No Such Thing
Tags: allegory, comedy, fantasy, cruelty, storytelling

Plot synopsis:
Beatrice (Sarah Polley) is a young woman working in a media center under a woman known only as The Boss (Helen Mirren). She receives a recording from her fiancé Jim, who has been sent as part of a small production crew to Iceland to investigate a Monster that lives there. Determined to find her fiancé, Beatrice convinces her boss to send her to Iceland, but her plane crashes. She is the only survivor and, in order to walk again, undergoes an extremely painful, radical surgery. As she recovers, she befriends Dr. Anna (Julie Christie), who helps her travel to the remote village where the monster lives.
After cajoling Beatrice into drinking herself into unconsciousness, the villagers strip her and leave her as an offering to the Monster himself (Robert John Burke), a foul-mouthed, alcoholic beast old enough to remember human ancestors crawling from the seas. Beatrice shows him no real fear, although the Monster tells her he has killed her friends and might kill her, too. He tells her that he wants to die, but is indestructible. In an effort to force Beatrice to try to kill him, he proves that he killed Jim and his crew. She shoots him twice and he reacts in obvious pain, but heals almost instantly. He tells her of a mad scientist, Dr. Artaud (Baltasar Kormákur), who had discovered a way to kill him, but Dr. Artaud had been "taken away in a straight jacket." Beatrice offers to help him find Dr. Artaud if the Monster comes with her to New York and promises not to kill anyone while he is there.
In New York the Monster becomes a celebrity, with the Boss staging a media frenzy as they search for Dr. Artaud. They find that he is working for the government. While Beatrice revels in the attention, the Monster remains miserable and drunk. The Boss makes a deal with a government scientist to study the Monster and he's rushed away by army guards who mislead him into believing he is going to see Dr. Artaud. Instead, he is subjected to torturous experiments as the scientists try to discover the key to his indestructibility, one of them noting that he can't seem to tolerate new information. One of those experiments involves the Monster being ridiculed and beaten on the street to study his behavior. The Monster holds true to his promise to Beatrice and does not kill anyone.
Meanwhile, Beatrice meets Dr. Artaud by chance. With Margaret (Annika Peterson), a remorseful former coworker of Beatrice's, they hatch a plan to escape back to Iceland with the Monster. They make their escape, but are pursued by the government, who fears the Monster and Artaud might fall into the wrong hands. Artaud builds a machine that will kill the Monster. Beatrice bids the Monster a tearful farewell, and kisses him goodbye. As the machine starts, the army storms their hideout. As the lights flicker on and off and the machine moves the Monster into place (in a process mirroring Beatrice's surgery), the Monster and Beatrice face each other one last time. Her face flickers in his vision for several minutes before the screen blackens.

Review: Imagine that the original "Outer Limits" folks remade "King Kong" in their standard monster style and you have a good idea of "No Such Thing's" look and feel.
Then throw in a little "Mighty Joe Young" banter, "Beauty and the Beast fashions", and "The Song of Bernadette" for good measure.The film is a stylistic masterpiece and the banter between the beast and Beatrice (Sarah Polley) is surreal comedy at its best.
The story alternates between modern settings of a television network and the home in Iceland of a legendary monster that -as in "King Kong"- will become a victim of the manipulative methods of the communication media (with Helen Mirren in charge.) The scenes dealing with the reserved journalist (Sarah Polley in an outstanding underacted performance) surviving a plane crash, meeting a community of weirdoes in Iceland and finally facing the monster, are the most attractive; the following is rather clichéd, though this endearing monster (who looks like a rock star) keeps making until the end, insightful comments on human beings, when we were still creeping "to reach the shore", and our destructive ways.
NO SUCH THING (3 outta 5 stars) A weird kind of project for indy art movie writer/director Hal Hartley...
With this film, which I recently saw in DVD form, he presents us a modern day parable about the media an its influence on our lives.It's curious to see how ahead of his times Mr. Hartley is when he deals with paranoia, even before the attacks of 9/11, in his own subtle way.
These are the questions posed (and answered) by writer/director Hal Hartley in `No Such Thing,' an often biting satire of the news media, the all-to-prevalent-in-our-society tabloid-type mentality and our response to the unknown, be it tangible or imaginary; a film that brings us face to face with fear and confronts it with humor, pathos and Hartley's own insightful and inimitable take on the human condition.Some time after a three-man television news team disappears after being sent to Iceland to investigate reports of a `monster' living on a rock island just off the coast, the station receives a tape recording from someone claiming to be the monster himself, describing in graphic detail what he did with those dispatched to find and film him.
And Beatrice finds herself at the point of no return; she has come this far, and now it's just a matter of getting some help from the villagers to get her across the channel to the rock-- and her encounter with this monster who is `changeless and eternal.'As no one else can, Hal Hartley has crafted and delivered a film that is part `Beauty and the Beast,' part `Frankenstein,' part `Forbidden Planet,' and ALL Hartley.
Unlike most films featuring a `monster,' Hartley does not keep his audience in suspense, but reveals his `man/beast' at the very beginning, as we see him making the tape he subsequently sends to the T.V. station.
Hartley is also a master of `thinking outside the box,' which enables him to offer entirely unique perspectives on the human condition and this thing we call `life'; you never know where he's going to take you, which is another reason why his films are so engaging (as this one certainly is).
Keep in mind, though, that once you hit the deck with Hartley, the rewards are many and great.Working with Hartley for the first time, Sarah Polley proves to be a quick study in all things Hartley; in creating Beatrice, she demonstrates an innate grasp of his methods, and most importantly, what it is he is attempting to accomplish through his characters.
Science and human kindness are the saviors, the forces that can eradicate the need for such symbols.In order to tame "evil", the good have to endure suffering, symbolized by the young ingenue who is injured and healed : a Christ-like character.This movie is gentle, sensitive and moving as well as filled with delicate humor.
I kept switching back to the INFO button and was very curious to see how I was watching a movie about a MONSTER when cinematographically it looked like a dramatic independent film...As I kept watching, I became more engrossed in this film as it wasn't heading where I expected...I'm usually good at pinpointing the basics of where the movie will go...About 3/4 of the way through I figured it was another take on "Beauty and the Beast" but it STILL ended up surprising me...I won't say more so I don't give away the CINEMATIC RIDE I so thankfully happened upon.
In one of the best lines in the film as the Monster is pining for the fear of humans, he is warmly hugged by a sleepy Beatrice who says, "I'm afraid of you."  It's a very good film, told as a cautionary tale in the modern world with fairly black and white characters.
Sometimes I try to think how much better the world would be if filmmakers like Hal Harley were more popular but on the other hand you can't really make people stop watching stupid movies, it's just the way the world works I guess.
Hartley has a great sense of humor, Beatrice, Arto, the villagers, the Monster himself are all very funny characters, they might look like caricatures to some, but they really are not.
Well if anyone is still reading (because I doubt anyone would care about how much I love Hartley's films) I guess I should say that "No such thing" is a media satire, a satire of religion and of humanity's ethics.
I know that I will look for more Hartley's works.As far as the story goes, like many directors before and after him Hal Hartley re-tells the old but immortal legend of Beauty and the Beast which is set in the modern, post 9/11 (even though the movie was made before September 11, 2001) world.
They are searching for a famed doctor who has managed to manipulate the law of physics to create a force that 'may' be strong enough to break this unbreakable monster, but first, the monster has to clean up his act.I have always liked Sarah Polley, I think that was why I was drawn to this film.
In a weird rendition of "Beauty and the Beast" the monster (played by Robert John Burke) - who by the way is apparently American - resides on a rock in Iceland far away from civilisation.
Not exactly sure what the point was of all this - why tell a serious story about a monster set in modern times, only to make it even more far-fetched with an exaggerated reality more fitting for a satire or a Monty Python sketch?Soon after we are forced to survive about 30 minutes of filler, where Beatrice becomes a revered almost supernatural personality, because of surviving an airline crash.
I can't however say the same about Sarah Polley, who in my opinion gave the most bland and forgettable performances of her lifetime.All in all give this one the pass, unless you want to see some nice pictures of Iceland or are interested in the weird and mildly intriguing ending (the only part of the movie that actually worked)..
They call this flick a dark comedy, but it fails in both.The monster makeup and the character is interesting enough, and Polley does a decent job of playing a naive girl thats being manipulated by her boss, but there was a lot of potential for story wasted in very long drawn out scenes.I understand the film is a cross between beauty and the beast and a modern commentary on media corruption or some such but it just doesn't hit home.
The characters are almost too withdrawn for the audience to make any kind of meaningful connection and potentially humorous situations go by without even a chuckle.It felt like certain characters and elements of the film were thrown together at the last second (ie the wonderful actress Helen Mirren had little to no poignant moments in the film) and a lot of it just felt like the director was trying to "wing it" until he got to climax..which wasn't all that well constructed or climatic.I really liked the actors in the film but I think they really didn't have much to go on script wise.
Call it "Monster" or "No such thing", it is a bad,boring film directed by Indie cinema wizard Hal Hartley..
However,it is a pity that he has completely goofed up his film "No such thing" as it is nothing short of a big bad joke.Many viewers might complain that this Hal Hartley film is something of an incomplete cinema as its characters have not been fully developed.Some viewers might also feel that by making a rather obscure film about a monster in a foreign land,Hal Hartley has attempted to distance himself from independent cinema movement.The only best thing which works wonders in "No Such Thing" concerns actress Sarah Polley's fortuitous transformation from a coffee maker to a beautiful journalist who achieves instant fame by bringing a weird monster to USA.Among other actors,Helen Mirren is wicked as ever as a boss who would like to get best news for her channel.For Hal Hartley,Icelandic setting also does not help much as the plot of his film is muddled as it has all the shades of a film which has been made in an agonizing hurry.This might be one of the plausible reasons why his film had a limited distribution despite the fact that it was chosen for "Un Certain Regard" section during Cannes International Film Festival 2001.
How did this thing get past being a script?How did Helen Mirren and Julie Christie become involved in this project?It sort of feels like they were all at a party and someone said, "Let's make up a movie!" And they started writing, with everybody throwing in ideas.
This movie describes the stupidity of the human being from the reviewer, and at the same time, sensible point of view of the sadly outcasted monster, with admirable simplicity; it's a sweet and heavy and funny and sad film.
I've never met an immortal monster that existed since time began, but if I did, I'd be willing to bet that it would be a lot like this guy.Polley also does a good job with the bizarre material she's given, especially in the beginning and the end of the film.
"No Such Thing" is a post-apocalyptic "Beauty and the Beast." Though Hal Hartley's the-future-is-now satirical plot was probably written and filmed before 9/11 and got overtaken by the real unthinkable happening in New York City and media wars that are almost beyond parody, it is still a wistful meditation on the nature of humanity.With his opening line resonant of "Moby Dick" -- "I'm not the monster I once was."-- Robert John Burke effectively and entertainingly uses his Kenneth Nordine-like voice to project The Monster's existential emotions and eternal intelligence under complex make-up.Sarah Polley's innocent ingénue is intentionally out of place in NYC -- but works well with The Monster in Iceland and beyond.
Two old broads, Helen Mirren and Julie Christie, get to strut their stuff in atypical roles for Polley to also play off of.Michael Spiller's cinematography is gorgeous, particularly in Iceland.Hartley's own music is mesmerizing throughout and its probably not unintentional that the leitmotif is reminiscent of "The Twilight Zone" theme.While I got that the climactic scene with The Monster is an ironic parallel to the earlier medical miracle that saved Polley's character, I'm not 100% sure if the denouement is certain, except that one of course thinks of the closing line of "King Kong."(originally written 4/20/2002).
Because the film's about a literal monster, played by Robert John Burke, who looks like a cross between Satan, a reptile and a grouchy dude.
Helen Mirren plays a loathsome news media executive and Julie Christie a doctor who helps rehabilitate Beatrice.Needless to say, this is an odd dramedy/fantasy that's so unique there's really "No Such Movie," which explains the mixed reviews.
The apostle Paul put it like so: "Bad company corrupts good character." This explains why Beatrice tells the monster she fears him at the end while simultaneously hugging (loving) him: She needed to carry out her duty -- compassionately putting the creature out of its misery -- because his intrinsic evil was starting to rub off!.
The scene with the junky/hostess, the blackout through pain, the "redemptive" ending ("" alluding to the insightful comments of an earlier post.)Beneath all the clunkiness and oddity, the restraint of the monster really was sweet.Odd, and let's hope it's commercial and critical failure hasn't heralded the end of HH.Recommended snack for watching this film: Any canape you can think of that involves olives, but substitute pineapple chunks for olives.
This feeling was reinforced by the tone of the mis-en-scene which in no way feels like it belongs in any type of horror movie so much so I thought I might be watching another film titled NO SUCH THING but as the titles came up it confirmed this was the film I referenced on Wikipedia The film itself isn't entirely inept where the technicalities such as editing and cinematography are concerned though the incidental music seems entirely inappropriate .
I want to nominate for the Obscure Movie of the Month...No Such thing.A delightful and imaginative 'monster movie' that sent me immediately to IMDb to give it my 10 points where I was glad but not surprised to see that I was not in the minority Where do I start to explain a horror movie that has no comparison except *maybe* Beauty and the Beast ?In a America where terrorists regularly load dynamite on to the Manhattan bridge and subways are routinely evacuated because of nerve gas releases a young unappreciated journalist is allowed by her chain smoking, sensation seeking news editor, played with aplomb by Helen Mirren, to go to Iceland in search of her missing fiancé, a camera crew member, only to wind up the lone survivor of a trans Atlantic airplane crash and pieced back together by doctors.
You ain't seen nothing quite like this.Whoever thought of this story (writer/director Hal Hartley) has some imagination and I will be looking for more of his work.Bravissimo !!!.
Because films like this, that actually try to say something, never have a chance at hell competing against the studio grind.Hal Hartley is a true original, just wish there was more than five people in the theater to view his passionate work.
She starts to take a liking to him and he feels the same way, despite his immortality.Written & Directed by Hal Hartley (Amateur, Flirt, Trust) made a unique, one of a kind film.
I don't usually look at user comments, but I had to see all the people who got tricked into seeing a Hal Hartley movie thinking they were going to see the girl teach the monster about love and how great it feels to use its powers for good and how society can learn to not judge people by what's on the outside.
I saw a preview screening of 'No Such Thing' so my commentary will be on that, not the finished product.It started out rather interesting, but I kept scratching my head about pretty much everything that went on.The dialog, the characters, their motivation....what the director was trying to accomplish was a complete mystery.Perhaps I consume too much entertainment pablum [I actually liked the idea of JarJar Binks, but not the accent, found 'On the Beach' engrossing, if depressing, and would really like to see Fox produce Temptation Island 3] but this was a little too much for my taste.Don't get me wrong....
In this one scene several outrageous stories are told and dismissed: "The Federal Government went on strike." "Has the President shot himself yet?" "A movie studio bought all of lower Manhattan." (In response to a list of international catastrophes) "You're reading all last week's news!" "...And keep putting pressure on the mayor," to which she gets the response "Careful Boss, the same studio owns this network."The movie is really about Beatrice, who works at the network serving coffee, but who asks to go to Iceland to find out what happened to a crew they sent there looking for an alleged monster.
But the Boss wants him alive "As long as he's fashinable." When Beatrice, the Monster, and the wacky Dr. Arto escape back to Iceland to do the deed, the Boss is held responsible by Arto's U.S. Marshal escorts and sees this as a news story in itself, a "demonizing of the media." It is revealed by Arto that the Monster, contrary to his belief that he lived forever, was actually a scientific creation he took part in.When all is said and done the movie seems rather pointless, and possibly low-budget given the abrupt ending.
Helen Mirren's character, the briefly seen Dr. Arto, and occasionally even the monster are the saving graces of a good movie gone bad.
The story is interesting, the acting decent, and the cinematography acceptable, but the sum of the parts did not make a cohesive whole, and the movie became muddled and misunderstood, much like the monster himself..
The weird part is that some people really think this is what a good film is, that his is HOW TO do it, how to write, how to tell that great story, how to direct actors.
The desolate landscapes of Iceland are gorgeous and suitable as a place where this monster would choose to live and suffer.As for the actors, I thought Sarah Polley (Beatrice), Robert John Burke (the monster), and Helen Mirren (the news boss) were great.
Beatrice, however, who is wholly good, simply loves the Monster.I think there is no ending to the film because there is no beginning.
It was so completely out of character I thought maybe I had passed out and missed a section of the movie.How did they get the monster on the plane?
But these questions seem to be somehow shoehorned into this really poorly made film.The monster looks and sounds like a rock star.