Puffball
Puffball
R | 28 October 2007 (USA)
Puffball Trailers

Powerful supernatural forces are unleashed when a young architect becomes pregnant after moving to an isolated and mysterious valley to build a house.

Reviews
fedor8

"Puffball" offers many shocking moments, such as the realization that Rita Tushingham hadn't changed at all in over 40 years. (A real witch, perhaps?) She was hideous then, and she's hideous now. What remarkable physical consistency. When you have nothing to lose, you age so much better - or not at all.I thought this kind of voodoo nonsense had been dumped into the movie bin by filmmakers in the 60s. Well, not quite. Certain Roegs and Faye Weldons consider that kind of crap to make for potent fantasy dramas about Irish people shagging each other in the bleak Northern countryside.Half-way through this tiresome drivel, Donald Sutherland shows up, grinning like an ape. Speaking of semen and sperm-donors, why was he ever even allowed to make Kiefer? Sutherland appears as a "wise old man" (dressed as a yuppie: go figure) but he comes off as a confused Methuselah, saying at one point this movie's puffyballian immortal words: "The hardest thing to keep separate is what we do and what we want to be." Now, while this kind of cheap deepakchoprian fortune-cookie utterance may sound true at first glance, think again... Isn't the opposite the case? Isn't it hard to unite what we do and what we want to be? I guess you need to be Roegian to appreciate the "intellectual qualities" of such a movie.But Sutherland doesn't stop there. True to the moronic New Age we live in, Sutherland utters the perennial esoteric favourite of every recent "spiritual" movie: "We know nothing." That's right, Donald, scientists have been wasting millions of their hours, spent futile centuries of hard work sweating over formulas, experiments and theories, and reaching conclusions that mean nothing, spreading lies and falsehoods. To get to the REAL crux of the Secrets of the Universe, it's best to talk to various Roegs and Feldons about it. Shagging in the Irish countryside holds more wisdom than 3000 Newtons and Einsteins combined.The sex is practiced on magical stones, in pig-sties, in bedrooms even (gasp!), just about any time and any place. Just to make sure that we know that it's the sperm that is the star of the show, Roeg shows us some dubious interior shots of Irish intercourse, footage as if kidnapped straight from the National Geographic Channel. What the hell, I thought, they might as well all get pregnant - as long as it isn't Donald Sutherland's seed they're carrying. One Kiefer is quite enough, thank you...Some people wrote about how intelligent and complex Feldon presents women. This couldn't be further from the truth: the women in this movie are portrayed as superstitious, hysterical, unbalanced halfwits who spend their entire lives poking their noses into their neighbours' affairs. If mental imbalance constitutes complexity then I stand corrected.Miranda Richardson has never looked bigger. Whatever happened to her small complexion? She looks like a Desert Storm tank. Whatever happened to her role-picking? She's made some turkeys before, but what kind of lies and exaggerations and charlatanic baloney did Roeg whisper into her gullible, impressionable thespian ears for her to agree to appear in this overlong, silly drama? Reilly, the central character, is totally uninteresting.

... View More
moviemaster

There were a lot of talented (at one point) people involved in this movie . But more to the point, what was the point? Maybe all those who claim to have read the book (really?) could explain what these magical puffballs are. I didn't see one person mention them and yet they are prominently displayed. Just hocus pocus?Rita Tushingham? Well this was no Taste of Honey. Miranda Richardson? This was no Tom and Viv. Roeg was great at one point, but now, I guess from celestial heights he's a Man who's Fallen to Earth.I will give him one thing... he knows how to execute a violent sex scene, far more about eroticism than love and ejaculation as opposed to ecstasy.Music was challenging at times and other times distracting. Camera work was fine much of the time (particularly with the Odin ring thing) but uneven also.Roeg still has an "eye." But now he needs an assistant for continuity. The plot was nonsensical.

... View More
niklburton

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.

... View More
avalon_2468

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!

... View More