One of those movies where it's good to read contemporaneous interviews to get the full flavor of what was intended. It's about how we have some grasp on reality, but it's never total. We have our interpretations, but predictions may not match up with events. The key is the scene where a painter is working on something but it takes time for his mind to recognize a pattern. There is a sense of reality in that a dead body is seen, but the grainy images that may or may not be a gunman could be just a Rorschach test, like seeing images in clouds. Without the evidence to be presented objectively to law enforcement, which is a good validation of reality, to have someone else confirm the same thing, it's up to a person's interpretation of who stole the film and prints as well as how the man died and what happened to the body. Antonioni said "I don’t know what reality is like. Reality escapes us, it changes continually. When we think we’ve reached it, the situation is already something else. I always doubt what I see, what an image shows me, be cause I 'imagine' what’s beyond that; and what's behind an image is unknown. The photographer of Blow-up, who is not a philosopher, wants to see more more closely. But what happens is that because he enlarges too much, the object itself decomposes and disappears. Therefore, there is a moment in which one seizes reality, but the moment immediately after, it escapes. That is, to some extent, the meaning of Blow-up." In the end, the main character disappears because he's viewpoint is coming from Antonioni the director. The audience of course will come up with their different theories in the same limited way so that everyone's point of view is illuminated, and probably quite different from the person sitting next to them in the theater.

Great 1960s movie about the illusion of then “swinging London”. The David Bailey type celeb photographer can’t tell illusion from reality and he doesn’t know what to do with either. David Hemings dominates the movie and captures the mood perfectly. Better than Antonioni’s take on counter culture America, Zabriskie Point, which didn’t quite do it for me.

Sooooooo boooooooring. Really? Some people loved it? Hmmm. Maybe they were on acid or something.

Without a doubt, the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. Painful. I would be more entertained by, and would find more excitement, depth, and meaning in, watching the grass grow in my yard.

You know an Italian (Michelangelo Antonioni) directed this one when a photographer (David Hemmings), believing he may have captured evidence of a murder and is questioning what in his life is real and what is not, stops his existential journey to have a threesome with two young girls (Jane Birkin & Gillian Hills). Blow-Up is a pleasure to look at, filled with “Swinging Sixties” flair and chic and a protag that is interesting and idiosyncratic. But the plot and “left up to interpretation” ending is a letdown. Long stretches exist where you realize that no one has spoken and dialogue is a welcome change. Perhaps the more existential elements were lost on me and I began questioning myself as to why Thomas (Hemmings) wouldn’t just take his photos to the police. Thomas is impulsive and a tyrant when it comes to his career. He’s one of those characters you want to follow on an adventure, especially one with a setting like this, but was set upon a tedious path instead of something more thrilling. Blow-Up influenced and inspired Brian De Palma’s Blow Out, which I gave an (83) a few years ago and remember as the more interesting and entertaining movie.

Absolute classic. A window into 60's London, intelligent script and mind blowing cinematography, if you've a good print.

Movie is from an experimental era and highly influecned by the work of some French directors ( I can't remember the names at the moment) Slow pace,creepy photographer who will surely get arrested in our time. Taking someones picture without consent ....come on love. Anyhow I was unable to watch it after that scene.

I have no idea why this is rated so highly. Slow moving and trippy. Ending had no resolution. I don't recommend it.

Of its time and not effective.

It is an undeniable fact that individuals either enjoy or endure Antonioni's films, and at times, this endurance may eventually result in utter perplexity.

The worst fucking movie I've seen what the fuck

Just nothing. So many reasons this movie is just not good. The main character is incredibly unlikable, and 90% of it focuses on him. There are many plot points that are never answered. Then again I don't think this film was really ever about the plot... but then its not some beautiful either. truly bad. Skip. Please skip. Do not waste your time.

One hypnotic trip into the perception of reality…this movie is weird as hell! Surprisingly very funny too. Worth seeing if only for that ending.

I've been planning to see Blow Up for a while, partly due to my return to 'serious' photography and also to watch films I missed back in the day. It wasn't all bad! It is, unsurprisingly, very dated and it its time but it kept me engaged and mildly intrigued. I thought the screenplay was awful, the acting stilted and occasionally absurd. Five Live Yardbirds (featuring Eric 'Slowhand' Clapton) is one of my favourite LPs, so it was good to see a later line-up when, for a time, they had both Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page. A shame that there was no synching of vocals and film. Deliberate? The absence of vehicular traffic also stood out! A Marmite film. I shall seek out one of the director's better films.

Totally mesmerizing. One of those movies you'll watch a 100 times and see something new upon each viewing.

This film has an outsiders point of view (Antonioni) and so it looks at London through a lens of reception and stylism rather than the feeling of what swing london was actually like in the 60's. This outsiders treatment is callous and feels brutally sexist at times and purely selfish and perhaps a prurient fantasy overlaid on top of a functional narrative. But its trying to act as a documentary to show things of the time that feel at times like just stories about David Baileys exploits tuned into set pieces - its too self consciously modern in its attitude. It does though capture old values meeting new as the various classes start to rethink their traditional english narrative and subvert it. Lots to signify its London context but its really just a loose collection of memories and some melodrama to jazz and by the time we get to the mime ending we dont care about any of it.

Uno dei maggiori successi di Antonioni in cui risalta la classe e l'eleganza del racconto; senza sequenze forti e senza nessuna forzatura. Il protagonista viene dipinto in modo originale e chiaro; atipico nella sua scontrosità verso il mondo che lo circonda e silenzioso come il lavoro che svolge per vivere. Giustamente viene data all'immagine la giusta importanza, anche se stridono un po' i forti suoni che scuotono lo spettatore, dalle urla delle ragazze ai suoni della città. Il finale è davvero per pochi; molto introspettivo, spinge lo spettatore a cercare una spiegazione razionale, che in tanti faticano a trovare.

One word: Unwatchable.

Fascinating, cold and beautifully shot film about a photographer who's soul is as dead as any of Antonioni's characters. Intrigue ensues but that isn't the point.

I think it's one of the approachable film by Antonioni, in my opinion. Artistic and also entertaining. Striking visual and sound. The story is about the curiosity and struggle of a man who slipped in the event. This film is influential and referred by later master piece "The Conversation" by Coppola and "Blow out" by De Palma. A bit like "Rear Window". Now it's a cult symbol of swinging 60s, models and the Yardbirds appearance is fun watch. Set in London, dry, empty, absurd feel is emphasised. Not for everyone.