Nochnoy dozor

"Night Watch" is far more entertaining than many of its American counterparts in the "secret underground world of vampires and good vs. evil" genre. Unlike "Underworld" and "Constantine" it kept my attention throughout, but still this Russian smash is severely flawed.

First, let's applaud the good parts. "Night Watch" is distinctly Russian. Moscow is presented as a vibrant mix of modern metropolis and Gothic-style throwback to the middle ages. The plot, heavily steeped in its own fabricated mythology from a series of popular books, also serves on some level as an allegory for the fall of Communism and the rise of Capitalism. In my mind, the forces of "dark" forced underground are the Communists, while the forces of "light" (whose HQ is fronted by the City Electric Company) are the Capitalists, who often get caught up in their own bureaucracy in their vain attempts to keep the peace and not violate the truce. Some of the special effects and modern riffs on vampirism are highly imaginative and disarming (I loved "The Gloom" aspect). The American distributors also deserve some credit for their creative use of subtitles which often become part of the scene without ever distracting from the visuals.

Unfortunately, the director is clearly a veteran of music videos, and he makes the action sequences hyper kinetic and often incoherent. When he does manage to create an alluring visual, he quick-cuts, and you wish he would've had the patience to hold some of the shots longer. This hectic visual style is evident in the plotting as well, which clearly is setting up for sequels with the introduction of many characters, though some of the subplots (especially involving the cursed virgin woman and her evil vortex) seemed unnecessary. Likewise, the rushed finale seemed oddly anti-climatic and didn't pack the wallop I feel the filmmakers intended.

Despite the flaws, I will eagerly await the American distribution of the sequels, and I suppose that is the greatest compliment a film like this can receive.

I have always respected fantasy-set films that try and take themselves seriously as cinematic pieces. When a director takes the actual construction of the film seriously, or tries to, I can respect the intent. As such "Night Watch" is difficult to judge. The cinematography is excellent: the camera-work is superb, the mood is perfect, the effects are beautifully rendered (and not overused), and the timing of individual scenes is consistent throughout the piece. The problem is the overall timing of the film. For over half the film, the overall plot and premise is ignored. It is very much as if we are watching two different episodes of the same TV series; the characters are the same, the premise is the same, it is clear how the plots fit together visually and thematically, but otherwise they have pretty much nothing to do with one another. They are not disjointed in their construction or presentation, it is simply that the plot threads are mostly unrelated.

It is worth pointing out that this is the first film in a planned trilogy. Every hanging plot/character moment in the film is very strongly intended to be followed through upon in the next two films, and it shows. Characters and references are not simply tossed aside, but are led into gently just enough to let the audience know that greater things are intended. While I'm not particularly a fan of this kind of thing, Night Watch does it very well, and I await the sequels with anticipation.

Many people on this board have made comparisons to Star Wars EpI-II, and for the life of me I haven't the faintest clue why. The concept of Imperfect Good vs Seductive Evil within the human soul was hardly invented by George Lucas (though vampires in Star Wars would be pretty freakin' cool), and its presentation in Night Watch is tight and interesting. There is no resemblance whatsoever, this is one of the more original films that I have ever seen, and I recommend it both for its flaws and perfections.

A tale of the modern, the effect that it can make, on traditions and behaviours, that over years have formed a brake, as barriers are broken, with walls cascading down, lines are crossed, words go unspoken, the Armageddon clock counts down.

The Night Watch keep on searching, for those who overstep the mark, those who crawl out of the shadows, those who live their life in dark; they have visions of the horrors, that may take the world to hell, using seers that they've discovered, a contemporary show and tell.

Anton finds more than he bargained for when hunting down a cursed doctor who is about to bring calamity and chaos reigning down on everything and all.

I was reluctant to see this film for so long.

It was mainly in defiance towards that frantic promotion campaign positioning it as the first ever "unrivalled Russian blockbuster" and "a groundbreaking achievement of the decade".

The soundtrack is annoyingly offered for the cell phones: you saw the movie - now set your ringtone to the Night Watch terrific score!

Now it is allegedly considered as the most possible nominee for the Academy Award, while American either remake or sequel is underway.

A real misfortune of the contemporary Russian cinema is that hardly concealed inferiority complex. Some filmmakers no longer shoot movies just to entertain the moviegoers. They strive with their last bit of strength in pursuit of the ultimate goal: TO MAKE AN EXCEPTIONAL FILM THAT WOULD BLOW UP THE Hollywood.

I don't really much incline to the idea that we are somehow aesthetically and culturally above the rest of the world and that we should obligatory go our own way.

But I'm afraid that the efforts to prove, at any cost, that WE ALSO CAN DO A COOL STUFF with bells and whistles, (at least not worse than the "big guys") may be not exactly the right path to the top.

Well, it's a way better than the arms race, but a work of art falls into somewhat self-sufficient category and shouldn't be an object of that sort of competition.

I believe a film doesn't have to bear a specific nationality. Once it is considered irrespective of the country of origin, and could be valued purely as is, just for it's inner virtues, it may look much more appealing.

To be honest, all that my reasoning, however, refers to the hysteria around the Night Watch, rather than to the film itself.

Unexpectedly to myself, I've bought an occasional (licensed) DivX with the Night Watch just to test MPEG4 capabilities of a DVD player.

And I have to admit I was pleasantly surprised. I found it rather atmospheric, gripping and engaging as well as neatly produced. I may say I liked it.

The cast was great, acting - almost impeccable and not over the top (what frequently degrades modern Russian fantasy, sci-fi or action movies). Some dialogues, nevertheless, could have been a bit more articulate.

The cinematography was equally nice - I liked that fancy shooting angles and professional camera-work. Effects were descent and balanced.

The closing titles background song was pretty cool. Frankly I'm not so much enthusiastic about that sort of tiresome music. What is really awesome about the song is its humorous lyrics embracing the entire movie plot.

The idea of the film/book is quite interesting (though not brand new). Numerous dark forces lurk somewhere in a parallel world unseen to unsophisticated humans. Until the time when some of their most villainous representatives would be eager to play with their unsuspecting victims. It is, however, contrary to a certain pact between the good and the evil specifying that both good and evil doings should be controlled and approved by both parties that have established for that reason the respective teams of guardians, the Night Watch and the Day Watch.

Entirely new for the movies with such kind of a pleasant premise is that none has ever got killed, except for a handful of malefactors (like that stoned bloodsucker). Just some pinpoint accurate destructions here and there, minor violence and mild torture. A close-up shot of the finger pinned for a blood sample was the only scene that made my temporal vein twitch of disgust. Menshov's healer-like manipulations with Khabensky's entrails were impressively staged.

A serious drawback of the film is the lack of explanation on some principle points. It's not that the philosophy was too complex for my convolutions. But the coherency of the storytelling was impaired at times. Like certain chunks of the film have been lost among leftovers on the cutting room's floor.

My son, familiar with the Lukyanenko's novel, was giving brief tips in the course of the action, which were conducive to the overall comprehensibility.

Final verdict: not for all tastes, but refreshing and worth watching, at least once.

P.S. Amazingly, the majority of the IMDb positive reviews comes from overseas audience, while the Russian reviewers lash the Night Watch with a scathing sarcasm.

With just over a $4 M budget, you would think there's only so much that a sci-fi/fantasy film can accomplish, but "Night Watch" proves exception with its well-imagined and executed effects courtesy the creative mind of Timur Bekmambetov. The style of the film alone helps to cover up the weak structure of the script.

"Night Watch," based on the novel by Sergei Lukyanenko, is sort of an anthropomorphic imagining of good versus evil, where good/light and evil/darkness are manifested as special individuals called "Others" who have been at peace since a truce long ago that said all would be able to choose freely between good or evil. Naturally there needs to be means of enforcing this truce, so there's a Night Watch (good guys) and a Day Watch (bad guys) who make sure both sides play nice. This of course becomes a lot harder with a prophecy suggesting someone will come along and his/her choice will throw off the balance forever. It's really a classic sci-fi "secret supernatural beings living among humans fighting a war of sorts" premise.

From the get-go, this movie is hard to follow. That concept gets presented fairly quickly and the script doesn't really give us any extra help in understanding who is what. It's hard to tell who is on what side and why and it hurts the film throughout whether its the lack of connection felt to the characters or that you're fighting just to get it the whole time that you have trouble appreciating much else.

Also important to know is that this film is not action-oriented. Although there are fight scenes, these are hardly action sequences as a moviegoer exposed to Western action movies might define them. It's more of a thriller story with lots of special effects and creative editing to bring the secret world of good vs. evil to life.

Bekmambetov is the key to making this movie work. He realizes that with the right editing techniques, anything low budget can still come across effectively. One early shot of the main character Anton taking out a vampire combines a little bit of special effects, illusion and make-up, but it is filmed in quick sequence that makes it all appear simultaneous like it is a CGI effect. It's creative thinking (and a few slow motion shots too).