Maybe it's because this year has had a whole bunch of lackluster releases but I totally dug this one. Not that huge of a Boyle fan but I thought this was shot and edited really well. I love Rosario Dawson, was quite nice to see her in such a dominant role. Overall I think this is one of the most entertaining flicks to come out this year, a welcome change.

If one sought to discover a single concern or intent within the oeuvre of the great and distinctive British director Danny Boyle, it might be his continued dedication to utilizing each implement at his disposal, from the ability to fragment or twist time through overt editing to the power of music (pop or otherwise) to create either a sense of transcendent euphoria or intense disquiet, to capture the pace and the temperament of modern life. His is is a genre cinema of excitement, spectacles and trends, and violence, though always blended with character, humor, and a surprising depth of feeling. It is a paradox, but his films tend to be very much of their specific moment in time in regard to content and style, yet not dated in the traditional and negative sense of the word. Put another way, he is the directorial equivalent of David Bowie. The culture which produced Low and "Heroes" is gone, but Low and "Heroes" remain treasures, and so it is with, say, Trainspotting. His tenth feature film, Trance, is characteristic and wonderful in its exuberance and wit. The story, involving a fine-art auctioneer with amnesia (James McAvoy) and a group of gangsters in search of a stolen painting, might call out for rainswept city streets and trench coats on the page, but it instead explodes in an ultramodern and diverse vision of London. The chance to see the city filmed with such an adrenaline fueled, yet precise understanding of architecture, atmosphere, color, and motion is one of many reasons this is a definitive must-see. Others include an entire roster of memorable performances (Rosario Dawson has never played such a rich part before), a pulsating electronic score by a member of Underworld, and a mad screenplay always moving in and out of the mind, turning on itself and its characters (who is a hero? who is an antagonist? who can be trusted?), and surprising the audience. It is a great piece of high-concept, high-wire writing in the vein of House of Games and Memento. It is also, in yet another unexpected twist, moving: we believe a traditional tale of deception, greed, and retribution is playing out, and it is, but the film also transforms piece by piece into a more moving portrait of longing, memory, and sexuality. It will be regarded as a return to danger and mischief for Boyle after the Oscar nominated 127 Hours and the high-profile, prestigious Olympics leadership role. It should also be regarded as one of his best films, another gem in a long line of them.

A

Dude, is this your best year at movies ever? This is like the 5th or 6th A you dished out so far

I s'pose so. Lots of films so far this year which heavily press the aesthetic and thematic buttons I enjoy being pushed. This, Side Effects, Spring Breakers, Stoker...

There are numerous disappointments and duds, too: Die Hard, The Host, Oz the Great and Powerful, Texas Chainsaw. Evil Dead to a lesser extent.

I happen to agree with you on a lot this year, with the exception of Spring Breakers (pure shit), Bullet to the Head (bleh) and Jack the Giant Slayer (solid, but certainly not as good as praised by you). Beautiful Creatures and Broken City are the two underrated films I agree on. Trance I look forward to very much, but it'll be a while.

I thought it had nothing to say. Which isn't to say that it was a bad movie- it's gorgeously shot and edited and all the deception and mind games were fun up to a point- but there's no rules in this universe, no fundamental story and no central conceit introduced until an expected 'twist' reveal before the end that didn't really justify for me everything that came before it.

To me it seemed like a movie in which Boyle took a lame screenplay and directed the hell out of it. So it's still a good time.

You clearly did not see the very important Holocaust allegory at play. Bit embarrassing, honestly...

All I ask for, David, are characters to understand in some capacity. I spent most of the movie wondering where Rosario's allegiance lay in this painting kerfuffle. If the point of the movie is to ask questions and follow up with more questions, then fine. I don't find that wholly engaging.

The egg came first.

Or did it?

Just reflecting on this film's last scene gives me chills. The way Cassel plays it plus the colors plus the music... So perfect.

I want to see this again. Tonight, perhaps.

I indeed saw it again last night. I am just in love with this film: its pinpoint construction, its sumptuous style, its blistering suspense, its subtle melancholy. It blows me away.

...I am feeling sleepy...

...wasn't I supposed to be writing a review for Trance?

Did I say I loved it's psycho-logical thrill ride?

Mention that dead sexy nude scene?

Was I just dreaming when I rated it some enormous number out of five?

...sorry, I must have dosed off there for a minute...

Meh, among Boyle's weakest. His signatures are there, they just don't seem to be as powerful as his tier one movies. The score is good, not absorbing. The cinematography is good, not mesmerizing. The turns are interesting, but it was pretty obvious that Dawson was in on it all along. And her motivations were unclear, unless I missed something. So she just stole the painting because she liked it? And that is why this whole movie happened? I did like that McAvoy and Cassel basically switched sides on the moral spectrum, leaving the viewer to decide who they liked and who they didn't.

Are we sure Guy Ritchie didn't direct this movie with Danny Boyle's severed face?

I'll still give it a B. It's a solid movie. My complaints come only from disappointment that it wasn't up to Boyle's very high standard.

The protagonist/antagonist switch definitely echoes Shallow Grave, in which Christopher Eccleston's character seems to be the reasonable and sane one at first and Ewan McGregor's the volatile asshole, but the former slowly becomes more menacing throughout the film.

As for her motive, I also believe a certain power-dynamic satisfaction plays into it beyond her love of the painting. She is his victim when they are together because he is abusive, but now she is fooling, controlling, and victimizing him, though she obviously is not prepared for how violent and unstable the situation will spiral.

I enjoyed the film a lot. Visually, it is great, well-acted, kept me intrigued throughout, had a nice pay-off.

But one thing bothered me and ultimately prevetned a better grade. The filmmakers have no idea how hypnosis works and like most movies just uses the stereotypical assumptions about it. When having a movie, in which hypnosis is front and center of the plot, you'd hope for better research.

dull

I thought it was pretty awesome. Gorgeously shot and pretty clever.

8/10 (A-)

Hypnotic. Definately going to check this out a few more times.

Trance

Trance is stylish. I love style. It has a mesmerising nature for such a simple yet modernized concept, and it's enthralling and exceptionally well cut, with a pulse pounding and rich score which complements the visual feast that Danny Boyle has so perfectly composed. One could be correct for judging Trance as a metaphor for itself. Danny Boyle has been trying so hard to find his spark since his glory days. Then he remembered. And made this. This is, contradictively, perfect modern art. I can see the hair to prove it.

A

Awesome.

Price beat me to it. But you should've quoted algren's review.

Very enjoyable. Definitely near the the top of Boyle's filmography. The entire cast is great and the film is filled with a great amount of suspense and twists to help the film go by smoothly and quickly.