Review of Blow-Up

Blow-Up (1966)
6/10
long on style, short on substance
13 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
POSSIBLE MILD SPOILERS This film, like much that the 60s considered great, has not withstood the test of time. Daring and intriguing in its day (Jazzy soundtrack! Nudity! Models smoking pot!), it strikes this too-young-to-remember-the-60s reviewer as pretentious claptrap. The plot, which many reviewers find to have some sort of Profound Meaning, meanders lazily, and has some glaring leaps of logic (like, why would the one time our hero is without his camera be the one time he really needs it?). Also, and I can't stress this enough, there are mimes; repeat, there are mimes. The (probably unintended) highlight is a scene of the Yardbirds performing on stage, which is clumsily interjected into the plot, such as it is. Don't get me wrong; while not the classic that aging denizens of Electric Ladyland deem it to be, this is not a bad movie. Vanessa Redgrave is exceptionally good. Also, the film is beautifully and lovingly photographed, and it does capture the mid-60s London milieu and attitude (Mike Meyers clearly drew on Blow-Up's fashion photographer protagonist for his "Austin Powers" persona). That milieu is captured just as well, however, by better movies like "A Hard Days' Night" and 'Darling."
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed