Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Reviews

Page 2 of 3
November 13, 2006
I found it to be heavy-handed, pretentious dreck.
November 13, 2006
My irritation progressed through contempt, eye-rolling, and, finally, a dull despair illuminated only by the imminent prospect of dinner.
November 10, 2006
Fur is a folly, though not a dishonorable one.
November 10, 2006
It only does to the artist what museums have tried to do to her art, putting her in a neat little frame and sticking her on the wall, another exhibit in the sideshow. And it still leaves us, safe and separate, stranded on the other side of the glass.
November 10, 2006
Like the artists who stock the Whitney Biennial with their plastic puddles of vomit, Fur works feverishly to dress up clichés.
November 10, 2006
Both in art and in death, Arbus escaped the demeaning constraints of society. By envisioning her as a flawlessly gorgeous mouse with no will of her own, [director] Shainberg and [screenwriter] Wilson have dragged her back.
November 9, 2006
If you are seeking illumination about Arbus' artistry or her psyche, it's not here.
November 9, 2006
Fur starts stylishly, and confidently, but the film dwindles down to a chamber piece in a claustrophobic chamber.
November 9, 2006
It remains simultaneously too far-fetched and thesis-driven to be convincing and too feelingly done to be ignored.
November 9, 2006
If so blatant a fiction is placed in a co-starring role into an account of a real life what can you usefully take away from the movie?
November 9, 2006
Fur's misstep, and it is significant, is in the creature design of Lionel. The resemblance to Chewbacca is uncanny. He also looks a little like Lon Chaney's Wolf Man.
November 9, 2006
Freighted with a risible air of pretension and gloom.
November 9, 2006
Fur is that rare movie that's too understated, so quiet and deliberate that it effectively buries consuming passions.
November 9, 2006
Downey, however, is remarkable, suppressing his trademark jitters and ticks and delivering a performance of heartbreaking sensitivity, no matter that he spends almost all of his screen time staring out from behind a forest of head-to-toe body hair.
November 8, 2006
Is it more interesting and entertaining than a straightforward biopic of Arbus would have been? Maybe. Is it more illuminating? Probably not.
November 8, 2006
It's been a while since we saw a truly boggling sophomore slump, one of those infamous second-act follies, like Steven Soderbergh's Kafka, made by adirector blinded with ego and overreach.
November 8, 2006
Fur may not be entirely convincing, but it's made with a conviction that deserves respect.
Top Critic
November 8, 2006
The paperback edition of Patricia Bosworth's mesmerizing book is being published again this week. My advice is forget about the movie and grab this literary gem fast. You will really learn something. You will learn nothing from Fur.
November 7, 2006
You won't learn much about Arbus, aside from the correct pronunciation of her first name; you will get to see Kidman try (and fail) to find her inner freak.
November 6, 2006
You'd expect a conventional biopic to be bland and overly telescoped. But Arbus's life and work ought to inspire something more than the generic tale of a repressed fifties doll wife who runs off with the circus.
Page 2 of 3