Search - Alexandra's Project on DVD

Disturbing

mjd | Cleveland, OH USA | 03/19/2007

(4 out of 5 stars)

"Many others have already reviewed the plot, so I will stay away from that. I just saw it at our the Cleveland International Film Festival. The director / writer was in attendance for a Q&A after the film.

De Heer claimed that he strived for balance in the two characters when making the film. He also admitted that most people who see the film do not see much balance. He also said that feminist groups were the main advocates for the film.

After watching I came to two conclusions on his intentions.
1. The only balance that I saw is that in the beginning she is miserable and at the end he is miserable.
2. I cant see how any feminst group would get behind this movie. DeHeer portrays this woman as a crazy b#$%#. She is vengeful, she is a whore (literaly), she abuses drugs, and probably worst of all she kidnaps their children.

I would hate to meet the kind of people that support this lunatic. Any feminst that supports a person like this needs a check up from the neck up. This women is evil and in real life she would lose both of those kids to the father. Dont mistake me here, the father is no choir boy himself. He certainly has his vices and the writer makes sure you know that. But by the end their is only one victim.

As a movie it is very well written and clever. It is a plot that will keep you on the edge of your seat for what will happen next. It ends on a down note with a little humor built in to soften some of the blow.

In whole it is a film that is worth seeing. It will keep your interest and leave you thinking....
"

Rolf de Heer has a feminine side?

Vera | Poland | 03/04/2006

(1 out of 5 stars)

"Amazon is quite gracious in allowing reviewers the chance to rate the worst movies with only 1 star. I have to say that this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I must disagree with my other reviewers and state that if this is Rolfie boy's feminine side, I wish he wouldn't have found it in the first place.

Actually, this movie is a feminist fantasy wrapped up in a pseudo-intellectual skirt posing as a commentary on contemporary relationships. If Rolf wants to make porno, he should just make porno and not call it art! Also, he should not be preaching to us about how bad men are, enough already!

The main character is a shallow, sad excuse for a woman and a mother. Whatever happened to talking to your partner and telling them, 'I'm not happy and what are we going to do about it?' But NOOOO! Ms. Alexandra has to become a hooker to get back at the man who she said, "Married my body." And what did she marry? Is her husband fat, ugly, an ogre, does he look like Shrek on crack? Quite the opposite, he is a normal guy - just like 75% of the men out there, he's nothing special.

Overall, Rolf de Heer must have been drunk when he made this piece of fetid tripe. If you like man-hating movies get it, if you want social commentary and entertainment, look elsewhere."

SPOILERS! BEWARE!

Maria William | Brooklyn, NY United States | 12/21/2009

(4 out of 5 stars)

"I'm giving this a high rating because it really IS a superbly done movie that kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time. Tense, disturbing, well-acted. This is a story of one woman unhappy in her marriage, who cooks up a rather original (and extreme) act of revenge against her husband. Most of the film is him watching the VCR tape she's made for him. What throws me off a bit is that I can't quite understand the message behind the film. It comes very close to being nothing more than hateful feminist drivel (and if it was directed by a woman, it would have probably led me to assume just that). If doesn't even attempt to state that the husband was in fact completely deserving of what the wife did to him. Apparently, the only thing this poor man is guilty of is high libido. He doesn't abuse his wife. He's a good father to his kids. He's a good provider. She implies he's cheating, but there's nothing in the film to substantiate this claim. His only sin is that he's constantly horny for his wife - well, I'll be damned! Any woman who can say her husband lusts after her a decade or more after he married her should feel very fortunate. I'm female, and I found myself rooting for the husband every step of the way. I HATED the female lead. Whether or not this was the director's intention, I'm not sure. I felt it was a drawback for me. But as I said, genre-wise this is a fantastically done film in every respect. Therefore, four stars."

Intense and Provocative

avoraciousreader | Somewhere in the Space Time Continuum | 08/02/2005

(5 out of 5 stars)

"This film will definitely not appeal to everyone. It is emotionally and sexually brutal, and the weak of heart or stomach should stick to Hillary Duff flicks, or perhaps a good clean slasher film. When I saw a 'sneak preview' a few days ago, not one walked out during the film but there was a stunned and silent exodus after. The closest I can come to its raw impact are Peter Greenaway films such as "The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover", though "Alexandra's Project" is simpler and more personal. It compels you to watch even as it makes it uncomfortable to do so.

The film starts out easily, though with some forebodings of camera angle and incident. Steve (Gary Sweet) wakes up in an Australian suburb on his birthday; his charming children give him some presents, and his wife Alexandra (Helen Buday) tells him that a surprise will be waiting him when he comes home. It seems an idyllic scene, but .... When Alexandra wants to pay a bill, Steve forcefully reminds her the accounts are his ... their row house has been fitted with deadbolt locks and automated security shutters (doubly jarring in free and open Australia) ... Steve curses a sinister neighbor out watering the communal lawn. At work, Steve is called into the boardroom ... sweatingly unsure if he is to be fired or promoted (perhaps, we think, his controlling nature at home stems from lack of control at work?). But it is good news, and he goes home ready to celebrate ...

... only to find an empty, dark and shuttered house, the light bulbs removed and a video tape on the TV saying "watch me". Pretty creepy, but when he puts it in it's a birthday present -- Alexandra informing him the children are staying with a relative and then doing an amateurish striptease for the camera as Steve has a beer (at the tape's suggestion) and enthusiastically watches. Then she stops, not quite naked, and sits down to vent her anger and frustration at her life and him. When he tries to escape, he finds he is cleverly locked in by all those security devices, and he is forced to continue, gradually becoming drunker, distress playing on his face.

It would be too much of a spoiler to describe what happens next, but there are several surprises as the tension builds and a sad and enigmatic ending. It becomes over the top at times, but in a way that is the point. We don't know if Alexandra is being logical and rational, reacting to a desperate situation, or overreacting out of dementia or paranoia.

Buday's is a bravura performance, as she chews up the scenery and convincingly plays a woman who is (justifiably or not) not about to take it any more. Sweet's performance is less overtly dramatic, but excellent in the play of emotion on his face as he gradually dissolves in pity and horror. Both actors take great risks. It is remarkable that each is alone, Buday/Alexandra speaking to camera while Sweet/Steve must act passively and receptively.

Women in the audience will undoubtedly sympathize with Alexandra's grievances and frustrations, while men will likely see her taped monologue as a metaphor for women's desire to have the men in their lives as mute objects, receiving an angry harangue without rebuttal. Many will be disgusted or horrified, but few will be left unaffected."