User reviews

It's one of those disturbing movies that makes you question if you're ever gonna finish it. The visuals, the sounds, the characters, almost nothing is easy on the eyes or ears...It's about a teenager with mental illness joining a theater class, her disturbing relationship with her mother, and her disturbing relationship with her theater teacher, and the disturbing dynamics involving the whole theater troupe. You can try to appreciate it as you go but it's not an easy watch. It might get more enjoyable if you achieve the first watch and then try for a second one focusing on its handling of mental illness and relationships while giving the crazy, incomprehensible scenes your own meaning. You know, like an ugly vase you finally begin to see the beauty of.

If Helena Howard-who plays the main character, Madeline-doesn't get nominated for an academy award, we boycott. She by far gives the most visceral performance of the year right next to Hereditary's Toni Collette's. She is seriously someone to look forward to in the near future of cinema. She's a hidden talent that's career just got its blossoming. You feel psychotic throughout this. You really do. You feel as if you are in the head of this mentally ill character Madeline, and you begin to come to terms with her in-visionary perspective behind her life, and the beauty but also the terror within it. I've never seen a film approach such a fascinating charactorial perspective. Film enthusiasts should be encouraged to study such a unparalleled take on "point of view." Of course, the filmmaking is exquisite in its own unusual design. It's dreamy, dozey, and surreal, and I adored it. Like a natural high. If you want me to mention any flaws, I guess the pacing is a bit droog (it's kind of a b at times). It's hard to stay focused all the time since the story-I don't want to say doesn't go anywhere-takes a while before its resolutions are presented. Besides this (and maybe some nitpicks with the finale that I won't get into it) this doesn't contradict how mesmeric the experience was. It's hard to rate this one, since I'm a bit conflicted with what I have watched-there's really nothing like it; it's undoubtably the most experimental film of the year-but in terms of the filmmaking power and the overall core themes/matter that had me in this film's grasp, I feel somewhat comfortable giving these aspects of Madeline's Madeline: (Verdict: A-)

I disagree with the 1 Star review who says this movie has no reason to exist. Everyone is different right? I'd say mental illness is one of the more worthy themes to explore in a film. It's really well edited and shot. It's got some laughs. It's a bit erratic and dark and anxious, like the main character. The music and sound design is great. I'd say the 3 principal characters (Madeleine, her mum, the director) all give performances worthy of an Oscar nom. Yep, it's got an experimental vibe, it's kinda weird, but it's not eraserhead weird. Enjoy.

During the first few minutes of this film, I found myself ready to be disappointed, thinking it was going to essentially be "Theatre Kids: The Movie", which it really isn't. About ten minutes in, I got more used to the film and started to kind of see what parts of it were going for and it became a much more enjoyable experience. Throughout my time watching this movie, there was both very much and very little for me to say. 'Madeline's Madeline' is a very challenging film on multiple levels, and I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it. My time watching it was certainly mostly positive, but whether or not it achieves true greatness is totally lost on me. It is especially difficult for me to pinpoint my exact feelings on the film's ending, which may or may not be both lacking and overflowing with ambiguity.

However, there are a few things about this film that are for certain. For starters, it is (in my opinion delightfully) weird, oozing with absurd humour, surrealistic imagery, and an ever increasingly uncomfortable atmosphere. The editing and camerawork go hand in hand to make this a visually fascinating and impressive work. The psychological depths explored in the film are perfectly portrayed thanks to director Josephine Decker's incredible vision and talent for realizing said vision. Equally impressive is the acting. Miranda July is surprisingly intimidating and unsurprisingly awkward and Molly Parker is able to juggle likability with a strange undercurrent of suspicion on the part of the viewer extremely well. However, the real highlight of the film's performances comes from Madeline herself, played by newcomer Helena Howard. If the visionary visuals, editing, and score aren't enough to convince you to watch this film, her performance should. There is a particular sequence towards the end that was legitimately breathtaking due to her emotive and powerful performance. In many ways, it is an extremely pronounced performance, and in many other ways it is extremely subtle. To see such a young actor display so much incredible talent makes me excited to see her future career, and makes this film all the better.

A challenging film. As a child of the seventies this movie resonated with me. My childhood was ordinary for the times (the 1970s), but would be considered child abuse in the 21st century. Still, I don't agree with this "western societal viewpoint."

Madeline is all of us. When we are born, we immediately experience life in purely sensory terms. It's BRIGHT out there. It's LOUD. It's COLD. It STINKS of alcohol and other antiseptics. Anxious energy suddenly fills the room. How do we respond? We cry and scream and squirm and kick. We resist being pulled out of our warm home. We close our eyes to the unfamiliar.

It is only through the rigid and repetitive teachings of our "tribe" that we acquire language, manners, morals, ethics. Madeline's Madeline shows us how we might more effectively communicate, if only we could get the rest of the human race on board.

This movie is difficult. Discordant, dissonant. Musically and rhythmically atonal. At times it is an assault on the senses. But it is also a luminous visual portrait of a supremely talented young woman. I want to be her.

'MADELINE'S MADELINE': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

An experimental indie drama about a teenage girl with severe mental issues, who begins bringing her personal drama into her theater performance. It was directed and co-written by Josephine Decker, and it stars newcomer Helena Howard. The film also costars Molly Parker and Miranda July, and it's gotten mostly positive reviews from critics. I really enjoyed it's bizarreness, and it's sensitive depiction of mental illness, but it's also really slow-paced and somewhat hard to follow (because it's so strange). The performances are all more than decent though, and the directing is more than adequate as well.

//Revelation Film Festival Review//

Arthouse films are often labelled with different adjectives that can split audiences. What some might label as pretentious, others might consider as a masterpiece. Madeleine's Madeleine oscillates between both sentiments but through its sheer force of its own conviction proves to be a startling achievement.

The story follows Madeleine (an excellent debut from Helena Howard), a young performer recovering from a recent mental breakdown. As her personal life starts taking on a central role in a play she is rehearsing, Madeleine's grip on reality becomes increasingly tenuous. The lingering question is: is it art imitating reality or the other way around? Madeleine's Madeleine is an unconventional take on mental illness, but what part of mental illness is conventional?

Movies about mental illness are a dime a dozen, and it's hard to find one that has a take on the subject that hasn't already been done, but "Madeline's Madeline" comes pretty close. It's a very experimental film in some ways and one that will likely frustrate some viewers. I will admit to finding my patience tested at times, but overall I will say that the movie rewards sticking with it until its ambiguous end.

Madeline is a young woman whose acting talent either encourages her illness or gives her an outlet for it, depending on your perspective. Certainly her mom, played by Miranda July, is suspect of Madeline's troupe of acting friends and especially her acting teacher, but whether this suspicion arises from a mother's natural instinct for managing her daughter's fragile mental state or the threat that her control over her daughter might be jeopardized is not made entirely clear. Perhaps it's a bit of both? Certainly she has some reason to be concerned, because Madeline's teacher has no qualms about exploiting her illness for what it brings to the vague theater project she's working on. I've always only half-jokingly believed that the very best artists the world has produced are always a little bit crazy, and "Madeline's Madeline" seems to suggest that the fine line between sanity and artistic brilliance is a fuzzy one.

The chaotic film making, with its abrupt cuts, jumpy camera, and disorienting whirls and spins can be read as a visual representation of Madeline's disassociated mental state, but I wished the director would have calmed down a bit.

Grade: B

The movie critic of The New Yorker said it was head and shoulders the best new movie out there so I gave it a shot. I knew from the first minute it was a piece of pretentious twaddle. I am trying to watch but it is so reminiscent of a student production and not a very good one that I am giving up after 15 minutes. I feel like the little boy in The fairytale The Emperor's New Clothes who can see what the rest of society can't, that they have all been duped.

This film demands work from the viewer but ultimately pays off with a haunting portrait of a teenager's mental illness being exploited by a local theater director. It's often confusing but everything comes together to make this a successful art film. The three lead females performers are all superb.

Is there a fine line between creative genius and mental/emotional issues? Our teen actress shows a range of rapidly changing emotions - good acting or pathology? If this script was a "coming of age" then most of the world's young teens growing up having to work to either contribute to their families or are barely surviving would only laugh at our portrayal of a teen's angst as spoiled immaturity & self centeredness. Alternatively I had considered some form of mental illness as an out, but when seeing similar behaviors coming out of her mom and her stage director that out didn't hold water. When the stage costuming dept. came up w/pig's heads (Why pig's?) I thought we were heading for a horror flick - no such luck.

Dec 10, 2018 It's not difficult to see and appreciate the intent of director Josephine Decker's Madeline's Madeline, an artsy, indie movie about artsy, indie people, but it is difficult to become immersed in their world when the message about the process and the craft-no matter how vital the performances or justified the feelings-fails to be intriguing to anyone beyond this realm. I love to write, I love the creative process, and while acting terrifies me I find a person's ability to give themselves over to the confidence it takes to embody something other than who they're already trying to work up the confidence to embody completely admirable. And yet, Helena Howard's titular Madeline never comes off as a performer authentic in her love of the craft, but more a young and impressionable soul struck by the mystic intangibility of what being an actor means. Madeline's Madeline tries its damnedest to sidestep ones expectations of any kind of formula within its filmmaking, but in the process of avoiding such trademarks it forgets to create one of its own that both demystifies and enlightens the audience as to why they should care as much about the method as they should the final, prepared version presented on screen. In other words, I just didn't get it.

We were able to get this movie on DVD from our public library. My wife chose to skip it, not her kind of movie.

Watching it I didn't expect to "enjoy" it. In fact there is nothing enjoyable about it. However there is something compelling about it, maybe in the same way that we can be fascinated watching a train wreck. I couldn't stop watching it.

Don't take my comment wrong, I believe the filmmaker made exactly the movie she wanted to make. But she is of the experimental camp, a quote from her is "The beautiful thing about making art is the enormous possibility of failure." In other words make a movie you want and don't worry whether anyone will actually like it. Woody Allen is also that way but to me Allen makes much better movies.

Nothing seemed authentic to me and maybe that is the point. While I can give it reasonably high marks for the quality of what was produced, the movie, I cannot consider it a good movie. I watch movies mainly for a good story and and characters that I like. This one doesn't have either. It is more like watching a train wreck and marveling at the debris.

Does art imitate life? Or does life imitate Art?

Anyways, I like the whole concept. Trying to put your life experience into being an actor and the fine line of crossing into madness.

I think the best part was the acting. It seemed natural and gave the whole movie an honest down to earth feeling to a high concept.

The only problem I had was with the ending. What did it mean??

The shifting relationships between intimacy, need and power in both interpersonal and socio-political structural relationships are wisely staged in this movie. Not unlike a feminine multiracial reinterpretation of Sartre's Nausea, the "grossness of closeness" coexists in the same home as dazzling creativity. Retrobution and tenderness mutate to form constant relational negotiation - this movie may be called surreal, but it feels mighty real.

I think part of my problem with this was that however experimental the whole concept, or concept within that concept, was meant to be - I just didn't care one way or the other about the eponymous lass (Helena Howard). It didn't start so well with "you are not a cat, you are inside a cat" - not an image I wished to conjure up on any level! Anyway, she is a wanna-be actress who is quite prepared to put in the graft to succeed, and that's no easy task when surrounded by a combination of attitudes and ambitions that are as likely hostile to her success as not. To be fair to Howard, there is something very natural about her performance - it's just a girl trying to make it whilst juggling the balls of her personal life and the camerawork is sympathetically disjointed to give the whole thing a sense of lively improvisation as her story (sort of) unfolds. It's not that is lacks a traditional structure, it's just that by determining at all costs not to conform it completely failed to offer us any positives as to what it did want to be - and quite who it was for. It's random, bizarre and sometimes quite characterful but ultimately forgets to give us any hooks onto which we could invest. I didn't care nor, I wondered, should I. It's worth a watch; it's quirky and off the wall - but I think maybe just a little too self indulgent.

It is easier to bear, and perhaps even cure, the passive-aggressiveness of two of the central characters (induced by mental illness and its exploitation) in Joesphine Decker's drama Madeline's Madeline than it is to complete watching it. Gosh, the exasperating background score made of vocal percussion just forces me to use another line here. TN.

And some problems because the theatre rehearsal woman director wants the young actress Madeline to have a great performance. The whole movie is the story of a theatre rehearsal where the actors and actresses talk to each other about their lives and problems. The young Madeline brings psychologically her personal troubles to her rehearsal performance mainly those who derive from her relationship with her mother. She performs this very well being adnired by the director and by the other performers. This is well shown in all the scenes by the performers' talent, chiefly by the young Madeline's character.

Have you ever looked at an abstract piece of art and strained to understand what the point of it was? I feel like I just suffered through some bazaar required viewing for a college art class. I stuck it out because I love thrillers (exactly how this movie qualifies a part of that genre is a mystery) and because of all the stellar reviews, but I did not have any answers by the film's end. Most importantly, I was not entertained or uplifted which are the only two reasons I watch cinema. Perhaps I'm just too shallow to understand what just happened or what the point to any of it was, but I'm typically able to appreciate 'artsy' stuff so it's more than that. No, I believe one must actually be mentally ill himself to appreciate this 'art', and it actually left me feeling as though perhaps I was cracking. The acting was superb, I think. I. Just. Didn't. Understand. It. At. All.

I definitely did not find this to be one of the most bizarre and incomprehensible films I've ever seen. It just happens to be coming from a unique perspective and requires a bit of focus.

All three lead performances are incredible, I agree with a previous comment that they're all Oscar worthy. Certainly, Helena Howard is a force and in my book gives one of the best performances I've seen this year. She has an incredibly bright future ahead of her and I look forward to seeing more of her.

I just love the way Josephine Decker's mind works. I've enjoyed her previous films and they seem to just get better with each release. Cinematography, pacing, narrative, performances, sound design; all of the elements here are intricate and purposeful and captured with precision.

I can understand someone not enjoying the film because it is not a straight forward drama, it's brimming with anxiety and confusion and youthful naiveté (all of which are there for good reason) and does require a certain level of dedication as a viewer, but if you can give it a chance and take the time to digest the emotional roller coaster that is Madelin'e mind I think you'll be happy you did.

Think of the worst piece of crap you have ever seen...now take it down a notch. If I saw this in the movies I'd ask for my money back.

I had no idea what to expect from this, but it turned out to be such a visceral, well-done atmospheric and experimental film.