Descansa en paz

First of all, I love what John Ajvide Lindqvist does. I read almost all of his books and every time it was a pure pleasure. However, he's very, very, extremely unlucky with the movie adaptations of his books. This particular movie... I don't know what it is and why it was made. For those who read the book it will be a torture, for those who didn't - just a dead-boring piece of crap.

Also, I don't think anyone in the team had any idea of what they were doing. The meaning of the book was completely different, and I mean 100% different. Why is there the Satanic cross on the poster? What Satan has to do with this movie and with this book?

In an already tired genre, Handling the Undead aims for a more contemplative and somber face than what we're used to with said genre. The standouts here being the music and atmosphere, one must think such a devotion to visuals would garner strong staying power, yet such was not the case. It's grief observed, through the lens of dark corridors and isolated pastures, asking the singular question, "if you had one more chance to talk to your loved one, what would you say?". Throughout the runtime I discovered the film wasn't exactly interested in exploring this question through a vessel or character of sorts, as it's practically nonexistent. In the end I was left starved, yearning for a connection. A film with a pulse that slowly fades into obscurity.

No pun intended - talk about Arthouse ... about personal film and all that. The director told us as much (video message at the festival), before the movie started. I understand what she tried to do - and I get that this is slow paced ... but it is not even the lack of "exciting" stuff happening ... it is maybe slightly the bunny stuff ... I mean the fate of it to call it that ... you don't hand(le) stuff like that the way they did ... still, suspension of disbelief and all that.

There have been other movies with (un)dead coming back ... also slow paced ... but with more story elements of sorts. The long shots are really not helping at all ... since this won some awards (and the actors really did their best), you really have to have the patience of an angel ... or multiple angels, to not want this to get going at one point or another (or all throughout). Still it has quality to say the least.

Somehow they manged to take the original story and remove most of the interesting parts, leaving us with a slow and atmospheric exposé of loss and grief. What it does it does great, it's beautifully filmed and the acting is good, but it's just not enough. The entire point of having the dead come back to life is to examine all the implications of this happening, the original story understands this, it's in the title "Handling the undead", it asks the question of how to deal with this situation. But here most of those implications are glanced over or not touched upon at all, making the supernatural elements superfluous. Ultimately this movie had worked much better if it was just a story about three families experiencing loss, maybe in some kind of sliding doors scenario. It unfortunately feels like a missed opportunity and a waste of good source material.

Slow. So sloooooow. And not a slow burn. I hate to say this, but I found it boring. I love bleak, atmospheric movies, but this one just made me sleepy. I really wanted to like it, so much so that I will probably give it another chance once it's released.

However, I had to close my eyes/ears/heart to the unnecessary, severe animal cruelty. It served little purpose and should have been handled differently.

I was excited to watch this film because I loved "Let the Right One In" and liked "The Worst Person in the World" but this film was a letdown.

Some of the atmospheric cinematography was nice but it was also slow and sleepy. I appreciated that it wasn't your typical jump-scare mainstream nonsense, but this movie really lacked heart. It lacked character development. I wanted to care more about the lives of the characters, but didn't.

The acting was good. The cinematography good, as mentioned. But the whole film was really lacking overall.

And the animal cruelty was disgusting/a cheap shock value gimmick. Does Norway have the same standards for animal welfare as the U. S./Hollywood? I sure hope so. Otherwise, I hope they are eventually slapped with hundreds of fines. That rabbit was clearly under severe genuine distress, in the very least.

An unfortunate waste of our $25 Sundance screening cost.