VidMate
Free YouTube video & music downloader
ACTOR
Max BeesleySaffron BurrowsRhys IfansSalma Hayek
DIRECTOR
Mike Figgis
SYNOPSICS
Hotel (2001) is a English,Italian,French movie. Mike Figgis has directed this movie. Max Beesley,Saffron Burrows,Rhys Ifans,Salma Hayek are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2001. Hotel (2001) is considered one of the best Comedy movie in India and around the world.
More
Same Actors
Same Director
Hotel (2001) Reviews
Even Trainwrecks Draw Your Eye - Not Hotel...
Maybe I shouldn't vote on a film I didn't finish watching but after sitting through 25 minutes of this, I took it back to the video store and got something else. This "film" has the quality of a video-recording. The "acting" is atrocious and the characters are flat. 25 minutes into the show there was no sign of a plot. When I read the back of the box I thought I was in for an intelligent pseudo-documentary. That is not what I got. If you're looking for an "artsy" independent film in a documentary style that is funny and intelligent I would recommend "The Incident at Loch Ness". Skip "Hotel" and use the time to watch something worthwhile.
WOW.
After sitting through literally 2 and 1/2 hours of assaultingly pretentious montages and amateurish camera work (not to mention editing), I was even more appalled by Figgis' own take on his work (speaking after his TIFF screening). The man brags openly about not having any script, storyline or characters to speak of. He then goes on to talk about how he is the "actor's director", giving his cast the "freedom" to indulge themselves and improvise. What I'm thinking was how could you do this to your producers, to your cast?!--people who put their reputations on the line and end up looking utterly ridiculous (the only one to emerge from this wreck unscathed is John Malkovich, clearly smart enough to pull-out from the project just in time, only to appear in the opening 2 scenes)! What I'm wondering is: why did Figgis want to make this film? For that matter Figgis didn't even seem to know what his movie was about. I've never before seen such a soulless, self-indulgent piece. Making a good, meaningful film should be a labor of love for the filmmaker. When you ask an actor to put their names and invest their abilities on your project you must pay them the same respect. In the end, when I think of `Hotel', I think of Figgis standing before a microphone making a complete ass of himself, going on about the brilliance of his work. But others not fortunate enough to have that experience will more likely remember David Schwimer barking like a dog or Burt Reynolds entering and smiling for the camera and then having literally nothing to say for an entire scene, never to appear in the movie again. If it were up to me the film would end with a still, black-and-white head shot of its "director" Mike Figgis, superimposed above all the credits. This is unwatchable, pretentious garbage--one of the worst cases of directorial masturbation I've ever seen. See it.
DVD should come wrapped in a Glad Bag
I'm not sure what to say the negative reviews all seem to mirror my thoughts on this absolute crap movie. "No script", I think that says it all. Uninspired is the nicest thing that I can say about it. I am amazed at how delusional people can be Figgis, shame on you letting people pay for this load of garbage. I would suspect that most people will find this to be a) a waste of money b) a waste of time c) a waste of talent (the actors) and d) an embarrassment for all involved. Some will also add e) insulting and f) bad PR for all artists trying to do some different and creative. I am sure there is a small group of people that will cast this movie in a somewhat better light than others, but they will be the minority and their reasons for doing so are probably worth examining. I notice that most of the reviews are well written and make their point without resorting to foul language or sophomoric references. I applaud you all. I must also add that this movie totally sucked the root.
Notice How No Reviews Warn of Spoilers?
Wow, this was probably a bottom 10 movie for me, although I'm not sure what the other 9 are yet. I am kind of embarrassed for the actors who agreed to work on the film. They won't do commercials because they are above that but they'll appear in crap like this? I could type the entire script of the film here and it still wouldn't "SPOIL" the movie. Now that's hard to accomplish. Many kudos to Mike Figgis for giving me something that I will never understand. I guess some actors/actresses just show up and say their lines and let the director and editor mold the movie into something after the filming ends. I looked at the history of what Mike Figgis has done and Leaving Las Vegas is the only project I recognize. I was not really even impressed with that one but at least there was a story line. I'm so mad at only looking at the DVD case before renting this. Save your money for Friday The 13th Part XX at the drive-in. This movie is really bad.
unwatchable, pretentious garbage....
Having enjoyed Mike Figgis' earlier efforts, "Loss of Sexual Innocence", "Timecode", and "Leaving Las Vegas", I entered the Varsity theatre at the Toronto International Film Festival in high spirits, also excited by the opportunity to hear Figgis introduce his film and take part in a question-answer program afterwards. After sitting through literally 2 and 1/2 hours of assaulting pretentious montages and amateurish camera work (not to mention editing), I was even more appalled by Figgis' own take on his work. The man brags openly about not having any script, storyline or characters to speak of. He then goes on to talk about how he is the "actor's director", giving his cast the "freedom" to indulge themselves and improvise. What I'm thinking was how could you do this to your producers, to your cast?!--people who put their reputations on the line and end up looking utterly ridiculous (the only one to emerge from this wreck unscathed is John Malkovich, obviously smart enough to pull-out from the project just in time, only to appear in the opening 2 scenes)! My question for him would have been something along the lines of "why did you want to make this film?". For that matter Figgis didn't even seem to know what his film was about. I've never before seen such a soulless, self-indulgent piece. Making a good, meaningful film should be a labor of love for the director. When you ask an actor to put their names and invest their abilities on your project you must show them the same respect. In the end, when I think of `Hotel', I think of Figgis standing before a microphone making a complete ass of himself, going on about the brilliance of his work. But others not fortunate enough to have that experience will more likely remember David Schwimer barking like a dog at the camera or Burt Reynolds entering and smiling for the camera and then having literally nothing to say for an entire scene, never to appear in the movie again. If it were up to me the film would end with a still, black-and-white head shot of its "director" Mike Figgis, superimposed above all the credits.