Copy Shop

it is difficult to say why. but it is it - a fascinating movie. for story and for technical manner to make it. for references to the early history of cinema and to Franz Kafka literary universe. for the brilliant music and for the admirable idea. for acting and for the great effort to create a parable about the essence of film, society and ordinary fears. it could have many interpretations. but important is its simplicity. and the wise way to transform in a film who impress in deep sense. because it has the art to become yours story. a warning. a trip in memories and black utopia. to remind the vulnerability front to technique. or to remind the stereotypes who are bones and muscles and skin of our lives. it is easy to define it as masterpiece. for reasons who are not from artistic area.

Terrible quality and it is a torture to watch it. Made in 2001? Maybe it is a mistake and was made in 1901.

According to the Short Of The Week website the process of filming COPY SHOP was done like this: Shot on digital camcorder , was transferred on to computer and was edited on computer . So what you ask ? Well after that - and here's the hard bit - each and every frame was photocopied and then each and every frame was filmed on 35 mm camera . It leads to a meta-fictional context for the film which narrative wise involves photo copying going haywire and I bet director Virgil Widrich must have gone a bit haywire himself while doing the process . It sounds a nightmare of absolute frustration to do

As admirable as the work that went in to it I am someone who likes a self contained narrative to a story and for something to really jump out and grab me by the throat . Alas COPY SHOP is a good idea filmed in a unique way but is rather one note . A man photocopies himself and this leads to ... well you can what the natural succession of this is going turned up to the power of eleven . No doubt this influenced a film directed by the son of a very famous rock star with Kevin Spacey playing the voice of a computer . You know the movie I mean , a movie incidentally I wasn't mad keen on and to blunt I wasn't mad keen on this one either

I've never seen any Austrian movie before and I would have thanked God to have made me tape this short movie if I believed in God!!! This is an excellent experimental movie which develops a very interesting idea and clever new technics which consist in animating photocopies of pictures. Moreover Virgil Widrich wrote the right story to stick with the technics. And the result is amazing: the aesthetics are very good and the special effects well-done. But it's not all: Zlamal's music is very moving and Johannes Silberschneider performs his several roles with majesty! At the end I felt very strange and wondered a lot of things but above all I thought about problems of cloning humans! Generally I thought about the dangers of homogeneity: can we become all fools?... But I won't tell you more because suspense is so important in cinema!

Interesting films are copies of life (or something related to life) that enclose and acknowledge themselves.

I call this "folding," where the film does something and them does something with itself, usually the same "something." That's the idea in many, many films. It is a hot topic in some films schools and many script labs.

And that's what this veteran of film intellectual circles addresses (even though he is from a historically daft area cinematic ally).

Nominally, this is about a man who copies his own reality and encounters the copies. What makes it interesting viewing is how the "copying" is woven into the actual making of the film: what we see was "filmed," then each frame made into a photocopy (with many artifacts of paper) and then filmed. So we get two layers of paper and two layers of film interwoven. Only the paper artifacts are acknowledged.

Very clever. It is only an essay compared to a real folded film like "Moulin Rouge," but a fun film school exercise in real folding.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.