J*A*S*M

I like Eubank’s work, I really enjoyed the emotional Love. The Signal is more plot centred and even though it doesn’t hit the bullseye, at least it aims in the right direction. It can be mysterious and slightly unsettling, and brings up interesting questions as any proper mystery film should do. But Eubank sort of lost me after the story leaves the lab, because there were already too many of those “weird things without answers”. Overall, slightly above average and I’m certainly curious about his next movie.

It starts as a likeable indie zombie rom-com with a personality of its own, which is nice. But then it starts falling apart, loosing the theme it has been building up to that point, and the intimate rom-com suddenly becomes a zombie outbreak, the development of the characters is forgotten and the humour is cringe rather than funny. And the creators don’t try horror, even for a second. The result is a lot of nothing. I didn’t suffer, I laughed a couple of times during the first half, but I don’t feel necessary to recommend it to anyone.

This film’s world makes no sense, not even at its most elementary level. Why should permanent peace and quiet be guaranteed by dividing society into five fractions? The system separates children from their parents and creates hundreds of outcasts, and yet it seems that everyone quietly agrees with it and that it works? And if it does work and everyone is where they belong and there’s peace and quiet, why does this society need a cast of lawyers? And a police cast? Or, on the contrary, do these five narrowly defined casts have all the necessary professions? How many people live there? It doesn’t seem that a lot. And why I’m a bothering with this when the adolescent author of the book probably didn’t even think about it? And what was the conspiracy of the intelligent exactly about? I’m just asking. But it’s nice that there’s room for that adolescent cow (whom are supposed to root for, even though her first decision in the film can be summarised as “I don’t want to help people, I’m going with those sexy athletes because they are cool”) to fall in love with the beefcake. Bugger me!

Hats off for how well the scary scenes are created, how effectively they are shot, edited and (in most cases also) scored. Scenes like “the hand in the park” and the “hospital hall” would be remarkable even in a professional film. It’s a pity that “In the Shadows” is not quite a twenty five minute film, but a stylish twenty five minute scary montage. It’s missing a plot arc and a story, things that in amateur films I much prefer over good craftsmanship, even if that can result in the big disadvantage of requiring amateur actors to speak and whatnot. This could have easily been half as long, or also twice as long, without anything changing. At the same time, it’s clear that there is a problem whenever something that builds a plot comes up (screams, spoken words). In any case, there’s not doubt that In the Shadows is an example of talent and a rich visual and style imagination, while at the same time is not an example of an effort to write and tell a focused and self-sufficient film or story. But I believe in their future and root for them.

(49th KVIFF) Good choice to end the festival. An entertaining and easy-going story set in an Italian amateur football league. The gags, be them verbal, physical or in the format (the almost western-like scenes sometimes) are on a very high level. That’s how you make a “country” comedy.

(49th KVIFF) A slow and depressive lyrical drama. This “genre” is not my cup of tea, but I wouldn’t mind giving Nagima a higher rating because it does have a very good atmosphere and excellent cinematography, and makes good use of the dilapidated locations of the Kazakh backcountry. But for that it shouldn’t have that incredibly stupid ending, which doesn’t really follow from the events thus far. The ideological structure that attempts to defend with a brief monologue is so weak that a flick of a finger would be enough to make it fall like a house of cards. All that is left is the unpleasant aftertaste from how the creators try to pointlessly and cheaply shock the viewer.

(49th KVIFF) Cute vampires (and werewolves, zombies and other similar creatures) in an incredibly funny mockumentary comedy. The midnight screening was worth it and the excited audience added to the experience. The film ends before it manages to build any sort of solid story through that relentless series of jokes. Those who say that a sitcom format would be more suitable for these vampires are right, after all, this is film is already a sitcom episode stretched to 90 minutes.

(49th KVIFF) Bizarre, but not very tight entertainment in many ways. Two days later I’m already having trouble putting together what the “tales” were actually about. Taking seven ideas, wrapping them in “something” and “bunching” them together unfortunately is not enough for a feature film. But I didn’t get bored.

(49th KVIFF) The biggest downer of the festival. Fourteen static scenes without editing that, on the bare bones of the stations of the cross, tell the story of a young girl who wants to be a good Christian, but that isn’t enough for her uptight, über-Catholic mother, who forces her to be an even better Christian. And because “I want my own father and my own mother”, she tries to be an even better Christian… but that excessive motivation harms her. A movie that actually isn’t very movie-like, but it’s still incredibly strong. The way the characters ruin their own and each other’s lives made me physically sick. It’d be interesting to watch this film together with the British drama Calvary, which looks at religion in today’s world from the other side (and not with a significantly more positive tone). The feeling it leaves is that what’s important it’s not faith, but whether a person is “normal”, or an idiot or an authoritarian asshole.

(49th KVIFF) This sci-fi movie is so non-conflicting that it’s almost unsuited for the festival. It’s the story of a molecular biologists whose research proofs the ungodly origin of the human eye, so that further research can then challenge this finding. The film doesn’t demand much from the viewer, never falls into a scientific rant or into deep philosophical speeches, even though it does have room for that. It’s well made, the story is interesting overall, even though it feels a bit too implausible and naive at times (for instance, the Indian woman who identifies a girl by a photo of an eye, even though she says she hasn’t seen her for several months). That said, in the middle of the bustle of the festival, I Origins felt like a pleasant rest and I was excited immediately after the screening, though the feeling fizzled out after some time. And yet, a nice four-star rating, the ending is very strong emotionally.