As a longtime lover of surrealist and experimental cinema, "Begotten" has remained on my radar for a while now. I've heard many varying perspectives on this polarizing film, and I did not finally decide to watch it until today, and all I can say is: .This is not a normal film by any means. Instead, it's really a piece of visual art, and I don't say this to sound like a hipster who's intellectually far more superior than the fools who surround me, I say it because that's really what it is. Technically, it is definitely a movie, but its classification cannot end there. It's too unconventional to not be given some sort of heavy artistic label. Of course, just because something is heavily "artistic" does not mean that it's good by any means, and maybe this isn't really good, but I definitely enjoyed it overall.There's definitely quite a lot of bad things about this film. First of all, some sections are way too slow and this painstaking slowness made me blackout several times while I as watching it, allowing my mind to wander freely and think about totally unrelated things. However, the sections in which it does hold your attention are really quite spectacular and rank with the likes of great surrealist films like "L'age d'Or" and, my all time favorite movie, "Eraserhead". However, it misses some of the key elements those films had that made them so entertaining-for example: humor! I feel as if humor is an essential part of surrealist cinema. Sure, some surreal films do perfectly fine without it, but those are few and far between (I mean, "Antichrist" is objectively a perfectly crafted film and there is literally no reason to alter it in my opinion). Nearly everything David Lynch has ever worked on has at least a few laugh out loud moments, and Bunuel was once notorious for his hilarious mockeries of religion, the bourgeois, and society in general. Although I must admit that I can't really find a spot in "Begotten" in which humor would be appropriate...Other problems that I had with the film dealt with its rather pretentious use of religious imagery. I get that the entire film is about the death and rebirth of gods, but you can tell this story without the common religious symbols that are used in tons of other avant garde art pieces! It's stale territory and can only be properly pulled off by a genuinely masterful filmmaker. And while the man behind this work certainly has the potential to be such, he has yet to fully prove said potential. I may sound like I'm picking on this film quite a bit, so I'll lay out some of the reasons I gave this oddity such a high rating: -the visuals are pretty damn beautiful despite their gritty feel, and whenever they aren't beautiful it's due to some of the film's intentionally disturbing imagery -in terms of a horror film, "Begotten" may be unusual but it's still extremely effective, filled with the creepiest visuals imaginable and an atmosphere so dark and strange that it almost flawlessly replicates the weirdest of my nightmares. -it's a successfully otherworldly experience, and that's one of the best and most important things I think that film can do -the scenes that are intriguing are almost endlessly watchable and have gained an impressively iconic status among horror fans in the modern day.Thanks to these several key qualities I can enthusiastically recommend "Begotten" to bug fans of artistic, surreal, scary, and disturbing cinema. I cannot guarantee that you will enjoy it, but it's worth watching at least once as a unique and unsettling curio and a mild modern classic of the avant garde.

Originally I hated this film upon first viewing. I saw a bootleg pirated internet copy on a dorm room TV in my buddies' dorm room when we decided to go down a list of art films we wanted to see. We watched this were severely disappointed. My original rating was a 2. I thought it was boring, pretentious, and overrated. But the more I went back and watched it, which I strangely kept thinking about the film. I watched it a few times and I liked it more every time. So at the moment this film is at a 5 for me. It's not accessible and it is challenging to watch and it somewhat becomes an endurance for your eyes to figure just what it is that you are seeing. SO take my review for what it is worth. I'm sure I'll get told; "You're an idiot you don't get it." or "Stick to big budget Hollywood garbage." But this is how I feel about the film. So there.

No dialogue, horrific images, surreal atmosphere, experimental cinematography and a concept abstract and haunting. This film is not for everyone. I dare say only the very brave, very patient and very open will find some credit through this ordeal of twisted context.With the directors vague intentions centred around a God disembowelling himself, giving birth to Mother Earth through a brutally and graphic wonder of dark imagination; I believe this film will effect everyone differently.Whilst the atmosphere is beautifully presented through the various unnatural noises and surreal artistry of the intensely graphic nature of this film, the plot itself isn't important. What counts is the journey it puts you through and how you see that vision through your own ideals and impression.I myself found it to be a nihilistic wasteland, where the evolution of humanity is born and instantly based on justice (Mother Earth) and regulation (Son of Earth); where this is both repulsed and lusted after, shown through the dilemmas of the first of the flesh and their fascination to bend it their wills; only to find that time is omnipotent and constantly against their plight. (The Shots of the sun rising, and Moon falling) The Black & White imagery shows the shades of Gray which represents how fickle morality is and can only be seen one-sided by the first of us born. In the end nothing matters. Existence and struggle continues, yet purpose is worthless and tiring. All we need to know was presented to us cleverly through the opening phrases. It's a reflection to our modern ideologies. Is this what the director intended when he first set out to make this? Probably not.However, no films is without it's flaws, and this one suffered from a few too: Most of the shots linger for far too long to keep any attentive interest. The numerous repetition takes you away from the film to make any lasting impact. The extreme close-ups make it hard to manage what's going on. And sadly the mixture of all three means you will be checking your watch every now and then.Is it perfect? No. Is is a masterpiece? No. Do I hail it as one of the greatest films ever made? No. But for something different, something niche and for those with the patience, lead stomachs and flexibility to handle it; Enjoy it, you sick dog you.

Remember that scene from the Japanese 'Ring' when we see the cursed video footage for the first time and it's a disturbing, grainy, black and white montage of writhing bodies, ominous hooded figures standing beside the sea, and the well in the middle of the desolate forest? Well 'Begotten' is a lot like that except that it's arguably more disturbing as well as considerably longer.'Begotten' is clearly not for the masses. From the get-go the imagery is gruesome: in the opening scene we see a figure disembowelling himself with a razor, the corpse of which is molested by a female figure who impregnates herself and gives birth to a fully grown man who convulses in seemingly perpetual agony before both of them consequently suffer at the hands of different categories of ambiguous, sadistic ghouls. At the end of the film a cast of 'characters' informs us that those at the beginning were God killing Himself, Mother Earth, and Son Of Earth - Flesh On Bone…if that helps.In addition to this challenging content, another point of contention is the grainy, 'Erasrerhead'-esque black-and-white cinematography which makes the images at times so distorted that it's difficult to discern any clear outlines, which can be frustrating when you're trying to not miss anything in an attempt to fathom the impenetrable narrative! However, in endeavouring to appreciate the bold artistic ambitions of the film I forgave all of this...but the one thing which really irked me was the fact is that it is basically too long. The film clocks in at over 70 minutes and yet I genuinely think I would have appreciated it to the same level if it were half of this.Having said that, the film clearly wasn't designed with any intention of crowd-pleasing, and unrepentantly is what it is: a unique and individual film which walks amongst the best (and most thought-provoking) experimental cinema has to offer. So while you could say "take it or leave it" I really think those that choose the latter are missing something exceptional.