Thanks for the memories!

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

This one-of-a-kind movie is hated by many but certainly deserves some kind of kudos for its uniqueness. I found myself being drawn into this movie; from the initial moments, where I didn't think much of it; to the growing love between Sands and Fenn, to the violent, unexpected conclusion. Jennifer Lynch tries to inject as much of her father's surrealism as possible into the film, so there's lots of symbolism and weird stuff going on. Calling this film "quirky" is an understatement.I remember this as being pretty controversial when it was first released, concerning as it does a man who kidnaps a woman, cuts off her arms and legs and puts her in a box. It's not in bad taste as you might think, although this supposed depravity certainly seems to be one of the film's main selling points (just check the video box for an example). What surprised me most about this film was the subtle message that real love isn't just about sex, but about what the person looks like on the inside instead of the out. There are certainly a number of surprises and twists as the film commences.As I mentioned before, the acting is pretty bad but bearable. The best of the bunch is Sherilyn Fenn, who turns her ice-cold bitch into a realistic, if unlikeable, character. Julian Sands (WARLOCK) overdoes it a bit with his turn as a childish, confused doctor, but to be fair it was a difficult role to play and I can't think of many modern actors capable of pulling the role off totally successfully. Elsewhere, Bill Paxton (with a ludicrous wig) is a cliché and one of my favourite bit actors, Kurtwood Smith, appears as a fellow doctor. But these characters are all unimportant, as the film focuses primarily on Fenn and Sands, and how their relationship progresses as time goes on.This is quite a slow-moving tale, well shot, and there's little in the way of action or gore as you might expect. The actual scenes of amputation are thankfully offscreen. The one thing I didn't really like about the film was the cheat ending, where the entire sequence of events turns out to have...well, couldn't they think of anything else? BOXING HELENA is a real oddity, and certainly worth a look in my opinion, despite the obvious shortcomings.

At it's core, the idea of Boxing Helena is interesting and pretty darn twisted. Knowing about it before hand was the only thing that kept me watching. It's a brave and unique premise for a movie. But it doesn't ever get good. Or shocking. From the get go the doctor comes off as odd and a little creepy. (And for some reason he's applying ear medicine and has cotton stuffed in his ear the whole movie. Why? I couldn't tell you.) His obsession with the (Needlessly?) bitchy Helena is questionable and for some reason there are scattered allusions to some kind of tainted past with his mother. About 45 minutes in, if he hadn't been set up to be so obvious, there could have been a real shock reveal when we find out what he's been up to. This movie tries, for some reason, to scatter erotica around too. There's a far too long slow motion scene where Helena gets undressed and jumps in a fountain at a party. You know, like you do. A scene from nowhere, where Dr. Nick has sex with a completely random and nameless woman to entertain Helena, who apparently reaches some kind of climax by watching this despite the fact that at this point in the movie, she can't possibly do that by herself. To top it all off it ends with - I'm not kidding you - "Oh, it was all a dream." DO NOT waste two hours on this flick, even if the plot sounds as intriguing to you as it did to me. It's a perfect example of how a good idea can be executed incredibly poorly.

When I saw Boxing Helena, I was young but pretty jaded to motion pictures. I was in a for the shock and ride of my life. Now that I read it was directed by David Lynch's daughter, it doesn't surprise me. I wont belabor the plot or details of the movie, but I will say that as a young man who was pursuing and dating lots of women, this movie really made me think about the vulnerability of even super attractive women, and about what happens when men put no constraints on their desire to chase or own a woman. The fact that it delivered that message in a totally original and effective fashion makes it a top-shelf film in my mind.I will say that I told a few women I thought it was a great film and they were disgusted by it. Too many people took this film far too literally, even though it wasn't literal even within the plot. I actually think it assaults our construction of goddesses in the media at such a root foundation that it's actually a very insurgent, anti-establishment film. It really attacks a materialism associated with the pursuit and existence of beautiful people.It's definitely a thinker's picture. It's a perfect use of film, portraying something you don't want to see in real life to illustrate a point. It's also brilliantly shot and acted. Make up you own mind. There's no other film like it.

My only recommendation for seeing "Boxing Helena" is for the short scenes flaunting Nicolette Scorsese. Director Jennifer Chambers Lynch should thank me for my saying so, because upon many a heterosexual male once reading that and remembering Nicolette from her role as the gorgeous lingerie saleswoman in "Christmas Vacation", there should be a spike in "Boxing Helena" rentals/purchases.Julian Sands plays a physician who is obsessed with Sherilyn Fenn, an ex-lover. Fenn doesn't dig him too much, however. When she suffers a terrible accident, Sands goes to town with her extremities and she is left a captive at his mercy."Boxing Helena" is depressing, uneventful, morbidly perverse in a boring sort of way, and ultimately an unmemorable waste of time. This, for me, was the turning point for Julian Sands where his career took a nose dive. In my opinion, it did little for Fenn's struggling career either, which has never seemed to completely lift off the ground.