*** PLEASE KEEP SEEDING FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE *
*** THIS WILL ALLOW ME TO START ANOTHER UPLOAD *
* Source ...........: DVD rip (Vidomi)
* Language .........: English
* Length ...........: 1:43.00
* File size.........: 730 MB
* Video codec.......: XviD ISO MPEG-4
* Video bitrate.....: 992 kbps 25.0 f/sec
* Resolution........: 720 (W) 568 (H)
* Audio.codec........: 0x0055 MPEG-1 Layer 3
* Audio bitrate.....: 48000Hz 128 kb/s tot , Joint Stereo
* Quality...........: good
*** Be warned this was rated Mature Adult age 15+ in Australia, 18 in Canada ?? *****
*** Contains nudity, language and a mild sex scene.
A number of actresses turned down the leading female role due
to the explicit nature of the script.
Video is a bit dark in places, but I believe that was the idea.
It is the same on the DVD so I didn't try to correct luminesce.
great film, pulls off the suspense really well. for a movie where most of it takes place in the one room, i was impressed with how well they kept the tension up, and i really felt for Gary Sweet's character. Helen Buday's character was equally great, and the happy homelife with the kids at the start was really well done. Great movie for any Aussie movie fan.
IMDB User Comments
(26 out of 43 people found the following comment useful:-
Unpleasant, but can you really fault it?, 13 May 2003
Author: from Melbourne, Australia
I have to say, I'm a bit confused by the responses of so many people to "Alexandra's Project". Enough Australians have gone to see it for it to be one of the only art-house films in my living memory to make it into the Top 10 at the Box Office, but no-one really seems to like it, with the exception of a few critics. In fact, when I came out of the cinema after seeing it, I heard one woman say, "That was a really bad movie." And this intrigues me - in what way is this a "really bad movie"? I can understand that very few people will enjoy it. I personally cannot say that I did. But as to its technique, construction, delivery etc., how can you fault it? The only explanation that occurs to me is that audiences are so alienated by the material that they can't notice a) Gary Sweet and Helen Buday's amazing performances, b) tight direction, c) brilliant sound and film editing and d) eerily effective cinematography. Perhaps Australian audiences don't like to be provoked in this kind of way, and I can see how that could easily be the case. "Alexandra's Project" is a feel-bad movie to end all feel-bad movies. It makes "Leaving Las Vegas" look like "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood". But does that make it a "really bad" movie? Some have actually criticised the material for being mundane - I REALLY don't understand that. Rolf de Heer has come up with a phenomenally complex and thought-provoking story, which, with the benefit of an amazing cast and very skilled technical crew who don't seem at all affected by what was a ridiculously low-budget, has been made into one of the (technically) best Australian films in years. If you don't want your films to be challenging, then don't bother - you'll hate it. But if you DO go and see it, try to accept it for what it is, which is an unpleasant but brilliant film that will give you food for thought for the next year.
That being said, I don't think I could ever watch it again, and probably couldn't bear to watch a film that I thought would be anything like it. It's impossible to come out of with your emotions at all intact.
Objectively speaking, ten out of ten. Congratulations Rolf. But in terms of audience enjoyment? Impossible to assess. Just watch it for yourself and see.