Magnus

I have seen the film and must admit that it is very good attempt for someone who is making her debut. Fact that film is related with really happened story does not weaken the film itself. It is story of father who have made mistake and throughout this film he shares us his pain. But we must not forget that it is still a truth of art not the reality. And also note that if we didn't know that father character is played by origin person - there would never come out any question of ethics. It makes us think of it and about many other things. And that is important for me!

Nice film with excellent camera work.

Being an Estonian myself, I have to begin with by saying that this is one of the very few Estonian films I've seen that I WOULD watch even if it was not an Estonian film - in my opinion, it was well done, especially considering it being Kadri Kõusaar's first film ever, and yes, she is hated in Estonia, but no, I didn't feel her showing off in this film not once. It was Magnus's story and it was told in a beautiful and subtle manner, at times it was a bit artsy and might have contained too may scenes of Kristjan Kasearu (who surprised me quite a bit as well, as I really do not care much about his music) looking all dreamy and disturbing, but overall, it is a film that gets you hooked and does not let go. The bizarreness of dad-son relationship, the easiness with which the film treats the most difficult of subjects (and thus makes them shout and stand up even more), the haunting music - I was taken aback. On the other hand, if you're the type of person who minds when characters are unreal in films (don't have names, for instance) or is shocked by sexual references, it might be a good idea not to watch it after all, I suppose. But I think that for many people, this film makes sense, it clicks, and no, you don't have think that Magnus or his dad are normal or cool or whatever for this to happen - there are other layers to it than just the plot line! Oh yeah, and all the fuss about ethics and court banning the film - I would just like to know where to draw the line. To me, this film was a piece of fiction, probably even more surreal than what one usually gets in a mainstream blockbuster. Of course I'm not involved in the actual story and I have no idea how the mother of the actual boy feels, but it seems to me that now, with all the media attention, it might be even harder for her - and people will want to see the "forbidden fruit" even more. And they will.

There's an old joke about Estonians.

A guy dies, goes to hell. Before his eternal torture begins the devil gives him a tour of hell. Everywhere the guy sees huge pits filled with boiling tar and people in agony, struggling to get out. When someone finally reaches the edge of the pit, there's always a devil's apprentice with a pitchfork there to push him back in.

Finally the guy reaches another such horrible boiling hole, but there aren't any devil's apprentices around. Confused, he asks the devil: "Where are the guys with the pitchforks? Aren't you afraid one of them is going to climb out?" "Relax," says the devil. "This pit of boiling tar is for Estonians. When one of them reaches the edge, the others pull him back in." This joke and this film both sum up Estonians almost perfectly.

I find it odd how the negative comments by other Estonians here are either personal, aimed at the director Kadri Kõusaar, or aimed at the film's quality. Which isn't groundbreaking, but is certainly good enough.

Quality, then. The quality of this film does not hinder storytelling. It's not up to the standards of Hollywood and the visual language doesn't really enhance the film except in a couple of parts, but it certainly doesn't hinder anything. It works to tell the story and it succeeds in that.

The story, then. There's a clear plot, but it might not be very clear on the first viewing. Nonetheless, every scene is crafted around the film's central idea and once you get it, you'll see it for yourself. The writing is not only competent, it's good. It's very good. Someone compared it to the cryptic works of Paulo Coelho. Well. I'm glad to say that Magnus is nothing like that. It's a lot better.

Magnus has a very clear point. It's about the dichotomy of Estonian life. You either don't give a sh*t and live a great life or you can bugger off and kill yourself. Nobody cares and if you look for someone to care about you, you'll just be disappointed.

One place where the film does suck, however, is the English translation. It's dry. It lacks soul. If that's all you have to go by, then sure, you'll probably not get what the film is about.

Magnus and Klass are two Estonian films I'm not ashamed to recommend to my foreign friends. Good films are made with great passion and both Magnus and Klass certainly have that passion.

A good effort from a young director. Some of the previous comments are peculiar. Particularly the ones posted in consecutive days by "different" users from several countries, saying basically the same (making negative personal remarks about the director). For someone in Lebanon and Slovenia and wherever else, people seem to know a lot of details about an obscure celebrity from an obscure country. A personal crusade from a disgruntled former admirer perhaps? Anyway, this is a movie website and the comments should stick to the movies. If you really want to wash dirty laundry, go do it somewhere else. It's not like there isn't plenty of space for that in the internet. And as for accusing the director of being "self-involved"... Does anyone get into any kind of artistic expression without being self-involved?

... when I arrived for this film 30 minutes before start time and saw five people in the ticket holder line and a dozen in the pass holder line that something was amiss. This is a stinker of film that collapsed under the weight of its pretensions. I gave it two stars for the beautiful shots of scenery but minus one star for the dearth of story, subpar acting and the director's pretentious tomfoolery with the camera angles, filming some scenes upside or from odd angles or through distorted reflections. Yeah, I get it: it was to reflect the state of Magnus's mind but a five minute shot of water or a three minute shot of Magnus staring off into space does not further the story and was ultimately boring and sleep inducing. Too bad too, because there were some great characters in the self absorbed modeling agent mother and the drug addict purveyor of porn father. BY FAR THE WORST FILM I've seen at the Seattle International Film Festival so far.