Beautiful (2009)

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Rarely there are films I don't like. Beautiful just happens to fit that quota. In a nutshell, to me, the film didn't make sense. Too many dead ends and some pieces that didn't fit. A beautiful blonde girl, whose the juvenile wet dream of the next door neighbour teen is asked something of her, while being kissed, prefore. She gets him to spy and take photographs of thesee girls who have supposedly been held hostage in a house, where the latest teen girl abduction could be. Trying to understand our blonde bombshell, especially at the end, which truly didn't make sense, would entail a lifetime of figuring. Other characters who's suffered come in and out of the film. Again, Aaron Pederson is great as a cop with a conscience, where some other actors are just wasted here. The only enticing bit is the flirtatious pro's in lingerie, working the upper end of Hindley St. The film makes as much sense as the t.v. show, Passions.

Overall a good drama about a shy teenage boy who feels disconnected from the people around him. The slow pace of this film builds suspense and mystery, using themes of voyeurism and urban myths.Some people seemed confused about the ending. I think the narration at the beginning and end of the film, is just the thoughts of a typical neighbourhood gossip. Like when you don't know what happens in "that" house down the road you add these little ideas together...but truth is often stranger than fiction.Like most of the reviewers here, I felt that the ending was a bit of a letdown. Most of the film is slow and atmospheric (with great cinematography) which makes the ending seem rushed.

Very nicely assembled by the director, Dean O'Flaherty. Misses being gripping because of the script by writer, Dean O'Flaherty.In its sluggishness, it's slightly weird suburbanites, its focus on a taciturn young boy with his ever-ready camera, and its terrifying secrets -- all leading to violence that erupts in blood -- it reminds me a little of "American Beauty," but without the sometimes sly wit. It also is reminiscent of the superior "Lantana," another Australian film about a missing person but filled with the self confidence that the crew and cast have when they know they're making a thoughtful movie.A girl disappears. She may have run away but Suzy, with her long blond tresses and unlimbered limbs, convinces the puppy-eyed fourteen-year-old Danny that she's been abducted by a serial murder who lives down the block in house number 46. Suzy uses her plentiful wiles to coax Danny into poking around number 46.What Danny finds is a woman who is afraid to leave the house. Her husband would do "something dangerous" if she left or if she were seen talking to Danny on the doorstep.The neighborhood is pustular with mysteries. Nobody is really happy. But nobody seems willing to talk about the source of that unhappiness.The bloodshed comes just before the secrets are revealed. What I mean is -- it's all secrecy and innuendo until the last ten minutes, then, as in an Agatha Christie story, all is suddenly revealed. It's all over in a twinkling. And while some of what is revealed is improbable, some other stuff is outrageous, unless it's all being made up by the narrator who takes over to give us the conclusion. There are moments when I wonder if I'm unbalanced but I'm a paragon of stability compared to these ordinary looking folk.O'Flaherty as director is fine. The tension builds slowly throughout. And he takes moments to show us some of the local Adelaide color -- mauve blossoms on a bush, a spider web, a centipede. Somehow he turns them all ominous.But I wish he'd spared us that nonsensical climax. The pieces of the plot all fall together but the pieces are too fantastic to be believed. Next time, give the guy a good script.

SPOILER ALERT! The trouble with the earlier reviews of this film is that the film requires you to think a bit harder about what's going on than the previous reviewers. True enough, the film is almost cartoonish towards the end, utterly lacking in credibility. But you have to ask yourself whether that's a mistake, or part of the film-maker's overall plan. Well, let's see. The movie begins and ends with a narration by Suzy's mother, talking about the dark and sinister things that are going on in the neighbourhood, things that she understands all too well, even though others don't. Moreover, during the film it becomes clear that she projects what she imagines onto what she sees. Think of the scene where she comes into the room when Suzy is dancing and accuses her of revealing herself to the world. So here is my conjecture. The entire film is the mother's fantasy. I think that this explains well why the cartoonish scenes towards the end, which come quick and fast, are the way they are. You're meant to be thinking, 'Oh, come on! This is ridiculous!', but then, when you see that final scene, you're supposed to think 'Oh! Now I get it. The mother is a nutjob and we've been seeing the whole world through her eyes.'