User reviews

The Manifesto is a German artist Julien Rosefeldt, played by Cate Blanchett's 13 different characters. Each character that Blanchett spots plays and sings passages from different manifestos. It's obviously a hard-to-follow, hard-core movie.

Still, the film has a fluent narrative. Rosefeldt identifies each character with a manifesto. It is possible to say, "What does he mean?" As the words flow rapidly. Because the content needs to be placed in a context and doing so is not possible because of the "difficult to follow" that I am talking about.

Although this situation reduces the pleasure of the film, it is not disconnected from the narrative that it reveals in general terms. Blanchett offers a one-man show. He did not portray his characters as if he had lived / lived. In parallel, I can say that atmosphere, make-up and fiction are also top level. It is also worth noting that the manifestos associated with Blanchett's performance, or the humor that he created about the contents ...

Manifesto might be the most unique viewing experience I've had in a while. Directed by German artist Julian Rosefeldt, who according to Wikipedia: "Elaborate, visually opulent film and video installations, often shown as panoramic multi-channel projections." I did more digging and found out Manifesto was originally an art installation. From the photos I've seen, visitors to the exhibit would walk to different screens where a clip of the movie would be playing. I think that's the gist of it at least.

Now I'd be lying if I told you I understood any of the monologues or "manifestos" presented in this movie. If I'm not mistaken, I believe one was about the relationship between art and capitalism. If anything, this movie felt like an entire semester of art philosophy crammed into an hour and a half film. I don't usually watch these kinds of experimental movies where plot is basically non-existent, but Cate Blanchett got me through it all.

Okay so here is what I wanted to talk about the most, Cate Blanchett's performance. I've always loved Cate Blanchett as an actress but Manifesto made me realize how amazing and talented she really is. I can't believe I never realized she had THIS much range. In one scene, she's playing a mousey housewife eating dinner with her family and in another, she's a brash punk-rocker chick. I was absolutely floored. The way she is able to slip into all of these roles astonished me. I swear, she slips into these performances like most people slip into shoes.

Even though we know nothing about any of these characters, we can infer who these people are by their facial expressions, behavior, and tone of voice. All the body language felt authentic and true for each character. In fact, I want to know more about these people. I could watch Cate Blanchett play a punk-rocker chick or a dance choreographer for hours. I would pay more attention to the news if Cate Blanchett was the anchor.

I also want to commend the costuming, hairstyling, makeup, etc. They really did elevate Cate's transformations throughout the film. In one scene, she's a loud, dirty, male drunk and in another, she's this really beautiful and well-spoken party host. I just loved seeing the contrasts that highlighted her versatility.

As I said before, I had no idea what was being said in regards to the philosophical art-talk, but Cate's performance kept me engaged the whole time. If anything this film may have convinced me that she's the best actress working right now. I can't believe I'm saying that over somebody's art project, but Cate Blanchett simply killed it.

Almost 2 hours of different art manifestos performed by Cate Blanchett who plays many different characters that aren't interconnected. There is no plot or story and although Mrs Blanchett is a very able and efficient actress none of it touches you and you don't get where its all going, what did the director want with this? Apart from showing us how clever he is? It reminds me more of a museum/video-installation type of thing than something you would put in a cinema.

This film tells the story of twelve people who make manifestos about art and life in general.

The captivating thing about this film is that Cate Blanchett plays twelve different characters in various walks of life. It gives her the opportunity to shine bright as usual.

However, there is little story in the film. The scenes are merely there to convey the manifestos. It is a daring project, but it is probably too artistic for me. I appreciate the concept and the artistic achievement, but I cannot say I enjoyed watching it.

I'm convinced that the internet has erased all meaning from the word "pretentious." It once meant exactly what it sounds like, pretending to be something other than what you are. This film, along with all non-standard films, has evoked countless online accusations of pretense, which in the world of online movie reviews actually just means that the reviewer found it weird and boring. The film does not, and be aware of this is if you plan on watching it, contain a plot-based, narrative fantasy for viewers to follow to a satisfying conclusion. What it does is combine together short slice-of-life vignettes with the reading of various bits of aesthetic and philosophical manifestos. Its appeal will be limited to only people who find the rantings of tortured souls interesting. I have actually read quite a few of the bits that were included in the film, and I find the whole absurd reality of artistic manifestos and philosophical creeds fascinating, so I enjoyed the film. If you're not that kind of nerd, you won't like it. But is it pretentious? No. It did not pretend to be anything other than what it was: a presentation of some famous manifestos in combination with scenes from ordinary life. It is certainly weird, and it will certainly bore most viewers. As always Cate Blanchett's performance is incredible. The cinematography is impeccable.

Acting is great and funny. Photography is gorgeous. The manifestos are interesting, BUT I would prefer to simply read them, instead of hearing those manifestos being recited for 2 HOURS by Cate Blanchet. Why? Because these manifestos, which are continuously being recited, are pretty intelligent and thought provoking. The content and it's message, evaporates to quickly when it is being read out aloud so fast. And there is CONTINUOUS reading of these manifestos for 2 HOURS straight, which is a bit overwhelming to comprehend.

That's my only criticism. More breathers in between would have been appreciated. I couldnt cope with even more manifestos after half an hour. However superb the acting and however gorgeous the photography, a simple written paper with the manifesto on it, would have more power and effect.

I like Cate Blanchett as an actress basically, but I find the film pretentious, this is not done with the film language, there is no story in it. The work is an "art" itself, more like mixture of critical documentary and "experimental" poetry. Cinema may not be a good place to be shown, but the art gallery.

Cate Blanchett once again displays her vast array of talent as she plays 12 different characters in 12 different settings decontextualising some of history's famous manifestos, bringing humour and new meaning to them, or perhaps no meaning, to stress a view of meaninglessness to them. There is no conventional narrative here but the film still has urgency to keep you watching through its compelling art direction and wit.

When we watch Julian Rosefeldt's ''Manifesto'', 2015 with Cate Blanchett, we were expecting that we will find a different way of filming. Director , a German artist and film maker, - https://www.julianrosefeldt.com - highlights different manifestos ranging from Dada to Flux , including Lars von Trier's Dogme 95 rules for filmmaking under 13 different characters with Cate Blanchett' s superior performance. However, film is not so bright for Cate Blanchett after her two important works : Woody Allen's Blue Jasmine, 2013 and Todd Haynes' Carol, 2015. After listening 13 different characters' speech , I remembered Leos Carax' s Holly Motors , 2012 with Denis Lavant. Directors are trying to show different aspects of their view. Meantime , a new film in the critics of art, Ruben Östlund' s the Square , 2017 is worth to thinking about.

Cate Blanchett plays various characters. Through narrations and monologues, they proclaim manifestos declaring a call to arms for artists questioning their roles and society in general.

There is no denying Blanchett's acting skills. She embodies this diverse set of characters. She is the voice of this movie. Few others even have lines. This is experimental and oddly monotone despite the vastly different roles for Blanchett. The manifestos all have that lengthy run-on sentence structure with big, complicated words. They are reminiscent of the countless manifestos from revolutionaries and madmen. The visuals are beautiful and artistically rendered. It all adds up to a single note played at a loud beautifully pronounced volume. At the end of the day, what exactly is this movie saying? It's a lot of buzz words cobbled together to say everything and nothing. It's a beautiful art piece with a profound actor skillfully performing. It's hypnotic. In a way, it is what it says it is. It is dissecting art leaving it collapsed in a pile of rubble. This belongs in a museum but it has no place in the neighborhood multiplex. It's a fascinating piece of experimental art. I'm not sure if it's actually saying anything.

Amazing cinematic experience guaranteed! Saw Manifesto yesterday as part of the Holland Festival cultural event. This is now a movie. I saw it as an installation of screens with short scenes and words spoken, based almost exclusively on famous and lesser known art scene manifestos. It could have been pretentious, but, director Julian Rosefeldt and the amazing Cate Blanchett turned this work into a flowing movie with connecting dots. In the installation there is some synchronicity in the screens, in that the 12/13 characters sing part of their text simultaneously. You may actually figure out some of the background surrounding the manifestos (such as Dadaism,Dogma). It was joyful and intense experience. One thing is sure, Cate Blanchett is the most prolific,daring, energetic, chameleon, dedicated, fun actor around.

Cate Blanchett doing what she does best from the public view: acting in such a versatile way. Art and media are the targets here. The movie portrays Dada movement, Karl Marx, contemporary pop culture, mass media and so many more, but also in a critic way by the act of this eternal diva. There are some OK scenes but overall it's worth-watching for everybody.

I really tried to "get this", but in the end I think I failed. How many different ways are there to explain the purpose of life? To get answers to the unanswerable, one must ask many different people, and then expect more answers than the total number of people asked. - I have great respect for Kate Blanchet's body of work. This is not her finest hour. So profoundly confusing and ultimately forgettable. Even if you're a fan of the star, skip this jumbled mess of a disappointing film.

There is more art in this movie than in any of the mainstream movies you will find. It portrays passion for art and ideas humankind used to have in previous centuries. This passion was often expressed in a very radical language, as a result of the struggle between the driven artists and the establishment. All of that has disappeared in recent times, and all art has become derivative and compliant with consumerism.

Cate Blanchett's performance in various parts ranges from great to mesmerising. I've never really paid much attention to her work up until now but based on her acting in Manifesto, she's definitely the greatest actress of our time. She's got it all.

She could turn anyone into a Dadaist.

Chameleon actors are bad once they are too over the top. Does it really matter if an actress or an actor is not recognizable? If the intentions of an actor/actress does not translate on screen 100%, they are surely giving an awful performance. Jake Gyllenhaal has for a decade been described as a chameleon actor, but even he has his limits. This film proves Cate Blanchett is not an amazing actress because she has limits. What do I consider amazing? Marlon Brando and Daniel Day Lewis of course. Those are the only true chameleons that have never given a terrible performance. All these subpar actors in Hollywood today are just beginners. She's not acting for survival, her mind is about giving a good performance, not survival. It's what modern actors get wrong, the focus on your performance does not equal a good one. Acting is a survival mechanism, so you have to use it like you want to survive.

walking into the dark room of the second floor in the NSW art gallery surrounded by screens all playing simultaneously. You sit down, confused watching the last minute of any one short. It starts over and you are instantly captured by the character. Cate Blanchett's stage is calmly set with drone shots and slow continuous camera movements. Here on her stage she draws you into this character, and their life. Blanchett captures your immediate attention and holds it until the screen goes black.

Some stories did not resonate with me but others drew me in and kept me sitting in awe.

Except this, eh...this flick reminds of my life long love of poetic logical jabberwocky...Cate Blanchett is such a treat and this flick is crazy creative fun as all get out...read anything into it or out of it...art schmartzie fartzie...a wonderful romp in the seriously ridiculous and wonderfully weird...silly seriousness...anyhow, Cate Blanchett is worth the entire show...this whole darn deal was done incredibly well...

I need, firstly, to praise Cate Blanchett's acting and versality. She always do an amazing work, even when the movie is completely tedious. All of the stars given are for her.

Now, my review of the film: this movie is so boring. Made me feel sleepy just like the kids at the kinda-praying scene. It's completely elitist, most people can't even get and understand what Cate's characters are saying: could be a lot better if it had a screenplay at least, a story behind to made people get a bigger context of the art scenario.

The complicated sentences and words are completely paradoxal: the director wants to criticize elitist art movements, but ironically isn't paying attention of how difficult his own art is to digest.

I didn't quite get it myself maybe partly cause english isn't my native language and the profanity was distracting but I think the general idea was about art being put on a leash with rules and manufactured for the consumer (like in the scene where the teacher CORRECTS the art of children instead of leaving it as it is) rather than being created as it is.It also seems to be about being too obsessed with glorifying old art and not really creating anything unique to our current time.

...And the best thing we've seen all year. We love great acting, big ideas, inspired film settings and cinematography, and ironically subtle subtexts. This film has them all. Wow. If you can keep your mind focused for an hour and a half and can hear ideas while recognizing how visuals can function as a counterpoint that often critiques them, this film is for you, otherwise it is probably NOT for you.

This would have been better as a sketch comedy featuring Cate Blanchette playing a bunch of random characters. It's throughly boring as it is. It's like listening to a wineo ramble about life. You watch Cate Blachette dress in different makeup and characters while there's rambling background dialogue about pretty much nothing. I don't know who wrote the script but I have a feeling they're so self absorbed they felt their opinions and theories on humankind needed to be a 2hr long film. Calling this art or artsy even is an insult to actual film artists. This isn't acting even. It's just Cate playing dressing and walking or sitting. In some scenes she doesn't even say anything. I mean I guess you could put the tv on mute and pretend it's Cate in alternate universes where she didn't become a famous actor. Perhaps that should have been the plot instead of the nonsensical yapping. We venture to different potential outcomes of Cates life had she not made the choice to act. Sounds a lot more interesting than what this film is.

Congratulations to absolutely everyone involved in this truly outstanding piece of work. Cate Blanchet's acting talent simply left me open-mouthed. What incredible performances. It's not an easy watch, so don't even try if you're tired. But if you're up for some real cinematic art, this is a gem.