Customer Reviews

In Dreams (Widescreen)

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

Somehow I feel that if this film had been even stranger, it may have been more critically popular. Had it not bothered with as linear a storyline and just followed the dream-logic plotlines it may have been hailed as a David Lynch-like fairy tale nightmare; add more violence and it could be a Dario Argento film. But instead we have something by Neil Jordan, who gives this film more wonder and magic (albeit dark) than anyone else could. I think it's a great film. See, it's called In Dreams, not In Logic. Its surreality is its strength, staying visually spectacular at all times and boosted by an absolutely great performance by Annette Bening. I think the plot contrivances are almost subversive; OF COURSE there are moments of coincidence because that's what happens in dreams. Moments of opportunity or clarity (claire-ity?) arrive for our heroine and she takes them in stride. The film's general feel is continuously reinforced by the eerie flooded dream village in the reservoir, and the fairy tale orchard. This is a Grim tale alright, but its beautiful, trippy and saturated in atmosphere. Killer ending too, closing a disturbingly satisfying thriller by a masterful director. Highly recommended for those who like to dream.

The fabrics from which dreams are woven can be horrendous, and more catastrophic still when the visions return to the fertile grounds of your mind night after chaotic night. This point is made even more pronouncedly when the dreams happen to be about things that are occurring or are going to happen, especially when they teeter on the edge of insanity, or, as is the case with Claire, on areas that hit close to home. For several nights now she has been seeing visions of an apple orchard and a figure leading a little girl through it, leading her to believe that the child in her mind might well be a little girl that has gone missing. So, with an outstretched mentality, her mind goes searching, looking for something which she can clamp onto. Unfortunately for her, the mirror sometimes has a darker side, one that can peer into the mind that dreams visions, and that hands that can effectively whittle away many of the pieces that lead a person toward happiness, security, and the warmth that we like to call home.

In dreams had some beautiful depictions within it, capturing the aura of a town floating beneath waters unleashed by river diversion, showing a person in the first few minutes that it had a surreal feeling to it and that there was the ability to seem frightfully eerie running laps through its veins. This was further accented by the visions that were seen throughout the film, those of children and a past foretold in the shadows of a nursery rhyme wearing a shroud of insane speech and garble imagery, keeping its viewer enmeshed in the tale that was being portrayed upon the screen. It also seemed to have a storyline going for it that was interesting until the final chase that is inevitable begins to ensue, dragging on for a time before leading toward a vindictive ending that leaves everyone shattered as sprawling in the dust and that makes up for the duration of the run. This was an interesting ride, too, because getting a handle on what exactly is going to happen is a bit hard until alter in the movie, and then its all apples from there.

Combine this with the acting, which was done beautifully, the fact that the movie was something containing portions that entranced me within their bleakness, and the madness in the eyes of a Downey seems somewhat believable int he role, and you have something that is worth watching and that does the book its based on, Doll Eyes, a fair amount of justice. It'll make you question all the delightful dreams that manifest within your mind!

Annette Bening is great as an ordinary woman who starts having dreams of kidnappings and murders before they happen. Her family and police won't listen to her until it's too late. She discovers that the dreams are actually the communications of a disturbed man (Robert Downey Jr.) who endured horrifying abuse as a child, and for some reason he has chosen her to receive messages of his criminal doings.

This is a terrifying psychological thriller, replete with imagery that will stay with you for a long time. The details of the abuse are not for the weak ---- I am still disturbed, years after watching this, by the treament of the child who later becomes a criminal.

What is so surprising about In Dreams is that so many talented people got lured into it. This has to be another case where a lot went wrong between a promising script and the finished product. The renowned producer Robert Evans once remarked that the biggest problem with movies today is that too many are made by a committee, rather than by individuals. Perhaps that is the problem here.

Annette Bening plays Claire Cooper, who lives in an ordinary town, but who has an extraordinary gift. She is psychic. This is not something she wants in her life, but she is unable to escape it. She has recurrent nightmares about a young boy who, tied to his bed, tries frantically to escape when water begins to fill his room. At the same time, a series of murders begins to occur in the town. She knows her dream is somehow related to them.

There are the usual elements of such fare. No one believes her. Her husband is convinced that it's really mental illness. The audience is given enough clues to know that she isn't a fake. There are scenes that make us jump. At times the tension builds, especially in the eerie underwater sequences.

Several great movies, such as Rosemary's Baby and The Exorcist, have been made from premises as absurd as this. After all, the best pictures cause us to get so caught up in them that we temporarily lay aside reason and logic. In Dreams tries hard, but it's rarely able to do that.

I think the main problem is that, unlike the movies I mentioned, there is not a whole lot to make us care that much about Claire. It isn't the acting. Bening is professional and convincing, as is Robert Downey, Jr. as the strange Vivian Thompson. Scenes which would bond us to her emotionally are absent. It is always convenient to blame the director. Respected director Neil Jordon certainly hit a career low point here. In this case, I think he didn't have enough to work with. Like a chef, a director can't whip up something delectable if he hasn't the right ingredients.

In Dreams makes a decent "popcorn" movie. It is simply not up to the standards of the people who worked on it. All of them will recover and go on to bigger things. If the production was run by a committee, I'm sure it's disbanded.

The first part of story seems to have some suspension and frightening plot, but the story got lost on 2nd part. It is not any actor's fault perhaps, but director's or screen play writer's. As the story reached the end, I don't even feel I care anymore, even though it would shock you at the last scene. Once again I like Rober Downey Jr.'s protrait of Vivian, a dark, weired, routhless but still charming killer, who only appeared actually on the 2nd part of the film. But it didn't save anything from the lost story, which wasn't that good really. Maybe the only thing the film has achieved is its visual effects, beautiful, haunting and chilling.

The most intriguing character in this entire movie was Vivian Thompson. Robert Downey Jr. plays the role so fantastically. He's twisted and frightening in a sexy way. It's very interesting.

This film is yet another overlooked Hollywood gem. Robert Downey proves he is a talented actor, and Annette does wonders with her role as well.

The pacing of the film is slow, so be warned. If you can deal with that you won't be disapointed with this film.

I believe this film is one of the best thrillers Hollywood has made. The fact that there are people who didn't like this film amazes me.

Have patience? Like suspense and surreal filmmaking? Rent this film!

'Good on you', Annette. She really puts her all into this movie. Sadly it's not enough. The rest of the cast seem to sleep walk through the entire length of the film. Hello! Stephen Rea - I swear to God his performance was so wooden, I doubt he even bent at the knees as he crossed the screen. The Cinematography is lovely, especially the underwater town (I'm a diver) but the story really goes awry, the characters show little concern for the plot, and Robert Downey. Jr plays Psycho like Bob Dylan, sans Guitar. The finale is straight out of a soap opera (did they run out of film, couldn't afford a less hammy performance?) Honestly, if you appreciate good mysteries and a good tale, if you want to be scared and convinced that something terrible is happening, then watch Alley McBeal, it's right up there with 'In Dreams'.

As much as I LOVE Robert Downey Jr., even he couldn't salvage this piece of garbage. He did a good job with what he had to work with. His talents were wasted in this film. I don't even think it deserves one star, but the ratings didn't go lower! Sorry.

Neil Jordans chilling psychodrama thriller In Dreams is a movie that will always come up on my list for the most impacting,disturbing films I have ever seen. It's wild, wacky, dark and absurd... and oh how it works. This is a film like no other- and Robert Downey Jr. is brilliant in this obscur performance. Annette Benning is her wonderful paranoid self in this thrill ride thriller. It will haunt you for days. I'm still haunted, two years later...