Charles Camp An incredibly bizarre film about the dissolution of a marriage told through the lens of the creature/body horror genre. Lots of lofty, philosophical dialogue as well about religion and human nature, though tonally the film goes for outlandishness and, at times, comedy, rather than feeling stuffy and intellectualized. Most of my enjoyment was derived from the unique genre-mashing, very compelling and somewhat experimental camerawork, and the absolutely unhinged performances. The acting in this film is really quite something. If you've ever seen a film by Andrzej Zulawski, you're aware that he directs his actors in a very atypical way and the result is what most would call "overacting." In this film, the absurdity and sheer intensity of the performances works quite well and leads to some truly arresting moments. However, the "heightened" acting style persists in nearly every scene, even those that may not really call for it. I fully realize that this is the style Zulawski is going for, but to my taste it was occasionally off-putting and took me out of the film. Perhaps just a bit more restraint here and there could've magnified the impact of the most volatile moments. It also felt like the film could've done a bit better at escalating the tension as it progressed. It's at full throttle nearly right out of the gate and manages to sustain that nicely, but it comes off feeling a bit one-note by the end. Again, some restraint could've possibly made the proceedings feel more dynamic. Regardless, it's a very unique and notable film with great performances that's very much worth checking out if you're into this sort of thing.Light 4/5

dragoshilbert I agree, Sam Neil and Isabelle Adjani gave performances of a lifetime but it is not enough to make a movie good. As Oct 2017, this is rated 7.4, so for sure over-rated. Isabelle Adjani looks amazing in this movie but I think this is as far as it goes related to good points. Constant screaming made my ears bleed, I understand that the Director had some bad events in his life but what is my fault to suffer? It is a long movie, 3 in one, with a lot of irrelevant scenes and dialogue that makes no sense. It is visible that the people involved had some good ideas and talent but the final result is faulty. Don't waste your time in watching this, except you want to see Isabelle Adjani with some amazing green eyes. At the end you will very bored and disappointed because it should had been shorter and better. A very good plot for a "Twilight Zone" episode but ruin by the desire to make it a movie.

siderite I can't begin to pretend I understood the film, but that means that, at least for me, the movie failed. It was a roller-coaster of great and stupid scenes, of hysterical acting and amazing acting and a script that mingled together divorce drama and Lovecraftian body horror and zen thinking and symbolism so heavy that I couldn't possibly enjoy it.Keep in mind that this is a performance that brought Adjani a Cannes best actress award, which is totally deserved. Sam Neill isn't far behind with an intensity of expression that makes the viewer feel things. However, what I felt was obnoxious was the heavy symbolism, the "you're not smart enough if you don't get it" type of art that always irritated me. If you are a great artist, express yourself so that people can understand.Bottom line: a weird melange of genres that ultimately felt like a masturbatory work for the writer and director of the film. The acting of the main character and the creature effects, as few as they were, were great. Others, like the gay detectives and the "best friend" where not only bad acting, but poorly made characters. The story was a mess. And it was a two hour long film that felt like a three hour one.

TheRedDeath30 I'm pretty active on Twitter and over the years have accumulated a lot of "followers" on there that I would consider to be "cinephiles". For those who have never encountered the term, call them amateur film scholars. Some really are film scholars with the degrees to prove it. Some write reviews for blogs and various sites and some are just fans of movie, who have gone far past the typical popular Hollywood pablum to dive into the history and culture of film. Some might call these people "film snobs". In a lot of ways I would consider myself to be one. One of the horror movies that I have seen a lot of these friends tout through the years is POSSESSION and it was with anticipation that I finally was able to find it on TMC and got my chance to watch it.I can only say I'm left more than a little disappointed. This is truly the kind of movie that only hardcore "film lovers" would appreciate. It's the sort of movie that's an acquired taste, developed through years of watching similar films and I just didn't have the patience to sift through the layers and find the value in this movie.We begin in what seems to be the middle of the story, as the guy from Jurassic Park returns home after years spent in government service to find that his marriage has hit bottom, his wife has been cheating on him and divorce is imminent. In the middle of this rocky relationship is a young child, who displays very little natural action. He is almost an object in the movie, meant only to serve the purpose of becoming another something for this couple to fight over.Much of the movie is spent in endless conversation, sometimes between two characters and sometimes with characters just babbling to themselves. There is not a normal person in this entire film. Everyone is neurotic, obsessed and "possessed" by various forces. It becomes an unnerving experience for the viewer after awhile. The wife is falling apart mentally and showing obvious cracks. Her behavior is completely irrational. She screams and shouts, talks nonsense and acts in bizarre ways that tend to grate on the viewer's nerves.The husband is reacting in obsessive ways, shown frequently rocking himself back and forth with a blank look on his face. This is carried out to such an extreme that it almost felt like a farce from a FAMILY GUY skit. His behavior is, also, erratic as he tries to cope with this failing marriage. At times, he is the focal point of the plot and the only "normal" thing, but then goes to extremes of behavior even worse than his wife's. Then, we meet the "lover", the wife's boyfriend, who is is as much unhinged as the rest of them, bouncing from an almost flirtatious encounter with the husband, to spouting college philosophy course views on life and love.Somehow, this all leads to the wife having a third (second?) affair with something out of a Lovecraft short story, a tentacled, vegetative bloody monster that feeds on human blood. She gives her body, her blood and her lovers to this new monster, who is bedridden and must be brought his dinner by this young woman. None of this is really explained and the director never intends to do so, because it's all some metaphor that we're supposed to think through about the nature of love and the forces that both bring us together and tear us apart.I'm all for art in my horror and appreciate a film that has layers for me to tear through, but this movie is too perturbing. By the end point, I want to kill all of them myself just to end their babbling and their drama queen behavior. By the time we get to the end, I no longer even cared what the director was trying to say and just wanted it to be over.