Watch The Forbidden Room For Free

It is a performances centric movie

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

About as far removed from a conventional narrative as possible, this highly experimental movie from Guy Maddin juggles a raft of plots with subjects as diverse as bathing habits, doppelganger theory, deep sea mysteries and a doctor whose obsession with bones interferes with his work. Even more bizarre than Maddin's rather random jumping between plots, however, is the visual style he brings to the project with black and white and tinted sequences, silent movie style title cards, deteriorating stock footage and the list goes on. The film has a found footage feel to it -- think Craig Baldwin's pseudo-documentaries and you will know what to expect -- however by providing no logic to the flipping in and out of stories, Maddin does not manage to spin an experimental movie half as enticing as Baldwin's seminal works. To call the film 'uneven' would be a massive understatement. At its best, 'The Forbidden Room' is laugh-out-loud funny - with Louis Negin offering a very funny take on 1950s basic hygiene movies - and memorable - with a catchy song about derrieres. These high points are very few and far between though and the majority of the movie is too convoluted to generate laughs with characters so paper thin that they are simply not interesting to follow around. With its uncanny visuals, daringness to be different and hilarious odd bits, 'The Forbidden Room' is not a film that should be dismissed altogether. It takes a lot of patience though to get through. There is reason why experiment movies usually are not as long as this effort is.

Despite having seen him mentioned a number of times,I've never found a good "entry point" to start with looking at the work of film maker Guy Maddin.Getting the wonderful chance to host an event on IMDb's Film Festival board,I was intrigued to find that a Maddin title had been nominated for viewing,which led to me stepping into the forbidden room.The outline of the movie:The film is based around short unrelated sketches that merge into each other with barely any connection. One of the stories involves a submarine crew eating flapjacks in order to get extra air from the air holes,who are left breathless,when a mysterious woodsmen is found in a dock,who has no idea how he got there.View on the film:Based on "lost" films which Maddin believed would only be seen if he made re-made them himself,Maddin and editor John Gurdebeke work closely together to unleash a rupturing nightmare atmosphere. Washing the screen in volcanic reds,Maddin & Gurdebeke blend the titles in a rugged manner,where the acid reds screech between each changing "dream/nightmare." Inspired by reviews of films which are believed lost,the screenplay by Maddin/Evan Johnson/ Robert Kotyk/John Ashbery and Kim Morgan aim for a dream-logic anthology,spanning disconnected stories which fade in/out at regular intervals. Despite this approach keeping the films focus constantly changing,it also causes the flick to get stuck in a surprisingly sluggish dead-end,due to there being no attempt to give any character the vaguest impression,and the writers giving the recurring stories no feeling of purpose over there return,in a forbidden room that should remain locked.

OK, if you hate the way Yorgos Lanthimos just terminates movies right before the dénouement, or if you kinda hated how nonsensical Mullholland Drive was (please, just watch it again, really), The Forbidden Room is not recommended viewing. This is a movie for people who are in love with the visual art-form of cinema, the technical history of it (especially full-colour processing), and who have an absolute love of classic pre-code movies. And those who may have accidentally tried a cup of mushroom tea. There is no linear story arc, but there are many snippets of a beautifully reimagined bygone age. Don't be afraid. It's super-watchable and actually has some high-brow humour in it, It has Charlotte Rampling and the utterly fantastic Louis Negin, and the visual film treatments are just unbelievable. This is a movie for all levels of consciousness simultaneously. I have to give this movie a 10 because for me, it's so spectacular it couldn't be any less. Forget Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, this is the real thing. (Sorry Terry, I'm sure you'll understand.)

Saw this at the IMAGINE film festival 2015 in Amsterdam. Walked out after one hour, nearly half of the 130 minutes running time. I did not understand a thing about what it was all about from the outset, but I allowed it some slack due to the overly positive introductory talk by the festival's artistic director. He told us about the abundance of references to films from the silent period (I don't think I care). The format is blatantly weird in taking trouble to look like a film from the silent period, with seemingly missing pieces and imperfect material, though we know that this film is recently made, as such leading to the conclusion that these imperfections are added as a gimmick and defeating any useful purpose. It may resonate with film professionals, however, but what do I know.There is no edible story (actually five stories I've heard or read somewhere, craft-fully intertwined). I could not derive anything in common that could have served as a binding theme. It may be so that the binding element(s) were to be revealed later on, but I did not wait until the final revelation, and left. Anyway, other festival visitors who sat it out until the very end, did not make much of it either, as it scored a lowly 36th (out of 45) place for the audience award with average score 6.78 (out of 10).