Watch: Blonde 2022 123movies, Full Movie Online – A fictionalized chronicle of the inner life of Marilyn Monroe..
Plot: From her volatile childhood as Norma Jeane, through her rise to stardom and romantic entanglements, this reimagined fictional portrait of Hollywood legend Marilyn Monroe blurs the lines of fact and fiction to explore the widening split between her public and private selves.
Smart Tags: #female_rear_nudity #marilyn_monroe_character #female_nudity #female_frontal_nudity #abortion #oral_sex #traumatic_childhood #fellatio #hand_job #female_full_frontal_nudity #erection #actress_as_protagonist #actress #based_on_real_person #sex_while_on_the_phone #film_within_a_film #threesome #hollywood_california #vagina #female_protagonist #parent
|5.5/10 Votes: 48,169|
|42% | RottenTomatoes|
|50/100 | MetaCritic|
|N/A Votes: 765 Popularity: 68.868 | TMDB|
What a truly disappointing film this is. It offers us a really slow, sterile and disjointed – almost episodic – depiction of just how Marilyn Monroe’s life might have panned out. For a start, I couldn’t decide whether Ana de Armas was really Lady Gaga or Scarlett Johansson (both of whom would have acquitted themselves better, I’d say) as she offers an admittedly intense, but remarkably uninvolved performance. We move along from chapter to chapter in her life hindered by some fairly weak and uninspiring dialogue and seriously intrusive scoring in what becomes an increasingly shallow and lacklustre fashion. The photography does try hard – it does offer us a sense of intimacy, but the whole thing is presented in such a stylised and un-natural manner that it is frequently difficult to tell whether she is/was a “real” woman. Her marriages are treated in an almost scant manner – and her relationship with JFK is reduced to something rather implausibly one-sided and sordid showing nothing of how their relationship might have come to be. It has no soul, this film. Aside from her glamour – which was, even then, hardly unique we are not really introduced to any of the nuances of her character, we are left guessing a lot of the time as to just how she did become such a superstar, and how she spiralled so inevitably into a maelstrom of booze and pills. It relies to a considerable extent on the viewer’s existing knowledge of, and affection for, this flawed lady. Adrien Brody and Bobby Cannavale don’t really have much chance to add anything as her husbands and the highly speculative relationship between her and Charlie Chaplin Jnr (Xavier Samuel) and his sexually ambiguous partner-in-crime Edward G Robinson Jr (Scoot McNairy) does suggest something of the rather profligate and debauched existence that some lived in Hollywood, but again their characters are also largely undercooked and again, we are largely left to use our own imagination. It is far, far too long and in a packed cinema, I could see people looking at the ceiling just once too often. Watchable, certainly, but a real missed opportunity to offer us something scintillating and tantalising about this most of iconic of women.
This is a movie that shows no other side of Marylin than her being miserable. While watching this movie, if you try to fact-check stuff, you realize that many parts of it are fictitious. Then as you continue watching the movie, you wonder what you’re watching. This movie is neither a good representation of reality nor a good work of fiction…
If you’re going to fictionalize the life of one of the movie icons of the 20th century why go there, to the darkest dark. There are some “invented” moments that are, quite frankly, unforgivable. What kept me glued to the screen was Ana de Armas. A tremendous show of talent and fearlessness. I was wondering what the experience would have been to watch it in a theater with other people? I don’t know because in the privacy of my own home I was free to stand up and walk away to pour myself a drink and shout at the screen. The awful Kennedy episode for instance. Why? That episode in particular made me question the intention of the filmmakers. So, yes, I can say now that I’ve seen it. Loved some it and detested some it.
There is so much in this film to talk about, to be honest I’m not sure where to start and if my opinion will change whilst writing this review!
I’ll start with the areas of the film that I liked! Ana De Armas was absolutely spectacular, well with what she was given to do in this film (although some of it I didn’t like but I don’t think thats her fault…..I’ll come on to that later). I wasn’t actually that skeptical about her casting whatsoever because she is a fantastic actress and this film only proves that more and more! For me one of, if not the shining light/ standout of the film! Congrats to her!
All the other actors where also good in their respective roles but I’d also like to shoutout Adrien Brody. Always been a solid actor that now and then shows flashes of brilliance. I thought he was yet again very good in this film and a compliment too De Armas performance, when on screen together.
I’ll combine the last two areas I liked together because they are due to the actions of the same person. Andrew Dominik! The directing in this film is unique, special, engaging and magical at times. Every frame was a feast on the eyes and something I really enjoyed. 100% transported you back to the 1950’s for sure. Loved the black and white usage and the frame format as well. The last area of the film I liked was the depiction of mental illness in this film. As Dominik wrote/directed this film for the screen I’d like to applaud his honest, brutal and true depiction of what mental illness can look like and what affect it can have on people. Also especially how it was treated back in those days, which is obviously very different from todays times.
For me personally that is where my love for the film stops!
There are so many issues/ things to tackle in this film that I’m not sure I’ll have enough character space in this review haha. I’ll start by mentioning something I read a while back about this film from the director himself Andrew Dominik. I’m paraphrasing here but he said that “Blonde” would “offend people and that not everyone would like it for its bold choices” not word for word but something to that affect. I was pretty shocked and intrigued why a director would say that about his own film before it was released? Maybe to get more publicity? Or did he know himself that what he had created was controversial?
Some of the characterisation of Monroe in this film is so so over the top almost to the point of caricature. Hence why I mentioned earlier that I felt De Armas did the best what she was given with. I don’t wanna hear the word “Daddy” again, it almost made me sick!
The extremely uncomfortable attempt to “try” and somehow connect childhood abuse with abortion is just truly dumbfounding and so bizarre. I’m really not sure what Dominik was thinking? Or maybe I’ve misinterpreted that completely and its my fault…..in that case I’m the idiot hahahah. Plus witnessing the “inside” of Monroe was something I didn’t want or need……why????
The jumps in time and pacing of the film is extremely jarring. This film is a really slog, slow and boring at times, it feels almost like a 4 hour film its so slow. Which contradicts the constant amount of jumps in time in the life of Monroe. Plus it is just jumping from one horrific moment in her life to another, which isn’t the nicest experience in the world.
The last complaint I have is the use of John F Kennedy in this film. It’s funny, whilst I was watching the film and nearing the end I was wondering whether they were even gonna cover JFK & Monroe or just leave it alone because it might be too controversial. As soon as I had that thought…….bang!…… Intro Monroe giving JFK a blowjob!! Like what was Dominik thinking? I’m sure he only added this to be purposely controversial and get word of mouth. (oh I’m sorry I honestly didn’t mean to use the word mouth after mentioning that scene lol). The world knows there was a “relationship” of some sorts between the two people however we didn’t need to see this!!! Totally unnecessary!
I’ve also noticed that this film was based on a book. I have not read that book so it be really interesting to see the POV of someone who has read that and watched this, to see what was not included??
Overall there are some aspects of this film that I think are great and are truly one of a kind. That bring a certain magic and swagger to the screen. However they are overshadowed by some really questionable and bizarre choices by Andrew Dominik. Like I realised this film was gonna be bleak and I don’t mind that in film however this one occasionally makes funerals look like discos!
So much potential and some bright parts however something I have no feel to watch again soon. Feel sorry for Ana De Armas for not having a film around her to the same level as her performance! I’m feeling very generous so I’d give it a light 70% out 100 however I could easily give it a 60 or a 50.
Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 47 min (167 min)
Genre Biography, Drama, Romance
Director Andrew Dominik
Writer Andrew Dominik, Joyce Carol Oates
Actors Ana de Armas, Lily Fisher, Julianne Nicholson
Awards 2 nominations
Production Company N/A
Sound Mix Dolby Digital
Aspect Ratio 1.00 : 1 (some scenes), 1.37 : 1 (most scenes), 1.85 : 1 (some scenes), 2.39 : 1 (some scenes)
Camera Arri Alexa Monochrome, Panavision PVintage and Petzval lenses (some scenes), Sony CineAlta Venice, Panavision PVintage, H-Series, Petzval and Leitz SUMMILUX-C lenses
Laboratory Company 3, New York (NY), USA (color and finish) (dailies) (digital intermediate), EFILM Digital Laboratories, Hollywood (CA), USA (digital intermediate)
Film Length N/A
Negative Format AXS-R7, Codex
Cinematographic Process ARRIRAW (3.4K) (source format), Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format), Spherical (source format), X-OCN ST (4K) (6K) (source format)
Printed Film Format DCP Digital Cinema Package, Video (UHD)