An Oslo detective visits a hick town to investigate some murders rumored by the locals to have been the work of 'angels'. More likely, given the unsavory types he meets, vengeance and vigila... Read allAn Oslo detective visits a hick town to investigate some murders rumored by the locals to have been the work of 'angels'. More likely, given the unsavory types he meets, vengeance and vigilantism are the very human motivations behind.An Oslo detective visits a hick town to investigate some murders rumored by the locals to have been the work of 'angels'. More likely, given the unsavory types he meets, vengeance and vigilantism are the very human motivations behind.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 2 nominations total
Gaute Boris Skjegstad
- Niklas Hartmann
- (as Gaute Skjegstad)
Trond Fausa
- Tommy
- (as Trond Fausa Aurvaag)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
A Norwegian mystery thriller that tries hard, very hard, to be clever. Nicholas Ramm (Reidar Sorensen) is a cynical city cop dispatched to an end-of-the-world province to solve a double murder. He is confronted with the Nordic version of omerta and must learn that the whole hicktown has conspired against him. Though on the outset, it seems like it has many ingredients going for it, 1732 Hotten was recklessly turned into a grade-A stinker by a bunch of taut overachievers. For one, everyone in the film, right down to the faintest supporting act, is a confirmed and heavily overdrawn nutcase, which despite the partly good acting becomes unbearable after just ten seconds. The music score, a poor man's Tom Waits (is that a pleonasm?) imitation, is the most annoying single piece of dreck ever to come out of a synthesizer; worse, it mostly kicks in for no reason other than making you beg your ears fell off. The same goes for the camera work, which is hardly ever purpose-driven and instead veers off into some of the most complacent film academy mannerisms to-date. The transitions, takes, and cuts are so deliberately arty that it hurts a blind man's eye, while the few physical action scenes look downright ridiculous. The fundamental problem with this film is that there's too much of everything: too much madness, too much bigotry, too much mystery, too much cynicism... And just when you think you're finally over it, this silly little cockroach of a film turns into a hideous monster, topping all the incoherences it's been churning out by staging one of cinema's most infuriatingly deceptive ends. I do sympathize with the Norwegian fraction that has expressed its anger on this site. Not that you'd necessarily expect a naturalist depiction of rural Norway but even if your option is atmosphere, there has got to be some credibility. Excentricity has to be authentic, too. Director Karin Julsrud should burn all her Lynch and Coen tapes and go fishing.
1732 Høtten (Bloody Angels) is not a typical norwegian movie but it has received typically norwegian criticism. There seems to be a trend in Norway to call norwegian films you don't like "typically Norwegian". But I tell you, this film is nothing to be ashamed of!
Not many films from both Norway and abroad will be able to give you shivers like this, hardly any film of this genre gets stuck to your mind. It makes you annoyed, it makes you sick, it makes you depraved and finally, at the end, in a sick and twisted way - you get your revenge. But the film has weaknesses, and the most annoying is the script. It could have been so much better so it won't receive a top rating from me. But go rent it today!
Not many films from both Norway and abroad will be able to give you shivers like this, hardly any film of this genre gets stuck to your mind. It makes you annoyed, it makes you sick, it makes you depraved and finally, at the end, in a sick and twisted way - you get your revenge. But the film has weaknesses, and the most annoying is the script. It could have been so much better so it won't receive a top rating from me. But go rent it today!
Clearly the Norwegian jury doesn't agree (read the other comments) but I think this Scandinavian take on David Lynch's TWIN PEAKS (hey, that's what they're marketing it as, so call me lazy, see if I care !) is one of the more startling cinematic experiences to come along in many a year. First time director Karin Julsrud didn't intend her fable of how violence can only breed more of the same to be taken as a documentary but as the idiosyncratic mix of drama, comedy and horror which led publicists to make the comparison in the first place. Unlike Lynch however, Julsrud doesn't let the viewers off the hook at film's end with a far-fetched supernatural conclusion but forces them to confront their own dark side by making some of the violent outbursts her film suggests (but rarely shows) seem 'righteous' at first, though that doesn't stop them from poisoning the close-knit society they sprang from. Opening with an atonal rendition of 'When the Saints Come Marching In', this spellbinding thriller charts the investigation led by big city cop Nicholas Ramm into the small town murders of a mentally retarded girl and one of the alleged perpetrators of that crime. To reveal more would take away much of the film's pleasures as well as shocks. Progressing thoughtfully, Julsrud has enlivened her narrative with such a wealth of telling details that you may need to see this one more than once. I for one welcome that prospect.
Is it the harsh, wintry climate that makes Norwegian small town people as callous as this film wants us to believe they are? I was wondering this at the beginning of Karin Julsrud's debut when we get to know the carefree and violent attitude of some of the younger citizens of the town. This is more and more obvious as the story unfolds: a detective from Oslo, sent in to help solve two connected murders, is first humiliated, then beaten without anyone lifting a finger to stop it. What bothered me was the pointlessness of it all. If one man can't defy a whole town, send in the troops, all right? But this film isn't about logic. The central theme is that of the young boy who is repeatedly being victimized. His continually changing relationship with the stranger -from curiously friendly to defiant and uncaring- is the main strength of the story. Unfortunately, it can not save the rambling nature of the script. It never seems to go anywhere and leaves one wondering what the film is actually supposed to be about. One mustn't be too severe, though. Many scenes are very powerful and I liked the moments of wry humor intermingled in the drama. What we have here, then, is a compelling but not entirely satisfying psychological thriller and another director to look out for.
The film follows the traditional storyline: big city detective Nicholas Ramm in a small town, trying to solve a horrendous crime, dealing with the townspeople who want to take care of the problem themselves. Vigilante justice is explored in detail and it is obvious what side the filmmaker, Karin Julsrud, is on. It was easy for me to side with Julsrud's outrage. I was a bit worried with the red herrings coming true, making the film a little too convenient but thankfully they didn't. When the twist comes, it is unexpected but (and this is a big but), I think Julsrud paints herself in a corner. Ramm's actions at this point are a little out of character and seem to be more of a way to clean things up. In this day of extensive media coverage of awful crimes, emotions are often manipulated and I thank this movie for making me more aware of how easy this is but as a film, I can't say it was a success.
Did you know
- ConnectionsReferences Cosby Show (1984)
Details
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $6,509
- Gross worldwide
- $6,509
- Runtime1 hour 40 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content