vincent_brems

This the story of a friendship between two women. It is however not clear why they are friend. They have basically nothing in common. They experience some kind of adventure in an haunted house. But this adventure is more or less senseless. The narrative telling of this adventure is nonlinear and very original. This together with the amusing light tone of the film (which is sometimes not humorless) is maybe what made the fame of it.

I found that film quite boring. I was wanting to go out after the first quarter an hour. It seems this film should be funny but it really wasn't to me. I usually like art-films even surrealist/poetic ones like "Zazi dans le metro", "Breaking the waves", "Dead man" and "the eel" ("Unagi"). But this one was really not appealing to me. Maybe the only film I could compare this one with was "une femme est une femme".

Lotta is a five old girl living in Sweden with her mother, father, brother and sister. She is living the very normal life of all children of her age. She is usually bold to grown up. And all in all very funny. The humor is all the time present but don't expect to much action or big laughing.

The film is divided in more or less five short stories and the pace is very slow. I think this format is perfect for young children who are not used to long stories.

Though the film is about 75 min long, my children thought it was very short and fast.

My both children (3 and 5 years old) loved that film. That was the first film they have ever seen in a cinema. They have been very impressed. What a success! They both want to go back again and watch the second part.

The film is telling the dramatic story of three soldiers (one Serb and two Bosnians) caught between two front-lines during the Yugoslavian war. Some UN troop try to free them but their very bureaucratic hierarchy prevents them of doing so and they require the help of a British journalist.

The plot is very credible and shows perfectly the absurdity and cruelty of war and the influence of the TV press on the battlefield.

But I would not qualify this film as a masterpiece. I found the acting not that convincing. Watch Kirk Douglas in Paths of Glory! Moreover the story is quite melodramatic. Some effects (in particular the UN colonel and his sexy secretary) are not really welcome (the director should have chosen between the MASH style or the documentary style and not oscillated between both). I really felt the whole was too long and not deserving such eulogistic comments as you can read on IMDb.

This film can be compared with the BBC TV series Warriors (1999). I really believe Warriors was very much superior. The pace was faster. The acting was better. The plot was more credible and more informative. Of course this was only a TV series and the quality of the film direction cannot be compared but, all in all, Warriors touched me much deeper.