Der Schatz

I spent $7 to rent this on Amazon, based on flamboyant critical praise. The trailer looked promising, like a deadpan comedy. But it wasn't anything like I expected. It couldn't have been slower, duller, plodding. I appreciate the low-key naturalistic style that is European cinema, but in this case, it wasn't shedding much light on any internal journey. And being halted as a comedy? I often marvel when reviewers claim something is a comedy. Why? Because there may be slight nuances of humannature's foibles? There was not a moment that I was amused in a heightened comedicway. The basic plot line - that a neighbor enlists another neighborwith a possible buried treasure - takes near 90 minutes for negligible plot development. I like slow, non-Hollywood movies, but this was really SLOW. And reviewers hailed the transformative payoff in the last two minutes. But for me it was too little, too late. Not recommended. Just plodding.

Corneliu Porumboiu's fifth feature could well be his worst too. He just follows the usual modern arthouse genre and show a story that is for mainstream audience. The script and making are way too shallow.

this movie is full of surprises, existing as it does in the shadow of conventional Hollywood story telling. it's premised on the deal made between two neighbours to investigate a rumoured buried treasure, and as the film progresses there are many opportunities for others to get involved and claim a slice, if not all, of the loot for themselves. if in fact there is any treasure. we've seen enough heist movies and buried treasure movies to know what money does to people, how they treat one another; double crossings, murder, corrupt cops etc. all of the tropes you can expect from this kind of narrative exist here as possibilities, and as such determine the expectations of a viewer. but the film operates in a kind of flat negative space produced by these expectations, and delivers a series of perverse thrills by its avoidance of conventional narrative arcs and possibilities. it's a refreshing, low-key undermining of Hollywood screen writing hegemony. . .

I watched this movie during the TIFF festival in Timisoara and I wanted my money back, but since the entrance was free, I want my time back.

The plot could have been easily narrated in a 5 or 10 minute short. It contained many scenes that were stretched for no reason or dialogue that was totally irrelevant to the main theme. Almost all actors (especially the ones in supporting roles) were lacking acting skills. There isn't any climax/peak, but only an enumeration of events that naturally derive from one to another like a very slow flowing river. No action, no suspense and definitely NO comedy. Maybe the only good parts that made sit down and watch it until the end was the general Romanian feeling this movie had (with traditions, idioms which cannot really be translated and so on) and the hope that some turn of events will make this movie great or at least interesting, but sadly it didn't.

I can't believe this movie got two awards and two nominations, since it was one of the most boring movies I ever saw.

Excellent film and a great script, relevant and fresh. The simplicity of it someone had called-out is its very strength, and if it carries some scenes in real time a la Béla Tarr, it is part suspense mechanism for the audience fantasies to play out, as well as to open up space for the viewer to contemplate their own values being addressed.

In it's sparing dialogue (suited to the social air density being portrayed), and not unlike a Roy Anderson film, each point of conversation is another clue or symbol threaded into the moral tableau performed over the course of the film. It deals with profound issues with understated situational comedy, leaving all conclusions up to the viewer. The acting deserves another notable mention, naturalistic and effortlessly comedic.

We've seen it as a group German, Swiss, American and were all delighted with the ending neither one of us guessed! Keen for the next film from this director.