WTF is an "imaginary portrait"? This film invents a Diane Arbus far less interesting than the real one. Why? Why god, why? The real Arbus was truly a fascinating character both personally and artistically. The biography this film is supposedly based one, Diane Arbus: Portrait of a Photographer, is two things: 1) fascinating, and 2) not even related to this dumb soap opera. I highly recommend the book. Now, why am I writing a review to an olda$$ film that no one cared about in the first place? I dunno, I suppose it still pisses me off how bad this is, and also that the real story hasn't been made into a film or series.

Few photos. And a sketch about a life. Nicole Kidman in labyrintic role. And new version of Beauty and Beast. Love story as way of harsh stones. Exploration of strange world. And status of part of it. A film as pure alcohol cup. Every piece as right place and gallery of freaks.An existence as kind of fairy tale and crumbs from a mod to define parts of normality. But final taste is chaotic. The story is romantic, grotesque and interesting but it is not entire. It is like a dream in which reality can not be more than fragile shadow. Robert Downey is impressive but movie is puzzle of ordinary refuges.Director desires say all . But the words flies and the strange is, in a lot of forms, exercise.And the end is a beginning, of course, but not for imagined action.

Director Steven Shainberg's "tribute" to eclectic photographer Diane Arbus, here seen as an unfulfilled 1958 housewife in Manhattan, an assistant to her commercial photographer husband desperate to carve out an identity for herself. Drawn to the grotesqueness of elements in daily life--the abnormal in the normal--Diane (pronounced Dee-Ann) becomes obsessed with a former carnival freak who has moved in upstairs. He's covered head-to-toe with hair, but Diane sees his soul and soon finds herself happily mingling with his circus friends, relationships which drive a wedge between Diane and her husband. Shainberg and screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson have decided not to go the biography route, instead delving into the mindset of this stifled woman with a unique eye. Though visually sumptuous, stylish, and fascinating, the problem with the filmmakers' approach is that we never see Diane at work (her camera always seems to be resting some place). Diane the Beauty predictably falls in love with the Beast, and he asks her to shave him so they can make love. This portion of the movie (pure fantasy, of course) is quite touching, but overly familiar. Shainberg goes from aping David Lynch to aping Jean Cocteau! Meanwhile, Allan Arbus is busy developing Diane's photographs, the ones we never see her taking. It's a jumble, yet an intriguing one, beginning and ending with Diane's first visit to a nudist colony. Nicole Kidman and Robert Downey Jr. give assured, courageous performances, and Ty Burrell as Mr. Arbus is outstanding (at one point growing a thick beard, possibly in envy). Not a success from a storytelling standpoint; belief must be suspended for the film to work at all--and it does work a little warped magic. **1/2 from ****

As an early representation of the turmoil of the 1960's that followed, Diane Arbus (Nicole Kidman) can be excused as an early flower child. The film itself deserves no such latitude. The lack of character development, motivation and justification for the character's behavior makes the movie very disappointing. I sat watching and waiting for some explanation of the bizarre actions only to find that Shainberg was letting me peek into a story that must have been someones inside joke. That the few facts presented did not match Diane Arbus' life very much did not help to clarify things either.The washed out Art Direction in Diane's 'normal' life was nicely contrasted with the brilliant colors in her 'awakening' life with Lionel. And the trap door stairway was a nice demonstration of Diane's attempt to inject her new life into her existing family (However, I don't see how that trap door in the ceiling of her dining room could directly connect to Lionel's apartment which was two flights of stairs up from her's).Maybe my analysis is a little too literal in looking for some character development and relationship understanding that goes beyond one sentence or one comment. I also would have liked to see at least one of Diane's photos as well. I won't wait for the sequel.