Kaybedenler Kulübü

I loved this the first time I watched it. But as I went, I started to dislike the movie, I don't know why? I started to dislike it less and less, but the first time I watched it, I kept my rating a little higher because it was different.

The film actually wants to show the loneliness of our two main characters, who have lost in life, and it does this through the life styles and perspectives of the people who live that life.

I am also part of the society that does not support this lifestyle, but I am against the criticism of separating people just for this reason. I just want to explain to you the understanding of judgment people have. In other films, loneliness is shown to us in a more artistic way. So, how right would it be to say "they live their loneliness" for those characters in that film, but not for those here? Isn't life actually about seeing what we cannot accept as wrong, looking for judgment within it? Just because the majority of society's view is opposite, does that make those people wrong? After all, aren't the things we consider right today what our ancestors thought were wrong back then? There is no universal understanding of truth; it is the common opinion chosen by society's majority at that moment. Therefore, everyone's truth, everyone's life, everyone's way of thinking concerns only them. I think the place we need to start changing is this: we should not judge people, their lives, their ways of thinking according to society's temporary norms, and we should not try to change them. Of course, unless the lifestyle they have chosen affects the rights of others to live normally. Otherwise, the world would turn into a night of purification.

Furthermore, the nuance I want to touch on is that the film is incredibly rich in meaning and full of philosophical sentences. This makes the film much more meaningful and beautiful. In addition, it reflects the inner richness of our main characters. Based on these details, we can easily say that our main characters are among the people with a worldview of their time.

The film does a wonderful job of drawing the viewers in and making them love the main characters. After watching the film, people really start to think, "Am I also alone in this life?" Thoughts do not leave one's mind empty, ideas keep spinning, wondering like this, wondering still. But the only thing we know for sure is that we are here now, and unfortunately... Everyone has their own regrets, and you fill in the gaps in this life.

Good night, dear city listeners. This is the Club of the Losers.

This is the best Turkish movie I've ever seen.. It's extraordinary and marginal. Namely, full of art.. If I had one word to explain this movie , it would be "perfect".. I was impressed deeply. Whole characters in the movie are so real.. It describes loneliness in an ingenious way.. Moreover ,this movie's humorous is really high.. I enjoyed so much..I was touched, laughed, self-questioned while watching this movie.. Additionaly,soundtracks had been chosen compatible. I would like to thank Tolga Ornek for presenting us such a special movie..I think everyone can find a lot of things closer to oneself in this film.. I recommend "Kaybedenler Kulübü" to all movie-lovers.

KAYBEDENLER KÜLÜBÜ (THE LOSERS' CLUB) is director Tolga Örnek's contribution to the cycle of contemporary Turkish films criticizing contemporary life in the metropolis. Others include Çağan Irmak's ISSIZ ADAM (ALONE) (2008) and Zeki Debirkubuz's Dark Tales trilogy of YAZGI, İTİRAF and MASUMİYET.

Örnek's film concentrates on a pair of single men, Mete (Yiğit Özsener) and Kaan (Nejat İsler) whose day-jobs are far from fulfilling: Mete spends much of his time in bars, collecting vinyl LPs, or talking to his mother (Serra Yılmaz), while Kaan runs a publishing house issuing coffee-table books that seldom sell. The two men have a thrice- weekly radio show "The Losers' Club" on Kent FM, an independent radio station, where they talk mostly about sex and existentialism, with sex assuming most importance. From modest beginnings the show becomes a cult hit, reaching No. 1 in the charts with a devoted listenership of people from all walks of life - learners, single men, potential suicide victims, artists.

Yet despite their aural celebrity, Kaan and Mete lead empty lives, comprised mostly of casual pick-ups, drinking in bars, and pretending to work. Their radio show might be popular, but they do not seem to derive any pleasure from it - apart from a misogynist delight in persuading their female listeners to reveal their sexual secrets on air.

Örnek's cinematic style in this film is very different from his previous work. He makes extensive use of the split screen technique, interspersed with sequences comprised of fast cuts and the use of subtitles to highlight some of the characters' dialogue. Such techniques are redolent of American and British films from the so-called "Swinging Sixties," where such techniques illustrated the new-found freedoms - cinematic as well as sexual - enjoyed by young people at that time. In KAYBEDENLER KÜLÜBÜ these techniques emphasize the artificiality of the protagonists' lives; there is nothing beneath the surface of either of them.

This emptiness is also evident in their radio show: much of the existential chat is pure bunkum, incomprehensible to most of the listeners. The reason why the show becomes such a cult is because of its unpredictability: the two presenters are continually challenging the borders of acceptability, much to the station controller Aslı's (İdil Fırat's) chagrin.

While KAYBEDENLER KÜLÜBÜ is obviously concerned to make social criticisms, its plot in truth is quite slight: perhaps the film could have benefited from a shorter running-time. Örnek's characterization is also quite weak; we learn little about the protagonists' off-air existence, except for their fondness for alcohol and sex. Perhaps less time could have been spent on the use of ostentatious cinematic devices and more on developing the script in greater depth.

Tolga Ornek is a very successful documentary producer. "Kaybedenler Kulubu" could be a better documentary than a movie. The pace of the movie is sometimes so slow that you lose your concentration. The dialog is sometimes hard to follow and not very interesting at some other times. In the end, I do not find the characters sincere and the radio program they are serving worthwhile to listen. The love in the movie does not get enough electricity but more than enough sex scenes which obviously aim to attract audience to the movie. At the end, I give an OK grade to the movie but easily understand if others love it. (it all depends if you like the characters and the radio show)