All I See Is You

Strange, surreal and compelling, All I See Is You is a dreamy exploration of a marriage, and what happens when all of its imbalances and insecure quirks are suddenly thrust out in the open. It’s also something of a thriller, and the two worlds don’t mesh in a way that is completely satisfying. Still, it’s riveting to watch everything unfold.

Refreshingly resistant to predictability.

Forster gets decent performances from Lively and Clarke, but the overall impression “All I See” leaves is of a picture that fails to live up to its filmmaker’s ambitions.

Marc Forster’s meandering, slow-burning tale has elements that might have attracted Polanski or Almodovar but eventually settles for a psychological thriller that is a little too enigmatic for its own good.

This is a visually arresting film with two attractive and charismatic lead actors, but it’s doomed by the melodramatic twists and turns, and the ridiculous behavior by nearly every major character.

The movie’s ambitions are misguided, which makes it all too fuzzy of an experience.

By the time All I See Is You works its way toward what should be an emotionally charged conclusion, most reasonable audiences will have likely already checked out. All they'll see is their wristwatches, as they count down to when the whole misjudged exercise is over.

ชอบองค์แรกของเรื่องมาก ที่ภาพจริงมันตัดสลับกับภาพที่นางเอกจินตนาการไว้ในช่วงที่ตาบอด มันสวยและน่ากลัวในเวลาเดียวกันมันทำไรคนดูเข้าใจความรู้สึกของคนตาบอดเลย ถือว่าการแสดงของนางเอกและงานภาพผ่าน แต่เนื้อเรื่องและปมต่างๆกลับทำได้ไม่ดีนัก บทมันไม่ส่งอารมณ์ให้คนดูเลย เดินเรื่องเนือยๆจนน่าเบื่อและองค์ท้ายมันเหมือนรีบจบไปหน่อย แทนที่จะเข้าใจง่ายกลับงง ว่าตกลงหนังจะสื่อถึงอะไรกันแน่

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

A solid idea with good direction and good performances by Lively and Clark but beyond that, the story is weak, it feels like it doesn't know what it wants to be. It's a cheap thriller, could have been more if the story had been more fleshed out.

"All I See Is You" is a cheap thriller with little to no actual content; it's hopelessly boring, not in the slightest exciting and mostly just annoyingly art-house.

Who would invest $30Million on a movie project with such an under developed plot – that it left ¾ of the viewing audience up in arms? Someone did, and lost it all! Sex obsessed German Born writer, producer, director Marc Foster is no stranger to making movies that lose massive amounts of money (Stay’05 - Machinegun Preacher’11). Here, he seems more interested in padding out time by creating a myriad of overlong, experimental ways to illustrate what a sight-impaired person may (or may not) see. His leading characters are an unlikeable married couple (she’s blind, he’s the ‘carer’) who seem only interested in taunting each other in demeaning ways. Along the way they spend some time with other sexually weird family members - this ends up inducing further ways to seriously unhinge each other. As this rather nasty obscene mess progresses - it becomes increasingly difficult to find many redeeming qualities, situations, or someone to humanely identify with (the husband, even with his character defects comes across as the more balanced!) Without offering the audience many logical explanations to ponder – the majority of viewers simply give up and long for an end to the torture (see the many international reviews). Only the over emotional or those who like to make excuses for bad writing would get much satisfaction from this tosh. A waste of near two Hrs and a lot of money - with pretty pictures not atoning for a weak script. Yet another example of Foxtel classifiers getting it wrong – an American R (deservedly so) played as an Aussie M. Who trains these (possibly desensitized staff?) Viewers require supplied information they can trust - to effectively evaluate content.