22. Mai

If you have seen the "Ex Drummer" (the directors previous movie) and go into this movie with certain expectations, you will be disappointed. While the other one was punk rock at it's finest, this is more to the tune of classical music. I'm talking about the pace here. Even the storytelling seems "ancient" (if you want to call it that) and very slow moving overall.

But is that necessarily a bad thing? I don't think so. While I did expect something else I was intrigued by this movie. Not enough to really like it (it could have done with a faster pace), but it is Art House that is as silent as it is loud. You will understand when you watch it (if you watch it that is). The movie has great cinematography and a great lead actor. And it has a feeling to it, that you can't really describe. But it's also not commercially accessible

This film doesn't have a plot to speak of, it has very little dialogue, it switches from reality to dreamlike sequences of subconscious or imagined events. Most of the time I was wondering what exactly I was watching, how I should interpret the images and what the film maker was trying to tell me.

The 'story' is about a security guard at a shopping center, who survives a bomb explosion and unravels the stories of the other witnesses and victims. The film starts off quite impressively: we see the guard leaving home for work, doing his job and panicking after the explosion. But after that the film slows down, becomes confusing and fails in engaging the viewer. I couldn't help thinking: where does all this nonsense lead us to? There are a few positive points. The locations are superb (we see mostly ugly and timeless cityscapes) and the cinematography is beautiful. And you could argue that this is an intriguing movie which invites the audience not to take everything immediately for granted. In this respect, some people might enjoy it. But I suspect this is a small group.