Velvet Buzzsaw | Official Trailer | Netflix Feb 1 Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo, Toni Collette

Oct 25, 2017
191
The trailer really does cover the entire plot and encompasses all the best parts of the movie. It has a fun energy to it that the actual movie is totally missing too.
 
Oct 27, 2017
713
I quite liked it. The horror parts are basically second fiddle to the comedy of a (blunt as hell) critique of the exploitative LA art industry but I enjoyed it overall, particularly the visuals and Jakey G's character. I think a couple of the jump scares were really unnecessary however and some of the deaths involved a REALLY bad case of stupid-horror-protagonist syndrome
 
Oct 30, 2017
345
I liked a lot of this, especially how slow it was, but I did think it was a bit of a mess at times. I felt the relation between the nature and presentation of the deaths and the story elements was way too shallow, and it speeds up at the end to its own detriment.

The cast was great, though.

Gotta give props to Tom Sturridge in particular. He played the white middle-class South African douche perfectly and his accent one of the best I've heard (it also helped that his dialog was well written in our dialect, and Jon Dondon is just the sort of name you'd except).
 
Oct 26, 2017
4,798
Watched last night with 2 others. They thought it was bad and the other awful. I won't ever watch again, but I thought it was good. The difference between the 3 of us? I went in 100% blind with no trailer. With 0 expectations or thoughts like, "come on, this guy gonna die already?" it felt like a fine pace.
 
Last edited:

Zabo

Member
Oct 30, 2017
388
Ok movie, I guess. I liked pretty much everything about it when it came to the art world stuff, but the horror aspect of the movie was disappointing. Horror is dam difficult genre to direct and Gilroy didn't have it. Night Crawler remins his best work and Buzzsaw and Roman J. Israel are far behind.
 
Oct 30, 2017
3,274
Gyllenhaal was fantastic. He has such a dominating onscreen presence and he continues to fly under the radar. He is mad talented.

Movie itself has a really plodding second act. As a short film, I feel like it could have been something really good. Instead we sit around [spoiler[watching unlikeable characters get killed off one by one[/spoiler]

I will say,
Hoboman is fucking terrifying
and the scene where
Jon Don Don thinks Peirs's trash is an installation
and
Toni Collete's character is mistaken for an installation
was pretty fantastic and spot-on with art critique snobbery. It gave me flashbacks to attending countless art exhibitions with my wife while she was getting her M.F.A.
 
Dec 28, 2018
851
The trailer gave too much of the film away...
Also, I'd much prefer if it was just a film about the art scene without the horror.
 
Oct 25, 2017
616
That was okay. The trailer made the movie look more high engery and the horror was tame. Kills were to quick and no suspense. Jake G. Is the best thing in the movie hands down!
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,341
It's sadly just a high concept, disjointed and blandly executed B-tier slasher.

I feel similarly to this movie as I did Nightcrawler. That movie was great in a lot of ways but just never came together fully to me. I'm thinking its something more with Gilroy as a director too, he has been very inconsistent if you look at all 3 films so far, and he was a bad fit for this.

This was tremendous in concept, some really good execution, but ultimately something is just extremely off about the final product. Here its a bit more blatant than Nightcrawler (which I thought had similar issues) but a lot mpre like Roman J Israel, because the script itself is very sloppy and unfovused with lots of pacing issues and too many character viewpoints that story beats that are completely half baked. This needed to be entirely focused on Morf but it jumps around way too often.

A lot of it looks flat, cheap, stilted somehow, with some boring cinematography and really iffy editing with those fade outs. Really strange because it keeps dancing in and out of potential greatness but never comes close enough consistently. Netflix movies seem to have this as a recurring issue for some reason, but I think there were bigger issues going on that were unrelated completely.

This needed more of an atmospheric director; a David Lynch, Oz Perkins, Denis Villenueve, Kyoshi Kurasawa, Sion Sono, Yorgos Lanthimos, hell even Ari Aster from Hereditary....someone with that kind of discomforting eye and a touch of dark humor to make the concept really work.

Gyllenhaal was really great and continues to be extremely talented; needed way more Malkovich. Felt like Colette was wasted.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
41
Philadelphia
I skipped the trailer and went in blind. It was bad.
The idea definitely had some potential but could have maybe used a more intense descent into horror?
The setups were all rather formulaic with everyone just ending up alone and UH OH THE ART!

I still loved - Gyllenhaal's acting. All of Malkovich's scenes. The comedy of Natalia Dyer's entire arc. Daveed Diggs standing naked in the kitchen for the "WE WERE ON A BREAK" scene.
But otherwise I agree, very disjointed and bland.
 

hoju

Member
Oct 25, 2017
338
Eh, Netflix has a lot of good movies. From what I’ve heard they give creators total freedom, Gilroy just fumbled this one.
But what a bummer this movie is. I love all the actors but even they couldn’t save this.

The assistant always finding the bodies gag was funny tho
 
Aug 15, 2018
522
??
Yea I liked Gilroys other two movies and I liked this one up until maybe the half way point. It just doesn’t have much focus, which Roman J Israel suffered from, but this is much worse in that regard.

However, that line in the bar where Josephina asks the bartender if her car is safe out there, and the bartender replies “how the fuck should i know” is the best movie line in the past five years
 
Nov 11, 2017
1,758
I fucking loved it. Jake in particular was a wonder as always. Movie had pretty much everything I could have wanted. Tons of great moments of comedy and horror and tension.
 
Oct 28, 2017
709
I loved Nightcrawler.

But this? Tonally, music, lighting, editing, it was just all over the place. It never clicked into place at all, it wasn’t cutting enough, funny enough, dramatic enough, and the 80s slasher bits weren’t well enough done to be scary or impactful, but not ironically enough done to be funny and tongue in cheek.
 
Oct 25, 2017
504
Saskatchewan
Didn’t like it. Horror parts weren’t scary, criticizing the art world is low hanging fruit and didn’t feel like it did anything unique with it. Felt like they could’ve pushed it funnier because it did feel like it was capturing something of a cheesy 80s thing. Like a 2hr episode of Are You Afraid of the Dark.

Was expecting s twist at the end involving the assistant who kept working for whoever died next. Instead we got an “booo, spooky” evil paintings are gonna go viral and keep killing.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,515
This was surprisingly awful. I see why it went straight to Netflix. Like, most of the performances can across as comedic, like no one was taking the material seriously.
 
Nov 13, 2017
3,329
The trailer was better than the movie. This felt like something I would watch on the SyFy network, or find in a Walmart DVD bin. Everything about it felt so cheap? Almost like a student film.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,722
Ontario
I was enjoying the first half of this movie, and then it kind of fell apart. I feel like this movie would've been way better without the horror aspects. Keep the same setup, but just letting the people obsess over those paintings (rather than having silly scenes where the paintings come alive and kill you), and focus on the human conflicts like obsession, jealousy, backstabbings and such.
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,279
Movies like this never really work because you don't care about the characters when they're soon cartoony and unreal. It was mildly amusing but had little to no hooks in for the viewer. The people are dicks and not particularly relatable or real people. So fuck em. Needed to be more lurid or more grounded.
 

Swig

Member
Oct 28, 2017
516
Wasn't as good as I was hoping for after seeing the trailer. Jakes acting was great for the character he played. It was okay, but I was disappointed because I was expecting more.
 
Oct 30, 2017
860
This was surprisingly awful. I see why it went straight to Netflix. Like, most of the performances can across as comedic, like no one was taking the material seriously.
It was obviously just another paycheque for most of them. I’d love to see what JM was paid for the 5 minutes he was in the movie.

This movie was fucking dog shit with literally no redeeming qualities except for Jake’s acting which was great. People shit on Polar but at least it clearly had some thought put into it. If my wife hadn’t forced me to watch it, I probably still would have continued watching just to see how bad the ending was. (It was bad).
 
Nov 1, 2017
1,555
Eh, Netflix has a lot of good movies. From what I’ve heard they give creators total freedom, Gilroy just fumbled this one.
But what a bummer this movie is. I love all the actors but even they couldn’t save this.

The assistant always finding the bodies gag was funny tho
I think Netflix giving creators total freedom is why so many respected filmmakers come to Netflix and make their worst movie. Sometimes studio notes can be a good thing.
 
Oct 28, 2017
3,797
Kansas
I can't remember the last time I was so disappointed by a movie :(

I wish there was more Malkovich. From the trailer I thought he'd at least have a role in the film, but instead he has like 8 minutes of screen time and a handful of lines that really don't matter at all. You can remove his character from the movie entirely and absolutely nothing about it changes.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,807
I can't remember the last time I was so disappointed by a movie :(

I wish there was more Malkovich. From the trailer I thought he'd at least have a role in the film, but instead he has like 8 minutes of screen time and a handful of lines that really don't matter at all. You can remove his character from the movie entirely and absolutely nothing about it changes.
So funny that in the end the first thing I asked was "what the fuck happened to his character" and then it's just him on the beach jerking off
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,028
New York
Could have been interesting, but it was just whatever. The whole artist angle was woefully underdeveloped and the deaths and stuff just kind of happened. Acting was all over the place and had a good cast, but they didn't really have anything to work with. Shame as I love Gyllenhaal and thought his character had a lot more potential.
 
May 29, 2018
1,189
I am one of the few people who thought Nightcrawler was mediocre at best. Gilroy works in broad strokes, his characters are caricatures. I am aware it's satire, but a little subtlety wouldn't hurt.
And Velvet Buzzsaw is even worse in this regard.

Also, I always feel like Gyllenhaal is ACTING, there's not much nuance to his performances.
I realize this might be a hot take, but that's the impression I usually get.
 
Oct 25, 2017
191
Omaha, NE
Watched this with my wife last night. We both enjoyed Nightcrawler quite a bit. This was a strange movie but it kept my interest throughout. Gyllenhaal's character is easily the highlight for me and made me laugh out loud a few times. The tone was all over the place and so was the pacing, but it's worth a watch in my opinion.
 
Oct 28, 2017
3,797
Kansas
So funny that in the end the first thing I asked was "what the fuck happened to his character" and then it's just him on the beach jerking off
This was my thought too. I was hoping it would be something more sinister, like the paintings and drinking drove him mad and he created some revolutionary art, but in the end....he was just spinning on a beach with a stick. One of the tamest ways they could possibly make him "crazy".
 
Oct 27, 2017
556
The admiration I had for Gilroy's work has COMPLETELY evaporated!

this was the best line in the film

This felt like 2 separate scripts that were mashed together, the part with the critic, artists and gallery workers jockeying for position was enjoyable but the addition of a bare bones ghost story was abysmal.

The ghosts rules are: you possess my art, im going to kill you, you have no escape, yay!
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
6,515
Isn’t this a satire?
Maybe. But it was still pretty bad. It's easy to see why it landed on Netflix. Their movies are often held to a lower standard. And I feel like critics are more forgiving.
It was obviously just another paycheque for most of them. I’d love to see what JM was paid for the 5 minutes he was in the movie.

This movie was fucking dog shit with literally no redeeming qualities except for Jake’s acting which was great. People shit on Polar but at least it clearly had some thought put into it. If my wife hadn’t forced me to watch it, I probably still would have continued watching just to see how bad the ending was. (It was bad).
Yeah. I don't know what they were thinking with this one.
 
Oct 26, 2017
765
Saw the movie this weekend after learning about it through this thread, and maybe it was the extremely positive first posts, but in the end it felt quite underwhelming :( I was expecting something much better after the first reactions I saw here.

Imo it's a very classic movie that may have greatly beneficiated from taking a more risks, here the end result is very classis and by the book, which makes it fall a bit flat imo, even though the premise looked promising.

What I won't take away from this film is that once again, Jake G can act , as always. He was REALLY good in this.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,999
Movie was pretty bad. Turned from an interesting satire of the art world into a very, very bland and forgettable horror movie. Horror rarely gets the credit it deserves as a genre, and this film is an example of that being a shame. Gilroy doesn't have the chops, absolutely no horror elements of this worked as intended.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,781
Nova Scotia
Movie was pretty bad. Turned from an interesting satire of the art world into a very, very bland and forgettable horror movie. Horror rarely gets the credit it deserves as a genre, and this film is an example of that being a shame. Gilroy doesn't have the chops, absolutely no horror elements of this worked as intended.
Yep. It didn’t work. Despite glancing past some genuinely pretty interesting ideas about the art world and capitalist aspect thereof. And had a good cast. Shot well. But just totally fell apart as it went on.
 
Oct 25, 2017
23,664
Movie felt really disjointed. It was like 3 very different films crammed into one and it never really meshed well and none of the elements were executed well enough to make it stand out. I will say the cast does give it a solid go of things.

The ending credits with John Malkovich drawing random squiggles on a beach was certainly a very weird and dare I say, artsy way to cap things off.
 

Brazil

Host at The Mansion
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
6,642
São Paulo, Brazil
Movie was pretty bad. Turned from an interesting satire of the art world into a very, very bland and forgettable horror movie. Horror rarely gets the credit it deserves as a genre, and this film is an example of that being a shame. Gilroy doesn't have the chops, absolutely no horror elements of this worked as intended.
That’s disappointing, but also exactly how I would describe that initial trailer.
 
Oct 27, 2017
971
That was not great. The ending was borderline incredible with how ridiculous it was.

Who would've guessed by watching this trailer that...

Jake Gyllenhaal gets killed in the end by a homeless robot.

I loved Nightcrawler so this was quite the disappointment. Velvet Buzzsaw isn't awful. In a way it's pretty interesting but ultimately it feels hallow. The problem is that the satire that works is really all this movie has to offer. Once the commentary on the art world is removed it just does't have a good story underneath.
 
Nov 6, 2017
2,948
This movie is a complete disaster on every creative level. It was a disorienting, mesmerizing, wonderful experience. I am now convinced Gyllenhaal is the greatest actor of his generation for pulling off the some of the lines he's forced to expel with the limited air of his lungs. It's truly incredible.

Nothing to me is more succinct in summarizing how I feel about this movie than the closing images of John Malkovich aimlessly swirling indecipherable scribbles into the sand of a beach with a stick: the sight of a broken man wandering the literal shores of his mind as he slips into utter madness.