Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus poster & wallpaper
Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites

Nicole Kidman, Robert Downey Jr., Ty Burrell, Harris Yulin, Jane Alexander ... see more see more... , Emmy Clarke , Genevieve McCarthy , Boris McGiver , Marceline Hugot , Emily Bergl , Lynn Marie Stetson , Christina Rouner , David J. Steinberg

Nicole Kidman assumes the identity of visionary photographer Diane Arbus in a film that draws inspiration from author Patricia Bosworth's best-selling biography to tell the tale of a once-shy woman wh... read more read more...o becomes one of her generation's most strikingly original visual artists. Diane Arbus was a typical wife and mother whose morbid interests stood in stark contrast with her decidedly conventional existence in 1950s-era New York. Upon making the acquaintance of her eccentric, newly arrived neighbor, Lionel (Robert Downey Jr.), the once-content housewife soon embarks on a creative journey that will forever change the way both she and her legions of fans view the world around them. By blending factual aspects of Arbus' life with a fictional narrative, Fur weighs the domestic expectations of the 20th century housewife against the irrepressible drive for an artist to create and explore the world around her in her own unique way. Scripted by Erin Cressida Wilson and directed by Steven Shainberg (Secretary), Fur weaves a fictional romance with intimate details from the iconic photographer's life to offer a fascinating look at Arbus' artistic development. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Flixster Users

64% liked it

18,689 ratings

Critics

31% liked it

108 critics

R, 2 hr. 2 min.

Directed by: Steven Shainberg

Release Date: November 10, 2006

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: May 8, 2007

Stats: 2,039 reviews

report incorrect info

Photos

Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Photograph by Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus as Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Robert Downey Jr. Robert Downey Jr. Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Nicole Kidman Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Photograph by Diane Arbus Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus
Upload a Photo | View All Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Photos

Your Rating


clear rating

Flixster Reviews (2,039)

  • 5oclockcoffee
    May 11, 2012
    5oclockcoffee
    "Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus" could easily be a modern "Beauty and the Beast" directed by Tim Burton. I have to say that the beast is not that bad; he actually looks like a cute dog, maybe a Cocker Spaniel. But the fact is that, in this case, David Lynch could fit b... read moreetter with the Arbus's work. Don't get me wrong, the movie is directed by Steven Shainberg, the same director of "Secretary". Not having seen Secretary yet, my interest was totally in Diane Arbus.


    Even knowing it was "an imaginary portrait", I expected something more biographical and maybe more faithful to the image I have of Arbus. Her photos can lead us to such a portrait, but knowing a bit about her we know she was not "one of us"*, but was more to a nice intruder. (Susan Sontag talks about it in "On Photograph"). Also, Nicole Kidman's Diane, and this is not her fault, could be both a model of Allan's ads or Arbus's strange photos, not mentioning that she seems a contemporay version of her previous Viginia Woolf. The film is not bad but it ends up resuming Diane Arbus into a fetishist herself and tries to explain her work by her supposed inner freak. But don't take me that seriously. "Fur" can be a good watch, specially if you like fantasy genre.


    *Freaks, directed by Tod Browning.
  • flixsterman
    March 5, 2011
    flixsterman
    "You see someone on the street, and essentially what you notice about them is the flaw." -Diane Arbus

    A provocative tribute to misunderstood genius, Fur is one part biography and two parts fairy tale. Ominous yet oddly endearing.
  • hunterjt13
    August 26, 2010
    hunterjt13
    The title cards before the film warn that this is not an historical biography, but I don't think that disclaimer releases the filmmakers from somehow connecting the main plot points to Arbus's art or artistic mission. What specifically attracts Arbus to the "freaks" she photogra... read morephs? And what is the connection between these subjects and her trip to the nudist colony, which frames the film?
    Additionally, the film offers a half-hearted criticism of how women were treated in the fifties, and of course, the criticism is warranted. But the "patriarchal" husband is certainly more supportive than William H. Macy's character in Pleasantville ("Where's my dinner?"). I might have missed something (because the DVD skipped in the middle of the film), but from the best that I could tell, Allan Arbus was not terribly oppressive. So, at the film's conclusion, Kidman's character doesn't earn our sympathy, and the tribute to her estranged husband at the end falls flat.
    Overall, the performances were good. Perhaps it's my ignorance of Arbus's work, but the film does nothing to connect a very basic story to an "extraordinary" artist.
  • ScoopOnline
    December 15, 2009
    ScoopOnline
    Brilliant Movie that makes you think after watching it.
  • FiLmCrAzY
    August 6, 2009
    FiLmCrAzY
    Its a pretty weird and quite a surreal film to be honest im not to shore wot to make of it and it takes talent for a film to leave you speechless coz you dont know whether its good in between or crap
    this movie is purely about emtions and feelings and is quite good in the way it... read more captures that but nicole kidman plays a character who seriuosly has a weird fetish about strange people !
    Its a movie that if you dont like slow not very much going on and to lovey dovey movies then you'll seriously hate this movie!
  • ebs90
    April 5, 2009
    ebs90
    Diane Arbus is a fascinating artist. A single one of her photographs can awaken and excite dozens of feelings, questions, curiosities going in all different directions. I remember seeing some of her photographs at the pompidou a while ago without even having heard her name ever b... read moreefore, and being very intrigued by them. Obviously, the writers of Fur understood the enigmatic character that permeates Arbus's work and came up with this imaginary biopic.

    This is a fictional account of how Diane went from being a dissatisfied, restless housewife and assistant of her husband's photostudio, to an independent, bold artist. Die-hard fans of Arbus can either love or detest this idea. Personally, and in a very psychodynamic attitude of mine, I prefer to think of this all as a metaphor of an internal transgression of hers. I think it's evident that she, at some point, had to take a step to break free of convention and into the lifestyle that would become her signature.

    A mysterious man moves into Diane's building, where she and her husband not only live but have a commercial photography studio. Diane is immediately intrigued by this individual. Her repressed tendencies towards the seedy and the freaky begin to surface. When she finally finds the courage to meet him, and surrenders to the pleasure of being frightened, she begins to change, to experiment, and surround herself with people and environments that make her happy, but which prove scary to her family, and of which they all disapprove.

    I can't say much for Nicole Kidman. She plays in the same, generic soft spoken way that has become her habit. A few inspired moments are not entirely her responsibility, they just happen to fit into her mold. When, of course, she should adapt herself to the script. Robert Downey Jr. plays the mysterious neighbor: a character that could've been, and to a lot of people is, ridiculous. The fact that he actually gave a good performance, being both charming and obscene, through a cape of fur is admirable and it's one of the things I enjoyed the most about the film. The art direction, the cinematography, and the director's slow, contemplative pace benefited the film tremendously. I think the filmmakers had the necessary awareness of Diane Arbus's meticulous cool approach to translate it onscreen. The hushed, understated soundtrack, the warm/cold palette and careful composition also add visual charm that may, at times, make up for weak points of a story that lacks credibility (although we ought to expect that, since this is an imaginary portrait) and a strong lead performance.

    I have seen Fur more than once and not because of Diane Arbus, but because of these outstanding visuals.

    Fur was never going to be a commercial success. It wasn't. The director should've foreseen this and refrained from casting Nicole Kidman -assuming he did it to give his film more publicity and increase the sales-. A more versatile actress than Kidman, which could have been basically anyone, would've given this movie, maybe, the extra strength it needs. Unfortunately, without that push, Fur borders on mediocrity. Unless you are visually enamored with it like I was, or unless you find something in the fairy tale to hook you, you might be disappointed. Still, I think, it meant well, and as an exercise it's intereting enough.
  • Redlats
    March 15, 2008
    Redlats
    It is interesting reading other's reviews for Fur. People pan the fact that this movie may have nothing to do with Diane Arbus, or that it was boring or bizarre.

    I prefer to see it as the beginning of Diane's career as a photographer. During this movie she changes from being... read more her husband's assistant to a member and photographer of New York's "freaks". Perhaps she is drawn into this interest because her neighbour happens to be a little strange.
  • deano
    November 11, 2007
    deano
    Bold, experimental and often confronting piece of work. Nicole and Robert Downey Jr. do nice performances in this drama film.
  • puffchunk
    November 1, 2007
    puffchunk
    Oh goodness. Save yourselfs from this film. "Diane Arbus" (not at all) aka nicole kidman plays a freak who leaves her husband for a wolf man, and when he dies she wears his hair suit and breathes his last dying breaths. This writter is sick. I like weird stuff, but this is li... read moreke 'masturbate with poopy bum underwear' sick.
  • dunmyer
    July 17, 2007
    dunmyer
    [size=3]"Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus" is a stunningly unique film. I can honestly say that there's never been a film like it.[/size]

    [size=3][img]http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2006-12-21/movie_reviews4-1.jpg[/img][/size]

    [size=3]It's not a singular triumph. T... read morehere are serious flaws. But there are also transcendent moments. Its mission is to try to use the distinctive paintbrush of cinema to draw a picture of the inspiration and skewed viewpoint of a serious artist. How glorious to find a film that even knows what a serious artist is. [/size]

    [size=3]In a culture that considers "The Departed" and "Little Miss Sunshine" the most significant artistic achievements in cinema in 2006, I suppose one can't be surprised that an astonishingly original work of art like "Fur" would be greeted with bafflement and derision. (The film has a 30% rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes.)[/size]

    [img]http://cdn.channel.aol.com/pmms/productpagemovies/0e/06/2183161[/img]

    [size=3]What's thrilling about the film is that not only is it a work of art, it also refuses to imitate artwork that came before it. This is very daring. Originality is hated by most humans, it seems to me. It triggers what appears to be a subconscious fear response. So artists have to weave some familiar formulas into their work to soften the blow -- to counteract some of the originality. This usually comes in the form of imitation. Im[/size][size=3]itate something that was radical in its day but has come to be accepted, that way the more fearful in the audience can be put at ease because they recognize something. Give them something familiar to hold onto.[/size]

    [size=3]To my astonished delight, "Fur" makes no such concessions. Its bravery is unsurpassed. Director [b]Steven Shainberg[/b] (who also directed "Secretary") deserves some kind of national medal of honor for artistic courage. So does actress [b]Nicole Kidman[/b].[/size]

    [size=3][img]http://images.salon.com/ent/movies/review/2006/11/10/fur/story.jpg[/img][/size]

    [size=3]The only artistic progenitor that I could see Shainberg influenced by would be David Lynch. There are numerous long hallways, quiet passages with no dialogue, strange set design and other Lynchian tropes. But these are subtle. The film so much has its own voice and style that it took me a while to notice that there was a hint of Lynchianism.[/size]

    [size=3]The film is about legendary American photographer Diane Arbus, who occupies an odd place in the pantheon. First of all, she was female. Second, she was a photographer. And third, she is, paradoxically, both lionized and unknown. Anyone who knows anything about art would recognize her name. But I don't think many have seen her work. I'm actually a perfect example. I have known of her for years and associate her name with heavyweights like Henri Matisse and Jackson Pollock. But I can't conjure up in my mind's eye any of her photographs. This unusual quality makes the film even more interesting.[/size]

    [size=3]Arbus is presented as having had an artistic impulse from birth. There's a staggering scene of her as a girl, coming upon a dead body while walking with her mother in Central Park. Her mother shields her eyes, but Diane is touched by the experience somehow. When she returns home, 10-year-old Diane goes out her bedroom window and stands on the ledge about 20 flights up. Frozen in fear, she whispers to herself: "Be brave. Be brave." Hardly the kind of thing the average 10-year-old does![/size]

    [size=3]But Diane cowers in the face of her aristocratic family's brow-beating and doesn't even try her hand at art until her photographer husband encourages her over and over. Even then, it takes a new neighbor (played by [b]Robert Downey Jr[/b].) to really inspire her. Downey's character has a major genetic flaw: long hair grows on every surface of his body. When he goes out, he has to wear a mask. [/size]

    [size=3]His "freakishness" somehow awakens Diane's artistic spirit. It helps that she also falls in love with him. Pretty soon, she's taking photographs of his friends, who all seem to work in sideshows but who have very deep inner lives, presumably in response to their complete social marginalization.[/size]

    [size=3]Nicole Kidman does a very good job in this role. There aren't many actresses who could pull this off. But I wouldn't say her performance is great. There's just a little something missing, it felt to me. But this is still an important achievement. I'm very impressed that Kidman continues to lend her star power and considerable acting abilities to the handful of directors who are genuinely trying to advance the cinematic art form. With films like "Dogville," "Birth," and now "Fur," Kidman has participated in radical new forms of cinematic story-telling. [/size]

    [size=3]I would even venture to guess that these films might not have gotten made had she not agreed to star in them. Or if they had been made, I'm sure that without her they wouldn't have gotten the kind of distribution they received. In this sense, I think Kidman has become an artistic mover and shaker in the last 10 years.[/size]

    [size=3]Downey does a good job. But there was something juvenile and awkward in his performance, I felt. I didn't see much heartbreak in his eyes either, and I think I was meant to. Bill Nighy might have brought more to this role. Nighy showed in "Pirates 3" that he can transmit oceans of feeling while covered in a full-face mask. Downey, who wears a mask through almost all of "Fur," doesn't have such skill. Or at least he doesn't show it here.[/size]

    [size=3]Despite these drawbacks, "Fur" is a must-see for anyone who seriously cares about the state of the cinematic art form in the United States.[/size]

    [size=3][/size]
    [size=3][A biographical tidbit about Arbus that I found out after seeing the film: Her major period of creativity was the 1960s. She killed herself in 1971 in NYC.][/size]
    [size=3][/size]
    [size=3][/size]
    [size=3][/size]

View All Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Reviews

Critic Reviews

Geoff Pevere
December 29, 2006
Geoff Pevere, Toronto Star

Stilted, stylized and art-directed within an inch of its life, Shainberg's movie (which was written by his Secretary collaborator, Erin Cressida Wilson) manages to be both oppressively literal and fat... Full Review

Rick Groen
December 29, 2006
Rick Groen, Globe and Mail

Don't be fooled for a second by that subtitle. Fur bills itself as An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus, but this thing's got all the imagination of a career bureaucrat slumped in his cubicle awaiting... Full Review

Lisa Kennedy
December 1, 2006
Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post

Shainberg neither sugarcoats [Diane Arbus's] distance from her girls nor judges it. The filmmakers understand Arbus's story within the context of her time and upbringing. Full Review

Robert Denerstein
December 1, 2006
Robert Denerstein, Denver Rocky Mountain News

The world created by Shainberg never seems strange or real enough to convince us that we're getting the goods on anything. Put another way, this imaginary portrait might have done better had it stuck ...

Roger Moore
December 1, 2006
Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel

[Arbus's] most famous images still have the power to shock, hanging as they do on the walls of the world's museums. Fur, the movie about her, reaches for that same jolt and settles instead for a raise... Full Review

Eleanor Ringel Gillespie
November 30, 2006
Eleanor Ringel Gillespie, Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Not a single frame of Fur conveys Arbus's distinctive vision ... Full Review

Colin Covert
November 21, 2006
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune

Much of the film is absurdist nonsense, and its symbolism is of the plank-to-the-head variety.

Richard Nilsen
November 21, 2006
Richard Nilsen, Arizona Republic

As a biopic, it is as meretricious as most, but as a myth about love and loss, about otherness and identity, about compassion and revulsion, about fetishism and sex, about art and life, it will likely... Full Review

Wesley Morris
November 21, 2006
Wesley Morris, Boston Globe

The movie officially becomes the one thing Arbus's photography refused to be: normal. Full Review

Peter Rainer
November 21, 2006
Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor

Arbus's life has been put through the fantasy blender. Full Review

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Cast

More Like This

Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Factory Girl
    Factory Girl (80%)
  • Secretary
    Secretary (100%)
  • Eyes Wide Shut
    Eyes Wide Shut (40%)
  • Frida
    Frida (44%)

More Movies like Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus

Facts

No facts approved yet. Be the first

Fur: An Imaginary... : Watch Free on TV

Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Trivia

Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Dia... Trivia

  • Nicole "The Sandwich Artist" Kidman Movie? Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus  Answer »
  • What uber-talented A-list actor/actress starred in these small independent films? Two Girls and a Guy The Singing Detective A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus  Answer »
More Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus Trivia

Movie Quizzes

Create a Quiz |

All Quizzes

Video Clips

No video clips yet. Want to upload one?

Meet Other Fans

Add Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus to favorites

Recent News

No recent headlines. Got one?

Recent Lists

Make a List |

View All Lists

Most Popular Skin

No skins yet. Interested in creating one?