the leading man is my tpye

good back-story, and good acting

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Oh dear. I watched this one a week ago, and although there's no way it can be described as bland or unmemorable – although probably for all the wrong reasons – there's little about this adaptation of Borges' novel by Alex Cox that impressed me enough to make a lasting impression. Cox's style has always been… quirky, shall we say – and sometimes he's very good, but this one is an almighty mess that is only partly salvaged by Cox's customarily strong visual style. The story sprawls like spilled liquid with no confines to contain it. The acting borders on amateur dramatic level at times – which is unremarkable in a lot of cases, but not from the likes of Boyle and Eccleston – and the script is like something out of a DC comic book. Definitely a Marmite movie by the looks of it.

I was very disappointed by this adaptation of the great Borges short story. The choice of Peter Boyle for the lead role of the detective was an extremely poor one. He removed any of the irony of this send-up of Sherlock Holmes, and ruined any chance for this film to work. The overdone acting, direction, and additions to the plot also sent this film straight into the trash heap. The rock music used in the score seemed particularly out of place. Although I liked Repo Man and Sid and Nancy, the director seems out of his league when he tries to adapt a short story like this for the screen. I don't think there's any point in making a full-length feature out of any of Borges' work. A short film or a collection of short films on other short stories of his would have been better.

This wilfully bizarre adaptation of Borges short story is typical Cox. His strong visual sense is, as usual, undone by the appalling half baked acting of most of the cast. The film is definitely in the surreal tradition of Bunuel's Mexican period, and looks at times like a poor man's take on Lars Von Trier's Elements of Crime. Cox's apparent preference for single takes, jump cuts, and ambient sound recording all work against the film's effectiveness. Worth a look but ultimately disappointing.

I had read a review of this film probably five or six years ago, but had never been able to find it anywhere and wondered if I ever would. I happened to catch it on cable last night by accident. I'm a huge fan of Borges and think this particular story is a masterpiece that equals Poe's greatest work in terms of pure intellectual force, profundity, and use of language and references. This movie version is fairly surreal and self-consciously stylized and does add a lot of details not in the story. But after about 10 minutes or so I started getting into this interpretation and thought that overall it was very clever and artful. Peter Boyle was an interesting (weird?) choice as Lonrott, and I thought Christopher Eccleston was excellent as Red Scharlach (including the sound effects for his voice). Most importantly, I thought this movie did capture the obliterating sense of the infinite that staggers me every time I read the story.