Dust

It's easy to miss what DUST does with the Western's clichés. The movie is a kind of rumination in modern, international terms on THE WILD BUNCH, with some problems (e.g., Joseph Fiennes's Southern accent and arguably too many bloodbaths) and with some remarkable achievements. Chief among these is Manchevski's managing to keep several threads hanging because he pays us the compliment of assuming that we are paying attention, waiting for culmination, like the youngster who finally proves to be the movie's protagonist. We need very few details to make the important connections. The lad is a low-class thief in hock to dirty cops; he confronts an old broad far tougher than he is, who sees his resemblance to the Luke of her memory, a mercenary cowboy who found it easier to kill than love. As she begins a sharp-witted decline to death, she tells Luke's story. The story is full of traps. We think Luke fled to Macedonia because he loves the prostitute his sinister, found-again brother (Fiennes) has married. But Luke and his life are more complicated than that, as we gradually learn, circling through past, present, and the minds of several participants. Manchevski values images, cutting to the old lady's photos from the past, mixing times and spaces within the frame. He insists that we are watching the old lady's story, not even a pretense at reality. At last the youngster takes up the challenge and Luke redeems himself in a final confrontation whose truth is in fiction's need to resolve the central issue: here, that memory is a story which makes time come round to emphasize the dark ironies and pains from which we keep trying to protect ourselves.

When we first put Dust into the DVD player and the film started, I wondered if maybe the video-rental store put the wrong dvd in the case. As the story progressed, I was enamored by the brilliant execution of story within story within story. The world needs more films like this, with semi-unfamiliar faces who don't need to work so hard convincing us that they are indeed this character they portray. This is one of those films people will still be talking about in 25 years; a monumental masterpiece that broke the grounds in straightforward plot-telling!!

Milcho Manchevski establishes new guidelines for independent movie makers, successfully balancing between Hollywood commercial and the independent art film. Only few compromises and hybrids like this have proven worth filming (and watching) and I was pleasantly surprised with the outcome.

First of all, there was the careful choice of names - Luke and Elijah (biblical names) opposed to the prostitute Lilith (female demon). No wonder that Lilith was in so many ways connected with water and finally she drowned. Than, there's Neda (from an old Macedonian poem "Serdarot" by Grigor Prlichev, awarded first prize at Athens). Then, a thing which impressed me was the short appearance of certain characters like Sigmund Freud, Pablo Picasso and Josip Broz Tito. Manchevski has used his old "trick" from his first film "Before the Rain" - non-linear time, but while in "Before the rain" the explanation was "The circle is not round, time never dies" in "Dust" it is "The centuries do not follow up each other but coexist like parallel universes".

Repentance was an important motif in the movie, especially the repentance of Luke and Edge.

Certain scenes have moved me, the scene in the hospital when Angela dies and the nurse is asking Edge what is he to her... The scene in Macedonia, when the women are laundering the carpets on a rocky waterfall (Mariovo)... And another thing - me as a Macedonian have always been brought up with the notion that our freedom fighters were noble men who were usually victims of blood thirsty Turks, but this movie had an interesting point that they were all butchers and murderers whose only lust is not freedom or fight against oppression but GOLD!

Probably this movie doesn't have the prophetic touch of "Before the rain" clearly displayed in the current political situation in Macedonia, but there's again the scene with Albanian gangs killing innocent Macedonian cattle breeders.

And another thing - both Angela and Luke are mocking the official clerical (church) "authorities", when Angela refuses the confession of the catholic priest on her death bed and when Luke kills the local orthodox priests offering assistance in the negotiations with the Turks (by the way, the priest is a traitor, which questions another illusion of mine and my generation - that the priests and the Church have been very active in protecting the Macedonian villagers from oppression and torment).

I know one thing for sure - that as soon as I am able I will use my proud privilege to be a Macedonian and visit Mariovo, where a part of the movie was made, and especially the bridge where the Turks attempted to pass so many times during the 17-th century and did not succeed.

The tension seems to fade at some points and that's why the rate of "9" form my user's vote, but still, this is an excellent complete product, made with the touch of perfect craftsmanship.

It's unusual a film will have as many good ideas as this and so many striking ideas and images and still not be a success. Perhaps it's because there are simply too many striking visuals and set-pieces - other directors would have built whole films around just one or two of the concepts contained here - for one film to cope with all of them. Essentially, the story is of a burglar (Lester) who breaks into a house of an old woman (Murphy) in New York and she tells him the story of American cowboys (Fiennes and Wenham) in the Ottoman Empire in Macedonia and their tangled fraternal love/hatred when confronted with a beautiful woman. It's a story that dips in and out of narrative timelines. Sometimes it's New York and sometimes it's the Old west and sometimes it's old Macedonia - and sometimes it's bits of all of them. And sometimes it's just fantasy. Reality, illusion, truth and cinematic deception are all part of the mix. Director Machevski is not here to give the viewer an easy ride. He is an intelligent man and he expects intelligence of his viewers. However, in return he offers some beautiful images that pay homage to spaghetti westerns while adding a sly twist of knowing humour. It's violent, but there's a blackly funny element to it that's closer to life than the comic-book stock-in-trade of such directors as Tarantino (and rightly so, Macedonians have seen more real-life warfare than most Hollywood filmmakers).And despite this, it's a movie that's life-affirming (not in the easy way - you really have to like life to have it affirmed here). The performances are variable. Wenham and Fiennes have both done better in the past and you have to hope they'll do better in the future. But in Lester and Murphy, there are two actors who are in full command of the camera. There's not an emotion you'll feel that they haven't carefully worked to create. Simply beautiful work. With a greater distribution, this is would have built a considerable cult following. Not easy-going, pop-corn-chomping stuff, but highly recommended.

In modern New York, a thief (Adrian Lester) breaks into an old woman's apartment. She surprises him and holds him at gunpoint. She tells him the story about two brothers in the turn of the century. Elijah (Joseph Fiennes) and Luke (David Wenham) have a breakdown in relationship. Luke is drawn to the wild east in Macedonia where the Ottoman is battling a local revolt. He joins a group of bandits pursuing the revolt leader known as The Teacher for the lucrative reward. He gets taken prisoner by the Turks who is joined by his hated brother.

Filmmaker Milcho Manchevski has taken on too much for one movie. It's trying to do too much and ends up stepping on each other. It may work better as an old style violent spaghetti western. Even taken separately, the narrative flow is a bit disjointed. The modern part only adds the trans-generational story. The robbery part isn't that compelling. Without knowing either character, there is nothing to root for or against. It's often problematic to have a character tell the story of the movie. The reliability of the telling is suspect. It's also trying to have some surreal poetry about flying. It's doing too much and gets muddled. This is definitely ambitious and probably too ambitious for its own good.