Highly Overrated But Still Good

Boring

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I watched this both as part of my ongoing Luis Bunuel retrospective (it was written by his daughter-in-law Joyce) and in tribute (comprising what are possibly his two oddest films) to star Bruce Dern's recent – belated but well-deserved - induction into the "Hollywood Walk Of Fame".The film under review is a maligned one: often described as "sleazy melodrama", plotwise it is quite similar to the superior Oscar-nominated THE COLLECTOR (1965; a theatrical rendition of which, coincidentally, has just been staged locally) but, while kidnapping as an extension of butterfly-collecting makes sense, it doesn't follow naturally from tattoo-painting! Dern has often played wackos on the screen, but this rare leading role was certainly his most extreme example: he believes in what he does as if it were a religion and, after falling for model Maud Adams, tries to convert her to his way of thinking; his obsession with her leads him to ignore an attractive young employee of the modeling agency who, on the other hand, seems to be quietly infatuated with him.However, the protagonist's overt prudishness – which, frankly, is laughable – alienates the model soon enough (even putting down an annoying acquaintance of hers in a restaurant with the classic tough-guy retort, "When I don't like someone, I don't hurt them, I kill them!"); eventually, the artist decides to take matters into his own hands: retreating to his old beachside house with the (unwilling) girl in tow, whom Dern keeps sedated until he is able to complete his ultimate achievement in body-painting. As often happens with this type of film, the victim ends up succumbing to her captor's wiles – in a genuinely weird scene as the undulating bodies are completely covered in Japanese art – before regaining her senses and breaking free definitively from his hold.In conclusion, Bob Brooks' former career as a TV commercial director is evidenced by the plot's over-reliance on chintzy modeling sessions; it is ironic, then, that the film works best during its first half!

Bruce Dern is something of an expert at playing psychotics, so it is hardly surprising to find him in this sleazy psychological thriller. Dern's deranged performance is weirdly fascinating but does not alone make the film an enjoyable viewing experience. Much more out-of-place is former model and Bond girl Maud Adams, whose non-performance in Tattoo is desperately embarrassing to watch, and fails to add credibility to the notion that Dern's tattooist could ever fall completely and obsessively in love with her.New York tattoo enthusiast Karl Kinsky (Bruce Dern) is hired to apply some fake tattoos to a bunch of sexy female models promoting a new line in swimwear. During the photographic shoots, Karl meets international super-model Maddy (Maud Adams), a beautiful but married woman with whom he is quickly smitten. Karl's only reservation about Maddy is that she is not particularly interested in tattoos, but in his twisted mind he thinks that he can change her views on the subject and ultimately force her to love him. A mentally confused loner whose father owns a secluded beachside cottage, Karl decides to take desperate measures to get through to Maddy. He drugs her, kidnaps her and takes her away to the cottage. Here, while she is almost utterly at his mercy, he lovingly tattoos her previously unblemished skin. When Maddy awakens and discovers what he has done to her, she is horrified. Over time, the weird psychological relationship between the tattooist and his prisoner grows stranger and stranger, culminating in a frenzied climax during which the victim stabs her kidnapper during sex….I half-expected Tattoo to emerge a morbidly interesting little film. The plot, while certainly unpleasant and disturbing, has the potential to build up to some interesting psychoanalysis and scenes of suspense. Sadly, very little of the potential is fulfilled. Things move along drearily and unconvincingly, with too many poorly written and poorly executed scenes. The very concept of a tattooist inking someone against their will is quite frightening, but here the pretentious approach virtually wrecks the film. Adams plays the victim-character as such a crashing bore that it's impossible to believe that anyone could desire her vehemently enough to stalk her. This makes Kinsky's decision to kidnap, tattoo and rape her totally unbelievable, which in turn undermines the entire point of the film. The bizarre and violent ending is unsatisfying, though in some ways tastelessly memorable. Tattoo is probably the kind of film that has a dedicated cult following somewhere in the world. 99% of viewers, however, will come away from the film feeling dirty, depressed and disappointed.

My trusty Video Movie Guide 2001 dubbed this 'the most vile, reprehensible, sexist, and misogynistic piece of tripe ever released under the guise of a mainstream film.' Naturally, I went out and rented it right away. Frankly, I don't understand what the fuzz is all about. It's just another character study, albeit not a very good one: given their respective situation, both the kidnapper and his victim exhibit rather unbelievable behaviour. There are hints of both 'Psycho' and 'The Collector', but 'Tattoo' lacks the tension of the first and the insight in character of the latter. I understand the ending caused quite some commotion in it's time: I thought this was the strongest scene in the whole film. I won't give the ending away, let me just say the scene was at the same time erotic and disturbing

It's movies like this that give tattoos and tattoo artists a bad name. I know a lot of people in the tattoo community and I don't know a single one who would tattoo someone against their will. Bruce Dern deserved the Razzi for this piece of poor filmmaking....