Adri Smith I found this film to be not so much enjoyable to watch, it was intense. I did not agree with other reviewers that the way was making any attempt at misandry. She simply got her point across, in a very calculated manner. I did not find her mentally ill. She's an ignored wife, and she expressed how she felt about it. There is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps her way of doing it was beyond what anyone would imagine could happen to them on their birthday. It' s easy to see that Steve is absorbing her message, he has no real choice. He felt trapped, alone, confused, and isolated. It may be exactly what Alexandra had been feeling for quite some time. I gave it an 8 because it's like nothing I'd ever seen in a film before. I could relate to Alexandra, I once was in that kind of isolated place. Although I simply left.

gradyharp Rolf de Heer both wrote and directed this strangely fascinating and equally disturbing 2003 film for a cast of two. It takes chances (both male and female full frontal nudity among them), relates a tale that will likely make the viewer cringe and have some bad dreams, depends solely (well, practically solely) on two actors to pull this off, and in the end brings to the table a story of a terminally dysfunctional marriage.Steve (Gary Sweet) and Alexandra (Helen Buday) live a middle class existence with their two children in Australia. After a strangely cold beginning - today is Steve's birthday and his two children and Alexandra have plans for an evening's celebration. Steve seems to start the day in an amorous mood but Alexandra is surprisingly unresponsive: Steve's attention is disturbed by the fat, ugly security systems installer neighbor (Bogdan Koca) who is constantly watering his garden. Steve is off, and at work his colleagues present him with a surprise birthday party AND an advancement in his company. When Steve returns home, his house is deserted and darkened with almost all the light bulbs missing, all easy access outside cut off and a videotape waiting for him, a videotape labeled 'play me'. Plugging the tape in Steve is instructed to get a beer and sit and watch what is about to unfold. On the tape Alexandra lays out her complaints about their marriage - Alexandra's feeling of abandonment, lack of sexual fulfillment, lack of intimacy, no control over the direction of her life. One of her biggest complaints is that Steve 'married her body' and made love at her, not with her. In an attempt to regain control of her body and her life Alexandra does some sexually perverse things on the tape to humiliate both Steve and the 'body' he married. She explains her grievances with him, her reasons for disappearing with the children and her revenge for how he treated her in a way he would never forget. The proceedings on the tape become real-time and the result of how Steve and Alexandra cope forms the surprise ending to this little sour film.Both Sweet and Buday give convincing performances and the progress of the tape watching keeps the viewer's attention. Much of the back story for the film is left to the viewer's imagination but as far as the experience the script offers, it is a tough and strongly acted experience. Grady Harp

Rotary68 After watching this movie, I read reviews here that were very tough on Alexandra. I was two (I'm male), but upon rewatching the early scenes, I realized I missed some important clues, many of which I haven't seen in a lot of the reviews.1) Steve is clearly a sex addict. His marital behavior indicates that, as does the brief scene in a cafe with a young woman. While he did not beat Alexandra, he was pretty tough on her, and I question whether she had organisms. As I considered this, I felt more sympathy for Alexandra. 2) The symbolism of the scene where he fast-forwards through her speech on the tape is obvious in the sense that he didn't care to hear what she said. But some commented that he did not know how she felt. Perhaps he did. Perhaps she had told him, he didn't want to hear it then, and he doesn't now. 3) I believe the items in the drawer had to do with passports. Note then that as the taxi with the kids pulled away, Alexandra said good-bye with finality. I don't think she was joining those kids. The neighbor sounded German. Perhaps he arranged for them to be sent to Germany. Obviously, if she joined the kids, it's likely that somewhere along the line the kids would give away what happened. This is still a plot concern, but not as much if she never joins them. 4) The shower scene makes it pretty clear that she hates what she's doing and/or is about to do. On several levels, possibly. Her expressions make this clear, as well. It reinforces my thought that she never expect to see her kids again. It may even reflect on what she may be expecting in the future--perhaps even on the failure of her marriage. 5) On the other hand, it's hard to see how she got away with being a prostitute in that housing complex with men coming and going all day. 6) I agree that it's hard to believe Steve could be so crushed as not to call the police. Unless he has had some issue with them over his sex addiction (nothing indicated, though). 7) The cancer scene was effective, but superfluous. 8) It does seem hard to believe the kids were so well adjusted and never picked up on the tensions. All told, I'm not sure Alexandra was crazy so much as simply fed up and consumed with hatred over what she had become because of her marriage. As I said, I had more sympathy for her after rewatching the early scenes. Taking pride in being a prostitute, which she did to some extent, is not a great way to live or value oneself.

ikanboy An interesting attempt to show the depth of hatred engendered by a husband's oblivious abuse of his wife. A man comes home to what he expects to be a "surprise" birthday party only to find his family gone, his house trashed and all the security mechanisms turned against him, effectively making him a prisoner. He puts on a Video that is wrapped as a present and sits down to watch his wife cheerily greeting him with what starts off as a birthday greeting but turns into an ever more evolving and prolonged dismemberment of him as a callous misogynist.The movie stays interesting for about an hour, but slowly the wife's bile spills over and righteous anger turns into venomous, sadistic rage, and becomes a Misandrous screed. She is not content to eviscerate his ego but to deprive him for ever of his children, and at this point it seems that the punishment no longer fits the crime, and the "victim" has become a soulless, sadistic, avenger. Is it intended for us to see her as much a victimizer as he is? From the final moments of the film it seems clear that the Director intends to simply present us with punishment not epiphany.***************SPOILER******************************** I liked how the Video goes from "tape" to "live."