Inkeeping with Roland's offensive culture site...

It must be said that Irreversible is a good movie. I read one critique that said something along the lines of "shitty plot, shitty dialogue; if you didn't have those two gruesome scenes you wouldn't have a movie." Which in a way is true, but it certainly doesn't give credit where it's due.

The reason that it is a good movie is that it forces thought and conversation about its content, whether you like it or not. Physically, I felt unwell and uneasy for 24 hours after seeing it. This forced me to reconcile my issues with the film's content - purely because I had to deconstruct it in order to feel better. And, through thinking about all the different perspectives through which you could interpret the film, I did eventually feel a bit better about it.

Two points on that last sentence: 1. There are many perspectives that you could take. Because of the simple plot, it's extremely open to interpretation. It does little else other than to trigger off your own concerns or issues with things like violence, rape vs non-rape, the need for revenge, sex and power, determinism and a whole other swag of conflicts that you may have playing out in the back of your head. (Or being rammed out the back of your head - in-joke). 2. Even though rationalisation and cerebral deconstruction of the film can help to take some of the nausea away, Noe was clever enough to sabotage this with the line in the film "You can't explain everything. Some things are just irrational and you can't explain them."

The back-to-front running of scenes was necessary to facilitate the comparison between the shocking acts and the normal acts. It was also necessary to allow you to see everything in retrospect, to make Noe's (weak) case for determinism and premonitions. I think essentially he was saying "You can't know your own future, because you wouldn't be able to live or be happy." His assertion and reiteration that "time destroys all things" didn't mean much to me. It just added to the sense of hopelessness that was created by the knowledge of the future.

Strangely, one of the things that left me uneasy was the fact that they killed the wrong guy - bringing to light my own attitude towards revenge. Another was the power struggle between men & women when it comes to sex. Ali somewhat surprised me with his comment that he sees sex and power inextricably linked. This is something that my mother said to me a few years ago, and something that I've never agreed with. That said, it did seem to be an issue for the characters in Irreversible. Alex was clearly hanging on to whatever illusions of power she could find, and exploiting them as much as she could. She said things like "It's always the woman that decides," and "the man just needs to concentrate on his own pleasure to give the woman pleasure," both of which were made painfully false by her rape. She obviously had difficulties with these issues, and took full advantage of her ability to hurt a man by teasing Pierre for not being able to make her come. She was clinging onto whatever power she could.

I do agree with Ali in that, in this respect, Irreversible (like any film depicting rape) would be much harder to take if you're female.

I think you could talk about this film forever. In the end I guess my point is this. Through direction, music, sound effects, and the graphic nature of the film, Noe succeeds in making you feel bilious. This was his tool. The simple plot forces you to address whichever element of the film most grabs you. This was indiscriminate targeting of your deepest concerns. The details and small tangents placed in the film that direct your thoughts, that was his craft.

I don't know, what do you think? All that I've written here is one stream of thoughts I had, whereas I've had hundreds. And I can't wait to hear one of yours Ali, Roland, anyone that's seen it.