Eleanor_Zissou I really had fun with the 10/10 reviews. :D We watched that undead picture at telly one night. It may be a dark romantic comedy in a parallel universe where 'dark romantic comedy' stands for pointless imbecile crap. It is only perfect for laughing aloud with friends about shitty violin parts and their funny use, lame and ludicrous dialogues and disgusting stone cold anti-erotic sex scenes. It lacks everything a movie makes up, this thingy is neither artsy nor European, it's an insult to every talented Independent writer/director. -_- Oh, and did I mention that the acting is pathetic? The director is the wife of WD. I can tell which way the wind is blowing...

rooprect There are 2 versions of this movie: the sexually explicit one and the censored PG13 one. My review is about the PG13 one which is 91 mins and released in the USA as "The Black Widow" by First Look Entertainment. And when they say it's PG13, they ain't kidding. All the explicit sexual scenes are cut (including the infamous tampon scene you may have heard about), there is zero nudity, and all the swear words are dubbed out.This is a very minimalist film about isolation, disconnection and unanswered questions. It will confuse & irritate anyone who is looking for a standard plot tied up with a pretty ribbon. Like the Brando film "Last Tango in Paris", it gives us the dysfunctional romance of two people who can't or won't share their past, who have no connection to the present and who haven't got any future. The only glue that holds them together is the house.The house, known as the "Rubber House" due to it's twisted black appearance, becomes the 3rd character in the story, like a voyeur but more than that--almost like an omniscient presence that observes everything but tells nothing. Again, this may frustrate the viewer who is looking for clearcut answers, but the poetry of the situation is far more important.There is also a lot of poetry in the dialogue, but you have to work very hard to catch the hints. There's a brilliant scene in a restaurant where the waiter (played by the unforgettable Issach de Bankole) describes a dish called "deconstructed jambalaya"--a recipe that consists of all the elements of jambalaya (a word that literally means "mishmash") but separated into its parts, not allowed to mix. The hilarious deadpan delivery of this speech along with Dafoe's reaction sums up the characters' relationship perfectly. In another cute piece of dialogue, Giada talks about how mathematicians never grow up because, living in an isolated world of abstract concepts, the never learn about the reality of life. This takes us back to the theme of disconnection and the timelessness of isolation which we feel in the Rubber House. The whole movie is very cryptically written, but if you pay attention to theme, not plot, it will make perfect sense.The key to enjoying this film is to imagine it's the first film ever made. Don't compare it to anything. Don't expect anything. There are no shootouts, car chases, criminal masterminds, Hollywood romances or melodramatic tear-jerkers. If you can somehow scrub those preconceptions out of your mind, I think you'll find that this movie is much closer to a real story than anything you've seen in the last 20 years. Whether that's entertaining or not is entirely up to you.

stark3923 I understand wanting to make a movie that is edgy and different. I understand the previous reviewer comments that this is a miss-understood movie. My point is as soon as this movie ended my first comment was: " this is what happens when a rich princess wants to be a movie star and has no talent".....she uses daddy's' money to make a movie she wrote, directs, and pays for.....obviously to close to the movie to realize there was no character development and no directions such as a beginning, middle and ending.....the voyeur part was good and edgy but what was the point? I saw a women go to a house, find some pictures, screw the caretaker, come out side on a very cold night (not believable) to check on noise and runs over her caretaker lover....movie ends......some one educate my ignorant arss?? I really want to know what the point is....what was the directors' vision.....why no development of the dead lover? Why no background on the caretaker? What is the point of the night vision? What is the point of the lipstick on the car? Why a dead caretaker? Why tell us about an escaped mental patient/peeping tom? What's with the urn? Oh and the lamp is that suppose to signify whose' house this is? Territorial? Why? Why would the caretaker feel like it's his house? that aspect was never pursued......as for William Defoe...I rented this movie because he was in it and known for edgy characters.....write back and do tell me what I need to learn....I am just a mom in middle America who loves movies....Chris....

info-7317 This movie was the worst i've ever seen. It doesn't seem to have a plot but the time you realize this is far beyond the beginning of the movie so you have to watch the shut for a long time to recognize the total incompetence of the director, aka the sloth that plays the tampon chick in the movie, and we do not believe the Willem Dafoe in this movie, he's a clone, because the real Dafoe, like we know from "apocalypse now" and "the boon dock saints", would never agreed to such a script. Duh, (Da)foe wrote this bill shut together with his twenty years minus baby. This movie starts with the credits of the two main characters, Dafoe and Colagrande, and then the two script writers, Dafoe and Colagrande, and then the director, Colagrande. Bottomline (the story); Widow meets guy, guy bangs widow, widow smashes windscreen with guy who banged her. Title in Netherlands; The black widow (different title, same bullshit). DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE!!! It's a total waist of time!!!