Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

In spite of the more negative reports here, I was rather pleased with this movie. To begin with: it has a sympathetic and genuine feel about it and the script is (for the most part) intelligent and amusing, with all these meandering story-lines that intertwine and in the end more or less come together. From one of the reviewers I learned that such is called an ensemble-movie. He apparently thought it a bit of a cinematographic cliché and in this movie not very well executed. But for me it totally worked. All characters get proper screen-time, so you can gradually learn something of their backgrounds and personalities, not too much (with so many different story-lines that's hard to do) but enough to make you care for all of them. The differences between the characters are prominent enough to keep you interested, but they never are exaggerated for the sake of cheap comedy or drama, they're mostly all simple, natural and realistic. Well, with the exception of the mother- figure; I agree with most reviewers that it was totally unnecessary (and even a let-down) to use a transvestite for that. Come-on, I can't believe that a Jewish director cannot find in Israel any Jewish actress that could play the part of the quintessential Yiddishe mama! It could be interesting to hear the view of the movie-maker on this.The acting is over-all pretty good: apart from the strange mother- impersonator everyone else acts very natural. Some of them stand out a bit more, like the promiscuous dance-teacher (very attractive to boot!), or the girl that plays Shirley (the sister of Omer), or the guy that plays Mickey as a bit of a queeny gay and who is actually very funny. Tomer Ilan is very convincing as cute Omer, exasperated by his overwhelming mother and frustrated by his marginal love-life. I also liked the musical score very much. It's linked with a few live performances in the bar where all the characters sooner or later meet. In a very subtle, almost coincidental way the director blends specific lines of the (English) lyrics with specific goings-on in the movie. You should almost watch the movie again and try to notice them. Very good!! Sure, there are some flaws to point out. The 3-year time-leap in the very beginning didn't seem to have any function. Instead it was a bit confusing, because right before the time-leap you think that Danny moves in with the promiscuous dancer, while right after the time-leap he appears to have lived together with a totally different person. The change in the appearance of Danny didn't help either: it took me some time to realize that this troubled-looking youth with the short hair-cut actually was the same person as the endearing inexperienced boy with the longer hair from the beginning of the movie. Over-all the abundance of characters was at times a bit confusing, since some of them look a bit alike and also have names that in Hebrew sound alike (like Ronen or Omer). Some of the many story-lines didn't seem necessary for the movie at all, like the woman with the alien-obsession. The final scene (again the alien-thing, now in an almost "Close Encounters"-like setting) was cinematographically beautiful, but felt a bit like a loose pebble (or maybe I missed the metaphor in this). The coupling of nerdy Omer with the obviously far more world-wise journalist was a bit far-fetched. And is Israel today really such a paradise for gay people? Where lovers can walk hand in hand in public and kiss on the sidewalks? Where all the mothers are just concerned that their gay sons and daughters find the right boy- and girlfriends, are competing with each other in gay matchmaking and all of them want their gay children to marry (!?) and have children (!?!). I thought that Holland was gay-liberated, but this beats all: I want to move there!!After viewing the movie I kept wondering what the message of the maker could be. Most characters end up with some kind of love(r) and in view of the title it seems to suggest that everyone can reach at his or her goal, however surreal or far-fetched this at times may seem. But on the other hand there are also characters who in the end stay empty-handed, like Mickey, or seem to go for a surrogate-love, like Danny. So no happy ending for all, and after the movie you're left with a smile mingled with a touch of sadness. Well, maybe there isn't a real message. It's just life.

if one forgets for a moment that love relationships shown in the movies are homosexual and not heterosexual, it is a simple film about people trying to find love and till they find one keep on trying. There is central character who is librarian and group of his friends and similar individuals they come across.in all there are 5 main male character and they are developed well given the time constraint, especially the journalist, librarian, the young boy and the Casanova. sub plot of hero's sister also being lesbian or their father being cross dresser seems unnecessary. there are comic moments though when their mother gets a new husband or one of the the character who works at a fashion store cracks jokes. Overall a good movie about love, commitment and relationship

I had pretty high expectations of this movie after reading a very short synopsis; I really like ensemble movies and 'Antarctica' being a gay movie and from Israel added to the attraction (I see a lot of Hollywood movies as well). I came out pretty disappointed.There was very little story in this and hardly any substance. I found it rather shallow while the premise was full of possibilities for an engrossing film. There is great potential in ensemble movies but only when a director and/or a writer know what to do with it… clearly in this case there could have been much more of a plot if the writer had left out a couple of characters and had focused on the remaining ones for some depth and background.I am somebody who enjoys striking images - by which I do not mean pictures of sunsets and lavish homes, but images that, whether they are pretty of ugly, enhance the story - but there was no beauty at all to be found in this movie. I am not referring to the cast because some of them were actually rather handsome, but the sets: apartments, kitchens, streets, surroundings… nothing spoke to me. It looked like nobody had been hired for cinematography. Now I am aware of the budget factor but there is a big gap between lush Hollywood sets and cramped TL-lit spaces. From where I was sitting a little more attention to imagery would not have distracted from the story; it would probably have enhanced it.But the one thing I could not get over was the casting of the character 'Omer's Mother'. This person was so ridiculously out of place that it hurt. I sincerely wonder what the deal was here because I cannot believe that any casting director who takes themselves seriously would voluntarily cast this character the way it was done, destroying any credibility the movie had to begin with.'Antarctica' in my view is mediocre at best, I give it 5 out of 10.

(minor spoilers) The director needs to work out what story he wants to tell and concentrate on that, neither hammering too hard on that story nor rushing off into side-stories all the time.Some of the relationships (the journalist and the clothing-shop boy) were just unbelievable, and actions by certain characters were rather random in the story (such as when the young dancer attempts to visit his old boyfriend the choreographer with flowers).A number of sequences just went on far too long (the opening, the café singers, and the alien-abduction conversations). I just got bored and I could feel the same restlessness across the audience at the screening I attended.The acting was fine, but the film was let down by the unfocused direction and slack editing.