Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

The Poster For HOLY MOTORS!

Nordling here.

HitFix has the exclusive premiere for the poster to HOLY MOTORS, so give them a courtesy click if you want the full-size image.  I think it's quite lovely myself, and I have no idea how this movie will play for people.  It took a few days for this movie to settle in my mind, and once I became comfortable with the film's many themes and ideas, I realized that I had seen a significant work by a significant filmmaker.

So what is HOLY MOTORS about?  On the surface, it's about a man (Denis Lavant), driven around Paris in a limousine, taking on various personas and telling different stories.  Some of these stories are seemingly nonsensical, and the true meaning of them isn't apparent until you see the complete product.  But it's not really about trying to crack the code, as it were, of the plot, but simply experiencing the movie and one filmmaker's catharsis as he tries to make sense of this crazy passion we call cinema. 

There's really no way to describe HOLY MOTORS without coming across as some kind of film snob, but there are moments of such beauty and power in it that took my breath away, and other moments that skirt right up to being silly, but they still worked.  It's certainly not a movie for most people, and that's okay; it was never meant to be.  But for those audiences willing to open themselves to brave, experiential filmmaking, I think HOLY MOTORS could very well rock their world.  Here's the poster, and visit HitFix for the full-size image:

Nordling, out.  Follow me on Twitter!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:20 p.m. CST


    by txubill

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:21 p.m. CST

    by txubill

    that made me laugh

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Is this the remake of The Phantom?

    by kindofabigdeal

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:32 p.m. CST

    dull poster

    by King_Ink

    Is that a motion capture suit she's wearing? I know that the general consensus is that this and Cloud Atlas are the two important geek movies of the fall. Whatev's. I'll probably see em both and judge them myself...

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    watched trailer looks good.

    by DarthBlart

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:41 p.m. CST

    But you are a film snob...

    by HandOfIncreases

    Now remember everyone... If you don't like this, it makes you lazy and anti-intellectual.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 12:45 p.m. CST

    sounds like COSMOPOLIS

    by Spandau Belly

    not that I saw that one

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Won't be watching this

    by Sandman

    I've read about four reviews of this now and they all share two basic things in common : they praise the film to the skies... and they make it sound like it's not actually about anything.It comes across in the reviews like a series of unconnected sketches that somebody stitched together and pretended it was a movie. Thanks, but no thanks.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST

    What is the actual difference between pretentious and intellectual?

    by kindofabigdeal

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:19 p.m. CST

    kindofabigdeal - my take

    by Collin Armstrong

    I take pretentiousness as a bad quality - someone who either thinks that they're smart, or actually is smart, who makes sure to rub others' faces in their knowledge. They get off on liking things that might be considered challenging simply because they're challenging, not necessarily because they actually like and / or understand them. Whatever you think or do, it won't be good enough to equal their own point of view or intelligence. Intellectual is thoughtful / thought-provoking. It might speak to a more learned point of view, but in general I just take it to mean something or someone who doesn't think intelligence is a bad thing or something to be ashamed of - it embraces intelligent thinking. It's not a negative trait. All imo, of course.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:36 p.m. CST

    Intellectual is smart, thought provoking

    by jim

    Pretentious is trying to be smart but coming off as smug and douchy.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 1:46 p.m. CST

    What is Jarmusch up to?

    by Ditko

    The world needs more Jarmusch.

  • Seriously -- sometimes it's just what you want.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 2 p.m. CST

    Cool poster

    by albert comin

  • Not that I'm sure that's what is presented here but I'll give it a shot.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 5:22 p.m. CST

    I ain't seein' no movie the Village Voice raves about!

    by Snake Foreskin

    And Eva Mendes couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. And the director's name is stupid. Carax? Looks like a typo for CarMax or CarFax.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 6:08 p.m. CST

    Inland Empire

    by readyoufool

    This sounds like the kind of movie I'd want to like, but still wouldn't. Kinda like Inland Empire.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 6:50 p.m. CST

    The difference between intellectual and pretentious:

    by FluffyUnbound

    Intellectual material has definable content that may be difficult to digest but which is still present. Pretentious material apes the forms of intellectual material but doesn't have any demanding content. It knows how to appear to be smart, but doesn't really have anything to say, or uses contrived high art forms to communicate extremely simplistic or hackneyed content. To give you an example: Kubrick's PATHS OF GLORY is intellectual; Malick's THE THIN RED LINE is pretentious.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 10:54 p.m. CST

    COSMOPOLIS was brilliant

    by beamish13

    Extremely funny take on a remarkably prescient novel. A DANGEROUS METHOD was poo-poo'ed by many critics as well, but I thought it was stunning, too. Anyway, Carax is a great filmmaker who's never released a dud and I can't wait to see HOLY MOTORS in 35mm.

  • Oct. 2, 2012, 11:30 p.m. CST

    tallboy, it's not a robot

    by konkrete590

    It is a woman in a motion capture suit, and the scene with her is incredible! Probably one of the most sensious scenes I have seen in any movie ever. And the scene is also very ninja. It is definately a must see movie!

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 2:53 a.m. CST


    by WavingFlagsInSpace

    I agee with much of what you have written, but I disagree wholeheartedly with you in regards to 'The Thin Red Line'. There is a definite intellectual strand running through that movie - I teach it as one part of an English A-Level course on 'Relationships' and the material certainly holds up to intellectual scrutiny. Lloyd Michaels has written an excellent essay on the film exploring its use of word and image as a form of 'tone poem', as have John Streamas, Stacey Peebles, Robert Silberman and others on other aspects of the films themes. I realise this topic is wholly subjective - my girlfriend views Lars von Trier's 'Melancholia' as the most pretentious piece of claptrap she has ever seen, I think moments of it have real value - do we judge parts or the whole? If just one scene in a film has emotional and intellectual value, does that render it unpretentious?

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 7:17 a.m. CST

    i liked the earlier poster more

    by t

  • No.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Also the crutch of poor critics

    by Adam13

    So often, you hear a film comprehensively dismissed by someone as "pretentious." If you watch a film and it doesn't speak to you, or you can't engage with it, or you flat out don't get it (hey, it happens to everyone), it's easier to write it off as pretentious and move on. My feeling is, if a movie is obviously difficult -- with non-linear narrative, cryptic dialogue, surreal, seemingly disconnected imagery, etc. -- you owe it to the director to make an interpretive effort. If you then conclude that they were merely "aping the forms of intellectual material" (a bang-on definition of the term from Fluffy, above), fair enough, but the onus, in my opinion, is on the viewer to demonstrate this "pretentiousness." Films aren't made in a day. Before I denigrate hundreds, even thousands, of hours of shooting and editing, I better take more than two hours on a Tuesday night to reduce it to pretension. Way, way overused term and generally thoughtlessly applied, frequently in concert with "self-indulgent." I thought of the latter term during Boardwalk Empire this week, when Gyp rages, "What's life if it's not personal?" "What's a film if it's not self-indulgent?" It's a director's vision, for fuck's sake. Frankly, "pretentious" and "self-indulgent" are often thrown up as intellectual white flags.

  • Oct. 3, 2012, 11:21 a.m. CST

    snake foreskin

    by WavingFlagsInSpace

    No human compassion...