StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Deni The Slayer I like watching movies without reading the synopsis first, that way I was surprised after the suspenseful first scenes of the movie. I thought I was about to watch a relationship unfold, when in reality, it was already way past its honeymoon phase.Submission and domination, but who's really in charge? Cynthia, who's the older in the relationship, feels just so afraid of loneliness she has adjusted to the high and super specific demands of his younger sub, Evelyn. Cynthia cages herself in tight corsets and thights, scripts and an exhausting way of living provided by her lover, and it doesn't come off natural to her. To make insatiable Evelyn happy, she sleeps alone at night and has to still remain watchful in case the word that haunts her comes out of the cage. "Pinastri". And on again the next day, when Evelyn finds something new (or wants to revive the old desires) and demands her lover to pull the act. Cynthia becomes frustrated trying, but still does, in fear of losing her only one.I loved the romance and aesthetic. The butterfly studies give it a poetic magic. I didn't like certain pauses in the movie that kind of made it bland, but I still believe is a highly recommended film for those interested in "unusual love" and sexuality movies.

hobbescottage I started to watch this after googling to watch something good. What the hell is the point of this film? I pity every single person who thought there was a single aspect of this film worthy of note. What the hell is going on with the gay/lesbian/human world that thinks that's worth watching.

Andres-Camara The truth is that I have become quite bored. With two actresses who give everything and are great, there comes a time when I do not know if what you want to tell me is that even if you have perversions, the sex life becomes routine because I do not know the times we see the same things.What do we want to see the poetic plans for? I know that I am very rational and I do not like abstract cinema, but the truth is that I get all the poetic plans from the film.Let's not say the master classes of living beings, I'm just waiting for the sequence to end. How boring they are.Then we go back to the movie and see the same fact again. I was wondering if my movie was wrong and then I saw that no, that is that we wanted to repeat the same sequences to satiety.I think he has a great photograph, although the composition of the camera seems to me the most bland. It does not have a pretty address.While there are times when she is wearing Sidse Babett Knudsen if it is erotic but it is.I really like the costumes and makeup but it is not enough, logically.The truth is that I have become very long.

lor_ The meretricious film "The Duke of Burgundy" sinks under its own pretentious weight - an obnoxiously bad example of music video directors (Fincher and the like) taking over contemporary cinema. I'll briefly comment on what ordinarily I would merely toss (DVD) into the waste basket, informed by the director's telltale interview comments in the "bonus" (or bogus) material.Claiming a budget of a million pounds (pity the fools running Film 4 and BFI in England these days) he mentions originally being pitched to direct a remake of a lousy Jesus Franco porn film from the '70s, a project he quickly tired of (who wouldn't - Franco remade all his losers from this period a dozen times over himself).Instead he pounces on the flimsy juxtaposition of a a BDSM submissive living in co- dependence with an older woman who doesn't really get the BDSM imperative and only partially derives sustenance vicariously by pleasing the other. That plus unbelievably pretentious imagery about entomology spins out a tedious exercise that once again is all tension and no release - a surefire recipe for either putting a viewer to sleep or having him (or her) make a mad rush for the exit.I have been watching a vast cross-section of lesbian porn in recent years, from the key sources such as Girlfriends Films, Sweetheart Video, Filly Films, Abigail Productions, Girl Candy and others. To varying degrees they all deliver the goods - naturalistic sex, real orgasms (believable at any rate), beautiful female performers, modest but fairly interesting story lines, an emotional connection, full nudity and explicit XXX visuals (with no cocks in sight). There are no cocks (or males) in "Burgundy", but no nudity, not even interesting soft-core sex, and precious little emotion or faked orgasm. The entire movie is a cheat, typical of the junk that clutters Film Festival schedules around the world, aimed at a coterie of fest programmers and so-called critics who for many decades practice virtual masturbation at the screening rooms with "artistic" pretend- pornography (see: Walerian Borowczyk, name-dropped by this hack alongside Franco).Most telling interview statement is how the self-made genius who created this movie admires the films of hacks like Franco because they have been overlooked by mainstream film historians. What he fails to mention is that for approximately 25 years now the "outlaw" or euphemistically termed "exploitation" cinema has been egregiously promoted in conjunction with the rise of video (VHS then DVD) as prime source of viewing for younger would-be film buffs and due to the vagaries and ignorance of distribution predominates over mainstream works. Ask any young film buff today about Italian films and they will know by heart the works of Dario Argento, Joe D'Amato and perhaps Deodato and Umberto Lenzi (plus of course Sergio Leone) but would they have seen a single film by Ermanno Olmi, Francesco Rosi or even Marco Bellocchio (beyond his pornographic "Devil in the Flesh"), let alone the geniuses like Fellini, Visconti, Antonioni, Rossellini, Germi, Bolognini, Risi, Monicelli, Scola, Wertmuller and dozens of others? No, the Tarantino revolution elevating junk (ALL of which I saw 40 or 50 years ago in cinemas in parallel with the "high art" I'm namedropping here) above quality has become firmly entrenched. If "The Duke of Burgundy" is to represent the 21st Century's version of "Arthouse cinema", just contrast it with the most ubiquitous titles I used to see over and over 50 years ago at my local revival and art houses, neither of which has been shown hardly at all in the past 25 years: Bourguignon's "Sundays and Cybele" and Teshigahara's "Woman in the Dunes" (latter also dealing with entomology). Back in the day it was often decried how those two titles were "overexposed" since programmers became infatuated with them (alongside the most popular of the day, Bergman), but who knew they would be forgotten and Joe Sarno films of the '60s would replace them in the consciousness of so many film buffs two generations later.