I had the "pleasure" of watching the movie at the Berlinale (2006). I have this deal going on, where I watch a movie till the end, even if it ain't any good, so I always stay until the (bitter) end of a movie. In that case too, so I can assure that nothing works here! I mean why did I bother to go see it in the first place?
Well the premise sounded more than promising. There were three people who would recreate criminal events that had happened. And then something goes bad. On paper that sounded like a nice little thriller. In reality it was just a mess, that shouldn't even had been filmed in the first place.
Where should I begin? With the people that were in front of the camera (to call them actors, would not only stretch that word, but be the biggest insult even to someone like *add-here-the-name-of-your-favourite-bad-actor*!!!)? With the "script", if there even was one? Two people worked on that one? That's what is stated here on IMDb? I mean come on Dude, who are you kidding? He said himself, that there was only a loose storyline that they followed while filming ... With a "direction" that the director explained after the movie was finished, that was under the influence of "music" (I'm pretty sure if they'd have taken drugs, the movie could only have been better, but don't try this at home!) ... With "fight" choreography that even a 1-year old baby would have been insulted if you'd ask it to perform it? (ok granted they didn't choreograph the fight scenes ... Why this is a good thing? It just isn't!! Yes it is/looks real ... real stupid and looks exactly like that)
Now there is one thing that at least future filmmakers can take with them after watching this movie ... You can walk out of the movie knowing that if a bad movie like that (I do apologize to all the movies in the world that I even call this "bastardly" thing a movie) is shown at the Berlinale or at a Toronto Film Festival, than even you can make it happen! You know a location that looks good? Have some friends that don't mind being in front of a camera looking and acting stupid? Even if they mind, who cares? Just get them in front of the camera and "shoot" them. Make only one take (why bother spending to much money on the film, when you can explain later ... nothing at all?!), use some psychedelic music ... and you're on your way to a film festival. If the people don't understand your motives (like you had some in the first place!! Ha!), just tell'em that the viewer is allowed to interpret every thing as he/she likes ... (in other words feed them BS, 'cause you just don't know any better) ... So next up ... the man who's responsible for this ... "movie"
The director was wondering, why nobody in Greece will pick up his movie (distributor and or people, who couldn't handle his "vision" ... Vision?!?! You've gotta be freaking kidding me!!) ... he should be wondering how it's possible that they haven't taken his passport yet and exiled him ... Not only from Greece, but from this earth ... maybe he'll find some aliens that will find their own meaning for this "movie".
I can only tell you that if a director doesn't know what he has done, than it's more than a bad sign. And again using the word director in association with that man is not fair. Even to Ed Wood, who made bad movies no doubt, but at least kinda made them entertaining, even if that was unintentional, so that you could have some fun. After this movie though, this director said things like "You can see in the movie whatever you want" (yeah right, the movie is a piece of crap, which by the way at least half the audience thought too and they showed it by leaving before the movie ended, the other half stayed, but most of them were just as curious as I was, to what that man had to say in his defense ... unfortunately for him and us who waited not that much). And when he got into "details" he kind of said things like "this was like that, or whatever" ... That's probably the best word to describe the whole "experience" -> Whatever!
Now there are people who call this "art" (i.e. the Berlinale woman who introduced us to this ... "thing" = "movie"). They even say that it's cool that the actors don't talk that much. Now that is one point I fully agree with them! My ears are very thankful for that. But seeing body language in here? Good camera work?!? From a man with a camera on his shoulder and headphones that played music, so that he couldn't hear the director?! (come to think of it, a smart move on his part! Not that this director would've given him any good instructions anyways!)
If you're smart, you won't watch this movie and save the time and stress that other people had ... like myself (if there would've been a zero, this movie would've earned by all means!)
Well the premise sounded more than promising. There were three people who would recreate criminal events that had happened. And then something goes bad. On paper that sounded like a nice little thriller. In reality it was just a mess, that shouldn't even had been filmed in the first place.
Where should I begin? With the people that were in front of the camera (to call them actors, would not only stretch that word, but be the biggest insult even to someone like *add-here-the-name-of-your-favourite-bad-actor*!!!)? With the "script", if there even was one? Two people worked on that one? That's what is stated here on IMDb? I mean come on Dude, who are you kidding? He said himself, that there was only a loose storyline that they followed while filming ... With a "direction" that the director explained after the movie was finished, that was under the influence of "music" (I'm pretty sure if they'd have taken drugs, the movie could only have been better, but don't try this at home!) ... With "fight" choreography that even a 1-year old baby would have been insulted if you'd ask it to perform it? (ok granted they didn't choreograph the fight scenes ... Why this is a good thing? It just isn't!! Yes it is/looks real ... real stupid and looks exactly like that)
Now there is one thing that at least future filmmakers can take with them after watching this movie ... You can walk out of the movie knowing that if a bad movie like that (I do apologize to all the movies in the world that I even call this "bastardly" thing a movie) is shown at the Berlinale or at a Toronto Film Festival, than even you can make it happen! You know a location that looks good? Have some friends that don't mind being in front of a camera looking and acting stupid? Even if they mind, who cares? Just get them in front of the camera and "shoot" them. Make only one take (why bother spending to much money on the film, when you can explain later ... nothing at all?!), use some psychedelic music ... and you're on your way to a film festival. If the people don't understand your motives (like you had some in the first place!! Ha!), just tell'em that the viewer is allowed to interpret every thing as he/she likes ... (in other words feed them BS, 'cause you just don't know any better) ... So next up ... the man who's responsible for this ... "movie"
The director was wondering, why nobody in Greece will pick up his movie (distributor and or people, who couldn't handle his "vision" ... Vision?!?! You've gotta be freaking kidding me!!) ... he should be wondering how it's possible that they haven't taken his passport yet and exiled him ... Not only from Greece, but from this earth ... maybe he'll find some aliens that will find their own meaning for this "movie".
I can only tell you that if a director doesn't know what he has done, than it's more than a bad sign. And again using the word director in association with that man is not fair. Even to Ed Wood, who made bad movies no doubt, but at least kinda made them entertaining, even if that was unintentional, so that you could have some fun. After this movie though, this director said things like "You can see in the movie whatever you want" (yeah right, the movie is a piece of crap, which by the way at least half the audience thought too and they showed it by leaving before the movie ended, the other half stayed, but most of them were just as curious as I was, to what that man had to say in his defense ... unfortunately for him and us who waited not that much). And when he got into "details" he kind of said things like "this was like that, or whatever" ... That's probably the best word to describe the whole "experience" -> Whatever!
Now there are people who call this "art" (i.e. the Berlinale woman who introduced us to this ... "thing" = "movie"). They even say that it's cool that the actors don't talk that much. Now that is one point I fully agree with them! My ears are very thankful for that. But seeing body language in here? Good camera work?!? From a man with a camera on his shoulder and headphones that played music, so that he couldn't hear the director?! (come to think of it, a smart move on his part! Not that this director would've given him any good instructions anyways!)
If you're smart, you won't watch this movie and save the time and stress that other people had ... like myself (if there would've been a zero, this movie would've earned by all means!)