It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Overall a good drama about a shy teenage boy who feels disconnected from the people around him. The slow pace of this film builds suspense and mystery, using themes of voyeurism and urban myths.Some people seemed confused about the ending. I think the narration at the beginning and end of the film, is just the thoughts of a typical neighbourhood gossip. Like when you don't know what happens in "that" house down the road you add these little ideas together...but truth is often stranger than fiction.Like most of the reviewers here, I felt that the ending was a bit of a letdown. Most of the film is slow and atmospheric (with great cinematography) which makes the ending seem rushed.

Very nicely assembled by the director, Dean O'Flaherty. Misses being gripping because of the script by writer, Dean O'Flaherty.In its sluggishness, it's slightly weird suburbanites, its focus on a taciturn young boy with his ever-ready camera, and its terrifying secrets -- all leading to violence that erupts in blood -- it reminds me a little of "American Beauty," but without the sometimes sly wit. It also is reminiscent of the superior "Lantana," another Australian film about a missing person but filled with the self confidence that the crew and cast have when they know they're making a thoughtful movie.A girl disappears. She may have run away but Suzy, with her long blond tresses and unlimbered limbs, convinces the puppy-eyed fourteen-year-old Danny that she's been abducted by a serial murder who lives down the block in house number 46. Suzy uses her plentiful wiles to coax Danny into poking around number 46.What Danny finds is a woman who is afraid to leave the house. Her husband would do "something dangerous" if she left or if she were seen talking to Danny on the doorstep.The neighborhood is pustular with mysteries. Nobody is really happy. But nobody seems willing to talk about the source of that unhappiness.The bloodshed comes just before the secrets are revealed. What I mean is -- it's all secrecy and innuendo until the last ten minutes, then, as in an Agatha Christie story, all is suddenly revealed. It's all over in a twinkling. And while some of what is revealed is improbable, some other stuff is outrageous, unless it's all being made up by the narrator who takes over to give us the conclusion. There are moments when I wonder if I'm unbalanced but I'm a paragon of stability compared to these ordinary looking folk.O'Flaherty as director is fine. The tension builds slowly throughout. And he takes moments to show us some of the local Adelaide color -- mauve blossoms on a bush, a spider web, a centipede. Somehow he turns them all ominous.But I wish he'd spared us that nonsensical climax. The pieces of the plot all fall together but the pieces are too fantastic to be believed. Next time, give the guy a good script.

SPOILER ALERT! The trouble with the earlier reviews of this film is that the film requires you to think a bit harder about what's going on than the previous reviewers. True enough, the film is almost cartoonish towards the end, utterly lacking in credibility. But you have to ask yourself whether that's a mistake, or part of the film-maker's overall plan. Well, let's see. The movie begins and ends with a narration by Suzy's mother, talking about the dark and sinister things that are going on in the neighbourhood, things that she understands all too well, even though others don't. Moreover, during the film it becomes clear that she projects what she imagines onto what she sees. Think of the scene where she comes into the room when Suzy is dancing and accuses her of revealing herself to the world. So here is my conjecture. The entire film is the mother's fantasy. I think that this explains well why the cartoonish scenes towards the end, which come quick and fast, are the way they are. You're meant to be thinking, 'Oh, come on! This is ridiculous!', but then, when you see that final scene, you're supposed to think 'Oh! Now I get it. The mother is a nutjob and we've been seeing the whole world through her eyes.'

"Beautiful" is one of those movies that can be described with style over substance. From the DVD Cover (which represents the opening scene of the movie) on you know the director is into stylish and kind of odd shots. At first I really had big hopes for this but problem with this kind of mysterious movies is that as soon as the mystery clears up and doesn't lead anywhere you are left with nothing. Exactly thats what I was left with after watching "Beautiful". The odd shots which seem quirky and fresh at first soon begin to annoy you because they just don't mean anything. You can basically see the final "twist" coming a mile away considering we are following a boy who is rather the strange outcast and his mother regularly mentioning that he is not living "in the real world". From here you get a mysterious detective story revolving around some abducted girls and a strange house with a lady constantly watching through the curtains. There are too many comparisons with cult movies like Donnie Darko (and scenes like the night views into the suburban windows and the score sure are close to it) or American Beauty which had an influence on the opening scene and the odd suburban setting. Anyway just because a movie steals visual gimmicks and obvious sound design from movies like these I don't see many similarities because the story has no grip and the storytelling is uneven and getting very stretched in the middle of the movie. The constant use of strange shots inter-cut with the plot gets a little annoying and could have been used a little more subtle. Anyway... biggest let-down like in many movies is the finale leaving too many loose ends especially about the boy and his family. Where the opening scene with the off-screen narration works fine the same element seems pretty stupid in the end. I guess its easy to make a "mysterious" movie but when the plot clears even if things are left unexplained to make the viewer think for himself... thats where a movie shows its substance. "Beautiful" left me with nothing, not caring about the characters and the unexplained parts of the story. So to compare the movie with movies like the fore-mentioned which left the viewer with many thoughts in his head is far off. Visually interesting but story-wise a disaster that has far too many lengthy moments.