Comwayon
A Disappointing Continuation
Humaira Grant
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Arianna Moses
Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.
Wuchak
Released in 2001, "No Such Thing" was originally called "Monster," which is the superior title. Why? Because the film's about a literal monster, played by Robert John Burke, who looks like a cross between Satan, a reptile and a grouchy dude. The monster's been alive for millennia and is virtually indestructible. He dwells in bored solitude on an island off the coast of a remote area of Iceland where he occasionally terrorizes the villagers, kills people and blows flames from his mouth. Sarah Polley plays the protagonist, Beatrice, whose husband is killed by the creature along with a team of reporters. She's assigned the mission of finding out what the "legend" is all about and, after tragic bypass, meets the monster who stirs her compassion to put him out of his misery. Helen Mirren plays a loathsome news media executive and Julie Christie a doctor who helps rehabilitate Beatrice.Needless to say, this is an odd dramedy/fantasy that's so unique there's really "No Such Movie," which explains the mixed reviews. It successfully meshes the depth of inhuman evil with the height of genuine spirituality with generous does of comedy, drama, satire and tragedy. It comes as no surprise that it's an American Zoetrope picture, the studio founded by Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas at the start of the 70s and known for filmmaking expertise that generally eschews 'blockbuster' syndrome. In fact, Coppola is the executive producer of "No Such Thing." Unfortunately, 'unique' doesn't always mean great. My wife & I viewed "No Such Thing" in 2011 and were somewhat bored, even while there are undeniable entertaining elements, but I viewed it again last night and, while still finding it boring in some ways, I enjoyed it more. For instance, the monster is sometimes laugh-out-loud funny and the spiritual parts are palpable. Moreover, I was able to figure out what the film's all about, at least in my humble opinion. It's this factor – the film's insightful and fascinating MEANING – that breaks the threshold of greatness and inspires me to rate it as high as I do. See my explanation below for more details.The film runs 102 minutes and was shot in Iceland and New York City.GRADE: B+ ***SPOILER ALERT*** (DON'T read further unless you've seen the film) Imagine if you could live forever, what would you do? Imagine the potential for growth and learning! You could learn how to travel the cosmos and discover the answers to life's greatest mysteries. Now consider being indestructible and imagine the capacity for being a benign force in the world and universe, destroying evil wherever you go, etc. The monster in the movie possesses these incredible gifts and yet doesn't take advantage of them. All he does is mope around in a hateful, self-pitying fog, drinking booze, cussing people out – or threatening & killing 'em – and wishing he were dead.The monster represents people who are blessed with the gift of life and foolishly squander it on drugs, alcohol and various time-wasters (and I'm not talking about proper r & r, which is healthy); others misuse the gift of life to grumble, hate, slander, steal, abuse, destroy and murder. It's no accident that the creature looks like Satan himself. These types of people are all around us. Now imagine if these miserable, loathsome folks were immortal. What would they be like in a few million years? They'd be like the monster in the movie. The media executive (Mirren) is roughly 60 years old and she's on the same course as the creature, as are other individuals in the story.Beatrice is the Christ-figure who figuratively dies and is resurrected. Like the Messiah, she responds in love to the hate, crime and self-destruction that infects the world. When she meets the monster she observes that there is no hope for him; there's no love in him, no good, no possibility for redemption. The only compassionate thing she can do is assist him in attaining his ultimate desire: destruction.This destruction is a type of the lake of fire or "second death" where the bible says God will "DESTROY both soul and body" (Matthew 10:28). What's the purpose of this "second death"? The Creator is essentially doing what Beatrice does in the film and for the same reasons.If Beatrice is the saintly "Christ-figure" why does she morph into a loose woman who has a one-night-stand at the end? Because she's only a TYPE of Christ and, as such, is still wholly human, possessing the potential for moral failure. She falls after constant contact with the irredeemable creature for an extended period. The apostle Paul put it like so: "Bad company corrupts good character." This explains why Beatrice tells the monster she fears him at the end while simultaneously hugging (loving) him: She needed to carry out her duty -- compassionately putting the creature out of its misery -- because his intrinsic evil was starting to rub off!
Galina
No Such Thing (2002) was my first Hal Hartley's movie. Checking its site on Netflix when I ordered the DVD, I was intrigued by the viewers' reviews on the very first page that differ from one star to four, and by the Top 10 Lists of the viewers who had seen the film already. The lists included "Independent does not mean good", "Don't Waste Your Stamp", and the most sincere "What the heck am I watching?" I knew that I was going to see a different, controversial, and interesting movie. After I saw it, I was very impressed. I know that I will look for more Hartley's works.As far as the story goes, like many directors before and after him Hal Hartley re-tells the old but immortal legend of Beauty and the Beast which is set in the modern, post 9/11 (even though the movie was made before September 11, 2001) world. The film is worth watching for many reasons. First, it is visually beautiful and poetic especially the scenes shot in Iceland, mysterious far-away country. It did not surprise me that the monster made the remote Iceland his residence. Second, the music score that Hartley wrote himself was appropriately gripping and disturbing. Third (and very important for me), any movie that would place in one scene two of the greatest actresses of older generation, Helen Mirren and Julie Christie, and young but enormously talented and charismatic Sarah Polley and let them do the magic of acting together, is a remarkable movie in my book. And the last one, it is the interesting and compelling, satiric and biting retelling of Beauty and the Beast dropped against the frenzy of the modern media hunger for sensations at the time when terrorism is omnipresent. The film explores the nature of the beast in original, ironic, and clever manner. I guess I can call it a Hartley way. The bitter, cruel, deadly tired from eternal insomnia and scornful (quite often for good reasons) to human race monster as played by Robert John Burke, is sarcastic, scary, observant and strangely sympathetic. I would recommend the film and I am sure in case of No Such Thing, independent does mean good.
John Zappulla
The worst waste of time and film. A good double feature with Battlefield Earth. This film has no rhyme or reason and you will be very disappointed unless you are heavily sedated. You too will wonder what the heck Helen Mirren was thinking. I know she said in a recent interview she has to do what she needed to survive, but damn. Trust me, the plot has nothing to do with the movie and the movie has nothing to do with the plot. I sat through the entire what ever this is, and kept saying to myself, this is going to get good, it's going to make sense, there has to be something! But, I was greatly mistaken. Right through to the last scene you too will say, did they run out of budget and just shut the whole thing down?
glen-88
They call this flick a dark comedy, but it fails in both.The monster makeup and the character is interesting enough, and Polley does a decent job of playing a naive girl thats being manipulated by her boss, but there was a lot of potential for story wasted in very long drawn out scenes.I understand the film is a cross between beauty and the beast and a modern commentary on media corruption or some such but it just doesn't hit home. The characters are almost too withdrawn for the audience to make any kind of meaningful connection and potentially humorous situations go by without even a chuckle.It felt like certain characters and elements of the film were thrown together at the last second (ie the wonderful actress Helen Mirren had little to no poignant moments in the film) and a lot of it just felt like the director was trying to "wing it" until he got to climax..which wasn't all that well constructed or climatic.I really liked the actors in the film but I think they really didn't have much to go on script wise. Perhaps under a different writer and director the flick could have been more impactful and humorous or darker and more moody..but as it stands its just a post-modernistic soup of ideas and no real point.
