Manifesto (2015) Poster

(III) (2015)

User Reviews

Review this title
32 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Cate Blanchett's Show
dorukonal11 April 2017
The Manifesto is a German artist Julien Rosefeldt, played by Cate Blanchett's 13 different characters. Each character that Blanchett spots plays and sings passages from different manifestos. It's obviously a hard-to-follow, hard-core movie.

Still, the film has a fluent narrative. Rosefeldt identifies each character with a manifesto. It is possible to say, "What does he mean?" As the words flow rapidly. Because the content needs to be placed in a context and doing so is not possible because of the "difficult to follow" that I am talking about.

Although this situation reduces the pleasure of the film, it is not disconnected from the narrative that it reveals in general terms. Blanchett offers a one-man show. He did not portray his characters as if he had lived / lived. In parallel, I can say that atmosphere, make-up and fiction are also top level. It is also worth noting that the manifestos associated with Blanchett's performance, or the humor that he created about the contents ...
14 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
'Impressive' but empty and without plot
Portobella4 September 2017
Almost 2 hours of different art manifestos performed by Cate Blanchett who plays many different characters that aren't interconnected. There is no plot or story and although Mrs Blanchett is a very able and efficient actress none of it touches you and you don't get where its all going, what did the director want with this? Apart from showing us how clever he is? It reminds me more of a museum/video-installation type of thing than something you would put in a cinema.
23 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Difficult subject and concept, but the competent execution makes it worth seeing
Horst_In_Translation26 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Manifesto" is a German English-language film that premiered back in 2015 already, so it took almost two years until this film finally came to Germany in terms of a wide release, which really should make people think as this is a German movie like I said. It is the second full feature film by writer and director Julian Rosefeldt and here he unites with 2-time Oscar-winning actress Cate Blanchett from Australia, who plays a total of 12(!) characters during these 90 minutes. The consequence is that there are hardly any other characters in here and those who are are basically just minor supporting players without dialogue. I think I remember only one other character talk very briefly on one occasion, namely during the tattoo punk segment. Anyway, this is a film about art, about all kinds of approaches to art, about how art is seen and also about how art should be created. The good thing is that, even if you have zero connection with art in the sense of paintings, sculptures etc. you can still definitely enjoy the watch here. It is honestly far more important that you at least don't mind Blanchett as an actress, preferably even like her or love her. I have general criticisms that she is pretty sterile and cold most of the time, but I would not necessarily agree. I usually like her a lot and she is pretty great when given the right role, like her more recent Oscar-winning performance that was perfect for her.

Back to this one here now, it is an educational film too I think and I am sure it depends on yourself with which characters in here you identify the most in terms of what they have to say about art. You probably won't find one that fits your approach 100%, but that's not a problem as you can just name several. I think the one who came the closest for me was the tattooed punk I mentioned earlier already. Sorry Chopin lovers! Another good thing is as well that the film is pretty funny at times too thanks to Blanchett's take on and Rosefeldt's writing of the characters and the scenarios we see them in. Blanchett sure gives the ultimate chameleon performance, even if this one is too "special" obviously for the Academy and several other awards bodies to pay it some recognition. And it is somewhat the exact opposite of a film like the recent Thor sequel, in which Blanchett plays a major part too. Anyway, I myself liked the watch here, even if it was not on a level where I would say it is among the year's very best or a must-watch. Back to the introduction, it is pretty telling a genuinely artistic film like this one needs so long to be released here while the Schweighöfer audience heads to cinemas on a weekly basis to honor their false heroes. But hey maybe we can be glad it got a wide release at all. It is also a big success visually looking at the excellent set decoration from start to finish. Each character gets 7-8 minutes screen time as average, but of course some get more and return later on for a second sequence, like the recurring table food sequence, while others disappear as quickly as they came. That's all then I guess. A certain thumbs-up from me for Rosefeldt and Blanchett, especially the former as I think this was a really challenging project that could have gone all kinds of wrong, but turned out as well as I expected when reading the name of Cate Blanchett, who can be relied on as usual. Check it out if you get a chance to. This may very well be the most artistic movie of 2015.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Too artistic for me
Gordon-113 November 2017
This film tells the story of twelve people who make manifestos about art and life in general.

The captivating thing about this film is that Cate Blanchett plays twelve different characters in various walks of life. It gives her the opportunity to shine bright as usual.

However, there is little story in the film. The scenes are merely there to convey the manifestos. It is a daring project, but it is probably too artistic for me. I appreciate the concept and the artistic achievement, but I cannot say I enjoyed watching it.
36 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great characters, terrifically performed by Cate Blanchett. Beautiful photography. Interesting manifestos, yet I would prefer to simply read them instead of hearing them...
imseeg29 March 2020
Acting is great and funny. Photography is gorgeous. The manifestos are interesting, BUT I would prefer to simply read them, instead of hearing those manifestos being recited for 2 HOURS by Cate Blanchet. Why? Because these manifestos, which are continuously being recited, are pretty intelligent and thought provoking. The content and it's message, evaporates to quickly when it is being read out aloud so fast. And there is CONTINUOUS reading of these manifestos for 2 HOURS straight, which is a bit overwhelming to comprehend.

That's my only criticism. More breathers in between would have been appreciated. I couldnt cope with even more manifestos after half an hour. However superb the acting and however gorgeous the photography, a simple written paper with the manifesto on it, would have more power and effect.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Weird Vs Pretentious
dwankan27 June 2019
I'm convinced that the internet has erased all meaning from the word "pretentious." It once meant exactly what it sounds like, pretending to be something other than what you are. This film, along with all non-standard films, has evoked countless online accusations of pretense, which in the world of online movie reviews actually just means that the reviewer found it weird and boring. The film does not, and be aware of this is if you plan on watching it, contain a plot-based, narrative fantasy for viewers to follow to a satisfying conclusion. What it does is combine together short slice-of-life vignettes with the reading of various bits of aesthetic and philosophical manifestos. Its appeal will be limited to only people who find the rantings of tortured souls interesting. I have actually read quite a few of the bits that were included in the film, and I find the whole absurd reality of artistic manifestos and philosophical creeds fascinating, so I enjoyed the film. If you're not that kind of nerd, you won't like it. But is it pretentious? No. It did not pretend to be anything other than what it was: a presentation of some famous manifestos in combination with scenes from ordinary life. It is certainly weird, and it will certainly bore most viewers. As always Cate Blanchett's performance is incredible. The cinematography is impeccable.
31 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The movie that best demonstrates Cate Blanchett's versatility
ggroover972 October 2020
Manifesto might be the most unique viewing experience I've had in a while. Directed by German artist Julian Rosefeldt, who according to Wikipedia: "Elaborate, visually opulent film and video installations, often shown as panoramic multi-channel projections." I did more digging and found out Manifesto was originally an art installation. From the photos I've seen, visitors to the exhibit would walk to different screens where a clip of the movie would be playing. I think that's the gist of it at least.

Now I'd be lying if I told you I understood any of the monologues or "manifestos" presented in this movie. If I'm not mistaken, I believe one was about the relationship between art and capitalism. If anything, this movie felt like an entire semester of art philosophy crammed into an hour and a half film. I don't usually watch these kinds of experimental movies where plot is basically non-existent, but Cate Blanchett got me through it all.

Okay so here is what I wanted to talk about the most, Cate Blanchett's performance. I've always loved Cate Blanchett as an actress but Manifesto made me realize how amazing and talented she really is. I can't believe I never realized she had THIS much range. In one scene, she's playing a mousey housewife eating dinner with her family and in another, she's a brash punk-rocker chick. I was absolutely floored. The way she is able to slip into all of these roles astonished me. I swear, she slips into these performances like most people slip into shoes.

Even though we know nothing about any of these characters, we can infer who these people are by their facial expressions, behavior, and tone of voice. All the body language felt authentic and true for each character. In fact, I want to know more about these people. I could watch Cate Blanchett play a punk-rocker chick or a dance choreographer for hours. I would pay more attention to the news if Cate Blanchett was the anchor.

I also want to commend the costuming, hairstyling, makeup, etc. They really did elevate Cate's transformations throughout the film. In one scene, she's a loud, dirty, male drunk and in another, she's this really beautiful and well-spoken party host. I just loved seeing the contrasts that highlighted her versatility.

As I said before, I had no idea what was being said in regards to the philosophical art-talk, but Cate's performance kept me engaged the whole time. If anything this film may have convinced me that she's the best actress working right now. I can't believe I'm saying that over somebody's art project, but Cate Blanchett simply killed it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
It belongs to Art Gallery
litl-374442 September 2017
I like Cate Blanchett as an actress basically, but I find the film pretentious, this is not done with the film language, there is no story in it. The work is an "art" itself, more like mixture of critical documentary and "experimental" poetry. Cinema may not be a good place to be shown, but the art gallery.
32 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Cate Blanchett and the intelligent art direction make the film with an unconventional premise work
williammjeffery1 July 2017
Cate Blanchett once again displays her vast array of talent as she plays 12 different characters in 12 different settings decontextualising some of history's famous manifestos, bringing humour and new meaning to them, or perhaps no meaning, to stress a view of meaninglessness to them. There is no conventional narrative here but the film still has urgency to keep you watching through its compelling art direction and wit.
19 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Cate Blanchett's Talent
SancarSeckiner15 November 2017
When we watch Julian Rosefeldt's ''Manifesto'', 2015 with Cate Blanchett, we were expecting that we will find a different way of filming. Director , a German artist and film maker, - https://www.julianrosefeldt.com - highlights different manifestos ranging from Dada to Flux , including Lars von Trier's Dogme 95 rules for filmmaking under 13 different characters with Cate Blanchett' s superior performance. However, film is not so bright for Cate Blanchett after her two important works : Woody Allen's Blue Jasmine, 2013 and Todd Haynes' Carol, 2015. After listening 13 different characters' speech , I remembered Leos Carax' s Holly Motors , 2012 with Denis Lavant. Directors are trying to show different aspects of their view. Meantime , a new film in the critics of art, Ruben Östlund' s the Square , 2017 is worth to thinking about.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
experimental art piece
SnoopyStyle18 August 2018
Cate Blanchett plays various characters. Through narrations and monologues, they proclaim manifestos declaring a call to arms for artists questioning their roles and society in general.

There is no denying Blanchett's acting skills. She embodies this diverse set of characters. She is the voice of this movie. Few others even have lines. This is experimental and oddly monotone despite the vastly different roles for Blanchett. The manifestos all have that lengthy run-on sentence structure with big, complicated words. They are reminiscent of the countless manifestos from revolutionaries and madmen. The visuals are beautiful and artistically rendered. It all adds up to a single note played at a loud beautifully pronounced volume. At the end of the day, what exactly is this movie saying? It's a lot of buzz words cobbled together to say everything and nothing. It's a beautiful art piece with a profound actor skillfully performing. It's hypnotic. In a way, it is what it says it is. It is dissecting art leaving it collapsed in a pile of rubble. This belongs in a museum but it has no place in the neighborhood multiplex. It's a fascinating piece of experimental art. I'm not sure if it's actually saying anything.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Life is an artwork, an artwork is life
serge-338 June 2017
Amazing cinematic experience guaranteed! Saw Manifesto yesterday as part of the Holland Festival cultural event. This is now a movie. I saw it as an installation of screens with short scenes and words spoken, based almost exclusively on famous and lesser known art scene manifestos. It could have been pretentious, but, director Julian Rosefeldt and the amazing Cate Blanchett turned this work into a flowing movie with connecting dots. In the installation there is some synchronicity in the screens, in that the 12/13 characters sing part of their text simultaneously. You may actually figure out some of the background surrounding the manifestos (such as Dadaism,Dogma). It was joyful and intense experience. One thing is sure, Cate Blanchett is the most prolific,daring, energetic, chameleon, dedicated, fun actor around.
27 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Let's rebel agaist all conventions! Amazing performance, picture and deconstruction.
mehobulls10 September 2020
Cate Blanchett doing what she does best from the public view: acting in such a versatile way. Art and media are the targets here. The movie portrays Dada movement, Karl Marx, contemporary pop culture, mass media and so many more, but also in a critic way by the act of this eternal diva. There are some OK scenes but overall it's worth-watching for everybody.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The many faces of philosophical musings about whatever - Lost me early on!
thursdaysrecords29 June 2020
I really tried to "get this", but in the end I think I failed. How many different ways are there to explain the purpose of life? To get answers to the unanswerable, one must ask many different people, and then expect more answers than the total number of people asked. - I have great respect for Kate Blanchet's body of work. This is not her finest hour. So profoundly confusing and ultimately forgettable. Even if you're a fan of the star, skip this jumbled mess of a disappointing film.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Cate Blanchett performs several manifestos of art
maurice_yacowar30 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Manifesto is a manifesto about the ambition and limitations of artists' and philosophers' manifestos about art. Call it an anti-manifesto.

In their setting and delivery most of the theories about art-making here are presented lightly, ironically. Their earnestness is especially amusing,

Perhaps the one exception is the first. The Trump presidency — especially in the week of the Houston floods — gives an electric currency to Karl Marx's declaration of the deadliness and death of capitalism and the call for artists to lead a revolution.

The film is framed by the Marxist call to arms and the final manifesto, an antithetic preference for tradition over individual imagination that turns restrictive.

Still, that last episode provides the clearest representation of the beauty of life and the danger of restrictive art theory. Perhaps the film's most touching image is the tracking shot along the Grade III students' faces at their desks, especially the first three girls with their insecurity, uncertainty, fear. They are the future for which all the manifestos intend to prepare.

The teacher assigns their film-scripting with a license to steal their ideas from anywhere. She cites Godard: "It doesn't matter where you take things from, but where you take them to."

She seems thus to give her charges total freedom for their creativity. But as she visits each student's project she drops another restriction. No props are allowed. You must use fixed lighting. The director may not be named. Like every manifesto, her every specific direction is a restriction, not a freeing.

The students' real "liberation" comes when they're freed from their ostensibly "creative" class. Now the camera pans across the schoolyard where the children break into play, some in pairs or groups, some by themselves. They run free and physical, poised by slow-motion for our reading, Again the individual face is a rich encapsulation of life, the human condition, at its purest, most hopeful, most vulnerable.

As an emblem of these liberated spirits the film catches the schoolyard pigeons fluttering into the sky in slow motion. That film device is as pure as the children's faces, the artistic strategy that does what art should do — whatever the school or manifesto — illuminate our state of living and free the imagination.

Aptly, the film about art presents its own statement on art in a situation of restrictive theory on film — with liberation in film's unique capacity to reveal what is normally lost in the flux of time and life. It lets us SEE what we'd normally miss.

The various theories of art are wittily dramatized. Dadaism is propounded as a funeral sermon. The chicken soup and domestica associated with Pop Art lead to that manifesto recited as a suburban mother's grace at a lunch table, the father and sons burdened with the interminable inventory of Pop principles.

There are three emblems of Pop's withdrawal from nature. The family dog is twice brought to its food — and twice leaves it! The living room is defined by a variety of stuffed wildlife, including an adult black bear, and a live crow. At the table the mother pours gravy on the desiccated duck the dad carves.

So too the urban settings are generally monstrous, dehumanizing, or in ruins. Vorticism and abstract expressionism are propounded in a glitzy ultramodern estate by a chic CEO type. Conceptual art — where what counts is the idea not the realization — is presented as a TV news dialogue between shiny anchor Cate and rain drenched street reporter Cate. Naturally, the rain is fake.

Punk aesthetic is as deadhead, dead-end and self-destructive as the stoned party folk. The stock brokerage, factory, garbage dump and the martinet directing a robotic alien ballet scene equally show art responding to dehumanizing modernity but with their own destructive rigidities.

For the surrealist ethic Cate Blanchett speaks to/through a puppet of herself, an apt image of the merging of the real and the dream worlds. The doll springs to pained life when Blanchett sticks pins into its/her head to secure the wig. Whatever the theory, the power of art inheres in its visceral impact. We know it's a doll but the "art" is so true we wince.
16 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An artistic take on (mostly) art manifestos
alex-125021 November 2017
There is more art in this movie than in any of the mainstream movies you will find. It portrays passion for art and ideas humankind used to have in previous centuries. This passion was often expressed in a very radical language, as a result of the struggle between the driven artists and the establishment. All of that has disappeared in recent times, and all art has become derivative and compliant with consumerism.

Cate Blanchett's performance in various parts ranges from great to mesmerising. I've never really paid much attention to her work up until now but based on her acting in Manifesto, she's definitely the greatest actress of our time. She's got it all.

She could turn anyone into a Dadaist.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Proof That Being a Chameleon Does Not = Good Acting
LaLaLandSucks13 May 2017
Chameleon actors are bad once they are too over the top. Does it really matter if an actress or an actor is not recognizable? If the intentions of an actor/actress does not translate on screen 100%, they are surely giving an awful performance. Jake Gyllenhaal has for a decade been described as a chameleon actor, but even he has his limits. This film proves Cate Blanchett is not an amazing actress because she has limits. What do I consider amazing? Marlon Brando and Daniel Day Lewis of course. Those are the only true chameleons that have never given a terrible performance. All these subpar actors in Hollywood today are just beginners. She's not acting for survival, her mind is about giving a good performance, not survival. It's what modern actors get wrong, the focus on your performance does not equal a good one. Acting is a survival mechanism, so you have to use it like you want to survive.
15 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
and ode to acting and the simplicity of good directing and patient camera work backed by incredible locations.
r-lake-431-6987256 March 2017
walking into the dark room of the second floor in the NSW art gallery surrounded by screens all playing simultaneously. You sit down, confused watching the last minute of any one short. It starts over and you are instantly captured by the character. Cate Blanchett's stage is calmly set with drone shots and slow continuous camera movements. Here on her stage she draws you into this character, and their life. Blanchett captures your immediate attention and holds it until the screen goes black.

Some stories did not resonate with me but others drew me in and kept me sitting in awe.
18 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
cate blanchett is the worst
anafiz4 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
She is so full of herself and maybe on of the most pretentious arseholes in Hollywood. Her acting is over the top and she has that smug face on going "look how intense I am". This isn't art. I remember on the Hollywood Reporter, Cate once said she wishes she didn't have to do work- well that was clearly bull- she's doing Thor- which is crap. She thinks everything she comes up with amazing, I guess that's what happens if someone blows smoke up your arse for too long.
6 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Nothing Is Original
jcjs33311 June 2018
Except this, eh...this flick reminds of my life long love of poetic logical jabberwocky...Cate Blanchett is such a treat and this flick is crazy creative fun as all get out...read anything into it or out of it...art schmartzie fartzie...a wonderful romp in the seriously ridiculous and wonderfully weird...silly seriousness...anyhow, Cate Blanchett is worth the entire show...this whole darn deal was done incredibly well...
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Boring... completely boring
JessiLossa3 March 2023
I need, firstly, to praise Cate Blanchett's acting and versality. She always do an amazing work, even when the movie is completely tedious. All of the stars given are for her.

Now, my review of the film: this movie is so boring. Made me feel sleepy just like the kids at the kinda-praying scene. It's completely elitist, most people can't even get and understand what Cate's characters are saying: could be a lot better if it had a screenplay at least, a story behind to made people get a bigger context of the art scenario.

The complicated sentences and words are completely paradoxal: the director wants to criticize elitist art movements, but ironically isn't paying attention of how difficult his own art is to digest.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I can see most people hating this
kiratsuki-l4 February 2018
I didn't quite get it myself maybe partly cause english isn't my native language and the profanity was distracting but I think the general idea was about art being put on a leash with rules and manufactured for the consumer (like in the scene where the teacher CORRECTS the art of children instead of leaving it as it is) rather than being created as it is.It also seems to be about being too obsessed with glorifying old art and not really creating anything unique to our current time.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Like nothing we've ever seen
cliffskoog7 December 2017
...And the best thing we've seen all year. We love great acting, big ideas, inspired film settings and cinematography, and ironically subtle subtexts. This film has them all. Wow. If you can keep your mind focused for an hour and a half and can hear ideas while recognizing how visuals can function as a counterpoint that often critiques them, this film is for you, otherwise it is probably NOT for you.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Breathtaking performances and production
corrado-prizzi23 April 2018
Congratulations to absolutely everyone involved in this truly outstanding piece of work. Cate Blanchet's acting talent simply left me open-mouthed. What incredible performances. It's not an easy watch, so don't even try if you're tired. But if you're up for some real cinematic art, this is a gem.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
For Philosophers of Art. Exclusively.
skepticskeptical6 July 2020
I enjoyed this film because I have a strong interest in the contemporary art world and questions about value, aesthetics and art more generally. Manifesto is quite a bit more intellectual than most of the films available today, and in a way I am surprised that a major star such as Cate Blanchett was willing to participate. Glad to know that she does not find philosophy to be "gobbledy gook".

There are about a million ways to interpret what transpires in the various Manifestos strung together here, and what they mean taken together, but that just means that this film is indeed a work of art. Several of the manifestos overlap and seem to be pushing a nihilistic view akin to those who would "cancel culture", which I personally find childish.

I decided to scan the negative reviews of Manifesto and, sure enough, the word 'pretentious' popped up. Sometimes when someone calls a work "pretentious", it just means that they cannot come up with any pleasing interpretation of it. Of course, some people hate philosophy altogether, so their confusion and disdain is understandable given that this art work philosophizes about the philosophy of art.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed