Anthony Hopkins, Stella Arroyave, Lana Antonova

Aging screenwriter Felix Bonhoeffer has lived his life in two states of existence: in reality and his own interior world. While working on a murder mystery script, and unaware that his brain is on the...( read more  read more... ) verge of implosion, Felix is baffled when his characters start to appear in his life, and vice versa.

Flixster Users

28% liked it

2,800 ratings

Critics

20% liked it

5 critics

R, 1 hr. 50 min.

Directed by: Anthony Hopkins

Release Date: October 26, 2007

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: February 26, 2008

Get It:

Stats: 474 reviews

Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites

Your Rating



clear rating

Flixster Reviews (474)


  • March 2, 2009
    As I write this segment at 59mins in, I can't decide if this film is brilliant or pretentious. Certainly the first third (and pretty much all) of the camera work that isn't a jump cut is pretentious (esp the color changes are not earned). And this second third I've just finished ...( read more)is plain brilliant, a new sendup of movie production on par with The Player, Swimming with Sharks, and Day of the Locust. I do know that however I turn out feeling about this movie in the end, I will probably rent the DVD and do tons of research on how/why Hopkins put this project together. Okay, resuming screening.

    1:hr10mins: this movie is tripping me out, but also annoying me too(again with the unearned color and cutting "style").

    Okay, the SAVE creen is awesome! I'm totally geeking out on the writer aspects too, cuz it's like very much in the vein of a William S. Burroughs or Philip K. Dick confrontation b/w the self and reality. Perhaps other writers oft wonder if their lives will turn into that blur of story and objectivity; the multiple layers of reality that stack themselves before us cannot be ignored and must be grandly experienced, like a fever dream spanning a few decades. This film captures that very well. It is all really hinging on the last 10-15mins though.

    Alright, I thought it was awesome with the horror detour to the framed beginning/ending tragic device. Awesome as
    Schizopolis or Adaptation or Naked Lunch? Hellz NO. But I enjoyed; others will rate 3 to 3.5. I give it that extra bump just because the stylistic blend confused and angered me in a kinda fun way.
  • May 28, 2008
    It really is David Lynch meets Oliver Stone to redo Fellini. It's funny and it's weird, and only mildly difficult. If mildly difficult troubles you, stay away.
  • April 1, 2008
    Kudos to Anthony Hopkins for trying something fifty times more creative and ambitious than any other actor-cum-director would, but this just didn't work for me. You can't pull off David Lynch unless you're actually David Lynch, and that's solely based on name recognition - half o...( read more)f his quality is inflated by his reputation alone, but I digress. This is a lousy, wasteful movie, peddling style without actually having a fundamental understanding of it. Like I Know Who Killed Me before it, Slipstream tries to imitate Lynch while completely ignoring what makes his style (sort of) work.

    There is a sickening amount of jump cuts, freeze frames, crossing the line, all sorts of gimmicky editing devices scattered throughout this film. The first twenty minutes are nearly unwatchable. Past this point, these little glitches still occur, not as severe but certainly just as annoying.

    I understand that this movie was an attempt at a stream of consciousness narrative, so why did Hopkins let an eight year old edit it? It is perfectly possible to tell a story such as Felix's without disorienting camera changes, sudden removal of color and stuttering images. Maybe, MAYBE things like this could have enhanced the movie if they were used sparingly, and even then there would have been the risk of gimmickry. But Hopkins goes way the fuck overboard. It makes Slipstream into something deeply amateurish, not the product of someone who has worked in film for over 40 years.

    Past all that, it doesn't even change the fact that there isn't anything going on in the movie. The time that these camera tricks detract from the movie really begins to add up, and by the time you're an hour in there's this unshakable feeling that you've only seen twenty minutes of movie. It is not without its charms, but I'll be damned if I'm going to sit through an hour and a half of visual masturbation just to watch S. Epatha Merkerson laugh at something inappropriate.

    Skip this one, unless you're one of those indignant pseudo-intellectuals who thinks that anything "different" is automatically good.
  • February 27, 2008
    Were I to watch this film not knowing anything about it, I'd have given it 2 stars for being obnoxiously confusing. But, knowing that it is an autobiographical interpretation of Anthony Hopkins' career and views of todays dying film art and overlap of media, I would give it 3 st...( read more)ars. Put um together and you get 2.5 stars. Watch it when you have something else to do at the same time.
  • March 15, 2009
    Weird and messed up. It felt more artistic than trying to tell a story. It reminded me of a David Lynch movie.
  • November 22, 2009
    I cannot desricbed this film, at all. I could tell you what happens, but I cannot descirbe, partially because it will ruin the beauty of how astounding it is, but mostly, words cannot do this thing justice. Athony Hopkins directs a very assured movie, and does not care to make it...( read more) easy on the viewer. A must watch, even if you wind up hating it, I bet it'd be apperciated on come levels.
  • October 11, 2009
    I dont even know what was going on maby I missed some thing I dont know but it was very bad, maby I was to high? If I should watch it again let me know!
  • September 17, 2009
    Sir Anthony Hopkins is a true artist. He wrote, directed, composed and conducted this groundbreaking film, which explores the premise of a man who is caught in a slipstream of time and remembers his own future.

    Much like a picasso painting, this film's artistic value is often mi...( read more)sunderstood or under-appreciated by the casual viewer. Without prior explanation, the meaning may seem confusing and the style perhaps even uncomfortable. However, there is a deeper device at work here which merits a more considered preponderance.

    The key to understanding Sir Hopkins' work is found in the title. 'Slipstream' is an effect experienced out of cognitive dissonance when inconsistent or fantasy elements intersect with otherwise realistic or consistent settings, creating simultaneous feelings of strangeness with familiarity. Here, tropes and cinematography are skilfully employed to create a slipstream for the viewer, in order to portray the slipstream felt by the central character.

    The best explanation of Slipstream's true meaning is expressed by Anthony Hopkins himself, in the following quote :
      "I'm fascinated by time. I've written a script about the nature of reality... It's about reality and the illusion of life because life to me, as I get older, is so illusion-like, so dream-like, that I think it's all a dream. It's about a man, who's caught in a slipstream of time falling back on itself and he remembers his own future. My own interpretation is if there's a God, that God is actually time. I'm fascinated by the fact the older I get every moment just slips past. What is real? You grasp this moment and then it's gone. I was talking 10 minutes ago but that's all gone, it's all a dream. Maybe the puzzle of life is asking what it's all about. I've got a theory that at the moment of impact of death we'll wake up and say, 'Ah, that was it all along.' My life has been governed a lot by those thoughts and feelings."
  • September 2, 2009
    I am myself a big fan of surreal films and I found this film utterly confusing at best and nonsensical at worst. Even though the continuity in the story line was no where to be found, I found the film to be a visually pleasing delight. Anthony Hopkins is one intelligent man and t...( read more)his film of his is truly the most confusing film I have ever watched. I will give the style, artistry, and solid cinematography a rating of 3 but the rest of the film deserves a 2.5.
  • July 1, 2009
    Unsure of what to rate this. Frequently annoying and overt and overdone. But some good moments in there. Kind of STRANGER THAN FICTION meets a less spooky JACOB'S LADDER.

Critic Reviews


Comments


  • ladyphoenixxev
    May 12, 2008
    No its no joke!! It is amazing!! You have to truly be watching to solve this chess game. I LOVE IT.
  • imshy004
  • harryandtonto
    November 14, 2007
    (I love the little comment on the board before someone posts: "This board appears to be lonely")

    I don't know if others will post on here, but I do hope a lot of people get to see this movie. It's bizarre yes, but no more bizarre than anything David Lynch has done, and I would argue that "Slipstream" is much more linear. Is it for everbody? I guess the answer is no. However, I went into the film with all of the pre-release information of: "It's (Slipstream) is not meant to make any sense" and "I did it as a joke" and all of that, but I think it was just a bad marketing strategy to get people out to see it. The film makes so much more sense than a lot of other stream-of-conciousness films I've seen, in fact, this one has a purpose. So, I hope people watch it and take something away from it. Regardless, it made a great trailer: http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/slipstream/trailer/

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Official Trailer

More Like This


Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Mulholland Drive
    Mulholland Drive (0%)
  • Revolver
    Revolver (50%)
  • The Nines
    The Nines (0%)
  • Stranger Than Fiction
    Stranger Than Fiction (50%)

Facts


No facts approved yet. Be the first

Slipstream : Watch Free on TV


Slipstream Trivia


  • ***Which Sci-fi Film Stars Mark Hamill in A World Where Pollution Has Led To Giant Winds Sweeping Across The Planet***  Answer »
  • What colossal flop from 1989 did Mark Hamill star in after the original Star Wars trilogy?  Answer »
  • Sean Astin plays a character who possesses a device that can 'rewind' time in what movie?  Answer »
  • Which of the following mutants does not appear in the X-men trilogy?  Answer »

Movie Quizzes


No quizzes for Slipstream. Want to create one?

Video Clips


No video clips yet. Want to upload one?

Most Popular Skin


No skins yet. Interested in creating one?