Critic's Grade: A+

If ever there existed a movie whose title is a perfect summation of the viewer's reaction towards it, it is Gaspar No?'s "Irreversible," a piece of work so visually fascinating and yet so hard to look at in moments that averting one's eyes is simply not an option. In perhaps what is the most courageous display of filmmaking I've ever seen, No? pushes the envelope with depictions of rape and violence so profoundly disturbing in their sense of realism that they cannot be stricken from memory. Call it the best display of excess you've ever witnessed, or label it a mere exploitation flick with carnage to spare; love it, like it, or hate it, forgetting the experience is not one of your options.

The film's initial plot is miniscule: encompassing the events of a single night, perhaps a window of no more than five hours, the story plunges us headfirst into the underbelly of French society, taking us into the depths of a city underpass to witness the horrifying and brutal rape of Alex (the quietly powerful Monica Bellucci); moments earlier, courtesy of the film's reverse storytelling technique, we have beared witness to equally unsettling events taking place in a seedy gay club known as "The Rectum." Here we see the graphic murder of her assailant at the hands of her ex-husband, Pierre (Albert Dupontel), and her present lover, Marcus (Vincent Cassel, in a career-defining performance), who in a drunken rage has spent the entire evening on a search-and-destroy mission after being set upon by well-dressed street smarts who make it their business to know everyone on their turf, and how to find them.

All of this takes place within the first 45 minutes or so, with the rape sequence serving as the center of the film's entire storyline. This is pivotal, for it is at this point that No? lifts us out of the decay of what is, elevating us into what was for a glimpse of the lives of these three central characters prior to these cataclysmic occurrences. Some will quibble about this "Memento"-esque structure of the narrative, but I think it helps to enhance the movie's overall grandeur by first showing us the effect, and then revealing the cause, piece by juicy piece. One of the opening lines of dialogue spoken in the film reads simply, "Time destroys everything," and indeed, as we watch the sudden surprises and the small yet explosive revelations, this motif rings true with an impact as close to reality as any movie has ever been able to capture. You can practically hear No? whispering to his audience through his final plot twist, "What would you have done?" And while that might come off as exploitative, I tend to think there's more to it than that.

As a filmmaker, No? shows a great deal of knowledge when it comes to certain areas and how to use them properly. Acting as director, writer, co-producer, cinematographer, and film editor, he has a steady hand on the proceedings from a number of stances, most noteworthy being his incredible cinematography. His violent thrashing, rotating, and non-stop movement of the camera suggests the unease with which the situations depicted therein are met by those who experience them in real life, all the while careening through a series of smooth transitions that are a perfect contrast to the film's rough-around-the-edges demeanor. His unrelenting vision is shocking, his style unflinching, his bravery a testament to what movies like this are all about. There's a difference between making a movie to exploit diverse scenes of violence, and making one that explores them in such a way that you find yourself unable to turn away for entirely different reasons. No? walks the fine line between the two on occasion, but ultimately makes us aware of where his foot rests. To see "Irreversible" once is to remember it forever... like it or not.

Copyright @ Hauntnut.com

All Reviews by David Litton [Home page]
If you are the author of this review, you may edit it by signing in.