Begotten (1989) User Reviews

Haunting

[SheBear · 6/10 · 7 May 2004]

When you make a film like Begotten you know it will divide people - one man's trash is another man's art. I don't think Begotten is trash and I'm not sure if it's art but I do know that it haunted me long after I saw it.

This is completely unlike any film you'll ever see. The graininess of it and the fact that you can't always make out what's going on just ups the creep out factor. It's like watching a vague memory or a disjointed nightmare play out on film.

On the downside, at only 68 minutes, it's still way too long. Each scene starts with promise but drags on and on and on...

I admire the audacity of the filmmaker and this is certainly a one of a kind work but ultimately Begotten is flawed by it's own self indulgence.

A literal example of "gross religious symbolism"

[dfranzen70 · 5/10 · 30 September 2017]

Begotten is one of those movies that's aimed at a very specific audience. It's not for people who are easily offended, or even mildly so. It's not for people who prefer easy-to-follow plots or who prefer clear, crisp cinematography. It's really for people who relish weird movies, particularly ones that Mean Something, the better to analyze endlessly. Me, I don't care so much for the over-analyzing bit, but I do like me some weirdness. And boy, does Begotten get weird. And gory.

Reasons you might not like this movie, reader: 1) It's in black and white. (I know!) 2) It has no dialogue. 3) It looks like it was shot on Super 8mm film, transferred to Betamax, copied over to cave drawings, and then digitally recorded. What I mean to say is that grainy is a word that applies here. It's kind of like the old days, when one might get a partial signal for a TV channel to which one had not subscribed. Except at no point is the signal clear in Begotten. Where was I? Oh, yeah. 4) Its religious undertones are overtones, and they're not exactly reverential. 5) There's plenty of blood and other fluids.

Now those of you who, according to the above paragraph, not like this movie should stop reading now. Are they gone? Okay, rest of you. Here's the basic plot. There are no twists – the appeal is visual, believe it or not – because there's almost no story. It begins with God killing himself through disembowelment, which somehow causes Mother Earth to be born, and then a few minutes later she gives birth to a fully formed Son of God, who's really nothing more than a shaking skeleton with some skin on him, and then they're beset by faceless cannibals, and then things get weird.

If you do watch Begotten, be sure to cleanse yourself with some wholesome Yo Gabba Gabba afterward.

Disturbing, one-of-a-kind neo-psychedelic art film

[Flak_Magnet · 6/10 · 10 September 2009]

This is not a casual movie-going experience; its unnerving, dark, and filled with upsetting imagery. This film has a sort of evil, misanthropic feel to it that's difficult to explain succinctly. For more daring viewers, though, E. Elias Merhige's "Begotten" offers a unique and somewhat terrifying experience that is not easily forgotten. The storyline, if you can call it that, plays out in three loose acts, each personified by the brutalization and unfortunate death of the "character," who are themselves representative of an axiom and/or figurehead in any number of Judo Christean and Pagan religions. Ostensibly, the three defining characters are credited as "God Killing Himself," "Son of Earth," and "Mother Earth," with the remaining, nameless characters credited as "Theatre of Material," which apparently was Merhige's production company. The overall look of the film harks strongly of early silent films, with loose blobs of shadow predominating and copious simulated scratches and aging present in nearly every frame. Its very cool to witness the obvious hard work that went into creating such a look. The imagery itself, though, is quite brutal and strong enough to ward off nearly all of the mainstream. If you like Black Metal, Black Ambient/Industrial, or other dark and uncompromising art, though, you should really dig this movie. Its a terrific, memorable nightmare and arguably a strange sort of milestone. in the realm of avante-gard film. Watch this one with ALL the lights out... ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet

Definitely bizzarre, but the meaning is subjective

[grob248 · 11 August 2000]

Definitely one of the most bizarre pieces of moviemaking you will ever see. You need to sit through "Eraserhead," "Tetsuo:The Iron Man," and the like to have at least some preparation for this one. Not that I am about to claim that I understand what the film's intentions are. If it wasn't for the brief summary on the tape's cover, then I would be completely at loss, and even that wasn't really much help. Then again, as some people below have argued, it just may be some self-indulging mumbo-jumbo, so there might not be any need to stress over the meaning of it. In any case, because people's opinions on this movie are completely bipolar, I simply concluded that it can be looked at as, so to say, "raw matter" or "raw substance" (whichever you prefer), and one should just make out of it what he can, using his/her own perspective, experiences, etc. In other words, it's all very subjective. Personally, I can't say that I got something intellectually fulfilling out of it. I enjoyed the bleakness and weirdness of it all, though we all know how wearisome these things can become. So basically, give it a try if you are into all things out of this world, but you should probably keep you expectations reserved.

Interesting cheapie, indie horror film

[zetes · 7/10 · 27 March 2002]

I had picked up the video box for this film a dozen and a half times before I finally decided to rent it. I'm a big fan of this kind of horror film: cheap, independently produced, and inventive in their visuals. Begotten is filmed in stark black and white, with such a high contrast that you often cannot tell exactly what's going on. That's part of the innovation of this film: the horror arises because you're not 100% sure what you're seeing. Sometimes, when you do figure out what's going on, you've got to turn away.

The story is simple and, well, not really important. Most of the information can only be gleaned from the credits. A god kills himself, and Mother Earth impregnates herself with his dying seed. She then gives birth to "Flesh on Bone," i.e., mankind. The film is basically a creation myth, and also an apocalyptic myth. Unidentified beings end up destroying both Mother Earth and Flesh on Bone. None of this will really ruin the film for you, so don't worry. In fact, for those who demand a story, my little blurb might help you like it a little more than you would have if you hadn't read it (though I doubt people who are obsessed with scripts will like it at all; it's definitely for a limited audience).

Begotten isn't the best of its type. At only over 70 minutes (the box says 78, but I think it's a bit less), it still ends up feeling slow. Too much time is spent on each scene. If I were the director, I would have made the film a lot faster. As it is, it can get tedious. At a faster pace, the audience wouldn't have enough time to question and think about each scene. In a film like this, which doesn't really have any meaning or point, only the invention ends up mattering. Begotten probably has somewhere between 8 and 10 scenes in total, and they all go on too long. I still give it an 7/10, though, for its originality.

P.S. If you like this film, may I suggest a few others (which are all perhaps more successful): Incubus (Leslie Stevens, 1965), Tetsuo: The Ironman (Shinya Tsukamoto, 1988), Tetsuo II: Body Hammer (Shinya Tsukamoto, 1992), Tokyo Fist (Shinya Tsukamoto, 1994?), Haxan (Benjamen Christensen, 1922), Carnival of Souls (Herk Harvey, 1962), Dead Alive (Peter Jackson, 1989), El Topo (Alejandro Jorodowsky, 1974), and Santa Sangre (Alejandro Jorodowsky, 1986).

Just... what?

[thepearlpoint · 2/10 · 19 May 2021]

I really tried to enjoy this, truly I did. I'm a huge fan of art house/experimental horror movies but I'm just left in the dust here. I don't get it. It's a dude cutting himself up and a bunch of other random scenes that don't make sense. Even knowing the "story" it still makes no sense to me.

Interesting and original, but a bit too much art-house masturbation.

[French_Film_Blurred · 7/10 · 28 February 2007]

Even though it doesn't really matter to the film, this is a Creation myth. God (a convulsing, bloody figure in a chair) cuts his organs out with a straight razor and dies in His own filth. Mother Earth rises from his corpse and impregnates herself with his seed, giving birth to Man. It is, however highly unlikely for you to figure any of this out without reading a synopsis first, and it's not especially important to the film that you do, as it's more a surrealistic art-house imagery thing, all in inky, processed black and white. A sick, bleak atmosphere is created with the stark photography and minimal sounds (mostly water dripping, groans, scrapes, etc.) but each scene goes on a bit too long and so does the film as a whole. This could've been great as a short film, and the God killing himself scene was excellent and extremely creepy, especially being the first thing you see, but it's hard to be patient when it goes on for so long and you don't even know what you're seeing for much of the time.

Still, a good film for the original style, images, atmosphere and content.

The Novelty Wears Off 10 Minutes In

[alexnielson90 · 2/10 · 4 August 2021]

Can filmmakers and audiences stop perpetuating the very often false notion that just because something is different, shocking, or controversial that it's automatically good? Was this movie different? Yes. Was this movie shocking/disturbing? At times. Was this movie interesting? Almost never. Was this movie pretentious? Insufferably so

And for all the smug people who say the only reason someone didn't enjoy this movie is because they're too low-brow or unintelligent to appreciate it, get over yourselves. I could film my washing machine cleaning a load of laundry with a fisheye lens and strobe lights flashing for two hours and make the same argument that anyone who doesn't view it as transcendental artistic genius is just too shallow or dumb to understand it, when the reality is that, like this movie, it'd just be an occasionally interesting but mostly boring, albeit "unique" and "different", waste of time.

This is not entertainment. This is disentertainment.

[man-man-dot-org · 8/10 · 8 November 2003]

I saw 'Begotten' last night, and I'm of two minds on the film.

On one hand, I appreciate it for being the total invert of a Michael Bay film. No dialogue, extremely stylized grainy B&W photography, some of the most genuinely horrific imagery ever set to film, and a very compelling use of sound (which nobody else seems to have really picked up on yet). It's a reflection on a theme, and it dares go where most filmmakers do not not only in terms of images, but of production and concept. It's a movie that most people don't understand, and if you read through these comments you'll find a lot of people whose lack of ability to figure this film out results in them shrieking about 'pretentiousness' with the fervor of a gibbon rattling the bars of its cage at feeding time. It genuinely shocked and disturbed me, and the last time a film managed to do that was a while ago.

On the other, this is a thirty-minute short that sprawls out to over an hour and a half. I understand that there might be artistic merit in using repetition and monolithic pacing as a bludgeon, but in this case it just doesn't help everything hang together. Imagine being approached by a ragged man on the street who grabys you by the shoulders and says something that completely confounds the core of your being... but then, instead of leaving your shattered and gibbering in his wake, he just keeps talking and talking and talking. By the end of the movie, I found myself glancing at my watch now and again.

This is not entertainment, people. This is disentertainment. This is how you deprogram people who just watched "Glitter." If you watch movies to be entertained, this will frustrate, confound, and possibly anger you. You don't approach 'Begotten' like a chocolate cake you want to eat because it tastes good. You approach it like something on the menu you have never heard of before, something you see furtive glances of through the kitchen door, something that's dark and glistens and twitches on its platter; something you order not because it will taste good, but because you just have to know what it's like.

A gory S&M expressionistic meditation on Genesis

[RomanJamesHoffman · 7/10 · 21 August 2013]

Remember that scene from the Japanese 'Ring' when we see the cursed video footage for the first time and it's a disturbing, grainy, black and white montage of writhing bodies, ominous hooded figures standing beside the sea, and the well in the middle of the desolate forest? Well 'Begotten' is a lot like that except that it's arguably more disturbing as well as considerably longer.

'Begotten' is clearly not for the masses. From the get-go the imagery is gruesome: in the opening scene we see a figure disembowelling himself with a razor, the corpse of which is molested by a female figure who impregnates herself and gives birth to a fully grown man who convulses in seemingly perpetual agony before both of them consequently suffer at the hands of different categories of ambiguous, sadistic ghouls. At the end of the film a cast of 'characters' informs us that those at the beginning were God killing Himself, Mother Earth, and Son Of Earth - Flesh On Bone…if that helps.

In addition to this challenging content, another point of contention is the grainy, 'Erasrerhead'-esque black-and-white cinematography which makes the images at times so distorted that it's difficult to discern any clear outlines, which can be frustrating when you're trying to not miss anything in an attempt to fathom the impenetrable narrative! However, in endeavouring to appreciate the bold artistic ambitions of the film I forgave all of this...but the one thing which really irked me was the fact is that it is basically too long. The film clocks in at over 70 minutes and yet I genuinely think I would have appreciated it to the same level if it were half of this.

Having said that, the film clearly wasn't designed with any intention of crowd-pleasing, and unrepentantly is what it is: a unique and individual film which walks amongst the best (and most thought-provoking) experimental cinema has to offer. So while you could say "take it or leave it" I really think those that choose the latter are missing something exceptional.

A thorough waste of time

[cathcacr · 1/10 · 4 September 2001]

I came to this film with expectations of being similar in some ways to David Lynch's _Eraserhead_. After all, it has gritty photography and is supposed to be very weird and enigmatic, like some avant-garde artistic endeavor. I like the weird/bizarre in cinema (I LOVE lots of Jan Svankmajer's work); I like stuff that's enigmatic (_2001_ ending); I like stuff that has seeming incongruities and disturbing imagery (e.g. David Lynch's work). But this? This just plain sucked, as far as I'm concerned. Nothing of redeeming value as far as I could tell. There really IS nothing to tell. For 70 minutes, you have some guy writhing and twitching around while being dragged about by beings in cloaks. He even writhes and twitches around on what appears to be a big pile of timber. A guy in the beginning (it was supposed to be God, though how you can tell is beyond me) writhes and twitches around while appearing to poke himself and make a mess.

Actually, the main problem isn't any weirdness or ambiguity, it's the utter incomprehensibility of what's even going on. NOTHING discernable is happening in this film. (Things HAPPEN in _Eraserhead_.) I'll try to make an analogy and liken it to a piece of literature. On the one hand, you have articulate, meaningful phrases pieced together in a way that weirds you out. On the other hand, you have words strung together that fail even to meet any standards of grammatical correctness or comprehensibility (and not even failing to do so in a funny or interesting way). This so-called film falls into the latter category.

Scarred for life

[bannoy · 8/10 · 16 July 2002]

Don't watch this film while, or soon after, eating.

Having said that, Begotten will stick with you for the rest of your life, like it or not. Based on the nihilistic philosophy that life is nothing more than man spasming above ground (to paraphrase the title sequence/introduction), this will more than likely contain the most intense and grisly imagery you'll ever see in a film.

There is no dialogue, only image after image describing the cycle of life. The film's combination of stark black and white photography compounded with some truly creepy background sounds work to drive home the maker's message.

The movie begins with God (portrayed as a bandaged and obviously insane man) slicing open his torso with a straight razor and subsequently dying in his own filth. After his death, Mother Nature emerges from his corpse to impregnate herself with his blood and semen and gives birth to Man, represented by a maggot of a human convulsing on the earth.

The landscape is a barren waste, populated by hulking shrouded humanoids who eventually happen upon Mother Nature and Man. After a slew of violent scenes depicting the rape of Nature and destruction of Man, these humanoids proceed to pound the remains of the corpses back into the ground, and the cycle of life begins anew.

I actually rented this from Blockbuster one night, based on the cover art and hype content, but this is definitely not a Blockbuster-type film. Don't expect narrative, dialogue or any pulled punches. This is intense imagery based on a dark subject.

I give this movie some high marks for the filmwork and audio, but I don't think I'll be watching it too often, if again. I like my movies dark and unique, but this one is exponentially more than I expected.

More "Experimental"/Arthouse Stuff That Just Ain't My Thing...

[EVOL666 · 6/10 · 6 June 2006]

BEGOTTEN is another film that's really hard to form an opinion on. I'll admit that I don't particularly care very much for obscure "experimental" films - and this definitely falls into that category. The little bit that I've gathered from the film is from the end credits and production notes on the DVD.

God guts himself with a straight-razor, and Mother Earth uses his spooge to impregnate herself. Son Of Earth is born, and him and Mama-san roam around a desolate landscape until they are accosted by guys in robes that remind me of the Tuscan Raiders from STAR WARS. Those guys capture Son and Mother and do weird stuff to them, including hitting Mom in the cooch with sticks. That's about as much as I could make out of it...

I really try not to be obtuse when it comes to these sorts of films, but they are really a like or don't like type of thing. I appreciated the fact that the cinematography was very original and was obviously a labor-of-love from the director. The whole film is a very grainy black-and-white that enhances the overall "atmosphere" of the film. The sound-design is made up primarily of cricket-noises, low, rumbling thunder, heartbeat sounds, and some very muted "music" - also good at filling out the "aura" of the film. But again, I just didn't get it. I have to say that I do typically prefer films with a semi-coherent storyline, and BEGOTTEN is more of an "experience" than a film - just not necessarily a very good experience for me. Also it's FAR too long and could have been more effective had it been cut down to say, 30 minutes or so, and those that think they are going to get an art-house/splatter-film a la SUBCONSCIOUS CRUELTY will also be sadly disappointed. "Experimental" film lovers will probably get a boner for this one - me...not so much...6.5/10

What's next, A full bowel movement directed by E. Elias Merhige?

[wwwmsu · 1/10 · 20 August 2013]

Absolutely the worse use of undeveloped film in the history of the world. How anyone can say this garbage (will not use film again) is watchable must be in an drug induced fever with internal complications.

And then we read where it took many hours of filming just to get a few seconds recorded. I once had a kidney stone that was with me for five days yet that is something that would not make for a pleasurable view for the public.

This garbage may have a 'cult' following- but so does the third Reich and both are not something the sane people of the world want to be associated.

I have watched many many movies, films and shows throughout my years and I have to say that this garbage was absolutely the worse project ever witnessed. I do not think I have ever gave a rating of one to anything and it is just too bad they do not have lower ratings because this deserved less.

A Disappointment

[thymiane · 10 November 2003]

The first 3 or 4 minutes of Begotten were very promising; the graininess of the film, the obscurity of the scene in front of me, the silence, all made me feel like I was peering in on something forbidden, mysterious. I'd been told nothing of the film before I saw it except that it was "disturbing," and I thought initially that was just what I was going to get.

But after a while (and it wasn't a very long while, either) I just stopped caring. It stopped being worth the effort to struggle to discern the action going on in front of me, to piece the story of even the point of the non-story together, and sitting back and letting the imagery unfold in front of me, sort of accepting it passively for its own beauty didn't seem to work, either.

Some of the shots are beautiful, I'll admit it. And some of them are, for lack of a better word, disturbing. But I spent more of my time wondering "was this shot on film or on video, or both?" or "is that a continuous recording of crickets chirping, or is it a loop?" than "who are they, and why are they doing this?"

Because honestly I didn't care who they were, or why anything that happened on screen happened. I didn't feel any great need to. Half the time I was watching something purely abstract and non-representational, and the other half, what felt like old stock footage that someone had pieced together because they thought it looked neat, even though they had no context for what it was being shown. And it dragged on and on and on, going nowhere except where it had already been, so joy of joys, you get to see a variation on a scene that's already been beaten into the ground a couple times already, and then you get to see it again.

Mercifully, the film did eventually end, with what felt like it was supposed to be a "see, there's the point of all this" series of images, but in order to reveal the point, there needs to be a question posed in the first place, and that wasn't there. Everything just happened sort of matter-of-factly, without any emotional investment to it whatsoever, hoping it would get by on its grossness. Which it didn't. The grossness was deflated by how impossible it was to see what was going on anyway. It wasn't like peering through murk to find something you weren't sure you wanted to see. It was staring straight at the murk itself while it deluded itself that it wasn't something you couldn't bear to see.

Slow moving, pretentious, somewhat boring. But as a whole interesting with other world like imagery.

[NateManD · 6/10 · 6 July 2005]

"The Begotten is not for everyone. It is shot in grainy black & white and extremely slow at times. Some scenes tend to drag. It's not nearly as good as "Eraserhead" and "Tetsuo: the Iron Man". But as a whole the film is unique and visionary, because there's nothing like it. The film looks as if it was dug up from another time or planet. There's not much plot, but plenty of disturbing and surreal images. An abstract god like creature disembowels himself and gives birth to another god. Nomads torture a guy in extended sequences. The film seems to be a reenactment of biblical stories. I'm not one to call a film pretentious, but "Begotten" seems to have little meaning. I think critics were a little overboard calling it one of the best films of 1991. Anyways, If you get bored, turn down the volume and put some of your favorite music on. Whether it's NIN or Pink Floyd, any favorite music combined with the film's imagery; will make for an interesting and visual experience. Don't say I didn't warn you though.

It's like that killer movie from The Ring

[Tromafreak · 1/10 · 1 March 2009]

Begotten is, no doubt, someone's attempt at originality, but, what we have here is art in its most morbid, grotesque form. So, for that, Begotten has my respect, but, to be realistic, it makes no difference what this abomination is about, but for the record...

In the ultimate in incoherent horror, we begin in an unknown time, in an unknown place. Right off the bat, we are plunged into the psychotic nightmare that is Begotten. A god is, seemingly depressed, mutilating himself with a razor, I mean really trying like hell to end it all. It takes a while (why wouldn't it?) After this ultra-morbid introduction, something is happening, something is rising from the corpse, say hello to Mother Earth. What does she do? Well, she gives birth to a thing. The thing would have probably preferred to stay in the womb, but that's life. The psychotic nightmare realm of Begotten welcomes the thing the only way it knows how. The thing, along with Mother Earth is mutilated by unknown, hooded, assailants, with evil intentions being the only clarity available. From this point on, things drag as they've never dragged before. Interesting, grim images, with a totally decent soundtrack is the high points of the remainder. Not to give the impression that I don't recommend this evilness, because I do, but only once, and only for people with an appreciation for the dark side.

From my description, it may appear that I don't "get" Begotten. Trust me, I get it, and yes, Begotten is art if I've ever seen it. Everything in this film, regardless of how unrelated it may seem, is significant. That, perhaps, is the only thing that makes Begotten art. With that said, most of us require some form of entertainment value, and this is coming from someone who enjoyed The Chooper. Probably the most intriguing first five minutes I've seen in a film, but let's be realistic, the next 7 hours and 55 minutes would put one in a coma, that is, unless it's just meant for some kind of psychedelic purposes, in that case, never mind. But, how would one rate such a uniquely boring masterpiece? Depending on how much your attention span can take, It should be either 1 or 10, any other number just wouldn't make a statement. It hurts to do this, but as far as entertainment value goes, Begotten just ain't it. 1/10

One of the most original horror films of the last 25 years

[tomgillespie2002 · 7/10 · 30 October 2012]

Beginning with a truly disturbing scene that depicts God (Brian Salzberg) slicing himself open with a straight razor, Begotten tells the story of Genesis through a series of strange, methodical scenes involving various, unnamed characters in a barren landscape. While God lies dead, his blood sprayed across the walls and pooled on the floor, Mother Earth (Donna Dempsey) is born through his semen and sets off into the wilderness, where the Son of Earth (Stephen Charles Barry) is created. His body writhes pathetically in the dirt, and is found and captured by a group of hooded nomads. They drag him through the wilderness, collecting objects that the Son of Earth vomits, and when they cross paths with Mother Earth, they proceed to rape and destroy her.

Begotten is one of those rare films that manages to frustrate you as much as it will fascinate. The imagery, which took ten hours per second to render, is truly unnerving. It's like watching a lost silent film only to realise it contains some of the most f****d-up imagery ever committed to film. Often the film is so scratched and the blacks and whites so grainy, it's difficult to make out exactly what is happening. But maybe that's the point, perhaps the violent acts committed by the hooded beings are best seen through squinted eyes or merely glimpsed. Not much happens - most of the film spends watching the Son of Earth being dragged and abused, and the only soundtrack consists of crickets and birds, that become so repetitive it actually adds to the psychological torment of the film. But Begotten wasn't meant to be enjoyed, but simply experienced, and if you can look past its art-house pretensions, this is one of the most original horror films of the last 25 years.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

This movie was awful

[Heatgutspam · 1/10 · 13 April 2012]

I made an account, just so I could warn people of how terrible this movie is.

90% of the movie simply involves people writhing about as though they are mentally retarded. The blood and gore doesn't look realistic in the least bit. The whole movie is shot with some ancient outdated camera, and about 50% of the film is out of focus. Furthermore, the lighting is horrendous! Between the antique camera, the poor lighting, and lack of focus, I didn't even know what I was looking at most of the time.

Let's move on to the story line. Why exactly is god suppose to be killing himself in the opening scene? For that matter, what makes this man god, in any sense of the word? And then as he's dying, "Mother Nature" (I don't know why she is suppose to be Mother Nature either.) comes out of the shadows and plays with dead god's penis before fingering her hairy snatch. (Maybe she's Mother Nature because she doesn't shave?) Then she apparently gives birth to a fully grown retarded man, whom she abandons. He is harassed by some hooded weirdos, before Mother Nature comes back and drags him around by a noose. The two are then killed by rock harvesters, it appears.

Credits begin rolling! This entire movie is made by about 20 people. This includes actors, writers, producers, technical support, lighting, music and sound, etc. The camera used was a donation (Explains why the whole film looks so mediocre!). I'd guess the budget for this movie was about $100, certainly no more than $200. What a waste of funds...

Anyway, this was the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. A complete and utter waste of 1 hour and 12 minutes (I was constantly checking the time, to see if I was almost done...)

Go watch something else. Anything else.

One of the greats

[CeaSerin · 10/10 · 10 January 2008]

I first heard of Begotten when a girlfriend of mine picked it up in a "cult classics" section of my local video retailer. She knew I liked obscure artsy movies so I rented it and brought it home. It sat on my TV for a couple of days and then I put it in the VCR just before going to bed. I thought that maybe I'll see what it's like first then devote more time to it the next day. What followed was that it actually woke me up. I sat through the entire film and loved it. After I went through the closing credits I watched it again. Only after you see the closing credits do you get an idea of who is who. After you know that you can watch it again with renewed appreciation. Don't listen to the people that tear this movie apart. It's not for everyone. If you're someone that doesn't like reading subtitles than this movie isn't for you (not that there are subtitles, there's no dialog at all). If you're someone that actually owns Rush Hour 2 then this movie isn't for you.

This movie is truly original and inspiring. It does what other movies have never done. It looks like nothing else and is bolder than just about everything out there - from 1989 to the current date. You can tell that everyone involved in the making of this movie truly love the art of what they do and understand what can be captured in cinema form.

If you're looking to be "entertained" then the movie isn't for you. However, it is pure escapism in some extreme way and in film form. It's like someone attached wires to my head and taped one of my worst nightmares. But this nightmare makes sense if you really sit and watch the images, dissect the action of the actors, and don't sit there noodling your guitar passively but watch and not blink.

People compare it to Eraserhead but Begotten is so much more. I'm not joking when I say it is my favorite movie. It's an important film, visually stimulating, mechanically inspiring, and hypnotic. One review I read about it is very true though, "no one will get through Begotten without being marked."

Teenager's doom fantasy

[margus-kiis · 7/10 · 6 September 2006]

For me the movie was really familiar to see. When I was about 16 --17, I had just the same B/W fantasies. Especially if I was listening first albums of Soundgarden -- slow heavy monotonic rock. Or Sonic Youth. I imagined faceless strange people wandering around some wasteland doing something nasty, eating human flesh, digging in the dirt etc. I also imagined naked spastic men in the mud. And naked women with hairy pussies of course too. Everything have to be in slow motion, in extreme black & white aesthetic, in really apocalyptic mood. I had these ideas 15 years ago but I still remember. So I really laughed when I watched this pretentious movie and especially when I read the titles in the end of film: "God Killing Himself", "Mother Earth" and so on. Good "deep" movie for teenagers, nice alternative to every kind of plastic horrors.

The Horror...

[zero-30 · 1/10 · 17 November 2002]

"Shadow of the Vampire" wasn't great by any means - and vastly overrated, but "Begotten" makes that film look like a piece of classic cinema. The very height of pointless abstraction and meandering pretension, "Begotten" shares nothing with its audience other than animosity. Dull, witless and utterly, utterly empty of anything redeeming, the film seems to be impressed with itself, simply for being unbearably different than a watchable movie. It's just not worth the time.

Visually Fantastic and Technically Brilliant!

[smrger · 10/10 · 5 December 2002]

The visual effectiveness of this film is unmatched by anything I've seen. And the work required to make achieve it must have been incredibly long and tedious (you don't just stick "Kodak Grainy Film" in your camera to get this look). Don't watch this film to be entertained, watch it to be visually stimulated, watch it to be challenged and provoked in your thoughts on film and any other topic that comes to mind, religion will likely be one thought.

Expressionist Odyssey of Fantasy and Horror

[Screen_O_Genic · 6/10 · 7 June 2019]

Shot in stark black and white looking like an unearthed flick from the late 19th - early 20th-Century, "Begotten" is one of those films I never forgot ever since I first viewed it years back. A weird hybrid of "Un Chien Andalou", "Vampyr", and "The Seventh Seal", this burned and deformed offspring pretty much stands on its own. A phantom in white guts itself; a woman in an eye mask performs male genital exercises and gets cream-lined for her efforts; an endlessly spastic unfortunate in scars gets picked up by a group of Sunn O))) - like hoodies who persistently try to kill him in various ways all failing miserably; all shadowed with a soundtrack consisting of nature sounds and a hybrid of strange noises - scenes that will be etched on the mind's eye like a slightly disturbing memory. Long, slow, boring, tedious, unsettling and utterly memorable, this is one of the more enduring experiments in those attempts "to be different".

The worst movie I have ever seen!!

[BJColleton02649 · 1/10 · 10 June 2003]

I suffered all the way through this movie because I had read this was a disturbing masterpiece. I don't get it, what is the point of watching a washed out movie without dialog about naked people who quiver in mud. I have seen a lot of bad movies in my life, but this is without a doubt the WORST film I have ever seen. I think that if Ed Wood had directed this he would have listed the directing credit as Alan Smithee. Time would be better spent watching a TV test pattern for 78 minutes than sitting through Begotten!!