User reviews

From an artistic perspective, this is a very original and interesting blend of genres. The story is somewhat generic, but the way it is traversed is very unique.

For those not tripping-balls at the time of viewing, such as myself, this movie really suffers from pacing issues as well as a complete lack of editing. Watching this is similar to having a conversation with someone who's high out of their mind; while some of what they say may have some interesting perspectives, they ramble on, completely fascinated by what they're experiencing, while you're often waiting for them to get to any sort of point. This movie does have a few interesting points, but it is not consistently interesting as to how it leads you to them.

This film needed a lot more time in the editing room to be available to the general viewer, but then again, maybe that wasn't the target audience.

This is a visual diamond. The frame composition of this movie is amazing! every frame is like a well planed and composed photograph. The music is also wonderful and supports each scene in a remarkable way. BUT, the digital effects gets out of hand and takes over the movie. they should be supporting it, not drown it. The hallucination scenes are very complex and confusing and should have been simplified to bring the story forward. (why do the directors get so carried away by digital effects? they of all, should know that it is the story and the "flow" of the movie that is important, not the amount of digital effects you can put in it!) However, this movie is definitely worth watching, but don't expect a conventional action western!

This is an odd duck of a movie. I became interested since I'm a fan of Eddie Izzard who plays a mad Prussian lusting for gold. I knew it would be intriguing since its based on a Moebius comic strip, but I wasn't really expecting what I got.

The movie tells the story of Mike Blueberry, a US Marshall in the old west. As he lays "dying" we drift back through his life, stopping at about the point the crazed Prussian is getting everyone hot with gold fever and an old enemy returns to haunt him. Add to the mix shaman, bounty hunters, spirits, double crosses and peyote (for the crew as well as the cast) and you have a unique western.

Its a weird film with portents and visions criss crossing with hypnotic cinematography. This is a movie that looks great. There is a first rate cast, although I do have to say that I found some of the accents, Izzard's and star Vincent Cassel's a bit out of place.

Pretty much everything works except the screenplay which seems intent on being oblique for the hell of it. There is a heavy dose of Indian mysticism that seems to have been put there just to make things seem like they have a deep meaning (I think there was too much peyote behind the scenes). I'm not sure they do. The obliqueness and constant mystic reference slow the movie down to a crawl. After a while I stopped caring and started to look for the DVD remote. (Even worse is the fact that you have to pay attention to this movie or you're going to end up lost, so once I found the remote I had to back it up to see what I missed.) This is not a bad film, its just a rather dull and confused one. I'm sure in the right frame of mind this plays wonderfully, but I haven't determined what that is. I've rated it five out of ten because of the parts. The parts are interesting even if the whole is often a crashing bore. For fans of the cast, rabid western fans and those looking for head trip films only.

First I would like to make it clear that you cannot appreciate this movie if you are, for some reason, anti-shamanism or anti-hallucinogenics -as in, regarding those as a meaningless joke- because that's a big part of the movie. On the other hand if you're interested in shamanism, DO make sure you see this.

Most of the movie is visually very well done and it is, really, storytelling. there is only a light amount of action, though when it does go off, you can recognize Kounen's style, like for instance his habit of zooming in really close on strange but cool facial expressions from his actors etc.

I never read the comic. And seeing this free from expectation, I found it pretty good. not as attention grabbing as Dobermann (that goes with the type of movie) but definitely worth a watch.

Don't listen to the negative comments (especially those making fun of the effects, those people seem to be obeying a deeply rooted feeling that hallucinogenics are somehow evil) and make an opinion for yourself. I give it an 8.

At the beginning of the movie, the authors stated that film is "losely based on Blueberry comics". The word "losely" should be multiplied by 10 in this case. Don't get me wrong, when I'm about to see the movie I take the distance of the preceding material. But that's exactly what the authors shouldn't do - they might as well call it "Jackson" or "Smith" or any other surname. What's the point of making the Batman movie if you tell the story about the transvestite who dresses as cape crusader and disco dances in night clubs? Or lets say you shoot he James Bond movie about the guy working as a chef in restaurant? Those might be good parodies, but this movie tends to be serious (I think?)...

The Blueberry comics are within my top 3 of all time; not because of the greatness of the series or the impact on the world comics, just because few simple things: the characters, the drawing and most important - the story. Jean Michel Charlier is the author of the most of the series until his death in the 1980-ies and the man is genius. His episodes are the page-turners. His stories were always graping, with excellent plots and even better twists and turns. In the western movie terms, something between "The good, the bad and the ugly", "Unforgiven", Indiana Jones series and even some good political thrillers.

When I saw this brain plus action concept transformed into a bad mind-tripping David Lynch movie (which is a big compliment for this film), my jaw dropped and stayed that way all through the movie, while I waited for Mike Blueberry to wake up from comma or the film to change into something remotely like the comics. Alas, it didn't happen.

To all of you who haven't read the comics and are disappointed by the film, PLEASE read them, you will be more then surprised!

"Blueberry" or "Renegade" (U.S. DVD title) is an interesting movie but it will give you a headache. Vincent Cassel plays Mike Blueberry, who is the Marshal for a old western town. Michael Madsen co-stars as his nemesis Wallace. Juliette Lewis plays Maria, who falls in love with Mike.

Also appearing in "Blueberry": Ernest Borgnine, Eddie Izzard, Geoffrey Lewis, and Djimon Hounsou. There is a plot but it is overshadowed by almost non-stop CGI effects. The climax between Wallace and Mike is one the weirdest things ever. They both drink peyote and have hallucinations. All these hallucinations will give you a headache.

There is also some unintentionally funny dialogue like "Animals are beasts, but men are monsters"

It's a different type of movie and it's worth seeing once.

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com

Back in 2004 when Blueberry released, i didn't pay attention. Today i'm very glad that i didn't watch the movie till i had my dmt experience.

I'm not comfortable about talking people's choices so i won't tell anything special about experience, every human being have chance to choose which experience to live.

After the stunning and amazing experience we got together, all blown up, started to talk about if there is a computer or person or cgi team that could made or even design the same visions we encountered during the experience. We all know Enter The Void, it begins with the main character's dmt trip. it's visuals was OK but no where near our experience. At last we decided that Alex Grey's paintings are the closest possible cartoon copies of the visuals of the trip, until one of us mentions Blueberry. Unfortunately nobody watched it except him.

I like Vincent Cassel. Love Juliette Lewis. And I, well... got used to Michael Madsen. Michael Madsen is Michael Madsen in Blueberry once again. Exact same gestures, mimics, talking style and movements. He is like Highlander of mafia guys. There can be only Madsen.

Anyway Bluberry has beautiful scenes and smartly crafted motives. It's about greedy little human f***ks and the humans who had the influence of where really we are and respect the place. Just because of those points you can watch Blueberry and enjoy it.

And finally, when they reach the gold, the real story begins. Dmt experience is the experience you have to had to enjoy last thirty minutes of this film. I am sure that everybody who took part of making the last thirty minute experienced dmt. the special effects of the trip are most accurate depiction of what you experienced out there but unfortunately they are near no where the actual "thing". While i was watching it, i smiled like i am watching an old private video of mine. So even you won't want to have an experience of dmt just know that there is a meaning and a strong reality about those parts of the Blueberry and judge by knowing it.

If i don't experienced something like that i am pretty sure i would give Blueberry 5/10 points. But this movie is a little different with it's attitude, editing. it's absorbing.

Like Yuni said in the movie, plants have ability to show you who you are and where are we. Blueberry is a homage to that sentence.

One last thing. I think Michael Madsen supposed to be villain of this film. Not even close!!! Something 7500 voters misunderstood about this movie.

I love the comic book's Mike Blueberry and was very interested to see the story as a movie. The movie contains a character named Mike and a few other characters with familiar names and a few events from the comic books, but the story is completely new, as for every character's situation and behavior.

The story was vague and unclear. Much happened that did not push the story forwards, the scenes were long and did not lead anywhere. There were many characters that only filled the screen and did not have a purpose. It was overall a movie very far from the American way to do it and it left me only very disappointed and confused.

The photo was interesting sometimes.

Monday night I was at the French premiere of Jan Kounen's `Blueberry' and I thought I'd give you a little review. I don't know when the movie'll be out in the States, but in my opinion, this one really deserves to be supported. First let me apologize in advance for the grammatical mistakes I may make, especially if I get too excited during the review. Let's get one thing straight : this is no western. I would even go as far as to say that this is a true UFO in the cinema landscape. You have never seen and probably never will see a movie quite like `Blueberry'. Which doesn't mean that it's a masterpiece, far from it, but the vision (no pun intended) of the director is truly unique, and that's why I really encourage everyone to go and see the movie to support this great project. I haven't read the comics the movie is `loosely based on', but I think it's just as well, because apart from the main characters, the treatment of `Blueberry' has not much to do with Jean Giraud's work. (He admitted it himself in the masterclass he did with Vincent Cassel and Jan Kounen on Saturday, and that I was fortunate enough to attend). I don't want to make a novel out of this review, but basically, Jan Kounen has worked 5 good years on this project. And along the way, he went through a life changing experience meeting shamans in Peru. This made the movie go into a completely different direction. Because what you'll notice very soon in the movie, is that Kounen isn't really interested in the classic western good-guy-against-bad-guy, (in this case : bad-guys-are-after-some-gold-in-the-mountains-and-good-guy-has-to-stop-them) pseudo-plot that he develops at the beginning. The core of the movie is Mike Blueberry's journey to the truth through shamanism. This is what Jan Kounen experienced in Peru, as well as the lead actor, Vincent Cassel. And this is the reason why in my modest opinion, `Blueberry' probably won't enjoy the commercial success the producers are hoping for. Here's why : the main objective of the director was to show the `visions' experienced by Blueberry as realistically as possible. The term `realistic' is probably not a good one, but I think you'll get my point. This is done through special effects helmed by Rodolphe Chabrier and his company McGuff. The guy knows what he's talking about, because he had shamanic experiences as well, and he worked in collaboration with Cassel, Kounen and a real shaman (who plays a small part in the movie) to show as accurately as possible what the visions look like in reality (oops, I used the R. word again). The amazing thing is that everybody sees basically the same things : snakes, hydras, etc. and Chabrier tried to show that in the movie. The effects are amazing, but there's a small problem, there are some sections of the movie (I have no idea how long they last, but maybe 5-10 minutes each) where the real world as we know it disappears and we're completely immersed, with the character, in those visions. It takes a complete leap of faith for the viewers to forget everything you know, or think you know, or imagine visions such as these would be, just trust the filmmaker and get into the experience. After seeing the movie, one of my friends told me that the directors `lost' her because the visions scenes should have been slower and keep in touch a little bit with reality. I understand her opinion, cause I didn't get into it completely as well (I thought the visions lasted a little bit too long, and since we don't really know what's happening and what, for instance, the hydra represents, it's hard to stay `in' the movie); but what you have to understand is that it doesn't matter if we are lost in some scenes, it doesn't matter if it doesn't seem real, because what Kounen did is that he refused to compromise in order to have a more audience-friendly movie. He decided to show the visions as realistically as possible, and even if we imagine visions to be kind of in slow motion and to make sense; in reality they don't. They look exactly like that (well, at least as close as possible to what people experience in those cases).

Now that I got that out of the way, let me give you a little summary, and a rundown on the strengths and weaknesses of the movie.

Mike (the great Vincent Cassel) is a marshal in the small town of Palomito. When he was young his great love was killed because of a guy called Wally Blount. After that, he was taken in by an Indian tribe for a while. He discovered this culture, learned their language and even though he now lives in `civilization', he still keeps a strong connection with this culture. At the beginning of the movie we are introduced to Prosit, a German looking for a gold mine in the region. And then Wally Blount comes back into Mike's life.

This is basically the plot, not that it really matters. The movie starts as a typical western, and Kounen directs it beautifully. It's obvious he loves the country he's filming and its inhabitants. The images are just amazing. I guess it's a preview for the documentary (`Other worlds') Kounen filmed before directed `Blueberry'. But anyway, as a western, `Blueberry' is pretty solid : great landscapes, music, costumes, characters, and actors. Let's stay on the actors for a while. There's no casting mistake, everyone is great here. But Vincent Cassel as `Blueberry' steals the show. There is no doubt in my mind that he was born to play this character. It took a lot of guts to put him in the lead, given the fact that Blueberry is an American cowboy and Cassel a French non-cowboy, but he really delivers a great performance. Among the rest of the cast, Jan Kounen is also very good in a very small part and Eddie Izzard does well with a pretty despicable character.

But after one hour or so, Kounen leaves aside the western plot and focuses on the `psychological quest' of the character. That's one of the weaknesses of the movie, because in my mind some characters were left aside and the movie might have been more balanced if it had focused on this plot rather than on the visions. But then again, it would have been much less special.

I don't know if this review will make you want to watch the movie, but take my word for it, and go! Jan Kounen really has guts, and a unique voice in cinema. This is a UFO, but a very likeable one, worth 10 pre-processed mainstream movies.

And last but not least, a few words of advice 1. For those of you who speak French, try to get your hands on the special edition that the French version of `Premiere' did on the movie. They explain extensively how the special effects were made, and give a lot of anecdotes. That's priceless 2. When you see the movie, try to sit close to the screen to really get into the visions scene. That's not my advice, but Rodolphe Chabrier's, who did the special effects. 3. See it twice! At least. That's what I'm gonna do as soon as I get the chance. The first vision (sorry, I couldn't help making the pun) isn't enough to really GET the movie. 4. If Jan Kounen's documentary `Other worlds' is released in your country, I'd advise to go and see it. I think it will explain the movie a lot and make us experience it at another level.

That's it!

Let's take the dozens of comic books that are made of Blueberry. Rip all the pages out, shuffle them and take the 20 pages that are on top. Rewrite the text so it does not resemble the original text. Create stunning sets and make even more stunning camera work, really weird special effects and even weirder sounds. And some bad singing, horribly bad.

Take some arty looking actors and let them speak French or some native American language. Dub the spoken text in such a way that the lip movements that you see on screen are completely out of sync with what you hear.

If you don't know anything about Blueberry, you have no idea what this movie is about. And if you do know a bit about the comic books, you are thinking all the time... hey, this is from that album... no no, from that other one... oh no, that's not possible... eh eh eh... I'm not sure anymore.

It's not like any other cowboy movie I ever saw. But it's definitely not the Blueberry I know from the comic books. It's eye candy. It's a bad movie.

4/10

I've read all the series of the Blueberry cartoons in fact I still have the whole series on my bookshelf. I first was disappointed with the fact that this Blueberry character doesn't look any near the Blueberry Cartoon figure. But the spirit of the cartoons can be found back in this movie. I think they did a better job trying to catch some of the Cartoon spirit rather than trying to copy the original Cartoons which is very difficult anyway because even in cartoons you still have that personal touch of fantasy which always gets destroyed by making a movie of some Novel or in this case, Cartoon. Very nice to see a more "Holistic" approach towards the "Cowboy-Indian" theme. It's a good thing to realize that this native Americans had a much more healthier attitude to nature than we do and we should learn from them now we know that we already destroyed some of it. When I think about American Indians I also have that holistic feeling about them so for me this Movie adds up to that. See the movie yourself when you are in a chill mood and you will certainly appreciate it.

P.S. Nice to finally know how Tsi Nah-Pha (Broken Nose)is pronounced.

The film deals with a young Blueberry (Hugh O'Connor) who after a hideous experience he swears vengeance against a villain (Michel Madsen). Adult Blueberry (Vincent Cassell) is appointed as sheriff in a little town , he's helped by an old man (Ernest Borgnine) and a rough and ragged gunman (Colm Meany) . They will have to confront nasties and a greed bunch (Michael Madsen , Eddie Izzard , Djimon Honsou) that are looking for a treasury at Indian territory commanded by Apaches Chiricagua (leading Temuera Morrison) . When gold fever strikes white enemies invade their sacred mountains and Indians raid them . On his way, Blueberry meets a lot of villains on a persistent mission to find gold in the Superstition Mountains .

This exciting movie blends western action , shootouts , breathtaking landscapes with hallucinogenics shots ; besides, a little bit of violence and nudism . The final confrontation amongst the starring and contenders is overblown with amazing as well as thrilling images . Passable acting by Vincent Cassel , though Val Kilmer was originally offered the headlining role but respectfully declined . Willem Dafoe and Benicio Del Toro were then considered for the role of Mike Blueberry, but Jan Kounen remembered conversations he had about shamanism with his friend Vincent Cassel and chose him instead . The picture has gotten classification apt +18 , because of the crude murders , sex and violence are varied . Strange storyline by Gerard Brach , Polanski's usual screenwriter , from an original Jean Giraud (Moebius)'s comic book . However , being much better the drawings ; thus , the film is quite boring and isn't well paced . The motion picture obtained limited success , in United States achieved a few box office , in Europe attained money enough . Film outdoors are spellbound and overwhelming , it's the best part of the movie . Jean Kounen direction is mediocre , cinematography in Super35mm Panavision by Tetsuo Nagata is enjoyable and musical score is atmospheric . The flick will appeal to peculiar and queer western buffs. Rating : Mediocre , 5.5/10 . Well worth seeing for the extraordinary landscapes.

The only similarity between the comic and the movie is the title; Bleuberry!! The actor portraying Bleuberry is the exact opposite of the lead character in the comic and while the comic plays in the civil war,this story plays in??????????....Whatever!! There are some nice visual effects in this otherwise third rate western,but its one big peyote trip from the start.I am a big western fan and own all of the bleuberry comics but (to my regret), just like "Jeremiah" they raped the comic in a bad way. It would be nice if somebody just for once took a comic and followed the storyline, because that would be so easy in the case of Bleuberry and Jeremiah.

Released in 2004, Renegade was a very loose adaptation the French/Belgian comic book series Blueberry, and it starred Vincent Cassel as a U. S. Marshal who was partly raised by Native Americans. The cast also includes Michael Madsen, Juliette Lewis and Ernest Borgnine.

The classic comics were illustrated by Jean Giraud, also known as Moebius, so adapting the striking visual style established in the books to the big screen was always going to be a challenge, especially for a French production. Surprisingly, the film's budget was quite high and its straight-to-DVD release in the U. S. hardly earned it much attention. Critically, it wasn't particularly well received outside of French-speaking countries, or even back home, but it got some praise here and there for at least trying something a bit different with the Western genre.

Indeed, this isn't your typical Spaghetti Western, especially by the time you get to the film's trippy third act. And although it's pretty much nothing like the comics both in terms of tone and visuals, it's shot with enough flair and creativity that you can tell it was based on something pretty unique and the final burst of CG madness is clearly a homage to Moebius' more surreal works.

There is something refreshing about how unusual this movie is. The plot centers around Mike Donovan/Blueberry (Cassel) and his nemesis Wallace Sebastian Blount (Madsen), who once got a prostitute killed in front of him, as they make their way towards a mountain where they both take part in a shamanic ritual that might save or take away their lives. Along the way, Donovan meets Maria Sullivan (Lewis) who wants revenge for her father (played by Geoffrey Lewis) after he is killed by Blount.

It's a solid cast but, unfortunately, the actors often struggle with an occasionally weak script and, while Vincent Cassel looks the part, he doesn't really command the screen as much as you'd expect him to. For all its visual bells and whistles, Renegade has some serious pacing issues and its bold moves towards the end are undermined by a rather dull second act. Furthermore, as inventive as its ending may be, it'll likely leave you more confused than impressed.

Renegade won't be for everyone. Those expecting a faithful adaptation of the comics, a more traditional Western or an action-packed adventure will be disappointed but if you're up for something a bit weirder and more experimental, this is worth trying once.

Uneven yet intriguing flop.

This may be the dumbest film I have ever seen! The previews say "This movie breaks the mold of the Western genre". No. This movie stuffs the Western genre into a blender, adds in sci-fi, puts in a drop of porn, hits frappé, and then pours the concoction down the toilet!

Who the (expletive) came up with the idea of the spiritual visions that look like a kaleidescope on PCP? These journeys take up a good 10-15 minutes of the movie! With a small bit of voice-over, you're watching a spectral lights show instead of a movie!

The most awful thing is this: there is almost nothing in this piece of junk that can identify it as a Western! Yes, the location is in Colorado or something (an assumption because of all the mountains) and everybody wears Western-style clothing, but that's it! There are only like 3 bullets shot in the entire movie...and that's what you watch a Western to see! There's none of it! And for all the talk about revenge, you don't see any freaking revenge being taken! Come on!

The only plus is that the acting didn't suck. Several good actors in this thing--Michael Madsen was good, Vincent Cassel and Juliete Lewis did their parts well (with that bit of porno at the end that added absolutely NOTHING to the movie at all!!!!!!), and the supporting actors were good.

I beg you all, if you've not seen this movie, for the love of heaven, DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE! IT IS HORRIBLE! SAVE YOUR BRAIN MATTER AND SPEND YOUR EVENING MORE PRODUCTIVELY!!!!!

Well, I went to see that in order to empty my stressed mind and to

forget my personal problems. So I was not expecting a good

movie. Knowing 3 movies by Jan Kounen (Dobermann, Gisele

Kerozene and Vibroboy), I was also expecting a rather violent and

almost inhuman action movie. But to my surprise: NO! It was exactly the contrary: a kind of hypnotic western movie, far

from what we've seen before in that cinema genre. Of course it's

not a masterpiece and it has some clichés and "bad" scenes. But

the style is quite original and it's more an insight of Blueberry's

mind than a Blueberry's adventure. This movie is far from the

comic book's character (I have to admit that I don't really know the

comic book so it's probably why I was not that upset by the

difference!) but in one way it's not a big deal! It's announced in the

opening credits: "freely inspired by"! Therefore, I think that's just a

re-invention of the myth of Blueberry as "O Brother" is a

re-invention of Ulysses by the Coen Brothers or "Romeo + Juliet"

a re-invention of Shakespeare's work by Baz Lurhman. Adaptation shouldn't be a copy, in fact. And that's why lots of

people always say: "oh my God, if you know the book, the cinema

adaptation is totally failed!" Because they (we) are often afraid of

re-invention. To come back to the movie "Blueberry", I have to say that I was

completely hypnotized by the animated almost abstract part of it. At

the end, the long insight of Blueberry reminded me of "2001 a

space odyssey". Of course "Blueberry" will not be remembered as

"2001" is and will still be, but it looks like a kind of tribute to

Kubrick's movie. "Blueberry" seems to be a very personal movie for Kounen and I

suppose that's the reason why it's misunderstood and underestimated. People were probably waiting for a more

conventional western movie. And I think this one is kind of

in-between: both a commercial movie and a more experimental

author's film. So have a try, and just fly in Blueberry's mind... and don't expect too

many action scenes! 7/10

I cannot believe the low ratings this film has gotten. It's got something for everyone, and not only that, but it's the German chocolate cake for genre-lovers. I have a list of reasons why people SHOULD love this film: 1. Michael Madsen. He's the best thing about this movie. He plays it subtle but he's got bad-ass pouring out of him. He's got everything a villain needs: a quality of making you feel guilty for loving him, a presence that blows you away and keeps you intimidated, and most of all, he's got his own agenda. Not only is he a great villain, but a deep, complex character as well.

2. Everybody else. Vincent Cassel, Julliette Lewis, and Djimon Hounsou especially. Cassel plays Blueberry as a likable hero, although, properly and meaningfully, bugs the audience on the factor of "he just hasn't learned yet". Julliette Lewis, though isn't given much, well, makes what she's given seem like a lot more than it is. I'm sure a lot of her wound up on the cutting room floor, though. Djimon Hounsou has an amazing presence as well. He's responsible for one of the most memorable scenes in the film. The rest of the cast played their roles respectively too. Colm Meaney played a good friend and was more than just the "comic relief character", although delivers comic relief when it's needed. Eddie Izzard loses the German accent occasionally, and plays the easy-to-hate coward in a, well, easy-to-hate way. But by the time he delivers his "men are monsters" line, you know that's all changed. Temeura Morrison add more to being the sage (yes, that's a pun) than just being the proper race. He's got the being-in-the-know thing down.

3. CGI at its best. Though your purist self may usually be screaming at CGI, you will be screaming "To Hell with practicality!" by the end of this film. Marc Caro was behind the special effects department, and you truly will be convinced that Jean-Pierre Jeunet has been wrongfully taking his credit the whole time.

4. The music! We've got our smörgåsbord of properly American West flavors with a beautiful orchestra on top of that.

5. The balance. It was in everything. From pleasing us with proper Western blood and violence while still maintaining a lack of senseless gore. The dialogue being able to remain practical and not drawing attention to itself while still keeping a Tarantino-esque flare along with it. The French art dousing the film while keeping a western attitude as its proper foundation. The cinematography of making you feel dirty and sweaty but while still making you free within the film's beautiful scenery. The pure originality this film radiates while still not forgetting what genre it's in. Even the balance between our love and hate for every single character for this film.

Here are the only possible reasons I can imagine someone not being able to like it: 1. Genre-haters, this ain't for you.

2. The "why-in-god's-name-did-Phil Collins-betray-me" purists, this film may be a tad too original for you. This film definitely defies the laws of tradition 3. Impatient sitters. Yes, it's true the first act was slow and slightly confusing. But it makes the rest all the stronger.

4. People who hate French-style heavy-handedness. Yeah, they didn't exactly need the "eyes of the eagle" thing. There's also this really bothersome scene where they have flowers blooming cut in, just to show "growth". That's actually probably the only problem with the picture actually. There's many instances where they use symbolism to state what the viewer already knows.

5. People who hate Michael Madsen. Well, there's probably enough else in this movie for you to like about it. But after you watch, I'll probably be at your house already making sure you experience a slow, horrible death.

Bottom Line: Heartbreakingly UNDERRATED. But usually with underrated films I can understand why I'm the only one who liked it, but this film seems to have a whole lot anybody of any bias can dig. In my bias, it all traces back to the balance: this film is fun and re-watchable while at the same time complex and original.

Is this the first action-Western acid-trip movie? The theme is aboriginal shamanism, possibly inspired by the fiction of Jorge Castenada. The opening credits say that this was loosely based on some comic book series. All I can say is that I don't recall comic books being like this when I was young. There is some awesome photography of Western-looking countryside. It's hard to tell where the setting is supposed to be, perhaps no real place. Much of the film is in the recent style of dystopian Western realism, where (almost) everyone is dirty, has bad teeth, and kills on whims. When we get to the hallucinogenic scenes, the filmmakers went a little bit overboard. It looks like they had great fun making up weird and wicked imagery, but it goes on a bit long.

I was not familiar with Vincent Cassel, but he does a creditable job carrying the film as the main character. There is quite a bit of well-known talent in the rest of the cast, also. Michael Madsen plays to type, being thoroughly amoral and quietly menacing. The various actors playing the Indians did quite well. (I wonder what language they were speaking. It did not sound like Spanish to me, but not speaking that language myself, I could not be completely sure) Ernest Borgnine (who I thought was retired) was here in an interesting but small part. Also, Geoffrey Lewis (a fine character actor remembered largely for roles in Clint Eastwood films) did nicely. I was unaware that he was the father of Juliette Lewis, who played his daughter in this film. I noticed from the credits that Tcheky Karyo was in this one, too, but I completely missed him. Kudos to Vahina Giocante for her acting and beauty in a role near the beginning of the film. And, as for Juliette Lewis; wow! She showed a realism in her role that bespeaks real acting talent. And, of course, she was so beautiful here, more so than I had noticed before. I must see more of her work.

If you can stand the weirdness, check this one out. As long as you don't go into it thinking of it as a straight Western adventure film.

This movie is not worth watching... simply put. Its alienating, has pour dialog and story. There are so many minutes of distracting and boring graphics that it made me wanna stop watching the movie and see something else. Making a movie seem mysterious is not enough to make it good. It need substance other than just making the audience confused which it certainly did. It left me and my wife in a state of: WTF was that? Where are we now? what happened? And still have the same consistent feeling now about it now.

My point is: If you haven't seen it, don't waste your time.

This is just my opinion so live with it. :P