Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Madilyn Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

gradyharp Rolf de Heer both wrote and directed this strangely fascinating and equally disturbing 2003 film for a cast of two. It takes chances (both male and female full frontal nudity among them), relates a tale that will likely make the viewer cringe and have some bad dreams, depends solely (well, practically solely) on two actors to pull this off, and in the end brings to the table a story of a terminally dysfunctional marriage.Steve (Gary Sweet) and Alexandra (Helen Buday) live a middle class existence with their two children in Australia. After a strangely cold beginning - today is Steve's birthday and his two children and Alexandra have plans for an evening's celebration. Steve seems to start the day in an amorous mood but Alexandra is surprisingly unresponsive: Steve's attention is disturbed by the fat, ugly security systems installer neighbor (Bogdan Koca) who is constantly watering his garden. Steve is off, and at work his colleagues present him with a surprise birthday party AND an advancement in his company. When Steve returns home, his house is deserted and darkened with almost all the light bulbs missing, all easy access outside cut off and a videotape waiting for him, a videotape labeled 'play me'. Plugging the tape in Steve is instructed to get a beer and sit and watch what is about to unfold. On the tape Alexandra lays out her complaints about their marriage - Alexandra's feeling of abandonment, lack of sexual fulfillment, lack of intimacy, no control over the direction of her life. One of her biggest complaints is that Steve 'married her body' and made love at her, not with her. In an attempt to regain control of her body and her life Alexandra does some sexually perverse things on the tape to humiliate both Steve and the 'body' he married. She explains her grievances with him, her reasons for disappearing with the children and her revenge for how he treated her in a way he would never forget. The proceedings on the tape become real-time and the result of how Steve and Alexandra cope forms the surprise ending to this little sour film.Both Sweet and Buday give convincing performances and the progress of the tape watching keeps the viewer's attention. Much of the back story for the film is left to the viewer's imagination but as far as the experience the script offers, it is a tough and strongly acted experience. Grady Harp

Tony Bush Hard-hitting, resolutely twisted and unsettling low-budget psychological mind-bender from down under.A housewife takes a catastrophic revenge on her callous husband who arrives home expecting a surprise birthday party and gets something very different instead.It is cleverly constructed, paced to slow-burn, and acted with brave and impressive conviction by a very skilled and believable cast. Helen Buday is an absolute revelation and her unapologetic and naked (in more ways than one) portrayal is nothing short of electrifying. It is not exactly an enjoyable film to watch, but on a technical level alone it's very, very clever and it certainly stays in the memory long after.Borderline pornographic, emotionally unflinching and potentially disturbing, this is not for the faint-hearted or those with delicate sensibilities. A feminist wet-dream? Maybe. But it has a unique style that sets it apart.

dutchchocolatecake Good props, good scenery, competent acting and a gripping story that leaves the viewer on the edge of their seat makes this movie worth watching. There is a lot of nudity and some sex scenes, but are not gratuitous in that they are *actually part of the story.*Most of the reviews on this site are full of it. This movie is not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be. This is first and foremost a psychological thriller, it is NOT intended to leave you feeling comfy with your world view or everyday assumptions of how day to day life works. It is very much a "what you see is not always what you get" kind of movie. If you watch this and feel *that* enraged that you start attacking women, feminism, or encouraging violence against women; then you have serious psychological issues that need MUCH MORE than Prozac to fix. But, if you are a man who is secure in yourself and your ability to relate with women as human beings; this movie won't bother you at all. It might even amuse you. Several times I found myself laughing because this movie *really does* portray the average white collar career climbing narcissist as the clueless, dismissive derp that he is. Over here in the states, they act much more arrogant and stuck on themselves but the idea comes across well enough.The point-of-perspective of this movie is very intriguing. The first part of the movie is from the point of view about the husband. The viewer sees HE is visible to the public, HE is compensated for his contribution to society, HE is rewarded for doing a good job, HE is celebrated as a valuable member of society. The wife is sort of "just there" doing all the things society takes for granted; and goes relatively unnoticed unless she is doing something out of the ordinary.Fast forward about a half an hour and we start to see things from the wife's perspective. Her perspective is shown from the television screen, which is meant to symbolize the smallness of her voice and visibility compared to the husband's. His birthday present is a tape that he has the power to pause, fast forward, turn off, or do whatever he wants; conveying that everything has been on his terms from the word go. Despite all this, I did NOT walk away from this movie feeling it was feminist. It is a story that is MEANT to fly in the face of popular opinion of what people have the "right" to do. People saying the wife is "wacko" are clueless. That was never part of the story. She didn't Snap. She was completely lucid throughout. THAT is what makes the movie so disturbing in the first place.For pete's sakes. The conclusions people come up with about movies are endlessly creative in their interpretation. And out of all the movies that visit graphic, psychopathic, explicit, *obscene* scenes of violence and rape on the bodies of women; people choose THIS movie to get upset about? Really? It wasn't even scary, well, not unless you think losing control of the remote to the television (or anything else you "think" is property) is a horrifying thought. Then I suggest you skip it, because you all you will do is react; and you will not be able to *get* the story that was being told in the first place.

bluecoltrane It's hard to say why I give this film a three...maybe just to compensate for feeling sorry for the effort put into it. The beginning was terribly weak as there was no exposition of the characters and many ends were left open only for the viewers' guesswork. What I also found it initially odd that Steve hadn't any knowledge what was going on! He goes to work in the morning and comes home to an empty house with the locks changed on the doors, with a video set-up. This move couldn't have been made in a day without his knowledge?? Her being a prostitute in the same house also could not go on unnoticed. The children appeared loving and well adjusted, no problems there!Her falling into, who knows what sexual situations seems absurd as she doesn't desire his needs but she will allow herself to be used by strangers and the grotesque fat slob next door.When the film ends there isn't any resolution to the situation Steve is put into...and I thought I wasted a lot of time watching this.