Avis des utilisateurs

Between the musical score, and the sound effects alone- Angst is certain to conjure a panoply of negative emotions; then you add in the narration, and the pathetic narrator, and you've got a movie which will stay with you for awhile. This was certainly the very effect the director desired, and he accomplished it marvelously. Lead actor, Edwin Leder, puts in his most earnest efforts at achieving a potent mixture of disdain, and disgust for his character, never letting vanity get in the way of a depraved scene. (There's an uncanny resemblance between Leder, and GoT's Alfie Allen, who himself has the same ability to waller in someone's diseased creation.) Close up shots of Leder eating a sausage, while unrealistically fantasizing about two young women, goes beyond the limits of tolerance. Loud smacking, and breaking glass get to be annoying, but these are but two stops on the road to true angst. The family he torments isn't given any actual background, or character formation, so instead of feeling any real pity for them, the viewer stays focused on the human worm who is their antagonist. None of this attention is wasted, either, as Leder gobbles up our disgust, smacking, and drooling all the way. German directors are wunderbar at conjuring up these kind of jangly, uncertain feelings in an audience, so well, in fact, the music from Nekromantic came back to haunt me for a moment. If you want to have a disturbing experience, look no further.

A very well photographed B-movie who puts the audience inside the mind of a compulsive killer. A strange film halfway between Michael Haneke for the story (I didn't know anything about the film and I thought It was haneke's one) and Stanley Kubrick for the cinematography (many references to "clockwork orange"). Actors performances are incredible considering they are dead half the film and their corpses are pulled and strechted across long single shots. An hypnotic movie with only narrative voice and great moments of cinema (especially the last action scene in the tunnel). One detail of importance : 22 years after the shooting, this film looks like it was shot last month. I wonder what became this director ? Any news ?

This relatively obscure German film is very well-done. It's about a schizophrenic man who murders uncontrollably. The film features very innovative camera work (at the time) which includes a recurring POV shot that will impress, no doubt. What makes this film tough to watch is the very realistic murder scenes, which include a graphic rape/murder and the long, drawn-out drowning death of an invalid. It reaches levels of intensity seen in other great psycho films like Seul Contre Tous and Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. The lead actor is very convincing, and makes you feel sorry for him as well as loathe him. A highly recommended film.

Great camerawork and an unsettling sense of dread are the two main reasons to recommend Angst. It's an ugly and uncomfortable film, but one made with lots of skill. It's emotionally cold and a depressing experience, but an unforgettable one nevertheless. You might want to save it for when you're in the right mood, because it's bound to disturb the rest of your day.

I have always been a fan of the genre of serial killer movies. Not to get confused with slasher flicks because the serial killer movies are usually sophisticated with a realistic feel to them, causing an unnerving and disturbing feel. Not to take away from the slasher because there is fun in those movies. Angst is the best of the serial killer movies, in my personal opinion. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is marvelous and Amoklauf is also a great film, but as far as putting you right in the serial killers mind, this movie does the best and it is very frightening.

The story starts with the lead character (basically the only lead character) walking up to a house. He knocks on the door and when the door opens he murders the person who answers with a hand gun. After being in jail for 10 years he is released. Upon his release he instantly gets started again murdering a mother and her grown children. One of which a retarded man in a wheelchair.

The storyline may seem simple but in no means is the character simple. After he murders the person at the beginning of the movie we are shown events in documentary form leading up to the murder and him going into jail. So we become familiar with the character. But being familiar with the character and suddenly being put in the characters shoes are two different things.

The whole movie when he is released from jail is narrated by the killer, almost like he is thinking and we can hear his thoughts. When he goes into a restaurant and sits down at the table he starts getting uncomfortable after watching two young woman sitting at the bar. He starts thinking of sick things to do to them and as a result gets the feeling that everyone in the restaurant is watching him. So right away we, as the audience, get this uncomfortable feeling as well and we are also introduced to how paranoid the character is. Much of the movie is like this.

The moments in which he is murdering the family is almost unbearable and rather disturbing. I don't want to give to much away but be prepared to be disturbed. It's not the violent nature in which he kills these people it's almost the inevitable lead up to it.

Well, I hope this review helps. This is a very difficult film to find so good luck in the search. Sources from IMDb tell me that this will be released in the states eventually. If you find it before then... enjoy. 10/10

Angst is without a doubt one of the best serial killer flicks in the history of cinema. And some would say The Best. And I can tell you, it's damn close.

Angst follows a serial killer who is released from prison after a 10 year incarceration. What takes place is shocking and original film-making. What this man does is just start up where he left off. It's basically just following around the killer and just getting to know him. Oh and his victims, but in a more or less personal way. Eesh.

Angst excels in all facets. The acting by the main character, the serial killer, is flat out great, in an insane sort of way. He looks the part, and definitely acts the part. The scene when he's in the car is unforgettable. Throw in great cinematography, direction and writing, and the fact that this is a truly disturbing, realistic look into a serial killer's obsessive habits, it easily makes this one of the best serial killer movies of all time.

This movie is horrific and disgusting but the cinematography made it incredible. The stability shots following a character, the aerial shots, they all made it amazing. The movie felt like one continuous motion, no cutting forward no cutting back just focused on one single crime. As disgusting and grim as it may be, it still was a good film.

You can get the plot from others. All I'll say is that I didn't think this film was as disturbing or shocking as other reviewers seem to think. I liked the lead actor's performance and the camera work, but I found the exploration of the killer's psyche - the stories from his childhood - to be kind of facile, pop psych sorts of things.

A very disturbing, chilling, thrill ride of movie made by what should have and or could have been a very interesting filmmaker. It really is a shame that Angst was the filmmakers only film. What direction would his career have gone? At any rate I really appreciate this movie and it's contribution to the genre.

An impending sense of foreboding bathes the first minutes of the movie when we follow its protagonist (Erwin Leder), a psychopath with a history of reincarceration, walking through the streets searching for his next prey, where the instability of the camera enhances the overall feel as an open door to see the troubled mind of its bearer and his need for sadism.

Directed by Gerald Kargl and co-written with Zbigniew Rybczynski, the movie is based on real-life murderer Werner Kniesek, an Austrian responsible for the deaths of three people in 1980 while on parole. Angst illustrates the life of a man who after ten years in prison for the murder of a woman is now free again and willing to satiate his need for violence. It spends around ten minutes in a prologue about the past of its protagonist. An insight that allows us to understand not only who he is but also how far back his troubles began. As is the case with many serial killers, he had a penchant for torturing animals, something that later provided no more pleasure, leading him to crave human victims. By letting us in into this disturbing childhood, the voiceover in the prologue prepares us for what is to come, as his sadistic desires are but a reflection of his violent nature. A violent nature needing to find a vehicle to be released.

A movie that, given its theme, feels like an extension of the trespassing scene in A Clockwork Orange by Stanley Kubrick where Alex and his droogs attack the writer and his wife. Like Alex, Angst's protagonist has a lust for violence that is satiated only momentarily, resulting in his going around looking for potential sites of fulfillment. What the movie effectively captures is what is going on inside his mind, something that also furthers the discomfort of the situation. Introspective thoughts as well as spontaneous ideas fulfill the only safe space a psychopath finds to show himself as he truly is. He does not seek torture alone, he also wants to make his victims suffer as much as possible. This total lack of remorse is equally shocking as what is graphically depicted, an unsettling ambience from beginning to end.

Erwin Leder is great at portraying the killer. There is something in his face and demeanor that effectively transmits a sense of eeriness that the movie accentuates in the many close-ups. A sense of uncomfortableness is evoked throughout, even when not being violent. Angst might be one of the realest depictions of psychopathy in cinema, where the fear it evokes is not a product of imagination but of something that could happen to anybody. It is a movie that, despite being obscure, was very influential. Gaspar Noe said more than once this was one of his favorite movies, something that should give you an idea of what you are about to see and reason enough to give it a chance.

A full star rating, for me, usually indicates a film I would gladly sit down and watch again, straight away. Not this one. Not this mean disgusting, horrific, disturbing, involving and believable film from Gerald Kargl. If the refusal of distributors to show this upon release had been overcome, what mighty movies might, this clearly most talented man have brought us? Well, I suppose the influence is clear to see in much more recent and overwrought horror, but surely nothing so impressive as this. From start to finish, helped by a haunting score and free flowing cinematography, not afraid to mix intense POV shots with overhead and hand-held. Blistering and uncompromising film making helped much by a sensational central performance from Erwin Leder and also by the clever use of voice over where we learn what this guy has done before and how much pleasure it gives him and then what he hopes to do with these very people he is dragging around. A very tough film that is out there on its own. Grubby and hard to like but a genuine and sincere masterpiece.

Well there certainly aren't a lot of movies like this one! I've been looking forward to a viewing of Angst for some time now, and now that it's finally come, I have to say that the film didn't disappoint! Unlike many films of this nature, this one truly is horrendously disturbing and the original way that it goes about portraying the mind of a serial killer has ensured the film its cult status. The obvious film to compare this one to would be the 1986 film 'Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer', but although they share some themes - the two can never really be compared, Angst feels a whole lot more real! The plot itself is very simple and there isn't really any story to it. The film simply follows a man upon his release from prison. We are immediately made aware that he is a psychopath through his musings and the way that his first plan upon release is to go back to his old murderous ways. First, he decides to murder a taxi driver; but that plan goes wrong when he bottles it at the last moment. Later, he happens upon a secluded house and decides to have some fun with the occupants...

The best thing about this film is the way that it mixes the killer's sadistic monologues with the action on screen. We get to see him torturing his victims, and at the same time he's giving us a run down of past events in his life and his desires, and this really makes us feel like we're getting inside the psychopath's head. The film is lead by Erwin Leder, who gives an absolutely great performance in the central role! He both looks the part and sounds the part of the psychopath he's portraying, and much of the success of the film is courtesy of him. The film is completely disturbing, but it doesn't deliver this with shocks in the way that many movies do - Angst is not a gory film, but it's more shocking than any amount of gore because of the way that it presents itself. The realism of the piece, together with disorientating camera work, the piercing soundtrack and the aforementioned voice over ensure that this is not an 'easy' film to sit through. However, if you're looking for a sadistic shocker that really does do what it says on the tin - then good luck tracking down a copy of Angst!

A deranged serial killer with mental health issues is released from prison sentence following a brutal murder. Immediately, he plans to kill again.

The movie starts with a man who shoots a woman at random in her home. He is arrested and tells the authorities that he had no motive and needs help. The courts put him away for only 10 years, charging him with a botched robbery despite his claims that this wasn't a robbery and that he doesn't know why he did it. The film explains a very troubled childhood for the killer involving an abusive relationship with his mother in which he attacked her with a knife. Fast forward to the killers release 10 years later on October 28th, 1983.

We start to follow the serial killer and his inner thoughts, including seeing his psychiatrist and telling that person all of the things inside of his mind including the urges to torture other human beings. Once released from prison, we see that he has immediate sexual thoughts of women he sees and it of course involves torture and pain to be inflicted on the female. He breaks into a house which seems like a perfect secluded paradise for him, and kills the family who lives there.

Angst is a very interesting and fairly unknown Austrian horror film from the early 80's. It pretty much follows the POV of the serial killer and his inner dark thoughts, which are extremely messed up and eerie. We get all of his memories from an abusive and warped childhood, which have shaped the way he is today. The acting of the serial killer played by Erwin Leder was really good. He looks and acts the part of a seriously deranged person. There is one killing scene in particular which is very gory and realistic, the make up/special FX people did well.

All in all, Angst is a very rare horror movie out of Austria that most people won't get a chance to see. I just caught it on Shudder by chance. I'd recommend it for sure. It's a bit intense and gritty/real at times which can be a bit much for some folks. I found it effectively disturbing.

7/10

This film combines a hard history of one psychokiller whit a incredible use of the camera, i have never seen this before an after, the camera turns around the actors realizing imposible movement and hallucinating travellings (e.g. in the woods).The name of the camera is Risinsky, one of the best that i see, i don´t know much about him but i think that is a master. If you can see this film is a masterpice of the psychotrillers.

This movie takes you into the mind of a serial.

The characterization of the killer is quite good. And there are some layers to it.

It's a psychological study of the serial killer.

There's a strong sense of realism in this movie. It makes the brutality more impactful.

The film is artfully shot. This kind of captures the attention in the beginning but soon leaves the attention as the action begins.

One thing I will say about the camera work is there are a number of times the killer is on the edge of the frame. This is very intentional and done to add to the unease.

The story is quite simple but well told.

The ending 20 minutes or so kind of drag but the dogged focus on the brutality remains.

This is a disturbing, upsetting film.

It's not for everyone. And an unperceptive viewer may miss the layers of characterization within the film.

It's a very simple plot. What makes it good is the characterization. The horror of the movie is not just murder but the mind of the murderer himself.

The movie stays very engaging but kind of drags at the end. But still good.

The movie is not for everyone.

Not only because of it's disturbing, brutal nature.

But there will be those who take it on face value and miss the psychological subtext at play.

But it's a well made film, if you can stomach it. Should appeal to fans of dark international cinema.

Well it's good, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's all out excellent.

But it's worth a watch for those who can handle it.

Word on the street is this is a super intense, gruelling, claustrophobic serial killer film. They're not lying. But it's important to get to note why, especially in this case: why this type of violence enthralls so much? And I mean apart from any particular on-screen nastiness. More virulent films have been made, much nastier. Why this fascinates is a completely different beast than say, something like Hostel.

It's the easiest thing to make us cringe and shy away, but to fervently want to keep watching?

The popular opinion is this works so well exactly because of how contained and straight-forward. There are no distractions from the concentrated moment we first encounter: a inmate giving himself a shave on his day of parole. There are no allusions to anything else but private madness and nothing to escape to for comfort or respite, except perhaps sheer exhaustion. This man is going to go on a crime spree again as soon as he's out of prison, we can tell this much. We can tell it's going to unravel the way we secretly hope it does.

Well, this is fine and makes some sense. But doesn't adequately explain to my mind. No, why this works so viscerally - and ties in with other interests of mine in film - I believe has all to do with the cinematic eye.

Now most films operate on the assumption that you want to experience a world as real as possible. Every advance in cinematic technology - sound, color, the recent fad of 3D - is a step in that direction. We want to escape more vividly and more urgently than ever. And what most films do to abet that escape is to let loose a few threads of story and place, hopefully open enough if we are in caring hands, that we can be trusted to attach ourselves from own experience. The tighter the weave of the threads from that point on, the closer we are lassoed to the cinematic world. Editing and camera are assigned invisible ways; they have to work without us getting to notice.

The Soviets changed all that very early in the game. Here a very world was assembled by the eye. There was no story, it was all a matter of calligraphic (dynamic overlapping) watching. Welles, and less famously Sternberg before him, unpacked these notions by letting it fall on the eye of the camera to join fragments together.

(this particular eye was first conceived by the Buddhist but that's another story altogether).

Now this is rumored to be the DP's project working under an alias, a Polish man who knows the camera. The opening shot exhibits masterful knowledge of Welles; a crane shot that establishes location by joining together many different planes of perspective. It would have been a film to watch with just this mode, that others like Argento and DePalma exercised in adventurous flourishes of spatial exploration.

It's actually a little more elaborate than that. We have two eyes instead of the one. The first is the killer's eye, tightly screwed and always at eye-level as he prowls around. Interior monologue plays out in voice-over, itself taken from the diaries of an actual killer, and meant to recast everything as internal space: victims are an invalid, an old woman and her daughter, each one mapping to a person that deeply wounded in the past as we find out. So we have exceedingly tormented soul spilled out and contorting physical space, very much like Zulawski practiced. Another Pole, another piece of the puzzle.

The second eye you will notice is always mounted on a crane and pulled upwards in steep ascends. A bird's eye far removed from human madness, which is the Buddhist eye of woodblock prints. To the film's credit, and this is a lot of its power for me, it remains abstract enough that we may use this perspective as we are inclined: is it a godless and uncaring or a merciful eye, pulling us from the carnage or skipping to the next?