User Reviews

This film's subject matter is pure Southern Gothic - mysterious stranger; fairy-tale house in the forest; religious overload; repressed sexuality; mad matriarch; weird hereditary flaws; purge of salvation. This overheated content is filmed in a very cool, stylised manner, broken up into chapters, mannered acting and dialogue, static scenes. The effect walks the tightrope between eerie and overblown. The film's central mystery - the sexuality of Callie - is left ambiguous: is she an innocent or witch? Charming.

It is rare to chance on the first few films of a Hollywood actor obviously destined for better stuff and this is no exception. This is Brendan Fraser post California/Encino man and pre-Mummy etc in a sexy movie about passions bubbling under the surface. Fraser plays the Darkly Noon of the title who is found by a labourer and taken to his friends, Caly and Clay who reside in the forest. For the first 30 minutes plus of the film, only Caly is present, a beautiful and at times teasing presence in the film from Noon's perspective. Extremely religious Noon has difficulty reconciling Caly and his feelings for her until her lover, Clay returns and, troubled by their love for each other and the teachings of his parents and other strangers in the woods, Noon fights, literally against his rescuers quite spectacularly.

I stumbled upon this movie years ago and only recently was I reminded of how great this movie was. Brenden Frasier and Ashley Judd were totally unknown to me at the time so I can't really compare any of their more recent works to this movie, but I can tell you that this movie has stayed with me for more than 6 or 7 years. I can't understand why anyone wouldn't be drawn in to the madness that is Darkly. His innocence alone would pull you in and beg for your compassion. I don't care what anyone else tells you, if you truly love great writing and movies that get to you where no other ones can, then you have to see The Passion of Darkly Noon. It's a dark thriller with a fabulous one-sided love story tragedy. Maybe I'm just biased for emotionally disturbing thrillers with twisted story lines that are not so far fetched that you can't relate on some levels.

Writer/director Philip Ridley presents a suspenseful and equally strange story that holds your interest from the beginning. Brendan Fraser fans will see a piece of his best work. Ashley Judd fans will be very satisfied with all they get to see.

This is an odd and sometimes slow story that really sizzles and catches fire. Fraser plays Darkly Noon, who finds himself separated from a strong religious family and is wandering in the woods. He is befriended by Judd, who plays the part of Callie, a very seductive soul who lives in the woods with her mute boyfriend.

Fraser's character soon begins lusting for Judd (and who wouldn't?) and has to battle with his religious upbringing and his impure thoughts. His self contained emotions makes him a very volatile person, as he feels God wants him to eradicate the new found evil.

Figure into the mix; the mute's deranged mother; an evangelic undertaker; and a wandering circus family. This is a very entertaining movie to say the least. And Miss Judd mesmerizes.

I watched this film yesterday and was pretty blown away by it. It's very much like a magical realist novel in how it mixes aspects of modern life and society with fairy tale mythology and a general dreamlike atmosphere.

The story is basically about a young man named Darkly Noon who has been brought up by religious fanatics and who stumbles upon a weird "family" of three that lives deep in the woods after his parents are murdered. These people consist of Callie, a women who is so beautiful and sensual she's being compared to a force of nature, her mute boyfriend and a third young man. At the beginning Darkly, played by Brendan Fraser who is actually downright awesome in this film, is alone with Callie, which causes a lot of confusion as he's attracted to her and his sexual desires clash with both his religious dogmas and, upon his return, with her boyfriend. There's also a strange old woman living in the woods who claims that Callie is in fact a witch who seduces and kills every man she meets and also accuses her of having murdered most of her family. With that in mind Darkly, who has been continuously mutilating himself to control his urges, decides Callie needs to be punished for her sins against god. Things go very wrong from there...

The Passion of Darkly Noon is a tough film to describe because there really are not a lot of movies that are anything like it. It's part thriller, part dark erotic drama, part supernatural horror and part fairy tale. Now try to wrap your mind around that ... It is expertly and effectively directed by Philip Ridley, who has only directed this film and THE REFLECTING SKIN a few years before it and spends most of his time writing children's books. Which makes sense because DARKLY NOON bears some resemblance to the simplicity of the narratives of children's books. It's just that it goes into extremely dark and adult territory instead of remaining wholesome and family-friendly. The performances by everyone involved are great, Fraser really surprised me with his portrayal of Darkly. The guy once had some promise before he decided to squander it all in ridiculous braindead blockbusters. Ashley Judd, who plays Callie, also does a great job with a very difficult role. Callie is incredibly seductive, naive, playful and almost childlike all at once and Judd pulls it off admirably. Her mute boyfriend is played by Viggo Morensen and he's also good in a role that requires him to convey everything with gestures alone. Special praise has to go to Nick Bicat for a truly haunting score that fits the style of the film and John de Borman's lush cinematography perfectly.

THE PASSION OF DARKLY NOON is the best film I have seen in a long time and a genuine discovery.

I would have had no idea about this movie unless it was recommended by Mark Kermode (in a recent interview with director Philip Ridley) because, to be honest, I'm not the biggest fan of either Brendan Fraser or Ashley Judd. Good thing I gave it a shot, though. THE PASSION OF DARKLY NOON isn't the least bit subtle in its thematic approach, but it crafted a unique, compelling story whose implications are hard to ignore. It examines the darker tendencies of religious fundamentalism, its obsession with the nuclear family and how easily a brainwashed and distorted mind can resort to violence when beliefs are challenged. Brendan Fraser plays Darkly Noon, a man raised in a Bible-believing cult who, through circumstance encounters Callie (Ashley Judd), who lives with her boyfriend Clay (Viggo Mortensen, in a wordless performance). Initially, Clay is away and Darkly finds himself sexually attracted to Callie despite being conflicted. Things take a turn for the worse when Clay returns. That's all you really need to know going in. Ashley Judd gives a decent performance, although she serves more as eye candy in some respects (but intentionally so). I wasn't as sold on Brendan Fraser's performance initially, but his choices did make more sense as the story progressed. Viggo Mortensen also did what he could playing a mute. Ultimately, the blunt force approach to the themes in the story cheapened it a little (for me, at least), but it was very effective at eliciting an emotional reaction at all the right points. What tipped the film in a more positive direction was the melancholy, mostly piano score which conveyed a sense of isolation and unrequited desire that are at its heart. There were also a couple of songs, one of which plays over the closing credits, that I really liked. This isn't a film I'd recommend to the casual movie-watcher (or an overly religious person, who would probably take offense to the portrayal of religion), but for the more adventurous person who seeks out under-seen gems. While not perfect, this one will probably stay with you (and me) for quite a while.

The film starts with a young man stumbling through a forest He is obviously in distress. Brendan Fraser plays the man and we discover later that his name is Darkly Noon. The name comes from I Corinthians, 13:12, "For now we see through a glass, darkly…" Does that have some sort of significance? He is helped by a passerby named Jude and taken to a house in the forest. A young woman named Callie lives there. She is played by Ashley Judd whose entire wardrobe seems to consist of clothes given to her by a smaller woman with a taste for skimpy attire. Is she an emotionally confused free spirit or is she a sexpot tease? Whichever, it certainly confuses Darkly. It seems he was raised in a community of religious nuts who were so outrageously fundamentalist that they were set upon by their neighbors and slaughtered one and all, and only he escaped alone to tell the tale. Despite, or perhaps because of his strict upbringing, Darkly becomes burdened by longings with which he is ill equipped to deal. Matters are made worse when Callie's boyfriend comes back. This is Clay, played by Viggo Mortensen. He is a carpenter who doesn't seem to make anything other than cradles and coffins. Darkly becomes more and more obsessed and starts indulging in self-abuse of every kind, some of it involving barbed wire. It's not pretty. Then things start to get weird. A giant silver shoe floats by. Darkly meets a strange old woman who spends all of her time wandering around the forest with a dog and a rifle and ranting. Jude, who is the one contact with the outside world for these people, also seems to be their one contact with reality. He tries to get everybody to calm down but they're all too busy making cryptic remarks and dealing in symbolism. The ending is totally bizarre, involving an elephant and an explanation of the silver shoe that only confuses matters even further.

This is an unusual film. The summary above does a fair description of the plot, but what it doesn't describe is the air of magic around the forest and everyone's encounters within it. It's hard to describe this, except to say that the film both brings you together with one character's descent into madness while also introducing you to people who seem as though they stepped right out of a story book.

At times, it has the feel of some children's tale of a lost soul wandering through the woods, encountering various odd characters. Some are endearing, some are frightening. The difference is that this isn't a children's tale, and the emotions and imperatives are being experienced by adults, though not always with a mature sense of self-control.

Ashley Judd is both eerily wistful and intensely sensuous as a young lady seemingly without any concept of shame or self consciousness, and deeply in love. Brendan Fraser does a credible job of portraying an inexperienced, painfully conflicted child-man and seems to sweat this tension from every pore.

After being found in poor condition on a road in the woods of North Carolina, Darkly, a young man brought up in a zealous cult, is brought to the home of Callie, a beautiful young lady, who lives with her mute partner Clay. Clay takes days of refuge and reflection in the woods and happens to be gone when Darkly arrives. His absence allows Darkly and Callie time to bond over the course of several days and Darkly is conflicted by his religious ideology and the feelings Callie has stirred within him. Upon Clay's return, Darkly becomes all the more distressed and begins to spiral into madness.

This was a beautifully filmed movie. While the setting is meant to be the hills of North Carolina, the filming location was in Germany and the natural beauty was amazing. Brendan Fraser and Ashley Judd both played their roles brilliantly but for me, there was something lacking. The story could've used a little more work when it came to the scripting as well as character development. While passable, I just never got the sense that I knew enough about the characters to fully understand their perspective in relation to their backgrounds, especially when it came to Callie's relationship with Clay's mother.

It's not a bad film and was an entertaining watch albeit a slow one. I wouldn't mind recommending it to people who enjoy dark dramas. As aforementioned, Brendan Fraser and Ashley Judd did a really great job in their portrayals with Brendan as the skillful standout.

Takes an interesting premise demanding gentle, contemplative treatment, and cruelly abandons it for sick slasher stupidity. Brendan Fraser plays a stuttering, sheltered man-child who knows nothing about the world except what he's been taught by his religious fanatic parents. After he watches them die in a Branch-Davidian type incident, he wanders into the care of a beautiful outcast (Ashley Judd) who lives in the woods with her volatile, mute boyfriend. He struggles to reconcile his overwhelming attraction for the openly sexual woman with his parents' harsh, judgmental teachings.

Some early scenes are effective, but it soon becomes obvious that the director, Philip Ridley, doesn't know what he is trying to say. He goes for horror, he goes for camp, for dark humor, for arty symbolism - none of it works. It's an amateurish effort all the way around and there is some stupendously bad dialogue as well as bogus, completlely unbelievable confrontations. (I was particularly amused with the way Fraser at one points dangles his arm and index finger like Elvis and "ominously" declares something like "Now it's time for a walk in the dark."

Working with Ridley's shallow, dim-witted script; Fraser obediently gives a shallow, dim-witted performance. He overacts atrociously. Ashley Judd is radiant as always and ultimately the film is nothing more than an excuse to put her in situations where the camera can adore her.

I began watching "The Passion of Darkly Noon" with nearly little information about it. I knew which actors were in it and that it had something to do with a man who just got out of a cult. That man meets a "scantily clad" woman and desires arise.

Well, maybe that sounds like a lot of information, but let me express that it really isn't. The movie is so much deeper than those few lines of plot. During the beginning of the movie, I wasn't sure how I was going to feel about the film, but afterwards, I sat in awe of what had been displayed. The true test of the value of movies is if one contemplates the film at a later date, and without a doubt, I've pondered this film for a long time after viewing it. I don't profess to understand all the symbolism, but I do understand the purpose of the film and the significance of the characters. I have theories about the big shoe. Perhaps it is a symbol of how out of place Darkly is or feels, or a symbol of how he doesn't understand much in this "new" world. And in the end, with the small shoe, maybe it's a symbol of how out of place we all feel or how we lack understanding of our own worlds. But who knows what the shoe really meant.

Although things progressed too quickly in the beginning, by the end, I realized that it was supposed to be like that. This is Darkly's story and we see the most important parts of his stay with Callie and Clay. It was the lightening quick progression of days and events that led me to understand just what was happening to Darkly Noon. His need to see everything as a sin dissipated and he began to really desire to be accepted by Callie and to try to accept her. But then he realized that acceptance wasn't enough, that he needed to be loved, and his desire did not love him back. Like his self-inflicted wounds, Darkly, himself, became infected and turned to poison (just as Callie said) because he wasn't tended to the way he needed to be.

His cultist parents popped back into his mind and everything was a sin again. Still, there is a part of him that knows differently, but he so desperately wants to be loved, by his dead parents, by God, by SOMETHING, that he allows himself to be manipulated. And the form of his manipulation is incredible. It's not a living person who uses him...it is his past, his upbringing, his learned beliefs and his vision of his parents that manipulates him into wanting to be "right" with God again and cleansing himself and the place he has been. And he allows himself to be manipulated because he knows that he will finally be loved, not by Callie, but by God, by something.

It's the development of Darkly that makes the story. It's not about Callie or Clay or anyone else who happens along. It's about Darkly, how he responds to people, how people respond to him, and how he effects other people. He is searching for something he can understand, something that is normal to him...hence his friendship with Roxy. I also think the movie is about the basic need to be important to someone. This movie left me thinking about the possibilities if Clay hadn't returned. Would Darkly developed into a "normal" person, acquiring his desire's love? Darkly is important to Callie until Clay returns, then he is put aside, although not in an obvious way. It shatters Darkly's notion that Callie could love him and that drives him right back to doing things the way he was taught in the cult. And also, what would have happened if Jude had come to visit more and made Darkly laugh and feel a part of something. But in the end, "Who will love him now?"

The way this film was shot is so striking. The film makers are unafraid of being unusual and using some non-standard techniques. The cuts, lighting and angles of the scene where Darkly is praying is simply amazing. How that scene is crafted really lends itself to project a creepy feeling to the viewer. That's only one example of the uniqueness of the film making.

Now, let me mention Brendan Fraser. He is quite possibly the most talented actor in "young" Hollywood. No, he's not De Niro or Nicholson (and personally, I feel that they are over-rated anyway). Fraser is an actor who can convince me that he is a Cave Man going to High School just as well as he can convince me he's a stuttering cult member or a persecuted Jewish football player at a 1950's prep school. To be able to convince someone that he is all of those things is amazing. He's extremely versatile. And while some people question some of the roles he takes on, everyone of those roles fills as if he was born to play them.

I loved "George of the Jungle" not only because he was mostly naked most of the movie, but also because he was so GOOD as the title character. Brendan Fraser doesn't have to take himself seriously ALL THE TIME, like other actors do. He can take cartoon characters on and have fun with them.

Since this is a review of "The Passion of Darkly Noon," I'll stop writing about Brendan's other movies. As for this one...my God (oops, that's a sin), Brendan showed his talent. His stutter alone was amazingly well executed. But the magnitude of his performance left ME stuttering. He mastered everything nuance and side of his character, from Darkly's naivete and his blind devotion to his cult's belief in the Bible, to his fierce need to be cleansed and right with God and his transformation into an Angel of Death filled with fury.

In short (and in closing), I found this film to rich in characters played by talented actors and rich in deep and significant intent. This is not a movie for everyone. I can see how someone could not like the film, but if you like movies that are strange, yet comprehensible, movies that keep you thinking long after you've stopped watching, movies that make you wonder "what if...", then you'll probably get something out of this movie. I've avoided using the word "enjoy" because I'm not sure if one can "enjoy" this movie...one must experience this movie. The word Enjoy seems to project this sense of being entertained, and while "The Passion of Darkly Noon" is a movie and movies are meant to entertain, this film is not about entertainment, it's about emotions, thinking, feeling and understanding. It's meant to make you think, not give you that good down deep "I've just been entertained" feeling. It's meant to give you that "I've just experienced something very intriguing and wildly amazing" feeling.

I hope other people took something from this movie and that the makers of the film know that it is an appreciated piece of work. I'm very taken with this film and I know that I'll be contemplating it for a long time to come.

A Blonde Firecracker of a Sex-Pot, Ashley Judd at Her Most Sensual, finds She now has a House-Guest, the Confused and Neurotic Brenden Frasier.

She Welcomes Him with Open Arms, So to Speak, with Stand-Offish Rhetoric about an Absentee Boy-Friend that is Expected Back at any time.

The Fundamentalist Frasier, all Stuttering and Damaged by Religious Dogma of Parental Persuasion, Holds Back His Urges.

Vito Mortensen is the Estranged Boy-Friend who Shows Up from a "Walk in the Woods" and the Beauty that is Ashley is Oh So Excited and Their Lovemaking is such that Frasier can Take a Peep.

All of this Tennessee Williams Throwback is Set Against some Stunning, Surreal Off-Beat Images that Captivate.

It's a Wild Artsy Ride Full of Heat and Tension.

Most of it is Predictable but Fun Watching.

A Remarkable Low-Budget Indie from the Director of "The Reflecting Skin" (1990), Phillip Ridley, who Demonstrates an Eye for the Sensational Bizarre.

The Story is Reminiscent of a Fairy-Tale with a Tragic Ending.

That Literary Ignites the Screen as Brendan Frasier, Achieving His Climax, as Darkly, Embraces His Namesake and Consummates His Passion.

This film starts out well enough: a young man (Darkly Noon, played by Brendan Fraser) stumbling through the forest collapses onto a dirt road and is found and taken to the home of Callie (Ashley Judd). As his mind clears, we find out that Darkly is a deeply disturbed individual, and that his keeper (Callie) is no less strange. Unfortunately, the remainder of the film doesn't capitalize on its interesting beginning. The acting by both Judd and Fraser is distinctly uninspired, and the plot entirely predictable. The use of blood and gore as an attempt to shock the viewer is overdone and unnecessary.

Brendan Fraser's association with this film is in line with his previous work (Encino Man, Airheads), but Judd's involvement is a disappointment following the excellent Ruby in Paradise.

The weirdly named Darkly Noon (Brendan Frasier) is the sole survivor of a Waco-style massacre and a religious fanatic. He is taken in by Ashley Judd, who lives in a isolated cabin in a huge forest. The first set of tensions come when Noon's strong attraction towards Judd clash with his religious beliefs. The second arise when Judd's mute boyfriend Viggo Mortensen returns. And then hermit Grace Zabriskie befriends Noon and tells him Judd is a witch.

This is pretty impressive stuff from writer and director Philip Ridley. He's not afraid to risk being pretentious and, in truth, he is at times. Mostly, though, he creates an unsettling, powerful piece with the texture of a nightmare. Surreal at times (a giant, glittering boot floating down a river?) it conveys the powerful and enigmatic nature of both human emotions and the unexplored forest. It's clear that things are going to end bloody but, crucially, you can't guess for who; because at times it seems the coquettish Judd might be a witch.

This extremely unusual film is definitely worth a look, but this is most certainly not for all tastes. The pace is sometimes quite slow, at other times it is edited faster than a music video, and all the while I was sitting there wondering what weird person thought this up. A number of memorable scenes, and a particularly good ending make this a worthwhile selection if you're willing to watch something that is very much off the beaten path.

Brendan Fraser is incredible adept at choosing horrible movies to

star in, and this one is no exception. From beginning to end, the

characters live in a totally unbelievable world. This is one of those

movies that is meant to be completely serious, but causes only

hoots of laughter from movie-goers. This was hands-down one of

the 5 worst movies I have ever seen.

Brendan Fraser and Ashley Judd do what they can with the terrible

roles they were given, but I will never understand how they were

coerced into making such a film.

'The passion of Darkly Noon' is probably one of the worst movies I have ever watched. The reason why I stayed with it till the end was that I was curious how many more unreasonable, incoherent and irrelevant features were about to appear. This is not discrediting the actors, I leave that open, but only about the storyline.

The plot is very simple and easy to guess after the first few minutes but then the movie keeps changing subject and focus. First, it is obviously the issue of Noon and Callie and that she is his first love after being brought up in a very isolated context. Then the movie shifts to the story between Callie and Roxy suggesting to become more of a mysterious thriller about witchcraft, but this is just a fake and does not go far. The appearance of Noon's parents adds to the issue but seemed to me completely ridiculous, furthered by the awful acting of both of them (and who did that make-up?). Towards the end the movie goes into longer and longer scenes. The climax (from the point where Noon starts painting himself in the cave until he is killed) could have been just as well expressed in half the time, the scenes drag on for ages.

few more things. First, the undertaker. Who wrote this character into the movie? He is a joke and does not fit at all with the overall pace and depth the movie desperately but unsuccessfully tries to establish. His little helper (who finds Darkly Noon in the first place) speaks of Darkly as his friend, although they have only seen each other once or twice. The friendship was probably so emphasized in order to make the final shooting scene a hard decision for that guy (seeing that he has to kill his 'friend'). But the conflict does not appear at all in that scene (he quickly shoots Darkly and that's it).

Last thing. What is the silver shoe all about? Was that to include some symbolic feature? Anything would have been more believable than a giant silver shoe floating down a river because a circus-family had an accident loosing that shoe on that river. How come the shoe floats past Darkly but is later used as a burning stake for Roxy's dog (would you incinerate your dog on a silver shoe? was it completely normal for Roxy to find a giant silver shoe? shouldn't the shoe have been much further downstream by the point it is used?). The circus family, who appears randomly in the last scene of the movie, did not only have one giant silver shoe, no, they also had a miniature model of it (which the son's 'favourite toy'). First of all, who believes that!? Second, his son's 'favourite toy'? Any stick is a better toy than a silver shoe (which will always remain a silver shoe, any wooden stick would be more interesting (because it would trigger the imagination) than an abstract silver shoe. By the way, Callie never saw the silver shoe before, so when it is presented to her it cannot have any meaning to her (and how helpful is a silver shoe after your house burned down!?)

These were my major concern, rendering this movie completely ridiculous and horribly written.

While driving through the forest to the isolated house of the lovers Callie (Ashley Judd) and Clay (Viggo Mortensen), the driver Jude (Loren Dean) finds a young man fainted on the road. He rescues the stranger and the sensual Callie welcomes him while Clay is retired in the woods. When he awakes, he tells his name, Darkly Noon (Brendan Fraser), and explains that his religious parents had been killed in their house by the furious locals and he had successfully escaped with his bible. Clay returns and accepts the presence of the new-comer in his house. Along the next days, Darkly becomes sexually obsessed by the sexy Callie and uses flagellation to punish himself for his desire. When the confused Darkly meets the deranged widow Roxy (Grace Zabriskie) in the woods, she tells him that Callie is a witch that killed her husband and that bewitches young men. When Roxy commits suicide, the insanity of the fanatic Darkly leads him to punish the sinners.

"The Passion of Darkly Noon" is another excellent and underrated movie of director Philip Ridley. I do not understand how this awesome director has only two movies in his filmography (the other is fantastic "The Reflecting Skin"). Today I have watched "The Passion of Darkly Noon" for the second time and this movie still very impressive. The story has drama, romance, eroticism and suspense, supported by magnificent direction, top-notch performances, beautiful landscapes and an awesome soundtrack. In 1995, Brendan Fraser proved for me that he is a great actor with his performance of a young man living in a conflictive situation between his religious credo and his carnal desire in spite of being miscast, since his character is a kid and Brendan was twenty-seven year-old in 1995, the same age of the sexy Ashley Judd (both were born in 1968). This gorgeous actress in her first lead role has an extremely sexy performance, with some of the hottest scenes of the cinema history with the great actor Viggo Mortensen. Unfortunately this disturbing movie is recommended for very specific audiences only. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Paixões na Floresta" ("Passions in the Forest")

In this film there's all the ingredients for a good thriller. And, above all, movie making that feels fresh. Striking editing, good music, fine acting and excellent direction (by Philip Ridley, a name I'll keep in mind).

The reason I saw the film in the first place - Viggo Mortensen has a supporting role as mute husband to the nymph (Ashley Judd). Brendan Fraser shows that he doesn't only can play the handsome young man. He does a phenomenal role portrait in the difficult title role.

Darkly Noon is an unpredictable film that surely haven't got the audience and critique it deserves. It made me think of such films as _Shining, The (1980)_(qv) and _Enfaldige mördaren, Den (1982)_(qv).

That was the worst 100 minutes of my life. Honestly I would pay twenty dollars to had not watched this movie. Out of all of the cheesy movies I have seen in my lifetime, this movie is the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. Save yourself and DO NOT WATCH. I would provide a better critical analysis, but I watched the movie like 5 years ago. The horribleness, if a word, still haunts me to this day. The movie was poorly directed. The movie was poorly produced. The movie had poor acting. I have no idea why anyone would consider watching this movie. If you would like to rent a video to see your threshold of pain this is the movie for you.

Honestly, this movie gave me the creeps. The intense psychological symbolism going on in it really makes for a total mind-candy movie. It takes you on a journey through the deconstruction of a young man's mind through conflict with his religious beliefs and outright lies. You once again get a new facet of Brendan Fraser's acting ability during his portrayal of the tortured Darkly Noon. The movie is absolutely chilling. I recommend it, if you're into movies that make you think. It may be hard to get, Blockbuster had to order it for me.

This is the worst film I have ever seen. Seriously.

Despite some great cast members, it is simply awful. The so-called plot is pathetic and utterly unbelievable. The film just kept getting worse and worse as it goes on.

It is not even the kind of bad that can be funny - it is simply terrible. Do not think of watching this pathetic attempt at film-making.

I think the director was trying to go for a kind of surreal, possibly allegorical approach, but it does not work at all. Most of the characters and events are one-sided, bland, and uninteresting. Certainly unenlightening.

The ending is so bad it makes you cringe.

this movie is actually the worst movie ever made... i know people have told you that "plan nine from outerspace" was the worst movie ever made, come to think of it i think that was the tagline... but "the passion of darkly noon by far blows it away with its awfull acting, terrible story, unexplaned occurances, and it's massive quantities of unimportant crap that is thrown in there to make you think your drunk. the first tiem i saw this i actually was drunk... it was on HBO at 3:30 in the morning and i was laughing my head off because it was soo silly. i tried to blame the s***ty story on my drunkness but when i saw it again, sober, i was sadly mistaken. this movie is crap. i did buy this movie just to show it to people and make them hate brenden frasier. you lose all respect you ever had for him after watching this.