Senki

Today evening I watched the Shadows, the third movie of Milcho Manchevski. I believe the title of the movie should be Ghosts rather than Shadows. Even tough I expect it to be a movie about everyday life it turned out to be a horror movie. I believe this is the best Machevski movie so far and it definitely deserves to be at least nominated for Oskar, in the foreign movie category.

In this movie Manchevski uses the same rationality cliché as in his previous movies. However, in Senki this rationality is more stressed which gives good contrasts in the movie. To illustrate this I shall use some scenes from the movie, since I believe that many of you are familiar with them. Manchevski involves the contrasts between the rational and free, the moral and immoral, the individual and the collective, love and hate. The moral and rational win in the end. In a somewhat subconscious way Manchevski stipulates that the possibility of the origin of all the unhappiness lies behind the disobeying of the moral standards and rules. This can be seen in the beginning of the movie, before the doctor's traffic accident, when the doctor drove after having a fight with his wife, who, on the other hand behaved badly towards her child. She was smoking in front of him and even let the child light her cigarette. In the movie we can see various examples of breaking the moral standards. The doctor aimed to respect the morality, even throwing the money amounting to few thousand Euros because they were given to him as a bribe. He did this to respect one of the Ten Commandments – do not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor. He didn't want to steal and he was ready to help people even in the case of the old lady, that he took to the hospital. In other cases other doctors would say – I would not bother with her, she is old anyway. Doctor Lazar didn't want to commit adultery as an individual whereas everybody around him did. And, finally when he fulfills the task for the mother – the duty given by the church, to bury the bones or else the ghosts would not have peace. Now, a question arises as to where does this sense of morality arise in today's times of high immorality, when the world is in a chaotic state due to sins. Does this glimpse of moral value erupt only at unique individuals who remain heroes in comparison to the other immoral people. Is the source of sin in the fantasies – as in the lesbian scene between the doctor's wife and Menka? It seems like Manchevski subconsciously suggests that this could indeed be the source of all evil.

In conclusion, I believe that Manchevski would like to send a message through this movie that we should act humane and according to the moral standards for this world to become a better place

Doctor Lazar Perkov has just returned to his apartment in Skopje from his parents' villa in the lakes district after a year convalescing from a near-fatal car crash.He tries to return to work at the hospital,but his nightmares won't help him.He forgets things,fears his recovery isn't stable and has now had his first visit from the disturbed souls of the dead(the old lady and the creepy looking guy with unbaptized infant).I saw "Senki" during Warsaw Film Festival and I was a little bit disappointed.The film is too long and quite dull in spots.It offers some beautiful photography of Macedonian landscapes,some scenes are pretty moving,but the horror elements are weak.Still there are four lovely sex scenes with a good dose of female nudity to keep me happy.6 out of 10.

'Shadows' is a confection of images, evoked smells, fascinating faces, pitch-perfect acting, and unnerving events--with perhaps the best crash scene I have ever seen in film. My observation re: the accident might sound like hyperbole, but the psychology of the scene is sheer perfection. Its details are choice. I felt horrified, too, empathizing with all the people in the reaction shots, but at the same time exhilarated because it all looked so damn interesting! (The film has great cutaways!) I love it when a movie takes control of my moods and this has a driver's opening. There is also some great counterpoint with scenes and music. Really, very masterful. This film is better with a second viewing--like watching The Conformist--one always notices new and fascinating details in the frame, in the psyches of its characters.

I am very disappointed after watching Manchevski's film this evening. I came to the screening with his masterpiece "Before the Rain" in mind but some of the elements that struck me most about the film were endlessly recycled imageries of death/memory/temporal boundaries, exoticized depictions of landscape, identity and cultural otherness, tautological and often overstated motifs of death and desire, which literally drown the spectator into a sea of clichéd, old-fashioned psychological thriller formulas. Don't get me wrong, I like films which foreground their rich, highly-tuned semiotic texture and which interweave symbolic structures skilfully and compellingly. But here this twofold directorial temptation towards the symbolic and the literal doesn't quite pay off cinematically. The music is great, some of the montage is also powerful, the initial spatio-temporal build-up promising, but the film never quite takes off for me. The surreal, nightmarish, ghostly presences that populate the screen and Lazar's troubled mind amount, in my opinion, to some of the interesting cinematic effects of the film.

When i first heard about Manchevski's next project to be in the horror genre i was a bit skeptical to be honest. I mean a European horror? What was the last good one you've seen? The hype, however, surrounding this movie here in Macedonia inevitably took over me so i become interested in it too. And after watching it's fantastic trailer, "Shadows" suddenly became my most anticipated movie of the year. So my expectations were as high as they have ever been when i decided to go and see it. And it was worth the wait. It's nothing i thought it would be though. It has Manchevski written all over it, meaning this is not your typical "go and have fun" movie. It's dark and funny, simple on the outside, yet the complexity of the inside is what makes it special. It's a love it or hate it one. It's simply different from everything you have ever seen. It's more of a thriller than horror in my opinion and it's a movie that you have to see a few times to understand it's whole meaning. The symbolics used in it are brilliant(though too often ruined by the obvious explanations) and the cinematography is great. The acting was OK(I liked the performance of Sabina Ajrula as the mother) and the storytelling was good too. I felt like it was more of a collection of scenes than an actual movie to be honest but let's face it, as commercial as this movie sounded this is still in the art department. True, there are too many unnecessary sex scenes that are a distraction from the general idea, but i think it's something that should be overlooked. And even though the theme of the movie is not very original it does a good job by showing those same things, used so often these days, from a different more realistic "angle". All in all it's something that i heartily recommend you to see and despite it's few flaws it's still another great movie from a great director. Friends of thriller horror movies with a deeper even philosophical meaning, you'll be satisfied. 10/10, even though i have to admit not Oscar worthy as some have suggested