Review of 9 Songs

9 Songs (2004)
1/10
Is this really a spoiler considering there is no plot?
29 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
A sorry nonsensical excuse for a porn flick. Why in the world director Michael Winterbottom has confused himself into believing that by putting footage of live gigs in between explicit sex scenes warrants the film (I say film in loose terms, more like 'footage') as 'mainstream' or 'art-house' and not 'porn' is beyond me. This truly was a waste of a cinema ticket.

The films plot or lack of one, consists of footage of live rock concerts followed by sex scenes followed by more live concert footage and more sex scenes in a vicious circle of tedium. This tiresome, lazy drivel is obvious proof that Michael Winterbottom is incapable of producing a film which shows the relationship between rock n roll and sex without simply forcing poor live footage of some great bands and gratuitous sex scenes in front the viewer over and over again. Boring.

On a plus note for Winterbottom, this film has has NO redeeming features: A dreadful script if there was one, terrible sound quality especially for a film called '9 Songs' and as for the acting; it cannot really be judged considering that the sex scenes were so explicit that there was 'no acting required'. The film looks as though it was shot using a web cam and then edited on a mobile phone, incoherent and flawed in every way imaginable.

In short, if you want to make a honest porn flick make one and I might even buy it, but don't dress up live footage of rock bands with explicit sex scenes and expect us to be blinded into believing it's not a porn flick. This should have never made it to the cinema, it stinks and I'm bored of talking about it.
44 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed