Despite having seen him mentioned a number of times,I've never found a good "entry point" to start with looking at the work of film maker Guy Maddin.Getting the wonderful chance to host an event on IMDb's Film Festival board,I was intrigued to find that a Maddin title had been nominated for viewing,which led to me stepping into the forbidden room.The outline of the movie:The film is based around short unrelated sketches that merge into each other with barely any connection. One of the stories involves a submarine crew eating flapjacks in order to get extra air from the air holes,who are left breathless,when a mysterious woodsmen is found in a dock,who has no idea how he got there.View on the film:Based on "lost" films which Maddin believed would only be seen if he made re-made them himself,Maddin and editor John Gurdebeke work closely together to unleash a rupturing nightmare atmosphere. Washing the screen in volcanic reds,Maddin & Gurdebeke blend the titles in a rugged manner,where the acid reds screech between each changing "dream/nightmare." Inspired by reviews of films which are believed lost,the screenplay by Maddin/Evan Johnson/ Robert Kotyk/John Ashbery and Kim Morgan aim for a dream-logic anthology,spanning disconnected stories which fade in/out at regular intervals. Despite this approach keeping the films focus constantly changing,it also causes the flick to get stuck in a surprisingly sluggish dead-end,due to there being no attempt to give any character the vaguest impression,and the writers giving the recurring stories no feeling of purpose over there return,in a forbidden room that should remain locked.

I realize that a lot of people are going to be put off by the abstract, artistic nature of this film. But what it lacks in cohesion, it more than makes up for in style - similar to poetry, this film is very expressive and doesn't follow any particular norms for film making. It's very visually striking, and for me this was a large part of the enjoyment. Although it has references to films from the silent film era, this film doesn't necessarily keep to a specific style. At times it is sensual and erotic, at other times it's violent and shocking. I believe the intent was to adhere to a certain randomness in both the events portrayed, as well as the tone and visual style; this makes the film follow a seemingly arbitrary path. To me it was visually beautiful and compelling, and I never lost interest. I was impressed by how ambitious it was, with a huge variety of scenes, actors, events. Obviously, the film is very nonlinear and I think the best way to enjoy it is with the expectation of a visual and thematic journey, a series of emotional and artistic events strung loosely together to form a dreamlike storyline.

I was completely blown away by all of it. From the dazzling aesthetics, to how bizarre it was, and strangely of all, to just how hilarious it was. "The Forbidden Room" is simply a groundbreaking piece of work that unfortunately a lot of people will lose patience with - perhaps due to its two hour + running time, its non-linear narrative or maybe people wont find its sense of humour funny.Nonetheless, I found myself entranced by the whole thing. Part silent film, full surreal film, it's definitely made me want to check out Guy Maddin's previous work, and this could just be the best comedy film of the decade so far - putting it above my favourites: "The Lobster", "Submarine" & "Moonrise Kingdom".All in all, if you like art-house or unconventional films and have a bit of patience, I'm sure you'll love this one.

On the face of it, this silly story within story romp through Saturday morning films of a previous generation should be ignored.It is not a pastiche - and the strange punk lurid dream style is both art and annoyance. But the style is to no useful end. And to force an audience to revisit bad early American cinema 'somewhere between Berlin and Bogotá' for 2 hours, with gentle mocking of early 20th century sexual strictures, is quite unfair.It plays out as being more appropriate for a repeating segment in a high concept sketch show than a cinema production. A short experiment of 15 minutes maybe. But to inflict real people to this at full film length seems strangely tragic.