Gerry Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
720x300 | 915.07 MiB | hidivx | |
|
640x268 | 562.99 MiB | divx | |
|
320x132 | 207.44 MiB | ipod | |
|
320x132 | 210.82 MiB | hpc | |
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
A friendship between two twenty-something men—both named Gerry—is tested to its very limits when they go on a hike in an impossibly large desert and forget to bring any water or food with them
| Casey Affleck | Gerry |
| Gus Van Sant |
6.10 out of 10 (3898 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Great Movie for Weak Bladders
posted on 26 Aug 2009Unspectacular slow paced movie about two retards who get lost in the desert. This is a great movie if you need frequent bathroom breaks. Go to the john, talk to the Pope, come back and you've missed very little. One of the key scenes involves one of the Gerries (they're both called Gerry, perhaps named by George Foreman who calls all his kids George....)marooned on a large rock and can't get down. Other Gerry (Damon) asks how he got there and he says he scrambled up somehow. I cannot say for sure how he got up there as I was taking a leak at the time. He finally jumps down and if you look without blinking you can see poor image editing on par with movies of the Laurel and Hardy era.The scenery is breathtaking but you can probably get a comparable scenery video from the Nevada Tourist Bureau for a fraction of the price of theater admission.One of the last scenes shows the two of them walking across a wide expanse of the desert. They walk and walk and walk. The desert is vast and endless, yes WE GET IT. Watch for this scene and go to the john and change the oil on your car, take your time.A scene later, they collapse in the desert and Gerry (Damon) goes through some "conflexations" on top of the other Gerry. Not sure whether he is trying to get up or play hide the salami.About as exciting as watching a casket warp....
Stark, beautiful, scary, riveting, trying, hypnotic.
posted on 18 Aug 2009Two friends both called Gerry (Matt Damon and Casey Affleck) go for a wander in the desert only to find they've lost the path back to their car. Stranded, they spend several days without food or water attempting to find their way. The plot is as bleak as the landscape, and the slow pace matches that of the protagonists as they grow weary from malnutrition, resulting in an incredible sense of loneliness and isolation. This can be difficult to watch, particularly with the baggage of other more action-orientated films you may have in your head molding your expectations. The deliberately sparse nature of Gerry is mesmerising and juts out like a rocky crag in the current movie landscape. The minimal (and at times what feels like improvised) dialog is designed to support this and create a sense of reality rather than be strictly entertaining. I admire this approach as it's a lot easier to relate to; two friends going for a wander don't spend every minute talking to each other.Comparisons with Gus Van Sant's 'Elephant' are inevitable as the pacing and structure are quite similar. Also, like Elephant, this is very much fly on the wall stuff rather than a contrived fantasy where everything is explained. Unfortunately, the ultra-realistic nature will be too boring for those not willing to go with it and put themselves in these guys' shoes, but for those who are, this is a rare cinematic (not to mention visual) treat.
Boring!!!
posted on 04 Aug 2009Casey Affleck and Matt Damon decide to take a trip into the desert and they get lost. This is the plot, and there is also hardly any dialogue, and no meaningful dialogue. And yet the movie manages to be almost 2 hours long. I had to fast forward through some parts. However there was some nice camera work and scenery. Very boring film.
Tedious but awesome!
posted on 25 Jul 2009I loved the creativity and originality of Gerry but it is one tedious movie to sit through. It's not about watching two guys die of thirst and exposure in the desert. It's more like being there with them, trudging along mile after mile, and dying of thirst and exposure yourself. Beautiful photography and great settings add to the ominous mood. If I ever meet Gus Van Sant, I'm going to throw a rock at him for dishing out this kind of punishment.
For want of a nail
posted on 13 Jul 2009For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe
the horse was lost.
For want of a horse
the rider was lost.
For want of a rider
the battle was lost.
For want of a battle
the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want
of a horseshoe nail. We've all probably heard that before. It's been adopted as a metaphor for mdoern chaos theory. And I think Gerry has a wonderful and funny take on this idea. Affleck's rambling speech about his computer game is an updated version of this poem though he (his character, I mean) undoubtedly doesn't know it. He talks about how a volcano destroyed his sanctuary to Demeter and then she got mad and he couldn't grow wheat and then the river flooded out his docks and he couldn't trade and because he couldn't grow wheat or trade, he came up one horse short (I needed 12, I had 11) when his vassal attacked and then he lost. In other words, "for want of a nail..." We get to see a decidedly unphilosophical person not given to introspection manage to stumble upon a bit of common wisdom all by himself, even if through trivial means and without full realization of it. It's both touching and funny.This and other fine touches make Gerry a worthwhile experience for me. I got to laugh and I got to see a few things I never saw before (that "bobbing head" shot is truly startling.) Cinema is a quest for new images and Gerry provides them.I don't really think it's a terribly profound film and fans of the film need to be careful about feeling all smart and righteous about their keen perception. It's simply a ruthless exercise in aesthetics and rewarding for some viewers. But it's certainly not "wrong" to dislike the film.
Gerry is perhaps the worst movie of all time
posted on 27 Jun 2009This movie has no action, no plot, no story. I don't seem to understand how this movie even got created.Two guys walking in the desert, that forget to bring food or water. And, most of the movie, nothing happens.I cant stand this movie, and if I saw it on a shelf for 1.00$ I wouldn't buy it, even for an independent film.I saw this movie on IFC (independent film channel) which was the only reason I saw it. I thought to myself: Matt Damon, Casey Affleck and I thought this would be an awesome movie, but it was horrible. I believe this is the worst movie I have ever seen.
Visually stunning but with no substance or meaning to speak of
posted on 19 Jun 2009Two friends (both called Gerry) take a drive out into the New Mexico wilderness to go and see the thing. Following the trail they assume will lead them right there they eventually decide they are not going to find it and decide to head back to their car. However they have been blindly hiking for hours and before long they realise that they are lost. Sleeping rough that night, they continue their trek across the desert in search of a way out, putting their friendship under stress with every passing hour.Perhaps this is one of those like it or hate it type movies but I do dislike the way that those that love it feel the need to lash out at those that don't, claiming that they are perhaps stupid or hollow people for not getting the beauty of this movie. Personally I do slightly suspect that the viewers who fall over themselves to love this film have never really seen many films that compare and perhaps mistake being different and non-multiplex as being the same as having depth. That the film is minimalistic and different is not in question but there is no substance to this film other than what the viewer forces into their own experience of it.Having said that the film is still hauntingly beautiful to watch. The desert landscapes are impressive and really well captured – what a shame that you do not go to the cinema just to stare at landscapes. The cast of two have nothing to do but, as they are also responsible for the concept then they have nobody else to really blame. Affleck and Damon stumble around the place vaguely improvising but they have nothing about them; most of the time I found them an intrusion in front of the landscapes that were of much more interest.Overall then a beautiful but empty film. The landscapes are haunting but I could not find any of this beauty in the material (such as it was). Those desperately seeking something deep will find it, but that is different from the film actually having depth.
a cloyingly idiotic trek interrupted by minor insights.
posted on 09 Jun 2009Aside from an accurate sense of "being there" in the wasteland, little else makes this film worthy of your time. We are told that much of it was done ad lib, as in created, devised, or just allowed to unfold whichever way onsite. Believe it. And, trust me, only an idiot child could have ever become "rock marooned" in the fashion depicted; then only a "dumb and dumber" set could have finally figured out their solution to that "dilemma." Spin all the grandiose existential allusions to "Godot" and "The Wasteland" that the arty-aesthete within you cares to, this still is a yawner. Waste neither your pelf nor particularly your precious time nodding off to this silliness.As to where "there" is, my main entertainment was trying to ascertain where we were....from The Badlands, no, to Arizona/N Mex, no, ah yes finally to the Great Salt Flats of Utah....no, since the opening setting wouldn't have been walkable in the length of time covered. Then I saw online that it was filmed in Argentina....
Meditation on life, the search for meaning andexistence.
posted on 24 May 2009Okay my one line summary is SO pretentious but that it is not often you have to just say what it is trying to do. The theme of two lost souls in a wilderness, spiritual, literal, is one already explored by van Sant in My Own Private Idaho (MOPI) and to an extent Drugstore Cowboy. The long long single takes and the accelerated clouds were also used in MOPI but here Van Sant takes that further and makes them the objective themselves.For those that have been to Death Valley, then this will seem familiar.... even the desert can be mundane in its endlessness. But how beautiful and supreme, how different it was to linger on every shot. In a time of 20 second attention spans between channels this was the antithesis.I think Van Sant was also playing around where he could. Why a soliloquy based on Richard III Act 4? A horse a horse etc.... but only in Age of Empires played by Affleck Gerry; Richard III for the 21st century.
One of the Greatest Allegorical Stories Ever Filmed!
posted on 24 May 2009You know a film is special when it uses so little to say so much, and so much as to make it an emotional experience minus an actual narrative. Gus Van Sant (possibly the best American director working today) delves so far into allegory that "Gerry" becomes something more than a film. And its hard to not watch "Gerry" with awe, as we the viewer is treated to some of the most gorgeous cinematography in American film post-2000 while banking in on a very powerful study of isolation-induced mental pain. It's easy to brand "Gerry" as a boring film based on what is seen at the surface, but when looking deeper, the film is a testing ground for human struggle. A man vs. self conflict that gains its power by using physical pain to symbolize the mental aspects, and in this case, of sexual insecurity. And Gus Van Sant's incredible use of symbolism in the photography, the dialogue, the actual title of the film, and the brutal ending comment, not only on the personal homosexual aspect of Van Sant's story, but also on that of the viewer who faces this journey head-on for the tedious, yet influential experience it is.To get the full impact of the film, one must think of who Gerry actually is. We are presented in the film with two men, both named Gerry; and we barely see anymore people except for a few outsiders on the path the two characters walk on. It would be best to see that the two Gerry's are really one person, and that the outsiders are really just those who are pushed away, and fail to realize their existence. The true Gerry of the film is a man who is outside of the film, while the film is really a symbol for his own sexual insecurity (the two Gerry's in the film symbolizing the two emotional battles within him). The fact that the true Gerry could very well be a teenager becomes relevant through the dialogue and acting (which includes a discussion on video games by the two characters, who both feature teen characteristics) and this is also an important set-up for the film's final scene. This is, bluntly, the lost struggle of a man, whose true sexual identity has become isolated; lost in this world that is eaten up by rock, sand, wind, and the bluest of sky.Many have questioned by view on this, but I think it holds its ground seeing as the film includes many scenes that hint at the topic such as a discussion about which direction to go (symbolizing the confusion of whether to be gay, straight, or bi) to a scene where one Gerry is stranded miraculously and mysteriously on a rock. "I'll make a bed and you can jump," the other Gerry says. "It should break the fall." This also leads up to the climax and resolution of the film which shows a battle with both Gerry's, which involves a highly sexualized, homoerotic, yet brutal strangulation one Gerry does on the other. But what makes this death the more chilling is when the strangled Gerry nods his head for the killing to go on. This shows that the actual Gerry may have found his footing, he has fought this inner battle, and has chosen a path to be on. And as we get our final scene, we see the living Gerry making it out of the desert alive (finding the right path), in the back seat of a car, being stared at by what seems to be an angry father, maddened at his child. Could this be Gerry's "coming out"? Could the Gerry that lived symbolize the homosexuality that the true Gerry was repressing? (Think back to an earlier scene in which the dead Gerry stares out at the mirage of the other Gerry. Could this be him looking at this homosexuality as something fake - i.e. shameful?)All in all, "Gerry" is open to many, many interpretations, but knowing Gus Van Sant as a gay director who connects well with gay audiences (many of his films feature homosexual and/or homoerotic themes) I feel that what I see "Gerry" as, in this case an internal presentation of a repressed gay man, is very justified. And this also leads up to why "Gerry" is, to me, one of the greatest allegorical stories ever filmed.
Very Good and Interesting Movie, Though Definitely not for Everyone
posted on 22 Apr 2009Gerry is a sad, yet intriguing movie that has potential to be very good if you're okay with a change of pace. If you think good movies can arise from a slower pace then you definitely may like this movie. The cinematography in this movie is great. Also the piano score that is also played in "WIT" gives a nice dramatic affect. Matt Damon and Casey Affleck had great chemistry together, which in a movie like this goes a long way. I liked how the dialogue had an improvised to it, like the actors and Gus Van Sant had a general outline for the scenes and the actors took it from there. (Spoilers) Some of the dialogue was really funny also, like when they're by the campfire. Its a very sad yet well done scene in the end when Casey tells Matt how he is giving up, and how he is happy to be with his friend. It was a very different and ambitious movie for Gus Van Sant as well as the actors to make. It always so nice to see something new done in movies, especially by more well known actors and filmmakers who don't do projects that are meant to be the big blockbusters etc. Be sure to watch this one if you're interested. Most likely you'll remember it, whether you find it good, bad or any other opinions you'll have of it.
almost the worst
posted on 18 Apr 2009the 2nd WORST movie i have ever endured to watch a TOTAL waste of Money, from all aspects of film making, and what were they thinking ??? This movie will never be on the top of Matt Dameons "best " list. Watching grass grow would have been more interesting the only reason i gave this movie a 2 rating was that as a rule I do like to watch Matt Dameon act. and although he had to act profusely in this movie, it will always remain at the bottom of my most liked films by Matt. I just thought that he would have thought better before making such a cheap piece of junk. just my 2 cent worthDenny
Help!
posted on 08 Apr 2009There have been so many comments surrounding this movie, but very few concerning the ending which still intrigues me. I am now seeing it for the second time and I am trying to figure out the scene at the end on the salt lake. Did Damons Jerry strangle Affleck's Jerry or embrace him as he was dieing? If he did strangle him, why? To put him out of his misery, or because, as some have said on these reviews, that he was his personality double? I loved this beautiful movie, it is one of my top 5 all time. I wish there were more like it. For anyone using the cliché "boring" etc., aren't there enough Batman and Star Wars movies for you? This is one of the few true art in cinema films I have seen in the last 5 years.
very quiet movie
posted on 29 Mar 2009Two guys; both names Gerry, have driven to a wilderness park, to go hiking on its trails. Not far into the trail, they start to go off the track, going where they feel. Soon after they are lost. With no water or food, they walk through a never ending desert that strains their friendship, causing an ultimate dept on ones behalf.Gerry is one of the most quiet movies I have seen. For the length of the film, there is very sparing dialog. For the moments there are dialog, it is conversations of mundane topics. Situations are drawn out passed there limitations, with scenes that have an never ending sense. While i understand that you can't take this to seriously nor over analyze, but there does come to a point of watch two people endlessly walk become mundane. There is a real distancing with Gerry. You are given a perspective that you are the third traveler, but you never get any interaction with the two Gerrys.The harsh landscape is beautifully captured. The desert looks so wonderful, it's so breathtaking. It is a world of death that the two Gerrys are walking through.There is a point to Gerry, but I just don't see it.
Fine, haunting movie
posted on 21 Mar 2009Boy, I like this movie.Two guys out on a hike get lost. They're less than ill-prepared for anything like an overnight outing, and they make one huge "gerry" -- their slang for a mistake -- and they get so, so lost. The movie simply follows them as they succumb (a bit too easily) to nature. There's a bit more to it than that, but I won't spoil anything.Some people refer to "the title character" (both men are named Gerry); I couldn't help wondering if the movie's name was a noun or a verb.I don't see it as pretentious at all. It's so simple that I think the effort to read anything oversized into the movie is probably the stroke of death. Does it have to mean anything? Aren't people interesting enough anymore? If Bergman can make a chamber piece like SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE (tons of dialogue and largely medium or close shots of actors' faces), why can't we have a story about two guys who screwed up and found themselves dying of exposure? This is a movie that insists on slowing things down to life-pace -- not to say real time. But I thought it captured boredom and drudgery so well that I was constantly engaged. I like the long silences of two folks who know each other (and perhaps a little resentful of one another) and don't have to banter. Most humans, in real life, don't try to be "on" all the time for some imagniary movie-going public; I think it's great that we aren't insulted or asked to be charmed by our desperate Gerry's "witty banter."-- not that the film is without humor, either. There's an oft-mentioned long take in which one Gerry, stranded on a rock, is coaxed into jumping.
The camera doesn't move, and the scene is a masterpiece of economy, suspense, and wit. It's a beautiful mini-movie inside the larger film, and, as mentioned elsewhere, is alone worth the price of admission.I think the best way to watch GERRY is to let it dictate its own terms and not demand that it function the way movies usually do. Meet the film on its own terms, and I hope you're as riveted as I was.8 out of 10.
beauty
posted on 03 Mar 2009One of the most, if not thee most, beautiful films I have ever seen. It seems as
though a new trend is starting amongst some directors, picking up where"L'avventura" and Ozu left off, maybe as a reaction toward the Tarantino andRobert Rodriguez style of filmmaking. The "plot" seems to exist solely for the
purpose of providing a reason to show the viewer a series of images and toshow us how the two characters interact with one another in the situation and
location. This is not to say that plot is secondary or disposable in any way. But
it exists in a manner that is stripped down, like the number of characters, like the
long takes. The camera's presence is more like that of a canvas. The camerawants to show us something, as opposed to just showing us something becausethat's what it's supposed to do. The same could be said of Van Sant's latest film,
"Elephant" and Sofia Coppola's "Lost in Translation" and perhaps VincentGallo's "The Brown Bunny," too, although I have not yet seen the film, onlysurmised this from hearsay, but he did use several Ozu-style shots in the scenes
with Billy Brown's family in "Buffalo '66."
the worse movie
posted on 01 Feb 2009This has got to be the worse movie in the world. I cannot believe i rented it, or even watched the whole thing. To tell you the truth, it's a movie you need to rent just to see how awful it is! I don't think i can describe the movie anymore than that! There is no plot, no story. Watching them do the same thing for 10 minutes straight... BORING. Worst of all, my room mate and I were able to memorize the first 30 lines and repeat them over and over before any new lines were said. We kept watching the movie thinking that it would get better... boy were we wrong! The movie was so bad that we thought it couldn't be any worse to watch the trailer... Did we ever learn our lesson! What a waste of time. Sorry but it's true!
Don't go to "Gerry" expecting "The Bourne Identity" or "Good Will Hunting"
posted on 01 Feb 2009GERRY Released: February 14, 2003 Gus Van Sant is not afraid to follow up a big Hollywood movie with a low budget indie production and "Gerry" is definitely unlike any movie I've ever seen before. Some directors, like Steven Soderbergh, will do something as commercially appealing and popular as "Ocean's Eleven" - then follow it up with something as commercially unappealing as "Solaris". Van Sant has done the same 180 degree turn here as well. Sure to incite anger from casual moviegoers expecting the "new Matt Damon movie", "Gerry" is a 103 minute long movie that has virtually no dialog. And the only two characters on screen are Matt Damon and Casey Affleck - both named Gerry. The movie opens with a wordless scene featuring the two Gerrys driving in the desert until they stop at a rest area. Finally around ten minutes in we are witness to the first dialog between the two Gerrys. They embark on foot down a wilderness trail where they anticipate finding "the thing". We never find out what that "thing" is because the pair end up getting lost before finding it. The next 90 or so minutes is a nearly dialog free collection of scenes showing the two guys trying to find their way back to the car. The beauty of a film like "Gerry" is that its minimalism is the silent third character. Blended in with the environment and weather, the two Gerrys are faced with thirst and starvation. The ending is shocking, especially in context of the location where it occurs. This is not a film for everyone. In fact, over half of the people in the theater abandoned the screening by the halfway point. Whole groups of people left the theater at one time, unable to endure this movie. Don't go to "Gerry" expecting "The Bourne Identity" or "Good Will Hunting". This is not that kind of movie. The amazing acting from Damon and Affleck would be difficult for an actor to carry off but these guys did it. Damon really demonstrates his skills near the end in a wordless scene that relies solely on his face and body language. Van Sant deserves credit for even considering a project like this. Will you be able to appreciate it, however? That is the question...103 Minutes My Cactus/ThinkFilm Inc.
a masterpiece
posted on 24 Jan 2009Gerry truly is a masterpiece. The film is Directed by one of my favorite directors Gus Van Sant and the film uses his new style of film making, a slow but beautiful technique. The technique is letting the audience enter the film, the slowness of Gerry will give you the feeling as if you are lost and you don't know where your going or were you will end up. The dialog is spoken in such a true to life form, the two men lost have nothing philosophical to say nor important their discussions lead to video games and such, and more films should be true to their characters as this is. If you have two hours and you are not being rushed then sit down relax and turn the lights off and let this film entrance you and suck you in, Highly recommended.
Take it for what it is
posted on 28 Aug 2009Gerry is nothing more than it makes itself out to be. I mean that if you want to search for some deep meaning in the shots or try to make any sense of the plot, forget it. It is an impossible task to try to pull some personal meaning from this film. Believe me, my friends and I tried it. Gerry is a great film, it uses elements in such a way that I can only hope to draw inspiration from. The plot is simple; it doesn't require or use a lot of dialogue. No, this story is told through amazing cinematography and sound. This film is an art house film, but to have seen it was to take a journey with Affleck and Damon. These two men are wonderful at telling this story through movement and facial expressions. There isn't much that we learn about them, yet the audience feels for them and their plight. Gerry, although it is not a favorite film of mine, was one that I found both interesting, thought provoking, and entertaining. I enjoyed both the film and the discussion afterwards greatly.