Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

2freensel I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

prguy721 Robert Altman's engrossing drama Images stands alone in his vast collection of directorial achievements. Though he directed other intense dramas, this opus of unsettling psychological intrigue is about as far as one can get from his more familiar fare of offbeat comedies populated by equally offbeat characters. In a landmark performance that garnered her a best actress award at Cannes, Susannah York portrays Catherine, a troubled soul who desperately tries to escape her innate demons and memories of past relationships. Increasingly, reality and fantasy start to blur as Catherine develops a coping mechanism she thinks will solve her mental dilemmas. Unfortunately, there's an inherent danger in her method's madness. Images was beautifully filmed in Ireland by master cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, and veteran composer John Williams provided the score. Altman protégé Rene Auberjonois effectively portrays Catherine's somewhat clueless but good-natured husband.

MartinHafer Susanna York plays a woman who you realize very early on is a schizophrenic. What is surprising is that although she's completely out of her mind and actively hallucinates, her dopey husband (Rene Auberjonois) seems VERY slow to realize and accept this. But, as you see and hear the world through her perspective, it's obvious she's lost much of her contact with the real world. Her life is full of paranoia, delusions and hallucinations.There is a very small group of people who would enjoy this film or Roman Polanski's "Repulsion" (which is also about a woman undergoing a psychotic break). The two films are very similar but have almost no commercial appeal at all and are the sorts of film intellectual and film snobs would adore--but most folks would find terribly tedious. Even with my mental health background (having been a therapist and having taught psychology), I found the film dull and soon lost interest. I can respect what these folks did but that doesn't mean I have to like it or recommend it.

runamokprods This is a a film I'll definitely watch again. I have the feeling it could feel even stronger on repeated viewings. A character study of a schizophrenic from inside her subjective point of view, so the whole story is told by an unreliable narrator. Some fascinating moments, and good tense twists as we (and she) wonder what's real. The film isn't wildly stylized, so the line between hallucination and reality is truly, effectively blurry. On the other hand a lot of the style feels awkwardly dated, and some story elements feel manipulative and not easy to believe. For example, she's very obviously a potentially dangerously disturbed woman, but her husband seems to barely take that in. Even if he's the supercilious prig that Rene Abougenois plays him as, his complete ignoring of her state feels like a cheat. And some twists just feel like they were 'a cool idea' at the time, but not rooted in deeper character or story elements. A little like Nic Roeg, but not at his very best. All that said, certainly a must see for any Altman fans - it's not quite like anything else he ever did - although '3 Women' could be seen in some ways as a more mature follow up.

porbeagle_zen Since the 90s, audiences have been treated to a variety of "mind blowing" thrillers, films that make people sit up in their chairs and say, "what the hell is going on?" We've had JACOB'S LADDER, DONNIE DARKO, MULHOLLAND DRIVE... The subgenre culminated in the profoundly weird LOST HIGHWAY and the profoundly lucrative THE SIXTH SENSE. Now, as audiences wade through pale imitations like THE MACHINIST and THE NUMBER 23, it's good to go back to the roots of this strange breed of movie. Those roots would be IMAGES.IMAGES was a superflop upon release, and it's not hard to see why. With a bleak, dreary atmosphere, characters impossible to trust, and slow moody pacing, Altman wasn't trying to make the feel-good hit of the summer. Or even a film with stable logic-- every time a "rule" appears explaining what's going on, it's broken.Is Cathryn going crazy? Is her husband and his friends playing tricks on her? Is she being visited by spirits? Are figures and scenes from an alternate universe crossing over into this one? Or is something sinister disturbing the flow of cause-and-effect reality? IMAGES poses all these questions, yet answers none of them. There are no "twists", no silly contrivances, no deus ex machina moments to save the day and explain everything. No. This is straight up cinematic insanity, something even the noblest of mind-bending flicks fail to achieve (with the exception of LOST HIGHWAY).In the end, the audience is invited, by means of provocative images, to make sense of the film themselves. This is no easy task, which explains the godawful reviews bestowed at Cannes and in the American press. Over time, with a little help from David Lynch, audiences have gotten savvier at decoding nightmares of logic, and IMAGES has found its acclaim in an era where "Twin Peaks", "X-Files" and "Lost" make must-see TV, unthinkable decades ago.The acting is superb. The cinematography is perfect, capturing an ultra-creepy visual mood that contemporary filmmakers (such as Gore Verbinski with THE RING) aspire to, but fall short. John Williams' (!) score is a major asset, with sound effects of all types punctuating the mood like an impressionist painting.Depsite being clunky in parts, IMAGES is must-see film to appreciate the depth of Robert Altman, or complete your knowledge of mind-blowers.