Takes itself way too seriously

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

This is the perfect film for moviegoers who resist perfect to Boredom with capital B, that's why the title Perfect Sense! For everybody else it's very hard to digest, even though it is also about eating. The filmmakers want to make me think it's about love but I can not. If they show me the two protagonists, naked, making love, about half of the film, that does not convince me. The two main actors, Eva Green and Ewan McGregor are not at all convincing, it's just unconvincing acting. The film's comment is banal, even stupid. It's a love story, it's documentary, the filmmakers have not decided yet. The monkey, the rabbit and the horse that appeared at some point in the street played the best. When part two? Seven stars are too many, one is enough!

Way too much of Eva Green's boobs. Then the disease hits...first is taste and smell and then everyone goes deaf and finally everyone goes blind. I found the premise of this type of disease unrealistic. Just a morbid film with no real plot. In the end I felt empty after watching this for 90 minutes.I think we had 2 people that were alone in life and not very happy. One just lost his wife/girlfriend and the other can't have children. Then they find each other and quickly get to the sex. I mean these two did it like a couple of rabbits. Then they got mad at each other but at the end of the movie went blind together...happily ever after.

The log-line of "Perfect Sense" (directed by David Mackenzie) makes the movie sound gimmicky at best. "A chef and a scientist fall in love as an epidemic begins to rob people of their sensory perceptions"? Aside from imminent sentimentality, this description signalled to me the inevitable deployment of a cheap trick. Yet with Eva Green and Ewan McGregor leading the cast, I thought, give me a taste of the maudlin gimmick.Susan (Green) is an epidemiologist working on this sense-subtracting disease that begins with a few cases and ends up a pandemic. Michael (McGregor) is a talented chef at a high-end restaurant that shares an alley with Susan's apartment. Both characters are self-admitted assholes who fall in unlikely love while this affliction deconstructs their very personhood (along with everyone else's on the planet). I don't need to tell you to balk at my description if I've made the movie sound less watchable than the log-line has. Yet I will say that you'll be missing out if, based on any blurb, you dismiss this movie entirely. "Perfect sense" is a gem that increases in value the longer you look at it. "And what are we really?" it seems to ask. "A number of perceptual senses linked to a narrow spectrum of underlying emotions?" That's one suggestion it communicates before adding: "You've gotta love that." Prior to losing each sense, victims of this disease experience an uncontrollable surge of emotion: despair before losing smell, ravenousness before taste, rage before hearing, and, ushering in the loss of sight, all-encompassing love and hope. Darkness at last consumes all victims while blindly and silently they cling to loved ones whom they can also neither smell nor taste. Left with only the ability to feel the person beside them, all await the final subtraction (touch) that can only render them lifeless. Two of the many interesting things about this apocalyptic movie are the disease that sense-by-sense disassembles people, and the adaptive measures people take in order to cope with their ensuing condition. Those who can no longer taste begin to describe food in terms of texture, consistency or with onomatopoeia while artists attempt to reintroduce or at least remember flavor through music. So in a sense, synesthesia becomes a short-term savior. Though the movie provides much food for thought, at heart it's a love story between Susan and Michael. Remember that. Whether or not their love burgeons as a result of the apocalypse doesn't matter. We don't know what causes the disease. Is it environmental? Manmade? Gaia? Aliens? We never find out, so in that respect there's no didacticism. Neither are we subjected to some cornball yarn about love transcending space and time. The more existential and less literal question we're left with as a result is: Really, though, what else of any significance is there? I'm reminded of "Poem" by Al Purdy, particularly its last line: "there is nothing at all I can do except hold your hand and not go away." The sense of helplessness Purdy conveys when the narrator tries to console an ill loved one, a time when nothing can be done for someone other than to provide a loving presence, is nothing if not touching to the reader because of its understated, pragmatic truth: love, whatever magic it isn't, sustains us. It's sustenance. In the same vein, "Perfect Sense" isn't saying that love intensifies as the disease progresses. It isn't claiming that with all distractions removed love can be seen for what it is, all-important. Thanks for sparing us those sentiments by the way. Something of what the movie does say is that love, nurturing, care, warmth, whatever you want to call it, as we slowly fall apart, is the one thing we can still manage to express with each, however limited, piece of ourselves we have left—and right up until removal of our last sense snuffs us out. Potentially, perhaps coincidentally, yet for certain thankfully, love also happens to be all we need in perilous times like these. And if that's gimmicky then so are we.

That's the worst piece of trash i've watched lately! What is the basic message of this movie?? I guess it is supposed to be found in the final words of the movie: love, forgivance etc. Maybe they would have succeeded to make their message believable if they hadn't spent more than 50 minutes of the movie by showing mere sex and animalic instincts. I failed to see the romance or the LOVE - and what LOVE is really supposed to mean. Feim a movie of 80 minutes, when more than half of it shows only sex and nudity, I definitely understand its message is centered on basic instincts, non-existence of any kind of morality and pure animality. Is that what we all are?? In our daily existence, is this what we really do - sleep with the first stranger we meet because we've just broken up with someone (like the heroine does) or do we have pure sex with no matter how many partners, whom we coldly send home 'cause we don't need them anymore (like he does)?! Or does a true love story begin with a casual sex affair which develops into love?? At a certain moment i had the impression I'm watching a porn movie! Terribly disappointing and a mere waste of time! They could have made a beautiful story but they destroyed all possibilities when they decided to focus the biggest part of the movie on sexual intercourse and nudity. PS: if i was an actor/actress, I really wouldn't give up on my dignity to film naked and simulating sex. I guess that's why I'm not an actor...