Memorable, crazy movie

From my favorite movies..

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

"The Baby of Macon" is a very bizarre film. Part play, part period piece and part religious satire. As usual director Peter Greenaway creates a stunning masterpiece, that looks like a painting come to life. Of course the film has disturbing elements and is probably Greenaway's most violent and brutal film. Julia Ormond plays the daughter, a beautiful young women. Her mother who's extremely ugly gives birth to the most beautiful baby. The daughter lies and says the baby is hers and that it was a virgin birth. She profits from the child and has him bless the whole town, even the cow. Both Ray Fiennes and Julia Ormand have very tough roles in this film; including a manger scene seduction. When the town finds out that the daughter is lying and the baby is not hers, they sentence her to be raped by over 100 men. Poor Julia Ormond. Avoid this film if religious or easily shocked. The film does have a dark sense of humor and makes a powerful statement about greed and religion. Although brutal, "The Baby of Macon" is a surreal masterpiece in which reality and stage performance collide. You'll wonder what parts a play and what events are actually happening in the story. This film also includes an amazing film score by Micheal Nyman. If only it would get a DVD release in the US?

A great film, with the richness of texture we have come to expect from Greenaway, but in a context - the medieval church and court - which better suits this richness than some of his earlier offerings. Looking through the comments on this film, I am surprised that no-one has picked up on the pivotal nature of one specific scene in the film, that in which the girl tries to seduce the Bishop's son in the 'stable', against the wishes of the child. This scene to me is the heart of the tragedy which is the principal plot line of the film, and is excellently put together and acted. As such, it is far more important than the rape scene, which is merely an acting-out of the inevitable consequences of the split between the girl and the child, and is less significant than, for instance, the dismemberment of the child. I'd also just like to say how well the device of the separate voice for the child works for me.

A baby is born amidst a ritualistic theatrical event in the 17th century, with gaudy costumes and gilded sets, while a crowd look on and cheer. Many characters declare multiple times that the baby is too good looking to have come from such an ugly mother (who no-one can see anyway for the bag over her head) - so a better-looking mother is chosen.Its so slow that its impossible to enjoy as a story - and when you don't have much plot, its important that your central situation is fascinating enough to keep our interest up - but here, it wasn't enough. Its tedious to watch - unlike Greenaway's masterpiece, The Cook the Thief His Wife and Her Lover.Also, the camera is held at such a great distance to the action that its impossible to be anything but empty spectacle. It gives it a very stagey, theatrical feel, which seems intentional. But this same point of the shallowness and corruption of a society might have been better demonstrated with the aid of a story and some closer camerawork.The only real mystery is how someone could have read the screenplay (if there was one, which i doubt), or heard Greenaway's proposal for it, and agreed to give him money to film it, knowing they would neither enjoy the finished product nor ever see any returns on their money.1/5

I saw this movie on late night television and that could explain my confusion but I do not believe that I could have understood this movie if the writer were sitting next to me explaining it as it went a long. I have no comprehension of the ending.