Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > Puffball (2007) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Puffball (2007) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 7 comments in total 

22 out of 26 people found the following comment useful :-
Flawed, but intriguing, 31 July 2007
8/10
Author: Isobel Bernard

I wanted to write a review of "Puffball" when I saw the rather negative post that rated it 1/10. While I understand that some might see this film as a disappointment, I didn't want other moviegoers to dismiss Nic Roeg's latest right away.

Set in the Irish countryside, "Puffball" tells the story of Liffey (Kelly Reilly), a young architect who finds herself unexpectedly pregnant while renovating a rundown cottage. Her new neighbor Mabs (Miranda Richardson) has three daughters already, but is desperate for a son. Convinced that Liffey has "stolen" the baby, Mabs' mother Molly (Rita Tushingham) resorts to witchcraft to put Liffey and her fetus in peril. Though quite bizarre, "Puffball" still manages to teach the audience about relationships, motherhood and family.

Another user described "Puffball" as a mess. Though I clearly enjoyed the film more than they did, I understand, to a certain extent, what they meant. When watching the film, I got the distinct impression that beneath what I was seeing, a better film was struggling to get noticed. For this, I think the blame lies mostly the editor (who seems to have an unhealthy fondness for fade outs) and the numerous composers (who clearly weren't working together), because the images are lovely, the film is very well shot, the performances (particularly Reilly's as Liffey) are strong and the story is compelling. The script shows a few weaknesses (the point the other reviewer made about Odin's standing stone is a fair one), but all in all demonstrates a fascinating interpretation of Fay Weldon's novel. Of course, fans of Fay Weldon's "Puffball" may very well be confused by her son's adaptation (the novel and the script hardly resemble one another), but I think anyone with an open mind will find something to appreciate in this film.

Was the above comment useful to you?

16 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :-
Disturbing bur rewarding, 29 August 2007
10/10
Author: AJMcKenna from United Kingdom

Loath it or love it, once you've seen Nicolas Roeg's latest offering - Puffball - you'll probably never be able to forget it. Roeg has delved into the psyche of the male animal and returned with disturbing images of life, death, religion and sex. Puffball is as haunting and memorable as the best he has done before.

Kelly Reilly plays an architect who is refurbishing a derelict house in the wilds. When she arrives with her lover she is watched by an old woman who is possibly a witch and means the visitors no good. This almost familiar opening does not lead down a predictable path – Puffball takes myriad twists and turns and surprises and manages to remain original and engrossing. Supported by stunning and atmospheric photography in rural Ireland the plot twists and meanders to an exciting and satisfying conclusions. It is how Roeg waves his spell that is so fascinating and unforgettable. There is little erotic content – sex is brutal and cruel and ultimately a woman's body is the receptacle for hopes and ambitions that surpass the male lust for immediate satisfaction.

The cast is excellent. Miranda Richardson is convincing as the woman who aches to give birth, Rita Tushingham is compelling as the sinister old lady who weaves her spells and incantations and the always excellent Donald Sutherland makes a brief but significant appearance.

Not a film for screen slouchers, Puffball demands attention and rewards with a haunting tale of rebirth and redemption. The Screenplay is by Dan Weldon adapted from Fay Weldon's novel. Puffball is disturbing but rewarding. Nic Roeg has given us another great film and for that we should be thankful.

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
A passable cover of an excellent book, 8 January 2008
7/10
Author: (niklburton@gmail.com) from Canada

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

13 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
Old-fashioned, yet a treat for the eyes, 4 June 2007
8/10
Author: benke_nandor from Romania

I've seen the first screening on the Transsylvania Film Festival and I must say I was pleased. It strongly relays on Don't Look Now's and Straw Dogs' flavors (intellectual young couple in a new, strange place), but with more psychedelic and sometimes thriller elements. And it's got a really hot sex scene in it. It's old paced and sometimes quite nostalgic, but it's a treat for the eyes. There were a few unnecessary elements though, without which the movie could have been cut to, let's say, 15 minutes shorter and more quick-paced. Roeg could have easily put more emphasis on the scenery/landscape like he used to. But I'm happy to be one of the first people to ever see it.

Was the above comment useful to you?

14 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
Highly recommended, 30 August 2007
Author: andymacmason from United Kingdom

I was recently honoured to attend a screening of Nicolas Roeg's new film 'Puffball', at the Phoenix Cinema, East Finchley. 'Puffball' is Roeg's first major film in some years. Many of you will know his name and work via such classics as 'Don't Look Now', 'Performance', 'Walkabout' and 'The Man Who Fell to Earth'.

Nic Roeg 'enjoys' quite a reputation. In simplistic terms, he's considered something of a maverick; an occasionally wayward genius, a visionary director and a legendary cinematographer, he's responsible for some of the most striking, poetic and downright beautiful imagery committed to celluloid.

I'm sure he'd wince at the term 'style' when applied to his work but Roeg's films tend to be characterised by, among other things, a fluid, fractured, elastic, playful manipulation of time and space (largely achieved through some utterly idiosyncratic and unpredictable editing) and an uncommon, uncanny knack for revealing and dissecting hitherto 'hidden' connections and correspondences. They're often liberally peppered with literary and artistic allusion too...none more so than 'The Man Who Fell To Earth'.

Roeg's 'Puffball' is (reassuringly) utterly unsettling. To me, it seemed like a meditation upon thwarted desires...lust and betrayal, 'homicidal' jealousy, "green-eyed" rage and grief.

Kelly Reily plays a young architect who arrives in a beautiful but remote backwater of Ireland with a dream - to build a spectacular home upon the deserted ruins of a burnt-out cottage. But that cottage carries its own dark, secret history, and when Reilly falls pregnant, the envy of the superstitious, witchcraft-practising locals is aroused and old enmities are stirred. A confrontation, if not a conflagration, is in the offing...

The film re-unites Roeg with Donald Sutherland although his role is relatively minor, and the wonderful Miranda Richardson surpasses herself as an unhinged, tormented soul who craves a fourth child. Despite some dark themes and darker deeds, humour abounds and Roeg watchers will spot numerous in-jokes and allusions to other works. That said, there are some uncomfortably tense and gruesome scenes including one nightmarish flight of fancy which almost rivals the climax of 'Don't Look Now' for nerve-shredding tension. As always with Roeg, there are some startling and provocative visual surprises. OK, maybe I "haven't lived" but I've never witnessed an ejaculation from the "point of view" of a woman's cervix before!

The term "return to form" always strikes me as particularly cheap and meaningless. However, for my money, 'Puffball' is more engrossing and enthralling than any of Mr Roeg's works during the Eighties or Nineties. Highly recommended.

I'm afraid I cannot tell you when the film goes on general release in this country but I would urge you to make a "mental note" to see it when the time comes.

Andy p.s chastising people for minor spelling errors as this site does can only put us off posting. I actually find it annoying in the extreme. Site admin - you really should turn this irritating and patronising function off.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
Know when to quit… (always best) while you're well ahead!, 13 November 2007
Author: avalon_2468 from United Kingdom

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!

Was the above comment useful to you?

13 out of 28 people found the following comment useful :-
A thorough disappointment, 16 July 2007
1/10
Author: Abigailsparty from Ireland

Nic Roeg, Miranda Richardson, Rita Tushingham, Donald Sutherland - there were a lot of reasons to go and see this film. However, (and I'm holding back here) - this is the worst kind of unadulterated nonsense I've seen in a long time. It gives me no pleasure to slate this director and cast, but what were they doing? It's a complete mess of a film, highly insulting to it's audience's intelligence and I can't imagine what Nicolas Roeg was thinking of. Obviously these high caliber actors were well paid for the trip to Monaghan, Ireland - but what it was doing being shot there is anybody's guess. The original novel by Fay Weldon set the rural community as Somerset; the film screenplay by her son Dan Weldon doesn't even bother to adjust to it's Irish setting. A focal point is Odin's stone - a Norse god! This film looks set for minority interest; a once great director fallen on his sword, and for the dubious sexual scenes horribly overacted by the floundering cast.

Was the above comment useful to you?

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user comments Your vote history