No doubt a highly fictionalized, borderline surreal fantasy, account of photographer Diane Arbus' life. Nicole Kidman is effective as a woman shown caught between social standards and personal perference. Her relationship with former circus sideshow performer afflicted with wolfman syndrome, Lionel, is poignantly moving. However at times her demeanor makes its hard to know where she is coming from. Downey Jr once again shows his talent transcends as he acts beneath the equivalent of a fur coat. Its all in his eyes and voice here. Technically another faithful recreation of its era. The use of color is particularly notable. A good, abeit strange, love story.
The movie was pretty to look at... Nicole Kidman usually a very convincing actress anyway, so i wasn't really surprised at her performance, but Robert Downey Jr. is amazing and surprisingly sensual for a man that resembles Chewbacca (only slightly more cuddly).
An interesting, slightly odd movie. It works very well, though; the further it gets, the less you notice how unusual the characters of Diane Arbus and Lionel Sweeney are.
Perhaps that is what draws them together. They complement each other quite well, and the way their romance slowly brews is amazing. It all starts with fascination, and ends... well, bitterly, but I really liked the end of the movie!
As much as I love sideshow freaks, this story was totally unbelivable and I think Diane Arbus would hate it. Honestly, they could easily have edited a little bit and made it about a completely different made-up person, because this movie dosen't seem to have anything to do with Diane Arbus except taking her name.
***SPOILER WARNING***
It's supposed to be about her as a photographer and how she got her inspiration, but instead it shows her as an unfaithful wife and a mother who dosen't take interest in her kids. This movie suffers from the exact same problem as "Brokeback Mountain" = the love interest overshadows any kind of "faults" like being unfaithful, because love forgives everything. I also found the "disease" of Lionel not properly displayed in the movie, wouldn't he have stubble in ALL his face and not just where a "usual" beard would have been? Seemed very weird to me.
Robert Downey Jr.'s character just makes you want to love him even with all the extra padding. I loved the story though, very artistic and I especially liked how the music set the mood for everything.
I guess one has to understand before watching this that this is an art film, about an unconventional artist. It is loosely based on her life and too surreal to be believable. But that's why it's called "An imaginary portrait..." It was wise to cast Nicole Kidman for the lead because if it was a less talented, mediocre actor this could have turned into a total disaster. This was certainly interesting (think heavy imagery) but it's pointblank sad, the kind that moves you to watch a pointless slapstick after, just to shake off the melancholy.
I can't really comment on the connection to the photographer, Diane Arbus, as I'm not overly familiar with her life/work, but I felt the film was a vague yet strangely beautiful portrayl of a segment of a life.
The film could've explored fetishism a little more clearly, perhaps, or even Diane's supposed mental state at the time yet it seems to scratch the surface on a number of issues but never really explores the depths.
Beautifully filmed, uncomfortably realistic at points, but even without knowing a lot about Diane Arbus I felt that this was a little vague and perhaps didn't capture the motivation behind her talent as well as it probably could have.
I could have liked this if I didn't like Diane Arbus.
Didn't really capture Arbus unique visual aesthetic(as Stanley Kubrick did in "The Shinning", with the twin girls in the hallway, a direct homage to one of Arbus most famous photos, and one with...(read more) haunting qualities none of this movies images have), and certainly none of her character(outgoing), likeness(thin and jewish, not wasp Queen Kidman), or life, save some very superficial similarities, she was a fashion who later photographed "freaks" and "outsiders", among many things. This film focused on the "freak", as her symbol for artistic and personal empowerment, in a really shallow and predictable fashion. Outside of that, it might have been an interesting movie about middle class fetish, but I was too annoyed to care.
Perhaps if Arbus name had been left off, this might have been less annoying, but had it not had her name in the title there would have been nothing to make me interested in seeing in this in the first place. A letdown from "Secretary".
film çok ii olmasa da nolcak diye merakla izledik. castte robert downey jr yazmasaydi da en sonunda yüzü gözü acilinca süprüz olsaydi. ama sacma sapan bi film yapmislar yine de. gercek hikaye dedik izledik..
Normally I'm not a fan of Nicole Kidman, but her performance in this movie is great. I absolutely loved it, and so did everyone who watched it with me, even the men. I recommend it to anyone who wants something different that's done well.
Nicole Kidman falls in love with the really hairy, but intelligent and sensitive upstairs neighbor who *gasps* turns our to be Robert Downey Jr. as we see when he is shaved. Her lover dies and she joins a nudist colony.
In conclusion, why the hell was this movie even made?
All I have to say is, WOW. This movie is one of my favorites now. The slow and hesitant pace of events makes Diane's exposure to the things she yearns for makes her sense of insecurity of being admonished that much more tangible. It's a wonderful bit of acting through out the entire movie. Just the wonder and awe you feel from each time she sees something new makes this a repeatedly enjoyable film. Everything is laid bare.
This is because of movieempress lisa, I tell you! It was a very beautiful movie in its own slow pace, and even though it doesn't tell much about Diane Arbus and her life as a photographer, it still hits you with an odd comforting feeling of something that is both frightening and an absolute delight! Watch it if you've seen Shainberg's Secretary.
In 1958, in New York City, the upper class Diane Arbus is a frustrated and lonely woman with a conventional marriage with two daughters. Her husband is a photographer sponsored by the wealthy parents of Diane, and she works as his assistant. When Lionel Sweeney, a mysterious man with hypertrichosis ( a disease that causes excessive body hair), comes to live in the apartment in the upper floor, Diane feels a great attraction for him and is introduced to the world of freaks and marginalized people, falling in love with Lionel. Coming across a Gillian-lite, director Steven Shainberg is more preoccupied with atmosphere and weirdness to realistically suggest what actually made this woman tick, while essentially being based on nothing substantially true. Fur means to plant the seeds on what gave this important photographer an inner logic that helped redefine her craft, though instead ends up wallowing in it's own superficial quirks and thematic bludgeoning. "Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus" is a weird movie, actually a bizarre romance with characters that recall "The Beauty and the Beast". Nicole Kidman is impressively beautiful and gives an awesome performance together with Robert Downey Jr. His portrayal of Lionel is amazing, he makes him seductive, mysterious, sympathetic and lovable. The film is obviously a work of love and one that honors the life of Diane Arbus, even though we are not given much true information about the woman.
Le mejor peliÂcula del 2006. Todo el arte visual es maravilloso, la actuaciin de Nicole Kidman conmovedora (como siempre), la voz de Robert Downey Jr. seductora y la direccion de Steven Shainberd excelente. Recomendable!
Nicole Kidman was fantatastic in this.She seemed fraile and doll like..... yet her eyes would convey something entirely different.She played Diane Arbus beautifully. Robert Downey Jr. captivated me mind body and soul in this film. He made a man covered in fur/hair seem irresistible and so fascniating, so...so real, that you begin to turn inward and really ask your self, "who is the true freaks?" He was truly FANTASTIC in this. This is one of my new favorite films thanks to him.
It is interesting reading other's reviews for Fur. People pan the fact that this movie may have nothing to do with Diane Arbus, or that it was boring or bizarre.
I prefer to see it as the beginning of Diane's career as a photographer. During this movie she changes from being her husband's assistant to a member and photographer of New York's "freaks". Perhaps she is drawn into this interest because her neighbour happens to be a little strange.
Without a doubt, it is a bizarre film from beginning to end, but it is beautifully done.
Nicole Kidman is always at her best and Robert Downey Jr is eccentric as always.
I recommend the film especially if you like photography.
I was very disappointed by this film. I felt it told me nothing about anything really, I just wanted the movie to start when it had ended. Too much focus on the Furry guy and not enough on her photography, which is what one would expect from a movie about Arbus.
MCT:August 28, 2008
MCT:August 6, 2008
MCT:July 29, 2008
MCT:July 27, 2008
MCT:June 30, 2008
MCT:June 13, 2008
MCT:May 10, 2008
MCT:March 15, 2008
