonished again as only she could have done. I didn't even know what the movie was about...and in the end...isn't that what it's all about...just seeing a movie and enjoying the work--the art for what it is and how it makes you feel and changes your life.
  • beautiful & drunk & stoned. So what? Is that all there is? You never learn what the big attraction is. Is she an artist? Does she have any talent? Can she act? After seeing this movie I'm not sure. Another comment posted calls this an After School Special with a little of that let's put on a show: Guy you pretend to be Andy Warhol & Hayden you pretend to be Bob Dylan and we'll get Illeana Douglas to pretend to be Diana Vreeland. I know Sienna Miller was not the first choice to be Edie but she does a good job anyway. But after two hours of exposition it still looked like a lot of pretending.FYI Jimmy Fallon does an OK job in a non-comic role & Mia Suari is excellent as usual.
  • begob11 March 2015
    Warning: Spoilers
    No idea about the historical accuracy, but it was a fairly flat experience.

    Plenty of opportunity for set pieces, but none of them was interesting. Especially the confrontation between Warhol and Dylan - didn't get a single insight from it. Also the atmosphere was too ... reliable - it should create a nervous uncertainty.

    In the end the heroine was just sad and lost, no tragedy to it. I guess because she was essentially passive.

    The music was disappointing too.

    The actor playing Warhol was excellent - in interview he said he was surprised to hear he was a villain in the finished product. I agree with his approach - less of the judgmentalising, please.

    The pace is good and it all fits together, but overall underwhelming.
  • abbey712-19 February 2007
    I must disagree with all the negative comments which surround this movie. I think it is a brilliantly made movie, the acting by Sienna Miller is fantastic and she looks so similar to Edie. The movie is more original, well filmed and well written than anything else out at the moment. People who know a little about Andy Warhol and the factory etc. will undoubtedly enjoy it more than those who go in with no background knowledge. It is also important to remember that nowhere at the start of the film does this say this is a true account of Edie's life so there are bound to be a few discrepancies. Enjoy it for what it is, a well acted and filmed insight into the life and scenes of Edie and the factory days.
  • jwerwin804 February 2007
    Factory Girl reminds me a lot of Syd and Nancy. It's like watching a train wreck and not being able to stop it. It's a story of innocence lost.

    Although Edie Sedgwick had her drug issues, her biggest problem is her addiction to attention from Andy Warhol. Guy Pearce gives a merciless portrayal of Warhol as a shameless, bloodsucking, sociopathic, narcissist who cruelly leaches off of anyone who'll let him -- i.e. an accurate portrayal.

    Sienna Miller shows us Edie Sedgwick in all of her glory -- happy, charismatic, generous, sexy, kind, needy, shallow, spoiled, myopic, and very frightened. She's terrific in this movie and is clearly on her way to becoming a massive superstar.

    I'm surprised this was released after the beginning of the year. The art direction was as good as a lot of previous Oscar nominees.
  • The filmmakers have done the impossible: taken the story of Edie Sedgwick, Andy Warhol's muse and the object of underground fascination for Forty YEARS and produced a movie so banal, predictable, and downright boring that the they must be applauded for even releasing it. I would be interested to hear if the screenwriters even read the bible for Edie -- George Plimpton's "Edie" -- that's how spectacularly misguided "Factory Girl" is. This movie makes "Swept Away" look like "The Godfather." Sienna Miller gamely resurrects the type of sex scene that thankfully died in 1975, but I guess these incompetetents must have thought it gave the movie a teeny bit of energy. I was embarrassed for everyone. Guy Pearce does a marvelous Warhol impersonation (not quite as good as David Bowie's in "Basquiat"), but wonderfully fascinating. Unfortunately, the numerous re-shoots the producers demanded reduce Andy Warhol -- ANDY WARHOL -- into an almost uninteresting opportunist. Edie of course lands in rehab and, well, I won't give away the ending, but the New York audience I saw it with roared with laughter and grumbled about the time they had wasted sitting in the theater. My lowest rating, period.
An error has occured. Please try again.