Just what I expected

Best movie ever!

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I'm not going to completely slate this film. It had some convincing elements, and began to get a sense of drama after a while.However, that's pretty much all I can say that's positive about it. It's extraordinary to think about the films that Nicolas Roeg has had a hand in, and then to see the genuinely shoddy camera, editing and soundtrack work in this. From a production point of view, it's well short of what it should be. Shots are wobbly where they really aren't supposed to be, the camera operator seems to be initially obsessed with unnecessary slow zoom shots when setting the scene early on. And it does that atrocious thing of the camera positively taking you by the hand, pointing at the thing that's supposed to be relevant, and shouting 'Look! Look at this! Look! It's really important and relevant to something that's going to happen in the plot!' Appalling! There is literally no visual, and indeed editorial, subtlety to this at all.Of course, the camera spends plenty of time picking out things to look at that are apparently relevant to the plot (such as the titular puffball mushroom), but the relevance of which is anybody's guess, and is never elucidated on throughout the film. It is a story evidently revolving around a mish-mashed kind of magical mysticism, and yet the mechanics of this are never explained. A family consisting of the mad old witch (literally) grandma and her two harridan daughters are, apparently, desperate to produce a male child. Apart from the suggestion that this comes down to the grandma's loss of her son, there is again no explanation of what exactly this will achieve, beyond them having a boy in the family. Why is it so important? Why does this require magical, potion swilling machinations and almost homicidal hatred towards the perfectly nice, pleasant new couple in the old cottage down the road? We have no idea, and nothing in the hackneyed performances of pretty much everyone involved provides any enlightenment.As the heroine of the story, Kelly Reilly manages to squeeze out (pardon the pun) one or two moments of dramatic complexity, but little more. The other female roles are variously overplayed or underscripted, and none are believable. As for the incidental male roles (more on that shortly), there's no-one who stands out... EXCEPT for Donald Sutherland.Now just check that for a moment. Donald Sutherland, someone who, in his time, has offered some of the really memorable, if ever somewhat eccentric, roles in film. In Puffball, however, he appears, as though out of nowhere, with no introduction or explanation, then wanders about in woodland pretty much dancing gaily around magical stones and fairy rings, grinning all the time like a Cheshire... well, idiot. Then, when he does speak he's barely audible, delivering every line in a low, drunken murmur, and when he is audible, the pseudo-philosophical claptrap he issues forth makes about as much sense as a ham bicycle. I have precisely no idea why he was even there, and what his character was supposed to achieve for the film.But, finally, the issue with the men. Fay Weldon is a writer with a certain feminist character, and certainly her novels are not without their confusing, or at least complex gender issues. However, I have no idea who, or what in human psychology, this story is supposed to represent or serve. The men are, essentially, incidental tools either to be used by the women in the story, or to provide the most vapid, inconsequential 'guidance', that couldn't guide a train along a straight track. They are cyphers, nothing more, used by the women in the story primarily for sex and impregnation, and they are apparently useless to offer any resistance to this role. The women, on the other hand, are either manipulative and utterly bewilderingly obsessed morons, or in the case of Liffey, a shallow, daft victim, who only makes it through the whole business by barely relevant or believable luck. There is no actual arc or development to her awareness of the world at all. Stuff just happens. It seems to me that this story has nothing to say about gender roles or relations at all, as its representations of both men and women have no bearing on reality whatsoever. Nor does it provide dialogue interesting enough to pardon this.For a moment, somewhere, in the latter half of the film, there was almost a dramatic rhythm and character appearing in Puffball, but it didn't last very long. The timing is well off: it's over-long and narratively awkward. None of the story really makes sense, and one feels that there was an intentional decision not to explain what is happening. However, this went to the extent of not explaining it AT ALL, leaving the viewer with no engagement in the story, no understanding of what was supposed to be happening and why, and absolutely no idea why it was supposed to be worth the bother.So, all in all, really not worth making the effort to see.Oh, and some really pointless and off-putting 'internal' graphic sex/genitalia shots, using what I can only presume were latex creations from the xxx-online boutique's Pervy Plastic range. I mean, loads of them. Let's just say, I reckon there's a reason why not many filmmakers have felt the need to shoot sex from the inside. It's not pretty, and it's not clever.

I watched Puffball last night, as a huge Fay Weldon fan who read the book quite a few years ago. I was surprised to discover it was a 2007 film, as the subject matter, and the atmosphere of the pic, would have suggested something many years older.Still, I thought it was quite faithful to the intent of the book, and is, despite some comments, very much a women's film. It deals with elemental forces, and the complexity of women's nature and women's power. The men are little more than sperm donors, penile life support systems to be acted on by women's emotions and a separate women's nature, almost echoing, (or prefiguring, more likely) some of Jane Campion's observations in The Piano, among others.This has always been the heart of Fay Weldon's work, a poke in the eye of naivité, of the "Eyes Wide Shut" variety, about the nature of women. The film doesn't really add to this narrative, but it doesn't diminish it either, which is saying something for a film adaptation of a novel, made by an auteur to boot.

I've just had to sit through Puffball at the Exeter Phoenix screening –where Mr. Roeg graced us with his presence for a listed Q& A session pre the movie viewing…and thank god for 'his' own sake he did. I thought Basic Instinct II was a turkey… but this movie takes bird basting to a whole new level… There's no doubting Nic's past pedigree (40 years ago) with über works such as Walkabout, Don't Look Now and that allegory of our current times The Man Who Fell to Earth… but in his current contemporary offering the only truly menacing character in this supernatural themed movie is Molly's (Rita Tushingham's) Dog… It does the menacing stare very well… though as I know not of the book (original material)…I cannot judge what Fay Weldon's original story had in mind? And interestingly, Mr. Roeg stated pre viewing…that this is a woman's film… which as I saw the movie with three women… all four of us didn't seem to share this heterogamy vision… Major problems with the film are it's done on a shoe string budget… and the characters particularly Liffey lack real depth and any sense of believable credibility… And the monotonous steady delivery of the plot with no twists or unexpected turns also means that you just wish the whole experience would come to a more dramatic, less over acted, swifter end… I kept expecting to have Father Dougal McGuire appear, with Mrs. Doyle in tow… in which case some real farcical humour could have ensued…so at least the 'naff' typical Irish stereotypes could be further exploited… for better comic affect.I imagine as a favour to his buddy from the 1970's - Donald Sutherland's cameo appearances were there to add an A list weight -.playing the mad senior 'deity' partner from Liffey's city slicker, architectural practice past. Poor old Donald wanders around grinning maniacally like a Cheshire cat mumbling words of architectural design guru wisdom, ruefully confessing to having always wanted to see an ancient fertility stone….The continual references to Odin throughout the movie (Norse paganism) for me seemed at odds with the setting of in-depth Celt southern Ireland… but lets not be a stickler for accuracy here… perhaps it should have been shot in Stavanger? The heavy handed use of somewhat unsubtle sound xfx and inappropriate Irish music doesn't help either… and I do suspect greatly with this work that younger members of the team have been overawed by the combined presence of Weldon (by proxy through her son, 2nd unit Director, and screenplay writer Dan) and Roeg into creating a low budget, 2 year film school result, instead of following their own more polished and well-honed intuitions. Miranda Richardson… should really have known better… And as a woman we do 'get' how babies are made on a biological level… seeing frequent cutaways to spermatozoa and uterine membrane walls if over done leaves you feeling somewhat violated… To sum up, I'd recommend seeing this movie for one reason only… it's a testament to triumph of ego over more humble led creative sanity… and you need a film like this every-now-and-then to appreciate what's really good…I saw 2 Days in Paris by the wonderful Julie Delpy last week… this is definitely a 'womans' movie also made on a low budget… and is a remarkable result because of it… And I whole heartedly recommend you all go see that!

I was recently honoured to attend a screening of Nicolas Roeg's new film 'Puffball', at the Phoenix Cinema, East Finchley. 'Puffball' is Roeg's first major film in some years. Many of you will know his name and work via such classics as 'Don't Look Now', 'Performance', 'Walkabout' and 'The Man Who Fell to Earth'. Nic Roeg 'enjoys' quite a reputation. In simplistic terms, he's considered something of a maverick; an occasionally wayward genius, a visionary director and a legendary cinematographer, he's responsible for some of the most striking, poetic and downright beautiful imagery committed to celluloid. I'm sure he'd wince at the term 'style' when applied to his work but Roeg's films tend to be characterised by, among other things, a fluid, fractured, elastic, playful manipulation of time and space (largely achieved through some utterly idiosyncratic and unpredictable editing) and an uncommon, uncanny knack for revealing and dissecting hitherto 'hidden' connections and correspondences. They're often liberally peppered with literary and artistic allusion too...none more so than 'The Man Who Fell To Earth'. Roeg's 'Puffball' is (reassuringly) utterly unsettling. To me, it seemed like a meditation upon thwarted desires...lust and betrayal, 'homicidal' jealousy, "green-eyed" rage and grief. Kelly Reily plays a young architect who arrives in a beautiful but remote backwater of Ireland with a dream - to build a spectacular home upon the deserted ruins of a burnt-out cottage. But that cottage carries its own dark, secret history, and when Reilly falls pregnant, the envy of the superstitious, witchcraft-practising locals is aroused and old enmities are stirred. A confrontation, if not a conflagration, is in the offing... The film re-unites Roeg with Donald Sutherland although his role is relatively minor, and the wonderful Miranda Richardson surpasses herself as an unhinged, tormented soul who craves a fourth child. Despite some dark themes and darker deeds, humour abounds and Roeg watchers will spot numerous in-jokes and allusions to other works. That said, there are some uncomfortably tense and gruesome scenes including one nightmarish flight of fancy which almost rivals the climax of 'Don't Look Now' for nerve-shredding tension. As always with Roeg, there are some startling and provocative visual surprises. OK, maybe I "haven't lived" but I've never witnessed an ejaculation from the "point of view" of a woman's cervix before! The term "return to form" always strikes me as particularly cheap and meaningless. However, for my money, 'Puffball' is more engrossing and enthralling than any of Mr Roeg's works during the Eighties or Nineties. Highly recommended. I'm afraid I cannot tell you when the film goes on general release in this country but I would urge you to make a "mental note" to see it when the time comes. Andy p.s chastising people for minor spelling errors as this site does can only put us off posting. I actually find it annoying in the extreme. Site admin - you really should turn this irritating and patronising function off.