UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Fantasy >

No Such Thing

No Such Thing (2002)

March. 29,2002
|
6
|
R
| Fantasy Drama Horror

A young journalist journeys to Iceland to find her missing fiancé only to encounter a mythical creature who longs to die.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Reviews

sanjsrik
2002/03/29

Imagine something that should not be? Imagine that it is and we made it so because we needed to believe in monsters to make us more human? This isn't a movie about good and evil or death or ugliness. It's about the beauty that we possess because we consign the ugly nature to something that we can point to and say "that is not us", to make us justified that we are not it.If you see one movie, see this one. It's subtle. Watch it more than once. Watch it a few times and leave your disbelief at the door. Every actor who isn't a caricature of whom they need to be is simply just heartbreaking. The acting is comic while being better than you could ever imagine. The lines, while cartoonish in some cases, resonate and make the story.The monster is us and we are not him. That's why this movie is so good.

More
Wuchak
2002/03/30

Released in 2001, "No Such Thing" was originally called "Monster," which is the superior title. Why? Because the film's about a literal monster, played by Robert John Burke, who looks like a cross between Satan, a reptile and a grouchy dude. The monster's been alive for millennia and is virtually indestructible. He dwells in bored solitude on an island off the coast of a remote area of Iceland where he occasionally terrorizes the villagers, kills people and blows flames from his mouth. Sarah Polley plays the protagonist, Beatrice, whose husband is killed by the creature along with a team of reporters. She's assigned the mission of finding out what the "legend" is all about and, after tragic bypass, meets the monster who stirs her compassion to put him out of his misery. Helen Mirren plays a loathsome news media executive and Julie Christie a doctor who helps rehabilitate Beatrice.Needless to say, this is an odd dramedy/fantasy that's so unique there's really "No Such Movie," which explains the mixed reviews. It successfully meshes the depth of inhuman evil with the height of genuine spirituality with generous does of comedy, drama, satire and tragedy. It comes as no surprise that it's an American Zoetrope picture, the studio founded by Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas at the start of the 70s and known for filmmaking expertise that generally eschews 'blockbuster' syndrome. In fact, Coppola is the executive producer of "No Such Thing." Unfortunately, 'unique' doesn't always mean great. My wife & I viewed "No Such Thing" in 2011 and were somewhat bored, even while there are undeniable entertaining elements, but I viewed it again last night and, while still finding it boring in some ways, I enjoyed it more. For instance, the monster is sometimes laugh-out-loud funny and the spiritual parts are palpable. Moreover, I was able to figure out what the film's all about, at least in my humble opinion. It's this factor – the film's insightful and fascinating MEANING – that breaks the threshold of greatness and inspires me to rate it as high as I do. See my explanation below for more details.The film runs 102 minutes and was shot in Iceland and New York City.GRADE: B+ ***SPOILER ALERT*** (DON'T read further unless you've seen the film) Imagine if you could live forever, what would you do? Imagine the potential for growth and learning! You could learn how to travel the cosmos and discover the answers to life's greatest mysteries. Now consider being indestructible and imagine the capacity for being a benign force in the world and universe, destroying evil wherever you go, etc. The monster in the movie possesses these incredible gifts and yet doesn't take advantage of them. All he does is mope around in a hateful, self-pitying fog, drinking booze, cussing people out – or threatening & killing 'em – and wishing he were dead.The monster represents people who are blessed with the gift of life and foolishly squander it on drugs, alcohol and various time-wasters (and I'm not talking about proper r & r, which is healthy); others misuse the gift of life to grumble, hate, slander, steal, abuse, destroy and murder. It's no accident that the creature looks like Satan himself. These types of people are all around us. Now imagine if these miserable, loathsome folks were immortal. What would they be like in a few million years? They'd be like the monster in the movie. The media executive (Mirren) is roughly 60 years old and she's on the same course as the creature, as are other individuals in the story.Beatrice is the Christ-figure who figuratively dies and is resurrected. Like the Messiah, she responds in love to the hate, crime and self-destruction that infects the world. When she meets the monster she observes that there is no hope for him; there's no love in him, no good, no possibility for redemption. The only compassionate thing she can do is assist him in attaining his ultimate desire: destruction.This destruction is a type of the lake of fire or "second death" where the bible says God will "DESTROY both soul and body" (Matthew 10:28). What's the purpose of this "second death"? The Creator is essentially doing what Beatrice does in the film and for the same reasons.If Beatrice is the saintly "Christ-figure" why does she morph into a loose woman who has a one-night-stand at the end? Because she's only a TYPE of Christ and, as such, is still wholly human, possessing the potential for moral failure. She falls after constant contact with the irredeemable creature for an extended period. The apostle Paul put it like so: "Bad company corrupts good character." This explains why Beatrice tells the monster she fears him at the end while simultaneously hugging (loving) him: She needed to carry out her duty -- compassionately putting the creature out of its misery -- because his intrinsic evil was starting to rub off!

More
pommesmitsalbe
2002/03/31

This was probably the second worst movie I've ever seen - topped only by "Critical Mass". I actually enjoy independent films a lot but this one is just a very bad attempt at producing something artistic. The story is completely pathetic and does not make any sense - there are approximately one hundred mistakes or inconsistencies in it. They cannot seem to decide whether to make it a comedy or a dark drama. In addition, every single actor in "No Such Thing" could easily be nominated for a "worst actor" Emmy. However, the inferiority of the acting and the movie's senselessness is almost funny. This is actually all I have to say about this movie but Internet Movie Data Base requires me to write at least ten lines. So I do not want to conceal that the monster's costume was pretty poor too, making it look like a green faced human with horns. It is supposed to be a billion year old creature who has witnessed the dawn of creation, one could expect to behave quite wise. Instead, it is acting like my wife's little teenage brother. The woman first comes across very cool and mature, just to turn into some goofy girl later for no apparent reason. She may have been badly influenced by the monster's demeanor.

More
glen-88
2002/04/01

They call this flick a dark comedy, but it fails in both.The monster makeup and the character is interesting enough, and Polley does a decent job of playing a naive girl thats being manipulated by her boss, but there was a lot of potential for story wasted in very long drawn out scenes.I understand the film is a cross between beauty and the beast and a modern commentary on media corruption or some such but it just doesn't hit home. The characters are almost too withdrawn for the audience to make any kind of meaningful connection and potentially humorous situations go by without even a chuckle.It felt like certain characters and elements of the film were thrown together at the last second (ie the wonderful actress Helen Mirren had little to no poignant moments in the film) and a lot of it just felt like the director was trying to "wing it" until he got to climax..which wasn't all that well constructed or climatic.I really liked the actors in the film but I think they really didn't have much to go on script wise. Perhaps under a different writer and director the flick could have been more impactful and humorous or darker and more moody..but as it stands its just a post-modernistic soup of ideas and no real point.

More