Elephant - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Elephant Reviews

Page 2 of 210
December 24, 2015
A gorgeous modern masterpiece of unshakeable power.
November 30, 2015
This movie is absolutely awesome i loved it.
October 26, 2015
A fantastic film who's only flaw is its inexperienced cast. A truly disturbing tale based on the Columbine massacre. But the lack of emotional depth in the characters is prevalent. Still, this film is super important. And super.
Super Reviewer
½ October 22, 2015
With a flawless direction and elegant long takes, this hypnotizing film moves in a careful pace to follow its characters prior to an impending tragedy. I only wish I felt more involved with them, while the amateur actors could have conveyed a more authentic sense of terror.
August 24, 2015
Criticada por su sínica y "falta de profunidad" la película realmente brilla por una dirección tan lenta que termina por estresarme y es ahí donde capta toda mi atención al expresarla en miedo.
Super Reviewer
August 23, 2015
Gus Van Sant's powerfully unnerving film about two high school misfits, Alex and Eric well played by Alex Frost and Eric Deulen, who calmly plan a mass execution of their class mates and school administers like the massacre at Columbine. The real strength in this film lies in its power of observation, we get a brief glimpse into the young killers personalities, who are sexually confused, Hitler-loving dweebs, who get off on playing single-person shooting video games. But what makes it all the more chilling is that they don't seem any different from any of the other high schoolers. Brilliant cinematography by Harris Sadvides with those long steady-cam tracking shots really do a great job of putting you with the characters, as they walk the long endless corridors of their high school murdering innocent people. The supporting cast of mostly unknown actors all deliver fine naturalistic performances. I think the most disturbing scene in the film is when one of the killers turns to the other and tells him, "Most important, have fun man!" just before they begin their mass killing spree. Winner of the Golden Palm at the 2003 Cannes Film Festival. A starling and unforgettable motion picture. Highly Recommended.
August 4, 2015
August 3, 2015
Gus Van Sant's raw teen drama can be justifiably defined as 'all too real' and is that kind of movie that can characterized as good, but too upsetting to want to watch twice.
½ August 3, 2015
Shocking even as you know what's about to unfold.
July 27, 2015
School shootings have become a trend, if you will. This movie stayed with me for a long time after watching it because it made me really sad and scared. Watching a film like this, especially hearing about school shootings in the news, really changes your outlook about high school. One must wonder what must go through the shooters' minds so that they could do something really horrible. But this movie took it to the next level: it merely observes instead of making judgment, which is all the more painful. I wish there was a way I can tell unhappy high school kids that things do get better and that they don't have to be miserable for the rest of their lives--that there is an escape, an alternative; that there's no need to result to violence because, in the end, if they do choose the path of violence, they'll only be ruining their lives and those who care about them. This film is hard to take, not only because it's more of an experimental film, but also its subject matter. If you do decide to watch this movie, traverse carefully. You will remember this for a long time.
½ July 25, 2015
A somber, transfixing depiction of tragedy on a very intimate, disturbingly blunt level. The long takes hold bleak power and lyricism
½ June 20, 2015
Lethargic and poorly paced, I'm thinking this movie just hasn't aged very well(?) While Gus Van Sant clearly has something to say, the message gets lost in a haze of boredom - brought on by intentionally rambling long shots. There are a good five minutes where the camera rests statically on a small CRT TV showing Triumph of the Will. Seriously
June 4, 2015
What's brilliant about the film is that there is no theme, no reason for the climax to happen. Sick people are in this world, and there is no rhyme or reason for it.
½ May 31, 2015
A brilliant showcase of terror and horror. The only flaws are the bad acting and the random shooting of his friend at the end. Other than that, it was a brilliant film that shows the randomness and destruction that humans are capable of.
May 26, 2015
One of my favorite movies. A visual poem that starts off beautiful and ends in tragedy. Brilliantly unconventional and bone-chilling.
May 18, 2015
A masterpiece that was inspired by the Columbine school shootings.
½ May 17, 2015
An unsatisfying but hypnotic film, Elephant is an atmospheric journey.
May 11, 2015
I saw it years ago in film class, would love to see it again.
May 10, 2015
Flawed cinematic poetry.
May 1, 2015
[Spoiler Warning: this review contains major spoilers for Gus Van Sant's Elephant. If you have not watched the movie, I advise you to not read on.]

What makes Gus Van Sant's Elephant so popular is not its plot or traditional Hollywood thrill we are used to witnessing in most well made movies, but it's the experience of living in the realm of the movie and taking part in it. Elephant pulls the audience away from their seats and into the scenes themselves where they get to witness the most mundane lives then the most gruesome moments. It is a movie that, whether you love it or hate it, will keep you tossing and turning in bed for nights afterwards. In essence, Elephant makes the audience themselves become elephants as they watch it.
The movie begins with a car scene of a drunk father unable to drive his son to school, so the son takes over and drives there. The camera follows him all the way into the school and after he gets requested to go to the principal office, the camera transitions to someone else. The movie keeps transitioning from one student to another, showing nothing more than the average high school life many of us have already lived, but it does so at eye level to give the audience a feel that they themselves are the camera following the person. The monotonous story makes the audience want to spit on the screen and leave the movie theatre, but the way the movie is shot binds them to their seats and make them want to stay till the end like the way a child is made to finish his entire plate of vegetables.
At that point, it would be very surprising if there was anyone who was enjoying the movie. But it seemed to Van Sant that this was the optimum moment to completely change flow of events without warning. An hour into the movie, two students go inside the school and start shooting everyone. Even though the audience are forced to follow the killers as the brutally execute a mass slaughter of innocent people, the momentum of the movie remains flat. There is no music to accompany the scenes neither is there any expression on the killers' faces to show that they doing something out of the ordinary. The movie also ends with the same flat momentum as Van Sant provides us with no conclusion of what happens nor does he provide the audience with any lead for them to be able to conclude the movie on their own.
The movie kept me awake the night after watching the movie, as I had not understood anything of what I watched, and I did not have the mental power to process the movie just yet because I was still left with the enormous shock and prodigious load of emotions. Later I realized that my emotions were not conceived of a movie, but of me witnessing a massacre with my own two eyes.
Van Sant made the movie based on the an actual high school massacre known as the Columbine High School Massacre, which till this day is known as the largest high school massacre ever to occur on US soil. Van Sant did not want to make a documentary where he could feed us with information of what happened, but rather make us live it and try to come with the information on our own, as the name of the movie explains what his intention was.
The name of the movie was borrowed from Alan Clarke's movie where Van Sant also borrowed many of Clarke's filming techniques. What both Clarke and Van Sant meant by "Elephant" was something very obvious that we see everyday but fail to notice and that emulates a huge elephant in a room that no one pays attention to. The elephants in Van Sant's movie are both the socially isolated students we follow and also ourselves as the audience. The socially isolated students are shown to live their lives everyday with no one paying much attention to them, even though the pain and psychological difficulties they go through should be noticed. We are elephants because we too are isolated from the our surroundings as we walk around the school unnoticed.
Through the movie we come to a deeper understanding of what "elephants" are as he plays around with Berkeley's concept of existence and Descartes's. George Barkely defines existence as the ability to be perceived by stating that "To be is to be perceived." Descartes, on the other hand, defines existent as the ability of a person to think when he says "I think, therefore I am." Van Sant shows us how the students and the audience are trapped with their own thoughts because their thoughts are the only conformation to them that they exist, but they cannot satisfy Berkley's concept of existence. This provides us with one explanation for the killings as the two students start to kill others around them because this is the only way they can be perceived. But Van Sant gives us no absolute conclusion of why the killings happened, instead he leaves many clues which pose more questions than answers. Other than wanting to satisfy their existence, Van Sant also shows us they the killers were bullied, were gay, played violent video games, and were influenced by the Nazi's from world war II.
Gus Van Sant's Elephant is a masterpiece that is not like any other piece of work out there. It is like an organized piece of chaotic art that emerges the Dionysian disorder with the Apollonian order in a perfect combination where nothing makes sense on its own but everything makes sense together. It is unexpected and hard to grasp in a way that emulates the ambiguity of real life. It bores the audience and then horrifies them, but it does so in a well ordered and well designed way that makes them want to observe more. The movie does not give the audience any information about the shootings, but gives them all the tools needed for them to forge the information on their own.
Page 2 of 210