Closet Land (1991) Poster

(1991)

User Reviews

Review this title
59 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
What makes a great movie?
Madde-22 January 2000
Acting, of course! Think about it, Closet Land could easily have turned out so horribly - an entire movie filmed in one room with only two people, they better have some damned interesting things to chat about.

But it didn't turn out horribly. On the contrary, thanks to incredible portrayals by both Stowe and Rickman, Closet Land is a masterpiece in its own right.

That's not to say it is for everyone. Persons who have had their attention spans decreased through glitzy sex scenes and random gun fire may have trouble digesting Closet Land. However, those who can appreciate good story telling without explosions should give it a look (no matter how many video stores you have to call to find someone who has it in stock).
18 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"It's the suspense, not the pain, that will drive you mad".
gridoon31 July 2002
This two-character drama is extremely well-acted and has a valid message and some TRULY shocking moments (shocking not because they are graphic, but because you're not prepared for them when they come). But eventually it does become oppressive, just like the somewhat similar "A Pure Formality" did. Still, Alan Rickman should have gotten an Oscar nomination for his multi-dimensional performance, no doubt about it. (**1/2)
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
tremendous piece of work, continues to be timely.
grendelkhan24 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Closet Land is an amazing, terrifying piece of cinema. It features only two actors in a single set, but never loses your attention. The set design is imaginative and troubling, the staging of scenes maintains your attention, while adding to your own sense of confusion and terror. The acting is outstanding, with Alan Rickman and Madeleine Stowe having the duty of carrying every scene.

I first saw this film in 1991, soon after it came out on video. It didn't play in theaters where I lived; not surprising, given its political content. It should be seen, though. It features a brilliant staging of the torture and interrogation techniques used by repressive societies to instill fear and obedience in its citizens. The country is never named, which makes it all the more striking. It could be anywhere; East, West, 3rd World, 1st World. It illustrates what happens when a small group of people decide what is best for everyone; when government becomes the ruler of the citizens, rather than the servant.

Madeleine Stowe is a children's author who has been dragged from her bed in the night and subjected to terror and torture. She finds herself in a room with Alan Rickman, a seemingly pleasant functionary. At first it seems a horrible mistake and she is free to go; but, fear causes her to remain and the terror escalates. She is increasingly subjected to physical and mental torture. The interrogator uses sensory deprivation, temporal manipulation, confusion, auditory manipulation, role play, and twisted logic to break down the author. She is humiliated and browbeaten, forced to endure strenuous bodily positions, deprived of food and water.

Through it all, she refuses to give in; to do what the interrogator asks. She is told that it will all end if she just signs a confession. A simple little act. She refuses. Through it all, she employs defense mechanisms that have developed since childhood. It is slowly revealed that she was the victim of childhood sexual abuse. To survive, she developed fantasy worlds and characters that would take her away from the abuse. These mechanisms allow her to transcend her torture and turn the tables on her interrogator. She starts attacking his own beliefs and profession, forcing him to examine his own life and motives. In the end, she is free, because she maintains the freedom of thought. The interrogator is the one trapped by the state.

This movie was made during the height of the Cold war, Apartheid, and at a time when the crimes of many governments throughout the world made daily news. It is even more timely in a world where "enemy combatants" are held and interrogated in secret prisons, denied legal rights or counsel; where "ethnic cleansing" lays waste to whole societies, and humanitarian aid is denied. It demonstrates that the individual can stand up to the state or other oppressor by refusing to give in to fear and terror.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A definite thinking film
desertrain-12 June 2004
I saw this movie only a few days ago at a convention, and was moved to think about a side of torture tactics that I had never examined. The power of mental abuse can surely override any physical abuse, and that is shown through Madeline Stowe's wondrous acting in this movie. Likewise, Alan Rickman brings to the screen a marvelous portrayal of a ruthless government interrogator. It is interesting, though, even while he tortures Stowe's character, how you see a bit of himself shine through his terrorist personality. It grabbed me, in the scene where she is blindfolded, and he is pretending to be someone else, how he lets the mask fall from his face even as his voice continues his work.

The basis of the plot is this: A children's book writer (Stowe) is arrested on the premise that her books hold subversive political ideas, trying to get children to go against the government. The writer continues to deny these allegations, even as she is questioned and eventually abused physically and mentally by a government agent (Rickman). The showing of these torture techniques is disturbing, and probably should not be watched by those who are squeamish about such things.

The film was made in partnership with Amnesty International in the early 90's. On the surface of this movie, I would have to agree with all their policies, but as with any movie of this sort, a viewer should not support the organization purely on the face of the movie screen, but it should spur the viewer to outside research. I believe that is what this movie does for many of us.

The upshot of this: I would say I enjoyed the movie, but 'enjoy' is not quite the right word. I would watch this movie again if the opportunity arose, and would also recommend it to anyone who has a taste for realistically disturbing movies.

4 stars out of 5.
28 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Simply Amazing, Simply Disturbing
LaelW28 November 2004
Closet Land. The title itself conjures up thoughts of secrets. And that is really what's at the heart of this Amnesty International film. Government secrets, personal secrets, both are integral pieces of this story.

By far the greatest acting seen in too long a time, both Alan Rickman and Madeleine Stowe were phenomenal in their portrayal of a Government Interrogator and Victim respectively. With only the two actors in this unusual standard length film, it is instantly clear that both actors were dedicated and talented enough to pull the viewer into this tiny bubble of a world and shut the door.

A WORD OF CAUTION...

What isn't mentioned on the description of this movie is that there is a subplot that deals with childhood sexual abuse. While there is no graphic detail about the abuse, the nature of it may be difficult for some viewers to watch - especially given the intensity of the film on whole.

I'm not a big fan of Amnesty International films, but this movie drew me in because the acting was so exceptional, and I can't help but make this movie one of my personal favorites.
35 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Way too real
BandSAboutMovies17 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
With Closet Land, Radha Bharadwaj became the first director of Indian descent to have a film released by a major Hollywood studio. This movie was produced by Ron Howard and Brian Grazer and basically only features two actors, Madeleine Stowe as Victim and Alan Rickman as Interrogator.

In an unspecified country and time, Victim is taken from her home in the middle of the night and accused of putting anti-government messages into her children's book Closet Land, a tale of a badly behaved girl who has been locked in a closet as a punishment. However, the totalitarian and anti-woman government assumes that the book is filled with anarchy.

The Interrogator believes that the author is guilty of propaganda created to stir dissent in the hearts of children, while Victim knows that she wrote it to cope with a childhood assault. Worse, the Interrogator later claims that he was the one who abused her in her childhood, but it's never explained if he's telling the truth or trying to assert his will over her.

By the end, no matter what tools the Interrogator attempts to use to get the truth, Victim refuses to sign a confession and instead goes to her death.

This is a movie that has survived based on word of mouth, as it was only released on VHS in the United States. It's never come out on DVD or blu ray, which is incredibly surprising.

Alan Rickman said of the film in Empire magazine. "Somewhere in there I made - and have continued to do - films that disappear without a trace. You still care about them...while I was doing that bigger budget films, I'd also done Closet Land, which I should think almost nobody saw."

In 2009, Bharadwaj said, "If the film has currency today, it is because of viewers like you. You have kept my film alive. You had the ingenuity to put it up on YouTube. You have engaged in chats and discussions about it. So the fact that the film is alive, and its influence is growing, is very much a testimony to what you can do." You can read more of her thoughts on the film on her personal website.

Seeing as how this film is impossible to get legally in the U.S. - unless you still have a VCR - I've decided to share it. My biggest worry is that this is the future our country is headed toward unless we learn empathy and limit the powers of those who crave it most.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Everyone who likes freedom should experience this film
wyrder6 February 2001
"Closet Land" tells a powerful story and has many different subtle elements. You could read lots of stuff about the movie's plot before hand, but you don't really need to. All you need to know is that the movie is all about an interrogation. Along the way, we learn lots of things about the interrogator and the person being interrogated. We also learn that the world can be a dark and scary place. Especially when you have absolutely no control over it.

In the end, the movie amounts to a warning (really though, the movie has several different aspects to it) about what happens to people's freedoms when they "look the other way" and ignore injustices happening to those around them.

If you've got about an hour and a half and know where you can rent this, I strongly recommend that you do so.
17 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
fascinating fairy tale
johan.milo7 June 2000
The good news: the director is reportedly committed to the cause of Amnesty International and eager to deliver a solid message about the freedom of expression and the evil of oppression. The plot is distinctly original and the actors are two of my absolute favourites. The not-so-good news: 'original' is not everybody's buzzword when visiting the movies or video stores. Also, noted critics like Mr Maltin and Roger Ebert have dismissed the film as a genuinely failed attempt to convert a play from stage into cinematic form. If I remember correctly, the title is taken from the fairy tale Stowe's character has written and which has made her a possible subversive and suspect person in the fictitious place where the story takes place. Her dreams are dangerous to the government, represented here by Rickman as the intense, manipulative interrogator. Since those two people are virtually the only ones appearing in the film altogether, the director is in for a real challenge in keeping the viewer's attention. In the end, I found the whole thing fascinating. Not flawless and definitely not for everyone, but rewarding. It's nowhere near a masterpiece like Kieslowski's 'A short film about killing' or as explanatory as 'Dead man walking'. But if you're into those films or any of Costa-Gavras political thrillers, you may appreciate this one as well. Just don't expect any overexplicit sermons or eyefilling action sequences.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant. Not for people easily upset by intense material.
draya105 January 2006
Even the trailer for this movie makes me cry, like the first time I saw this movie. Not for people who are easily upset by intense material! The finest performances by Alan Rickman and Madelaine Stowe, without a doubt. This dreadful tale of a society with the power to kidnap and torture it's citizens for ANY reason, whether they are anarchist's or the writer of children's books will chill you to the bone. I saw it when it first came out 1991 and I remember every frame. It still scares the hell out me today. It's happening now.

Apparently, IMDb requires ten lines to meet their criteria for a film review. IMDb might want to GET A GRIP! Some of us are a little more succinct about writing opinions.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great acting, upsetting story
HotToastyRag23 June 2019
Waking up blindfolded, handcuffed, and with no idea where you are or why you're there could be very scary. The start of Closet Land is filmed in black as Madeleine Stowe discovers her surroundings. Not until her blindfold is taken off does the screen show anything but darkness. The first thing she, and we, sees is Alan Rickman's very handsome face. Nothing can possibly go wrong!

Well, in this two-person psychological drama, that's not exactly the case. Alan plays mostly villains in his career, and as Madeleine is clearly the victim, there doesn't leave much room for him to take a heroic part. How cute is it, though, for Maid Marian and the Sheriff of Nottingham to be locked in a room together for ninety minutes? In theory, it's very cute. This movie is just about as far from cute as you can get. Madeleine is accused of inserting political propaganda into the children's books she writes, and to get her to confess, Alan uses any number of imaginative torture techniques. He tries being the good cop, the bad cop, blindfolding her and disguising his voice so she'll think there is more than one interrogator in the room, as well as physical violence. Some of these scenes are extremely tough to watch, and I don't recommend this movie for squeamish viewers with sensitive hearts. However, if you sat through Goya's Ghosts and lived to tell the tale, you'll survive this one.

Inserted into this dark script are a few very dry one-liners intended to be jokes. Madeleine complains of her treatment, and Alan quips that she's not enduring anything very bad, since most people endure cigarette burns. Then, when he does resort to that tactic and she cries out, he says, "You're not one of those anti-smoking activists, are you?" I don't think anyone's really supposed to laugh during this sadistic movie, but the jokes are probably supposed to show how terrible a villain Alan is. I will say this for the film: it's very difficult for a movie with a two-person cast to keep the audience's attention, and Closet Dark does. The two leads give very raw, upsetting performances, if you're prepared to watch them.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. There are several scenes that employ canted angles or swirling camera movement that will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to psychological torture and adult content, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Soft Core S&M disguised as political cautionary tale
celr11 February 2001
Closet Land is a nasty piece of work with superb actors. Nothing more (or less) happens in the movie besides the unending abuse of an attractive woman prisoner (mostly verbal) by a sadistic police official. The setting is minimalist. This might be considered soft core S&M porn because the drama is devoid of all reference points such as time, place, and political context. Since what happens is cut adrift in a fantasy futuristic environment, the abuse becomes purely personal. The pornographic aspects are justified by being a warning about the evils of totalitarian government, but because there is no real context for the torture of this young woman, we come away disturbed but having learned nothing.

What is the point? That torture exists in the world? That abusing prisoners is bad? That dictatorships abuse innocent people? We know that already. Closet Land has echoes of such works as Darkness At Noon and Ionesco's Rhinoceros, but both those works were made by competent artists whose work had historical context and depth of meaning. This film is amateurish and the dialogue sophomoric. A definite thumbs down.
9 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Scariest movie I know
kaiima30 May 2004
This movie gave me recurring nightmares, with Alan Rickman's voice representing an omnipotent, insidious, fascist ruler. The scariest movie I have ever seen - psychological terror more powerful than anything any "horror" movie has ever achieved. Alan Rickman's voice will always represent to me the power and terror of a totalitarian state, reminiscent of Orwell's 1984. This movie describes to those who don't care the reality of a large part of current world governments. This film is disturbing, but in a way that everyone should watch it - it's a description of a reality that no one should ever have to experience, but so many do.
24 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Pink Floyd...the Room?
agonizer19 October 2003
This movie includes 2 well known actors I have previously enjoyed watching. There actions are great and each action is heart felt. But it makes me think these 2 were thrown into a speech/drama class at college for the first time and told for one to act dominating and constricting to the other in a room without allowing her to leave and the woman to be truly innocent and treat her with enough mind-humping to drive the audience into tears for her release.

The only good part IS the acting abilities, the plot has the same ruse as Hitlers influence and I started to hate the protagonist for that. But all of this could have been done within 15 minutes in my opinion, so to drag it out for over an hour was just pure punishment for all who watched it.
6 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
well acted, excellent dialogue, believable
helpless_dancer13 November 1998
These 2 fine actors played off each other perfectly in this terrifying film. Rickman was very effective as the brainwashing and brainwashed interrogator. Stowe as the confused writer was good, letting the crafty Rickman convince her that he only wanted to go one step further, then one more, etc. This movie came off as something that could happen in a country plagued with a police state. Very good film.
22 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
More than it seems
lilith703 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
"Closet Land" was sponsored by Amnesty International and does have a lot of political overtones, but there's so much more to this richly stirring story than that...

This is not just about the political tension of the late 80s - it's about the personal persecution that a woman puts herself through as a child who was molested by a family friend. We see the subtle allusion to the parallels of a dishonest government/society structure and the culture of sexual predation where one in four young children are molested and one in three women has experienced some form of rape.

For me, it brings up a chilling chicken-and-egg question: does the attitude of our sexual repression-leading-to-predation create the political environment of fear and censoring, or does the socio-political dysfunction fuel a culture of sexual predation? The psychological ramifications of even asking this question force us to a place where we are brought to develop our own answers.

In the end, our young lady writer (Stowe) has a similar moment to the one at the end of Hensen's "Labyrinth" - she realizes in one shining, brilliant moment that the idea of having her power stolen from her by the secret police (Rickman) is an illusion. No one can steal your power - they can only trick you into giving it up, and then you have the right to take it back at any time.

This is not a movie to be entered into lightly, and you most certainly do ENTER it. The minimalist aspects coupled with the child-like animation stirs the deepest parts of the psyche and leaves no viewer unchanged.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Alan Rickman, take a bow, same too for its first-time writer/director Bharadwaj
Quinoa19849 April 2010
Closet Land is... something else. It's a movie about an interrogation, and one that ends on a note of a "message" (brought to you by Amnesty International, which is well intentioned but not the right note at the end of all of this). Up until then, it's an absolutely riveting display of acting prowess and technical marvel-work. Its bizarre execution comes from somewhere primal, somewhere from a filmmaker who wants to take you to some place that is rather unrelenting and sad about the human condition, where we put ourselves in a place we can't get out of - and, sometimes, how we can find a way to make it through, bit by bit.

It's like if Kafka had to do a remake of Saw and use nothing but politics. Oh, and cast Alan Rickman instead of Jigsaw and make it about a woman who writes children's stories and is accused of writing subversive literature hidden in her latest story 'Closet Land'... come to think of it, that's nothing like Saw at all (save for the bits of torture, which, gracefully, are kept at a distance).

Two things are striking here: the sets and lighting, and the performances (maybe that's three, who cares). It's a showcase for Bill Pope, later the mastermind behind lighting The Matrix, to really make this a claustrophobic but somehow baroque room the characters are in. We rarely leave it, save for those few flashes where Madeline Stowe imagines herself away with her creations, so the photographer has to come up with new ways to show us these people, in this very strange and oppressive environment. The other thing is the acting. If you ever want to look up 'underrated', here's the place.

In fact, I would make a bold statement: this is Alan Rickman at his very best. He's so good here because he makes this character unlikeable but hard to pin down. Is he a really bad person, or is he just crazy? Does he really believe what he's saying, as he breaks this woman, or does he mean it when he says "They're watching me, too", when talking to Madeline Stowe's children's writer. We get glimpses of his character's life before all of this madness. but it's hard to see how that informs the macabre, pitch-black comedy of when we wee him as the "other guard" when Stowe is blindfolded, cavorting and contorting around the room like a madman. He gets to go to town, and is sinister, subtle, even warm, and when he gets mad, you can feel it. Stowe, on the other hand, is given a more challenging task playing the victim, always on the alert but strong because of her own 'Closet Land' she developed as a child, not as any kind of political statement.

I believed both actors in the roles, no matter how horrifying things got, and the film-making is just direct and absorbing. There's a lot of dialog that they have to cover here, but it's never boring or slight. And, oddly enough, I don't think it would've worked as a play unless it was restructured or if things were cut out a bit. It is, for all of its 'wordyness', a cinematic piece, shot on a specific-film set, and given a musical score that, unless I was mistaken, sounded a helluva lot like Philip Glass (it says Richard Einhorn, but who cares). It's ultimately 'that' movie that you have to tell your friends about, since they probably never heard of it until you came across it on, say, Rickman's IMDb page. Among a small group of people, I imagine, it's one of the great little-seen films of the past twenty-five years: intelligent, provocative, adult film-making.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
eye opening
severus_snapepm6 June 2004
This film hits the heart with a reality like no other I have seen. It shows what us what we, in a democratic society, take for granted, and just what we are lucky enough not to be experiencing. The acting in the film is superb, sometimes you have to remind yourself that the movie is a dramatization, and not real life. Mr. Rickman does wonders with his role (as he does with all roles) making the interrogator fully dimensional and human. The set is incredible. It gives the feeling of 'in the round" theater. Which does not add or take away from the emotion of the action. This movie seeks to open the eyes of the viewer, and I'd say they have made a success of that goal.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I can't believe the number of people who thought this was good!
amrten23 November 2001
This is possibly the hands down worst movie every made, that actually took itself seriously. And not as a result of the acting, because being an actor, I have to say that Rickman and Stowe had to be at their best, just to escape needing electro convulsive therapy after the principle photography wrapped. Being one of the 57 people that actually saw this movie in theatrical release, I have to say I have never before or since experienced a movie where the movie ended, credits rolled, the house lights went on, and no one moved from their seats. About five minutes after the house lights went up people started coming out of their comas to look around, and I think most of us thought, okay we get it, that was a joke, right?, they are going to show the real movie now. Eventually, after the ushers handed out disguises, and we swore an oath of secrecy to never admit we were there, we felt that it was safe to leave, praying that we would not be seen leaving the auditorium. I have seen some pretty bad movies in my day, (I have Cinemax for goodness sakes), but I am still bitter that I will never, ever be able to recover those two or so hours of my life that I lost watching Closet Land.
7 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
disturbingly fascinating
kel-816 April 1999
I caught this movie late one night and never knew what hit me. This was one of the most disturbing movies I have ever seen, yet had me on the edge of my seat waiting to see what would happen next. Alan Rickman is an excellent "bad guy" but this character beats all others. I've never been so affected by a movie! It's been 6 years and I still can't forget "Closet Land."
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Closet Land
Perception_de_Ambiguity18 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
A female children book author (Madeleine Stowe) is kidnapped and finds herself in a room with a male interrogator (Alan Rickman) who appears to work for the government, accusing her that her latest book is a thinly veiled allegory of subversive nature. Trying to make her admit her guilt he uses various brutal, unethical and sexist methods.

Brought to you with the friendly support of Amnesty International 'Closet Land' is an anti-government/anti-authoritarian allegory of the most blatant kind, if you can even call it an allegory. More precisely it is about the abuse of power by the government in the form of torture in particular, and the abuse of power by authority in general. Torture in the name of the state of course is a very real thing, but in its details the theatrical scenario bears little resemblance to anything real even if one considers that it is set in the future, which this appears to be. And even taking into account the lack of a real context in the story concerning time and place, the author's behavior in this situation more often than not doesn't ring true to me.

What distinguishes this film from most other anti-authoritarian allegories is its feminist agenda which, however, comes in the form of vulgar self-victimization (Madeleine Stowe's nameless character even is credited as "Victim") and with a portion of misandry. Government is concluded to be a completely male domain. Males are per definition the victimizers and women are the victims, just like the government is per definition evil and the people are good. It also uses copious amounts of sexism as part of the interrogation/torture and a rape plot device which in a better film would probably seem fine but just adds more predictable elements to this unimaginative allegory, making them feel like clichés.

But it isn't all bad, at least towards the end it DOES have some interesting things to say that can make 'Closet Land' a nice conversation piece, most notably it forcefully drives home the point that the seeds of obedience to (male) authority and the acceptance of the (patriarchal) status quo are planted at a very young age, often through actions that may not even seem directly related to obedience to authority and so on. We unwittingly are all accomplices to the system in enforcing those ideals. Of course once the seed is planted in the impressionable child it is unlikely to go away, if anything it only grows. But this, like almost all other insights, is blatantly spelled out, in this case regrettably just after the film had made its point dramatically, if not subtly, at least as an integral part of the story.

The woman's martyrdom at the end (which is recognized as martyrdom more thanks to the swelling music and the pathos in the staging than from any heroism in her actions) is the expected final note before quoting some Amnesty International torture statistics and last but not least we get a Gandhi quote. The Amnesty International thing (the film apparently also was advertised a lot by linking it to the organization) actually wasn't meant to distract from its not very clever, on-the-nose, overzealous feminist message, at least not by director Radha Bharadwaj herself since that quote apparently was put there against her will and she opposes that her film is linked so closely to the human rights organization. Her film, after all, "ultimately has such a far-reaching scope", it would be a shame to "dismiss it as mere human rights propaganda". That's what SHE said.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disturbingly incredible...
maelitael4 November 2000
This is such an obscure film, but it was so powerful, I had to watch it a second time on the same night, just to be sure I didn't miss anything.

Alan Rickman is at his best in this film, essentially playing four characters: the ruthless interrogator, the sadistic torturer, the tortured witness, and the lost soul. Madeleine Stowe is as engaging as Rickman. Her strong-minded character put most of the modern, pop-culture action heroes to shame. This movie, at first, looks so simple, but it is one of the most complicated and layered films around.

As it has been stated, this movie could very easily have turned out to be a flop. The acting is some of the finest that can be seen from the last 20 or 25 years. This is so underrated, but I would not recommend it for everyone, least of all my generation (I'm only 17. Not many people my age would like or even understand "Closet Land."). In the movie age of special effects, explosions, explicit sex, and all-too-often pretty faces with poor acting and dialogue, "Closet Land" is one of the best films I've seen.
10 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
many layered movie
battat223 May 2000
This little two-person movie is actually much bigger than it looks. It has so many layers. I've watched it over and over, and always pick up on something new. I am amazed at the depth of the acting, and I feel if this movie had gotten wider release that there would be no question that Alan Rickman is a major star
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not for the fainthearted
Jambo-69 January 2000
This is the most difficult movie I have ever seen...the emotional content is horrific, yet unforgetable. A woman who is accused of being a political activist is brought in for questioning. The whole movie revolves around her interrogation. Alan Rickman and Madeline Stowe have intense and powerful roles for which they deserve Oscars for their performances.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Character Study
osXsurf22 August 2003
What would it be like to be accused of being a subversive? This is what this film explores through the eyes of 2 characters, one being the accused subversive, the other being the interrogator. It is a frightening journey from the beginning to the end. This film is not for everybody and if you do not understand political governments thoroughly, you will never get the point of this film, as proved by 90% of the reviews here.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Absolutely horrible
chad-3539 October 2006
I classify this as the worst movie of all time.

If there ever was a movie I would wish upon my enemies, this would be it. The plot is ridiculous, there are only 2 characters, and the coincidences between these characters just completely strain belief.

These factors combined to make this an extremely boring movie.

My wife and mother walked out on the movie about 15 minutes in. I figured that a movie this boring and slow *must* have some cool interesting plot twist, and a was quite disappointed when nothing exciting materialized.

I briefly considered sending the filmmakers a bill for my 2 hours of lost life.
6 out of 22 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