User Reviews (323)

Add a Review

  • Saw this at the Melbourne International Film Festival. Whilst I didn't enjoy Noe's first film I Stand Alone, I loved Irreversible.

    There is lots to like about ETV and much to dislike as well. An hour into the film and I would have given it perhaps an eight or nine but by the end of the film I was frustrated. Why? Noe just can't help himself and you get the feeling he either didn't know how to end the film or simply just wanted to be shocking for the sake of it.

    Visually, I couldn't help but be impressed. Some amazing shots, lighting (strobe) and editing techniques. Noe also mixes up the story well as he did in Irreversible. You are not spoon fed the story and I love the way he told the back story of the two leads.

    Plenty of people walked out at the screening after the hour and forty minute mark and I couldn't blame them. Probably not because they were shocked but just bored and frustrated. Noe pads this out and it is such a shame as overall it ruined the film as a whole.

    The acting is quite wooden and doesn't ring true but that is only a minor quibble when compared to the film's bloated running time.

    Hard to fault Noe for his creativity, energy and style and refusal to follow norms in terms of narrative structure etc. Still, I wish a friend or colleague had tapped him on the shoulder or given him some constructive criticism about the last half of the film.

    I can only imagine how much footage Noe might add into a Directors Cut - Lord help us. Perhaps he could learn some lessons from this and streamline his storytelling and not feel the need to bludgeon the audience just for the sake of it.
  • In a nutshell, Gaspar Noe's often exasperating but always visionary Enter the Void follows a man on his journey from his last hours on earth, through his death and his journey into the afterlife. The first twenty minutes or so follows Oscar as he takes a hit of DMT (a very potent hallucinogen) and goes on a visually arresting, if slightly over-long trip. He then leaves his house to give his friend a stash of drugs he owes him only to be chased and shot by police when he gets there. From there, his death and afterlife mirrors the philosophies behind the Tibetan Book of the Dead which theorises (I'm sure I'm putting this very crudely) that one's soul floats around, watching the world without them until they figure out how to leave their old life behind and move on. To recommend this film to audiences is perhaps a wrong turn, as it is bound to strike most as indulgent, immoral, needlessly vulgar and uncomfortable (particularly in Oscar's tendency to watch his sister having sex whenever possible). However, with suitably forewarning, this is a film that any self-respecting cinephile should make a point of seeing, and especially on the big screen.

    Noe proved with Irreversible that he was a technical genius and that his eye for original visuals knows no bounds. He also proved that he wasn't afraid to shock his audience and has quite the nasty streak running through his stories. In both visual content and shock factor, Irreversible was merely a precursor to his magnum opus Enter the Void. With an endless stream of nasty images and depressingly dead-eyed unpleasantness, it is difficult to feel anything for any of the characters, but none of this dampens the impact of Noe's probing, soaring, spectral camera as it floats in and out of lives and deaths. I don't know if it has ever been done before but the camera-as-spirit conceit is highly effective and one which puts a very interesting moral spin on the voyeurism of this film. Noe takes voyeurism to extreme, as Oscar's spirit jumps in and out of bodies in often very unusual and even shocking circumstances.

    The trouble with Enter the Void is that it is difficult sometimes to know whether to laugh or be shocked. Some of the content is pretty outrageous and even quite silly. However, for every roll of the eyes, there is a gasp of astonishment in terms of the intensity of the cinematic experience. Having now seen this film twice (it premiered at JDIFF 2010 in February), I must say I was pleased to see some superfluous scenes towards the end cut out, giving the film a somewhat more streamlined effect.

    Your tolerance for Noe's self-indulgence will most likely decide your level of enjoyment of this, a film I imagine will very much divide audiences, but it is at the very least a visual milestone that should be seen on as big a screen as possible (though somehow I can't see this one gracing Screen 1 in the Savoy anytime soon). A flawed piece, but one flooded with moments of genius.
  • I attended the International Premiere of "Enter the Void" at the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival. Fans of director Gaspar Noé, whose film "Irreversible" created a significant following, will not be disappointed. At two and a half hours long, this film is definitely not for everyone. But I knew that going in and got exactly what I'd hoped for and more. It's trippy, dreamy, and mesmerizing and left me shaking my head in wonder many times. Startling and risky performances punctuate the dazzling visuals. The biggest surprise for me: "Enter the Void" has much more of a narrative than I was expecting. I was prepared for a cinematic acid trip, which I got, but there is an actual storyline which threads through the experimental camera-work and effects which are at the heart of the film. I highly recommend this movie but with qualifications, though. There is a great deal of drug use and some explicit sex but the film is compelling.
  • grmagne15 September 2009
    If the following things disturb you, then you should probably avoid this film: strobe lights, drug use, shaky hand-held cameras, graphic sexuality, sperm, spinning cameras, psychedelic imagery, blood, gay sex, abortion, breastfeeding or a graphic auto wreck.

    But if you're still intrigued then sit down and get ready for nearly three hours of mind-blowing imagery that you'll never forget! Although IMDb lists the Toronto Film Festival version as "only" 135 minutes, according to my watch we got the 163 minute version that was shown at Cannes. The presenter also warned us 3 times before the screening that anyone with epilepsy should leave the theatre due to the flashing lights in the film. She was quite serious about that.

    I was a bit apprehensive prior to the start of this movie. I didn't "get" 2001 at all the first time I watched it and I positively hated David Lynch's ERASERHEAD. Would I enjoy ENTER THE VOID? Understand it? Walk out before the end? Yes, yes and no.

    The film opens with Oscar and Linda, siblings from the United States living in Japan, looking out at Tokyo from an apartment balcony. It quickly becomes obvious that Oscar is both a drug dealer & addict while his sister works as a stripper. Their tragic family history is revealed in segments throughout the first hour. The entire film is seen from Oscar's perspective, either as: (1) First-person, shaky camera, blurry shots as Oscar walks around Tokyo, very high on drugs (2) An out-of-body experience where Oscar floats around the city observing Linda's life and the people that interact with her (3) Flashbacks to Oscar and Linda's youth, similar to (1) except that here we always see the back of Oscar's head in the shot rather than "through his eyes" (4) A surprise at the climax of the film.

    Number (1) above may sound nausea-inducing to some, but there's usually interesting dialogue to distract you from the disorienting visuals and these scenes only comprise a small percentage of the total screen time. Technique number (2) could have been Oscar-worthy if it was filmed for a less controversial movie. Floating and spinning above the city of Tokyo and watching various dramas unfold from up above is absolutely incredible. You'll spend so much time watching from this perspective that it's easy to get lost in the images and forget what an incredible technical achievement you're observing.

    Virtually all of the key plot elements occur within the first 90 minutes of the film. After that the film transforms into more of a psychedelic, visual experience while the story fades away. This phase of the film really tested my patience and I started to check my watch frequently but there were enough eye-popping scenes that I'm sure I'll view this a second time someday. The momentum returns during the final 10 or 15 minutes, and although this final phase is simply a logical conclusion of what had been blatantly foreshadowed earlier, it's nonetheless amusing and incredible to watch the taboo-breaking finale.

    This film is very unique, disorienting and absolutely incredible & unforgettable. I can definitely understand why it's been compared to 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, but I found ENTER THE VOID to be more accessible and more comprehensible during my first viewing. It's too controversial and too bizarre to appeal to most people, but it will undoubtedly find its niche as one of the greatest cult classics of all-time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    One of our next great filmmakers, yet another South American, makes a film about French filmmaking. That once great tradition was compromised in the sixties by a burst of non-sustainable creativity that ate itself. A decent enough metaphor is that cinema overdosed on introspective drugs. Now we get a film that both chronicles that rebirth and is the product of it.

    It incidentally uses BUF, an incredibly inventive CGI house. It seems that some national film industries are being defined by a single house of visions. WETA in New Zealand is another example. BUF is behind the few things coming from France that are exciting.

    The story, the way most people are accepting it, is simple enough. A young man dies and we watch what his soul experiences in the transition before he is reborn. Noe is bright enough to know that no matter how deep you choose to go, the thing should appear obvious to those who need it so. To those, he gives a few markers. Well actually there are only the death, the birth and some mention of the Tibetan Book of the Dead which supposedly deals with this transition state.

    This book itself is the victim of our need to simplify. Even the Western title is borrowed (from an Egyptian template).

    But Noe has created something worth watching. He has imposed a couple techniques that help a lot. One is that our man when he dies is under the influence of a powerful hallucinogen, one supposedly created by the brain upon death, DMT (Death, Memory, Time). This allows us to accept and extend all the storytelling conventions we associate with tripping, including confused identity and spatial projection.

    Consonant with this, but also independent is the relatively new trend of spatial cinematography. This, by itself is important enough for us to celebrate this. There are moments of old-style kaleidoscopic barrage. They work. But the new thing here is what I will call "French distance." I first experienced it at the end of "Taxi Driver," where our driver may have died and joined us in surveying the carnage while deciding whether to call it a victory or not.

    It was an amazingly effective technique, in part because it was something cinematic that could never be seen in conventional theatrical staging/framing. Here, Noe/BUF take three dimensional navigation and vertical framing to an orgasmic extreme. It is pretty wonderful.

    Now take these two devices and add in Noe's other tendency: to dynamically shift the story from your supposition. He did that better than anyone in "Irreversible" where in playing the story backwards forces you to re-interpret a brutal rape (perhaps the most brutal ever filmed) as having never happened. We simply cannot do it because we are damaged from having gone through it.

    This story has three characters. One is our man who dies. He is a split person, the other half we see as his "roommate." This fellow, we learn in after-death flashbacks had a (natural) sexual desire for his mother, which became pathological and transferred to his sister through some events which we see, The second character is an artist, which the filmmaker clearly identifies with and through whom communicates to us. He also is a split person with a "roommate." The split is between the devices we see on screen, the story and the space. The roommate is literally building the miniature neon city we inhabit in the film. This is extremely clever and makes me have to stop writing for a while in appreciation.

    The third character is the sister/mother. She is everything soft. In part she is defined by everything other than the hard surfaces of the environment. Unfortunately, we have to sign up to accept the South American woman archetypes here, compliant nipples and vulva. (Fortunately we have the continental Spaniards Medem and Aldmodova to compensate.) At any rate, we follow the trip of our lost soul, lost through desire for his sister. He dies. She has an abortion (another reason this isn't for sensitive women). He chooses to be born in a limbo as that abortion's ghost, as the price for a single moment of entering her. Her void into his void.

    Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this.
  • One thing's for sure, you won't leave Gaspar Noé's "Enter the Void" with comparisons ready. More than likely, you won't want to think about it at all. Over two and a quarter hours, the film hijacks your consciousness like a potent hallucinogen, and leaves you feeling burnt out and brain-fried on the other end.

    Is it worth the trip? Yes, with an asterisk. After all, the opportunity to see something this flagrantly original comes but once in a blue moon, yet it isn't the sort of experience many will enjoy having. "Enter the Void" begins with a strobing title sequence that explodes into a first person account of drugs and death in Tokyo; it ought to come with a seizure warning. Compounding matters, almost every scene is designed to look like one continuous shot, with the camera being placed either behind our protagonist Oscar's head, or behind his eyelids. As if the pulsating neon lights weren't enough, we're also subjected to the split-second blackouts of Oscar blinking.

    Visually, "Enter the Void" is unlike anything I've ever seen, but it sure ain't perfect. The problem, bluntly, is its amorphous, front-heavy structure. The first half plays out conventionally enough, beginning with what we assume is the end, and playing flashback catch up to contextualize the subsequent events. We arrive back in the present to neatly tie the knot, only to discover that Noé isn't remotely close to finished telling his story.

    Where he takes "Enter the Void" in its ethereal second half is actually pretty fascinating, conceptually. However, it feels like an entirely different film. Noé floats aimlessly back and forth across Neo-Tokyo (to support the 'one shot' aesthetic, he rarely cuts directly from one location to another, often necessitating that the camera move through walls and entire buildings). The film really wears its premise thin during this overlong stint, though the last twenty minutes mostly redeem it.

    The conclusion is a little predictable given that the characters seem to be arbitrarily engrossed by the Tibetan Book of the Dead, but it works because it boils "Enter the Void" down to its visual core. Somewhere along the way, the lines of the narrative are obliterated and Noé takes a hypnotically beautiful and bizarre psychosexual detour that bridges the gap to his ending nicely.

    In retrospect, it's easy to remember the curious power of its final moments and marginalize the boredom that divides it from the first, much stronger hour. The film would almost certainly benefit from a second viewing, but I'm still not entirely sure that I would ever grant it one. I seriously question how Noé and his editor could stand to watch and assemble this film all day every day, because even their 137-minute finished product is a workout for the eyes. God help us if it were released in 3D.

    But for better or worse, eyestrain is part of the experience, and "Enter the Void" is more an incomparable experience than a great film. It's a shame that the vast majority of its potential audience will never even have the opportunity to see it projected, as I can only imagine home video will diminish its psychedelic impact.

    The best recommendation I can make is that if, like me, you go out of your way to see distinctly different films, you'll get your money's worth with "Enter the Void." Objectively, it's hard to deny the incredible creative scope and visual audacity on display, but it's also hard not to wish the whole thing were just a wee bit more succinct.

    It ain't perfect, but "Enter the Void" is original, and there's no undervaluing that. Hell, I'll try anything once.
  • Enter the Void is exactly the kind of polarizing film that cinema needs right now. Too many films these days play it safe, being concerned with keeping the audience comfortable, safe and happy. Enter Gaspar Noe, who clearly has no regard either for the well-being of either the audience or his actors. We have antagonistically long (but brilliant) takes, beginning in an apartment and ending in a bar, several blocks over. We are given characters and are exposed to their darkest moments, but are never given a real reason to care for them, or to perceive them as anything but wretched. We are also shown some sexually discomforting things that we never really wanted to see on the silver screen (if you've seen it you probably know what I'm talking about). Also, the film is almost completely in first-person viewpoint, so you're constantly feeling confined to what Oscar is looking at, which are mostly psychedelic images. In effect, the feel and tone of the story are immediately off-putting for the viewer, but since you've already bought a ticket, what can you do but follow it through?

    This is definitely the kind of film that can be approached in the wrong way, both with the medium that you view it through, and with your state of mind. Enter the Void is meant to be a transportive film (i.e. you living directly in the viewpoint of another, and feeling how that person feels, and perhaps even thinking how that person thinks). To technically maximize the experience, the film should really be experienced on the big screen. I'd imagine an IMAX screen to be ideal.

    I also think a film like Enter the Void really needs to be approached with a separate set of goals than that of a normal film. First of all, chuck any notions of entertainment, or even enjoyment, out the window. While you're at it, remove any notions of positivity that you can think of. The only reactions that Enter the Void will draw from you are negative ones. Personally, the only emotion I consistently felt was a slight nausea, tinted with the occasional horror, or perhaps a shameful arousal, as there is excessive sexual content that is all wretched in one way or another.

    The film is shot with a certain frame of mind, and sticks to it with remarkable faith. It's in the point of view of a small group of friends who are confined to the drug and clubbing scenes in Tokyo. He then films them in the most abrasive ways possible, showering the viewer in infinite neon lights, and fish-eyed close-ups, and then Noe lets his frames linger on these unsightly images for uncomfortably long. Even with his tracking shots moving from one location to another, when the viewer is normally given a moments rest, he rapidly cuts across hallways, stairs, and streets, and never gives the viewer a free moment to settle down.

    Despite the film's antagonistic feel, and despite the physical and psychological discomforts that the film drew from me, I still found Enter the Void to be a worthwhile and even inspirational experience. More to the point, Enter the Void may not be a friendly experience, but this exact kind of experimentation and determined expression are just what cinema needs in order to be taken seriously as an artistic medium, when so many other directors air on the side of caution and safety. It might be a difficult ride, but just watch it once and you'll carry it with you forever.
  • I hate to give a NOE movie any less then an 8 rating. Especially a movie like this, that is so unique. But boy was it way to long to enjoy. The excitement and fascination just got kinda choked out of me while watching. Which is a shame. because there is a masterpiece in there.

    And on that note a shout out to "short" art-house films like "Daft Punk's Electroma" and "The Tracy Fragments".
  • Gaspar Noé's big beast of a Cannes entrant showed for the first time in the UK this week in October. Gaspar Noé was there to introduce the film, which was a great kick for me, even though he didn't do a Q&A. His intro was quite funny, because he's not a grand intellectual, he's more of a sensualist. It's clear that he had a pretty dissipated youth and he talked about his experimentation with hallucinogenics and he always wondered as a kid why nobody was making movies with the images like he was seeing whilst high in them. So this is a movie I think he's wanted to make for a very long time, perhaps a couple of decades, but only now has he been able to get the freedom and funding to do it.

    He said he had seen the film Lady in the Lake after taking a magic mushroom; this is a 1947 Raymond Chandler adaptation which is shot in POV (that is, the camera is like the eyes of the lead). Gaspar had also been reading about life after death experiences, or near death experiences. So he wanted to combine the hallucinations, POV shooting, and out-of-body experience material. The result is 2 hour and 43 minutes of masterpiece. It will leave the ciné-gourmand gorged and bewildered. For me it's a clear step-up, even an evolution, from his last feature film in 2002, Irréversible. The idea of having out-of-body experiences really frees up the concept of POV, Noé's not limited by the body (which can't just glide forty feet into the air, or halfway across the city). He's really freed up to shoot the fluorescent sexual labyrinth of Tokyo, which is shot only at night-time and in POV.

    The story in the movie concerns a brother and sister (Oscar and Linda) who have a childhood trauma and end up moving to Tokyo in their late teens where they become involved in a heaving underworld. I think though that Tokyo is more of a metaphor in this film, I don't think he's trying to tell you anything about Tokyo the city per se, I think it's just the perfect pre-fabricated set for Noé. In the film it's a nerve centre, it's that place in life where we meet lovers, copulate, produce new life, and die. It's the mayfly (order Ephemeroptera, from the Greek for short-lived) part of the human lifecycle, which we experience in a heightened fashion through the eyes of Oscar.

    There's a lot of stuff in here for you to take offence to if you want, If you have ever taken offence to a film on content grounds as opposed to intellectual grounds, you're likely to take offence here. Pornographic linkages between adult sexuality and the Oedipus complex, for me are brilliant, but will upset many filmgoers.

    Those people who have decided that Noé is homophobic or misogynistic after seeing Irréversible are not going to have their minds changed by this movie at all. There seems to be a very strong link in his mind between sex and procreation. You don't have to consume the movie in a homophobic way in my opinion, but there may be a lot of upset gays after seeing this movie. Particularly as the gay character in this movie is portrayed as being on the same level as the rapist in Irréversible. There's no direct comment, but if you read between the lines, you may not like what you read.

    I think the androphiles are going to love Nathaniel Brown who plays the lead teen, Oscar, in this movie, which is his first credited role on IMDb, straight as I am, even I can tell he's a heartthrob. Paz de la Huerta as Linda, his sister, is very eye candyish too. If you like to see beautiful things writhing (we're talking eye popping next level FX hallucinations here, as well as copious sex), then this is the movie for you.

    I walked out of the cinema still tripping, the POV is so spectacularly well delivered that you feel almost like you're still in the movie when you come out, because the mode of perception hasn't changed.

    The lasting images I am left with are from the Love hotel, a very strange pastel and fluorescent building that has holo-reflectors design on the outside and which Noé dedicates a lot of the later part of the movie to, the FX emanations are spectacular.
  • This movie starts out great with some good ideas, such as using the first person view, but after a little while, the time starts to really wear on, with long sequences which neither really serve any purpose (other than showing for 10 minutes what you see when closing your eyes after having taken drugs) nor are pretty for the eye. Also, the fact that you know much of the story right from the beginning doesn't help the boredom of this movie. So, although the original idea in itself is rather good, everything is so stretched out with uninteresting scenes, that I've really mixed fillings about this one. A unique experience which is boring, most of the time.
  • I think the art is beautiful, I really enjoyed the beginning and had high hopes. It laid out the potential of the plot, and the meaning behind it. And then it just didn't follow through with it. I felt a bit cheated watching a 3 hour long movie and being left with so little.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Where to start? I saw this film nearly a month ago at Melbourne International Film Festival. I haven't quite been able to shake it from my brain since! Firstly, let's get the negatives out of the was. The film is at least an hour to long and, especially in the latter half, at times ridiculously self-indulgent.

    However, as a whole, the film has this dreamy, hallucinogenic quality that absolutely entranced me. I admire and respect "Irreversible" a great deal; however, the at times raw emotional quality of "Enter The Void" struck a greater chord with me as a viewer. I love the scene where Linda finds out Oscar has died. One of the best uses of selective focus I've seen in film in a very long time.

    This is a film that demands to be seen in a cinema. Noe's command of sound and vision is truly astounding to behold. On both a physical and psychological level, he really gets you into the heads of the characters. Apparently, Noe spent two years planning the camera-work on the film. This sense of attention to detail definitely shows in the finished product. A month after seeing the film, moments and images of it are burnt into my brain.

    I will be the first to say that "Enter The Void" is absolutely an acquired taste and definitely not for everyone. However, if you have the mind and sensibilities for it, I can't recommend it enough. While not as deeply disturbing as "Irreversible", it is,in many ways, infinitely more challenging.

    I have always loved films that can push me, provoke me and take me somewhere I have never been before. "Enter The Void" does all three. I can honestly say that, in all my years of watching films, I have never seen anything quite like it.

    Can't wait to see what Noe does next. This film proves he is truly an artist in all senses of the word.
  • If you are a fan of psychedelics, shrooms, or acid this has got to be the best way to enjoy this experience. With the bright lights and creative filmmaking and drug use throughout the film. It Is almost comforting but beware this is not for the light-hearted. The film has deep trauma and makes you feel uneasy at points. It almost feels like you're a part of the movie with the first-person POV and the inner dialog of the main character. I found using headphones increases the realness and increases the nerves throughout the film. With All this said be careful this film is like no other I've seen before it's a beautiful but also a terrifying experience.
  • While the concept and technical execution of the movie is very good and interesting, it's a shame it's wasted on terrible editing and pacing. This isn't an epic tale with tons of twists and turns that needs a long time to tell it all. It's a fairly simple story, but padded out to the extreme with "sequences" between each scene.

    I get it's not meant to be fast paced. But had this movie been cut down to 1h 40min (1 hour slower) it would still feel slow paced due to the simple story being told which doesn't contain too many events.

    Giving this a 3 star feels too generous, as I would also regard this as one of the worst movies I have ever seen. A movie can't stand on the technical features alone, if the story and experience of watching the movie is utter crap. It was such a pain to sit through. It really could have been so much better with some better editing and pacing of it's story.
  • This was my first film at the Stockholm Film Festival, I don't mean to brag but Gaspar Noé got to use my umbrella when the reporters took photos of him in the rain, never going to touch that umbrella again...

    First I have to say "Enter The Void" technical masterpiece. The use of the camera is creative and splendid and makes the whole movie as a roller coaster ride. The special effects are really, really special. I got hooked on these technical superiority's in "Enter The Void" that I got all thrilled down my spine. Watching it at the cinema really gave it an incredible touch. The sound was ear piercing and in some scenes it made me jump in the seat. It could go almost half and hour without any dialog, just remarkable scenes and CGI. You could think by this description it's a joyful and happy movie, but it's really not. It's dark, sea bottom dark. This movie have everything all parents wants to keep away from their children. I just get the feelings this movie would get so censored in America it would be a whole other film when showed over the ocean. But censoring this movie is fatal and would kill it. I certainly hope everyone is going to get sucked into the void just as I did.

    It was a great experience, I can't deny it, but what made me put an 8/10 was the length. Sometimes Gaspar really could have made some shots shorter, there were unnatural long phases that were totally unnecessary. So that's why I give it an eight. Other then that I see no faults in this masterpiece. Go watch as soon as it shows up in a cinema close to you.
  • Gaspar Noe gets a free pass from film festival directors and apparently (judging from the IMDb sample reaction) ignorant film fans with his intentionally provocative works. I've seen this dreck before.

    With ENTER THE VOID we have a typical case of a film (or video)-maker infatuated with some technique and then running it into the ground. The floating "omniscient" camera p-o-v is unleashed early in the film after the first-person hand-held camera gimmick wears thin, and the viewer must suffer through it for over two hours, when Noe is not cribbing from "the ultimate trip", Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for his tedious light shows.

    As a film buff old enough to have sat through 2001 several times in all its Cinerama glory, I can vouch for its trippy theatrical impact back in 1968; current fans do not have this opportunity so we don't have a fair appreciation of this masterpiece based on mere video screenings. Even given this advantage, Noe conjures here an ordinary rendering of the "cult of ugliness", making each shot pastel-pretty but with determined ugly = beautiful inversions. I would prefer an Abel Ferrara visit to the drug-infested gutter with his intrinsically gritty approach to Noe's SFX hokum any day of the week.

    The bland anti-hero Nathaniel Brown was poorly cast, a dull presence in those few shots when we actually see him, and his sidekick Cyril Roy is embarrassingly there just to deliver exposition. Even in the most rudimentary, improvised XXX porn, I can't recall having the film's premise "explained" to me the way Roy lays out in detail the reincarnation theme from the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and then, sure enough Brown goes through the out-of-body post-death claptrap as described. Paz de la Huerta is the recent indie flavor of the month girl (see: Jarmusch), but her lack of acting ability is evident, especially in her freakout scene here. In castng this eye candy role, anybody (read: any body) will do.

    For porno content, Noe delivers considerable footage, none of which has the impact of real porn. Especially when compared to the work of Phil Prince, Joe Davian and other New York City pornographers of the '70s and early '80s, when s&m/b&d dominated (pun intended) porn features for a while, all fully documented on DVD reissues. Glamorizing then debunking the ecstasies/perils of the druggie life style is such an old hat concept in filmmaking that I'm surprised anyone gave Noe any credit for this rehash.

    Parting shot: the infamous "penis entering vagina" shot in ENTER THE VOID is a corny ripoff of pornographer Luca Damiano, who has used this effect in numerous '90s porn videos, any one of which is more entertaining than VOID. Check out his EROTIC ADVENTURES OF RED RIDING HOOD for a prime example.
  • Quinoa198412 August 2010
    Warning: Spoilers
    For certain directors, a project may gestate for a while, such as Inception, which Nolan said took eight years, or Tarantino's 'Basterds' a decade. For Gaspar Noe, he tops them all, with his film being worked on and re-tooled over the course of *twenty* years. This goes without saying that some of this was based around waiting for the proper visual effects; Enter the Void has so many shots that are done with CGI and with a kind of vfx-led camera approach that it's hard to count what is "really" shot and what was done on a computer. But this doesn't take away from what works about Noe's first film since Irreversible. No, there are other things to take away that don't work.

    In terms of artistic ambition and a deranged glee at keeping the audience on a hook for 'what will happen next', Noe goes to take the cake for the year - yes, even more than Nolan's mind-trip. This is such a mind-trip that it could give regular trippers a run for their head- shop money. And this all isn't hyperbole: this is a true drug movie, where a viewer is taken along on a character's journey - if it even is a character at all - and the psychedelic atmosphere created in Tokyo.

    As far as the plot goes, there is either very little of it or a lot of it. It starts with Oscar (Nathanial Brown), who is a drug dealer, leaving his apartment he shares with his sister, Linda (Paz de la Huerta), and meeting his buyer, some young kid. But when he's set up, and, supposedly, is shot by the cops in the bathroom - this is not a spoiler inasmuch as this is the start of the movie pretty much - he's dead... but then the rest of the movie goes on, and we see still from the first-person POV that the film started on continue. The difference is that now the POV angle keeps cascading and flying in the air, almost always getting over-head angles on characters talking across rooms and skylines and buildings.

    There is still more story for Noe to tell, however. Oscar and Linda's back-story, for one, is given some great depth (still that first-person POV angle, only shot from behind Brown's head instead of his eyes). It's an extremely sad tale, almost too tragic to call melodrama, as Oscar and Linda go from a relatively happy childhood to their parents dying in a head-on collision with themselves in the backseat, and Linda being sent to a foster home away from Oscar. They reconnect when they're adults in Tokyo, and are all they have left in the world - that is until drugs and stripping get in the way, as well as a sub-plot involving a local British woman and her son who is also deep into drugs.

    In terms of the story itself, Noe actually has a firmly constructed and at least mostly cohesive tale to tell. It's in the way he goes about it that will makes one's head spin. Make no mistake, this is an "art" film, or an experimental film or what have you. For those who found Inception too 'Hollywood' or possibly too straightforward, then come and get it. The real confounding sense of Noe's cinema comes forth in those pirouetting shots, which sometimes seem to be all of one single shot but in fact are probably many (they're separated by shots that literally dive into 'things' like a light or a plant or, at one disturbing moment, a fetus on a table). It's kind of staggering to see this control and exhilaration in many of these shots, taking into account the hyper- realistic settings in rooms and streets of Tokyo, and the electric- lights and psychedelia brought around by drugs.

    Early on Noe gets the audience right into the swing of it (not counting credits) with Oscar's trip with DMT: one may feel as if they're in a combination of fractals, that screen-saver on the Windows Media Player, and a legitimate drug trip. But this is only the start of shots and angles and scenes that play out sometimes over simply a bright white or yellow light. While this holds the attention for the first two thirds of the film, when it goes on and on in that last half hour or so (I wasn't sure how long and was at least attentive not to check a watch), it drags on and becomes tedious. It's hard to say exactly where to cut, though Noe reportedly has a "shorter" cut than the uncut 160 minute version. But for all of the deranged fun in seeing such a conceptual style executed, and always in mind with it being possibly a floating consciousness or just a super-extended drug trip (or both), it wears thin, even with the excess nudity and sex at the "Love Hotel" in the final reel.

    Enter the Void is a mixed bag of treasures and disappointments. Noe has so much going for him with his aesthetic that he almost neglects his actors. De la Huerta (previously all-nude in The Limits of Control) shows how well she can act here, and helps give a deep reservoir of emotional heft in the scenes that need it. And supporting actors and characters, such as the French drug-friend and that little guy Victor, all do what they can to make scenes more dramatically powerful than they have any right to be given the style over substance. But when both come together, it's truly amazing, and occasionally brilliant stuff, such as the repeated shock of the car crash or (some of) the up-front sex. It's like a remake of Requiem for a Dream by a film student in love with the over-head roaming shots from Minority Report. It's depressing, fun, dull, high and with an ending that is just pure WTF. Cult film fans rejoice!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Patience. It's something that's quickly eroding at the dawn of my generation. I do not mean this as a criticism. Times change. But in our age of accessing information so quickly, we can often find ourselves just "getting to the point" these days. I will start off by saying that this film requires patience. While you may actually get the point of this movie rather quickly, the ride itself is a long winded sermon about the sanctity of life itself.

    "Do you believe in reincarnation?" is the setup of the entire concept of what could be considered Noe's magnum opus. The driving force here is that procreation is driven by empathy. The need to connect with someone on the deepest level to create life.

    It is filmed entirely from the perspective of Oscar, the film's protagonist, who dies unexpectedly from a series of unfortunate events. What follows after is a deeply personal journey of his spirit's observations post-life. He must witness the humanity of those he loves most, laid bare. His willingness to forgive these transgressions ultimately leads to his rebirth, and the fulfillment of his promise to his sister.

    While Noe's films can be considered very personal in a way, and deal with taboo that we often stride over with rapidity, it serves well for those willing to receive it. If one were willing to give these ideas a chance, and explore them with said patience, they'll find something in a film that very few directors can provide us today... life itself. While such introspection can cause discomfort in those that expect merely escapism from a film, here provided is an introspective and soulful existentialism that dives deep into the nature of human forgiveness and retribution.

    A film that is beautiful visually, musically, and humanely. I guarantee that you will not experience another film like it, and it will resonate for some time.
  • I've been meaning to watch this for a while and after plenty of research I decided to go for it. Firstly, it is not as hard to watch as I was lead to believe, provided you're not too easily offended then this will not upset or depress you in a way that other films have.

    The first two parts of this movie are breath-taking, they were an absolute pleasure to watch and I loved every minute. However, as the movie went on, I found that some cinematic visuals and effects were being recycled too often and they left very long transitions between the narrative and the delivery of the remainder of the story. The cinematography is unparalleled though, and I have honestly no idea how much was this movie was filmed and created, I've never seen cinematography like it.

    This movie is worth watching but unfortunately is not as good as I was hoping.
  • So what could I add to what has been stated in the other reviews? Yes, 'Enter the Void' is definitely a trippy mindbuster, and as such anyone who requires story or frames to enjoy a film should give it a miss. Yes, the visuals are eye-popping and the ubiquitous stroboscope effects may cause severe nausea - I watched it on BR and couldn't help but thinking what an advantage home entertainment can be over cinema exposure. This is a film which may be best enjoyed alone, somewhat stoned or drunk, and very late at night. And the pause button is definitely a life-saver.

    I can sympathize with those who felt tormented by the epic runtime and disparity between the first and second half of the film: the former is sort of a 'last film' of the protagonist Victor retelling his life, and therefore makes sense plot-wise, the latter is a meandering flow representing his attachment to his sister. It is a bit unfair to discard the film for this reason, though, because the dialogue between Victor and his best friend Alex in the beginning hints at what the nature and culmination of this attachment will be. The interspersed aerial shots of an increasingly CG-rendered Tokyo may actually put this transition into question - this could all very well be part of Victor's 'death trip'.

    What I really liked about 'Enter the Void' is the setting, for I have lived in Tokyo myself for three years. The area where the story takes place (judging from where the CG puts the Tokyo Tower) should be Roppongi, which is an expat and night club haven; while the CG makes the place appear a bit gaudy, it is indeed populated by a disproportionate number of drop-outs and sleazy bees, and I've always wondered why there's no film about Roppongi yet - contemporary Tokyo is mostly condensed to the Yakuza backdrop of Kabukichô or the juvenile epicenter of Shibuya. So on that note, I appreciate a film about the expat world, as weird and dysfunctional as it may be.

    'Enter the Void' pushes the gates of what film can visually do visually wide open, and therefore shouldn't be dismissed by any cinephile. But your viewing conditions will be crucial to whether you will love this film or hate it.
  • If Irreversible was like a sledgehammer over the viewer's head, with it's grim, violent reality told in strobe light and spiraling camera, then Enter The Void is surely a neon bullet. More colourful, pulsating, feverish and hypnotic than the first film, Void is quite a trip. But where it raises the stakes visually, it's storytelling falls short.

    This is coming from someone who doesn't 'like' Irreverible as much as admire it's power. It's not an easy film to sit through, and leaves an unshakeable feeling of horror well after it's over. I respect that, along with Noe's directorial talent in delivering it. In 'Void', I experienced a different journey, and one much less concerned with the characters floating through each scene.

    Like the neon lights of Tokio, the people in this film were simply there; moving in and out of focus, part of the visual landscape. Once the colourful assault entered it's second hour, I found myself checking my watch, looking around the cinema, waiting for it to end. I didn't care about what happened to anyone hovering under each crane shot, I just wanted to straighten out, leave Tokyo, meet another human being instead of being chastised by all the lights. It was like being given a sermon on life and death by an acid freak in a nightclub; I needed a polite way of excusing myself and finding someone else to talk to. But there was no one else, only Noe.

    Enter The Void is still in a league of it's own, still something wildly original in a universe of cinematic dreariness. It should be seen by anyone prepared to enter the unknown. But my god, how much more could it have been if it found it's footing on earth, as well as in the void?
  • "Enter the Void" is the cinematic equivalent of an epileptic fit. Beginning with the opening credits, Argentinian director Gaspar Noé seeks to overwhelm us with frantic flickering and humming. Then we are thrown into the first-person perspective of Oscar, a drug dealer in Tokyo. But that doesn't last for long, because poor Oscar gets betrayed by a friend and ambushed by the police. He flees to the toilet of the eponymous bar "The Void", where he gets shot. From this point on, the camera represents Oscar's soul, whirling through Tokyo and waiting for some kind of redemption or resurrection.

    When you watch "Enter the Void", you might be tricked into thinking it is art. But actually, it is the exact opposite: It is trash masquerading as art. Behind its flashy façade, there is not much to be said about the substance of this movie. Noé focuses on one single gimmick and does it to death until the audience is frustrated, nauseated or (in my case) bored. Don't get me wrong. Of course it can be interesting to challenge and even torment the audience of a movie. Look at Lars von Trier's work, or Nicolas Winding Refn's "Only God Forgives". Although "Only God Forgives" is deeply flawed, at least it has some kind of mystery to it, whereas "Enter the Void" is literally devoid of any meaning. Its style is one-sided and its story shockingly trivial.

    There are some redeeming factors. The sex scenes feel sensual and real in a way the rest of the movie doesn't. An incestuous relationship between Oscar and his sister Linda is frequently hinted at, which gives "Enter the Void" an emotional center, albeit a very blurred one. If you just want a different or extreme experience, you might enjoy Noé's visual orgy. But if you expect a finely nuanced and truly artistic movie, don't bother with this one.
  • Gaspar Noé has created his most ambitious journey with the latest addition to his already stellar filmography. Noé's new film "Enter The Void" explores what happens when you die and attempts to bring the audience into the "psychedelic" and near/post death experience. While this is his most technologically impressive and aspiring film it is not his best. In fact, it is the worst of his catalog but that isn't to say it is bad, it's just not as incredible as his other films. Noé has stated this film was inspired by psychedelic experiences and the "Tibetan Book of The Dead" which discusses the death experience including re-birth. He even traveled to the Amazon to experience one of the most powerful psychedelics known, "Ayahuasca". Noé laughingly stated this was for "professional research".

    Newcomer Nathanial Brown plays "Oscar", an American 20 something living in Tokyo trying to make ends meet by selling drugs. Him and his sister "Linda" played by a sultry Paz De la Huerta are orphans from a horrific car crash when they were children. Oscar has a slight obsession with breasts, psychedelic drugs, and inappropriate relationships; including one with his sister. The story is told in three parts, first showing Oscar's point of view as he takes DMT and deals drugs. Second, we are in the POV of Oscar's soul after being shot, re-living the events leading up to his demise. In this section, we learn that he has managed to move his sister out to Tokyo where she has becomes a stripper. We witness the car crash that took their parents and learn about his "awkward" relationship with Linda. Third, we see Oscar's soul traveling the city watching over his sister as he promised her that he will "never leave her". The ending is ambiguous, but most of his films are; though for the first time that I know of, he revealed in a few interviews big hints as to what really happens. So be careful if you are reading interviews prior to watching the film.

    As with most of Noé's films, ETV attempts to alter the viewer's perception through the use of sound and visuals. "I Stand Alone" and "Irreversible" were both filmed in this way and both managed to completely engross me into the characters psyche. In "Enter The Void", Noé attempts this right off the bat in the opening credit sequence. He uses an industrial trance song from the England techno group "LFO". Partnered with pulsating lights and text, he essential brings the audience into a psychedelic "trip". Some will be immediately turned off by this beginning sequence as it is almost seizure inducing but those who stick it out are in for a treat. The soundtrack was an integral part as well. There was music, but mostly it was background noise and what I think was Binaural Tones. Binaural Tones or Beats are low frequency sounds meant to alter the brain waves in an effort to change perception. If there is any truth to this phenomenon, I think the audience experiences it first hand while watching.

    Noe uses the same technique as he did in "Irreversible" having the camera float above and transition through solid objects. This was one of the few things I didn't like about the movie. I felt like I had seen it before and that he wasn't presenting anything new. The floating aside, he did managed to show me something I have never seen before. The POV technique. I couldn't believe what I was watching when Oscar was standing in the mirror washing his face. The camera blacked out perfectly in sync with when Oscar puts his hands over his eyes. It was fascinating to watch, in fact there are many camera shots in the film that left my jaw dropped.

    The script was great but some of the performances were not. I was surprised by this since all of his previous films were incredibly acted. Noé stated in an interview that there was a lot of improvisation on set in regards to the script. I can't help but think maybe this had something to do with the poor acting. I suppose the improvisation helped the film seem more real, but it just felt forced. One standout for me was the actress who plays the younger version of Linda. Emily Alyn Lind sent chills down my spine with her portrayal of a child witnessing her parents horrific death.

    Another surprising, but welcome change is that this movie wasn't very violent. Pretty much all of Noé's previous feature films scared the hell out of me. This trip was different, though he still featured graphic sex as he tends to do in all of his films. But this movie isn't about sex and violence. At it's heart it is about the unknown (death) and shows the collective experience of many people over many centuries (psychedelics). Early in the film Oscars friend "Alex", played by Cyril Roy, mentions that the chemical in with DMT and Ayahuasca is in the human body already. He says that when you die the DMT is released essentially giving you the "hardest trip" you can get. My theory is that Noe wanted to show the effect of taking DMT recreationally (Oscar's first person view of a DMT trip early in the film) and the effect of DMT naturally occurring at the moment of death. A brilliant concept that he pulled off flawlessly.

    As with most of his films, this is not for everyone. You have to be able to appreciate the craft of movie making to really understand the technical accomplishment this film was. Some critics have said this is "style over substance", but I disagree. The film has its faults, yes, but it is enjoyable and captivating. I've never seen anything like it and honestly probably never will. Gaspar Noé is one of the best directors in the world today, I can't wait to see what he thinks up next.
  • rooee9 October 2010
    A week after the initial rush of watching Gaspar Noe's follow-up to 2002's infamous Irreversible, and I'm happy to report no symptoms of a comedown.

    Enter the Void is a far better vehicle for Noe's brand of twirling visuals and echochamber audio. In Irreversible these flamboyances felt distracting; technical digressions that stole us away from the horror of the subject matter – it's notable that in that film's most frighteningly effective scene the camera fell still. In Enter the Void, we ARE the disembodied narrator: we live his fears, curiosities and oedipal desires.

    The abridged story: Boy becomes drug dealer to pay for sister's plane ticket to perma-night Japan. Boy is shot dead in botched drugs raid. Boy becomes angel, observing sister's self-destructive grief.

    With all its first-person death and despair and titillation, this is exploitation movie-making of the virtuoso kind. But it is also, at times, heart-rending, particularly in its depiction of the single event that drew Oscar (Nathaniel Brown) and Linda (Paz de la Huerta) into an unbreakable childhood embrace.

    There's a womb-like tranquillity to Oscar's Angel-Vision™: a kind of serene detachment, which makes his inability to intervene all the more poignant. Even when brother and sister were separated by 5000 miles, they knew they would see each other – one day, one day. But in death, Linda is tragically cut free of that shared umbilical. Death may have no dominion – but left behind on the mortal coil, how's she to know that?

    Did we really need the Tibetan Book of the Dead subplot? It seems rather hokey. That Oscar's journey follows the chapters of the Book is a lot more interesting than mumbled, drug-fuelled dialogue detailing its content and meaning. It's a pity that Noe didn't let us make the connection by ourselves.

    Some scenes fall disappointingly flat. Those involving Victor's (Olly Alexander from Bright Star) family, particularly, are jarringly unconvincing. It's as if Noe isn't comfortable directing petty domestic disputes because he has bigger fish perceptions to fry... Or more likely, it's because English is not his first language.

    The film's "Love Hotel" climax may appear to labour its point through repetition; but then Enter the Void is a fresh look at the circles of life – the rhythms of corporeal existence; kill, cure, love, create – so perhaps we should just lie back and surrender and feel safe in the knowledge that we're witnessing the progress of a film-maker who will one day give the world a vital work of art. Just not quite yet.
  • Jonny_Numb6 March 2011
    With each film, director Gaspar Noe aims to provoke, disorient, and even violate the viewer in some way; as a result, one gets the impression that he invites the vitriol of those who would slam his cinematic vision. Now, while I was compelled (if not "entertained") by the near-pornographic subjectivity of Noe's "I Stand Alone" (the tale of a sociopath butcher wandering around France with a whole lot of pent-up anger) and "Irreversible" (a backwards-unraveling tale of revenge and rape), "Enter the Void" is an agonizingly overlong tale of death and the Afterlife that mistakes neon-saturated, drug-trip informed imagery as a profound comment on a world beyond our own mortality. In its first half, "Void" manages to compel and intrigue, even if our grating and unsympathetic protagonists (a brother-and-sister duo living in Japan as a drug dealer and a stripper, respectively) do very little to make all the flashy neon seem like more than aesthetic window-dressing. At 90 minutes, "Void" is a passable (if largely empty) film, but as it crawls towards the 3-hour mark, it becomes obnoxious, intolerable, and infuriating (with Noe's pretentious excesses -- culminating in a literal orgy -- becoming the stuff of yawns rather than gasps).
An error has occured. Please try again.