Immortel (ad vitam) (Immortal) (2004)

Featured Audience Ratings

• EightThirty .

  
  03/20/2011 (ONLINE)

• Greg S

  
  The Egyptian god Horus shows up in a pyramid floating above Manhattan in 2095. The CGI special effects are as strange as the plot---for no obvious reason, more than half the human characters are played by "Final Fantasy" avatars---and the story leaves a lot of loose ends,… More
  The Egyptian god Horus shows up in a pyramid floating above Manhattan in 2095. The CGI special effects are as strange as the plot---for no obvious reason, more than half the human characters are played by "Final Fantasy" avatars---and the story leaves a lot of loose ends, but there is more imagination on display here than in a dozen Hollywood blockbusters. Confusing, but worth a look for the adventurous.

• Alexander W

  
  The film has good actors and good story. The CGI goes from great to bad and yet the "bad" CGI fits into this sci-fi fantasy as if they were computer avatars of real people. Like delving into a mind of a true sci-fi lover who needs to show an audience topics that have been… More
  The film has good actors and good story. The CGI goes from great to bad and yet the "bad" CGI fits into this sci-fi fantasy as if they were computer avatars of real people. Like delving into a mind of a true sci-fi lover who needs to show an audience topics that have been left alone. Its really odd and a cold world, so I think I have not seen a movie that makes CGI this bad into a reliable story prop, almost a commodity for your mind, that is if your mind likes rich sci fi stories. The character too, they are excellent and feel like they have been lived and not just created on a script-writers spare day off ( like so many sci fis ) The film, I have to argue is art, because none of it looks like it was fitted together in a whim, although some will disagree with me and say "its bad" I think its original. When a budget is not there for a movie, bad CGI is still often used because it draws an audience, its been strategically placed in the film here, as a great painter leaves no media wasted, the director here has really pushed his work load in order to satisfy something calling inside of him (or her) and really I can't see them doing better. Once you made a film in hollywood for the world to see, they often want to see the same thing in a different way. I wonder how the director and staff really feel about their future. I would watch this film again, but really only on my own, or with someone who really appreciates sci fi artwork or somebody who has seen the film and liked it. Not to say that people, and families watch this. But there is levels of violence not suitable for non-mature audiences.

• Kylie B

  
  The plot, in my opinion, is reasonably interesting, if perhaps a touch overcomplicated. My main objections are to the presentation of the Egyptian gods - both in terms of their behavior and the digital rendering of them - and some of the CG human characters looking obviously CG… More
  The plot, in my opinion, is reasonably interesting, if perhaps a touch overcomplicated. My main objections are to the presentation of the Egyptian gods - both in terms of their behavior and the digital rendering of them - and some of the CG human characters looking obviously CG compared to the human actors (and even some of the other CG characters). The background and set work is gorgeous however. I can't say I care for the sexual politics much though.

• Arash X

  
  " I am a professional guinea pig"

• Craig S

  
  <b><u>Directed by:</u> Enki Bilal.</b> <b><u>Starring:</u> Charlotte Rampling, Thomas Kretschmann, Linda Hardy, Frederic Pierrot, Thomas Pollard.</b> First off I will say that the whole concept of the film is interesting and I think the… More
  <b><u>Directed by:</u> Enki Bilal.</b> <b><u>Starring:</u> Charlotte Rampling, Thomas Kretschmann, Linda Hardy, Frederic Pierrot, Thomas Pollard.</b> First off I will say that the whole concept of the film is interesting and I think the director certainly had a vision to make it right, unfortunately, in the way of story and even style at times, it is an incoherent mess of a film. Now with any normal moviegoer, they will stop the review right here and not tell people why they didn't like the film, but I will tell you why. I will start off with the story, like I mentioned at the beginning of this review, I thought that the ideas and the concept that come across is quite interesting and could have been great if done right, unfortunately, the screenwriters have too many ideas and try fitting them all into a short running time and the film jumps around too much and alot of it is jusr plain confusing. So in some ways, this is a typical film of style over substance, but even then, the style isn't exactly focused. What the director has gone and done with this film, much like the screenwriters, crammed in alot of visual ideas and they don't always work. At times, some of the CGI is amazing, at others it is just downright bad, but what I don't get is why did they have to have actors and then actors with some makeup effects (which were also amazing), and then some with a bit of CGI and then the rest copies of characters that look like they just walked of the set of the video game 'Half Life'. And that is the main thing that put me off, the use of typical video game looking CGI characters. So to finish off, the visual style is all over the place and some of it is amazing, the story is a mess that shows some potential in scenes but not enough....and I will also mention that Linda Hardy was definately beautiful in this. A disappointment.

• vieras e

  
  I can't quite decide should I give this 3½ stars or 4-. The Dayak was a bit silly.

• FanGirl B

  
  Unsual non-vampire, vampire movie. Used to be called Wisdom of the Crocidile.

Read all 8 featured audience ratings