vukodlak
Joined Feb 2000
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews7
vukodlak's rating
This film remains one of the gems of Yugoslav cinema and one of the most under-appreciated. It is a strange mix of horror and comedy, hilarious, bizarre, unsettling and not for everyone's tastes.
The plot kicks off with the narrator explaining that Belgrade cannot yet claim to be a world metropolis. It is, as the calm female voice informs us, missing a vital ingredient: a master criminal! Petty hoodlums aside, Belgrade is about to get the king of criminals: a Strangler (and as the title suggests, not one but two).
The strangler is the overweight, middle-aged Pera Mitic (Tasko Nacic), still living with his mother and earning a meagre living by selling carnations. Tragically, at the time our story is set, carnations are out of fashion and Pera's flowers are often refused by women, sometimes rudely. To get his revenge, Pera begins strangling beautiful women - especially the ones with a dislike for carnations. The futile investigations of the Belgrade police force are led by the competent (but mentally fragile) inspector Ognjen Strahinjic (Nikola Simic). His prime suspect is a dissatisfied youth named Spiridon Kopicl (Srdjan Saper), whose rock band rides the controversy by releasing the hit single 'Come here baby, so I could strangle you'.
As the above paragraph suggests, the plot is utterly ridiculous. However, the movie (and especially the earnest voice-over) is played absolutely straight, giving this film a touch of comedy genius. Moreover, as the increasingly bizarre events unfold, the film takes on a distinctly unsettling path, with the conclusion being almost out and out horror. The laughs are still there, but they take on a slightly nervous quality.
Most of the actors are at the top of their game. Tasko Nacic is funny and at the same time disturbing as the monster-man-child, talking to his customers, his mother and his victims in the same plaintive, whiny voice. Srdjan Saper is not as effective, but adequate as the deeply confused, talented but quite stupid young man. Nikola Simic is absolutely hilarious as the put-upon inspector, growing increasingly more manic and unhinged during the course of the film, often acting far crazier than the supposed madmen he is supposed to be pursuing. Arguably, the standout is Rahela Ferari, who, as Pera's mother, essentially offers a glimpse at what Mrs. Bates might have been like in her livelier days.
This is also one of the only films I have ever seen where a voice-over narration is used effectively. Delivered in a deadly earnest, reporter style voice, the narration manages to add to the overall mood and also provides some of the funniest moments, including the excellent conclusion.
It is difficult to know who to recommend this film to, as I can think of nothing I can compare it with. Maybe if the Monty Python guys decided to remake Psycho the results might have been similar. Or maybe it was a product of its time and place and we will never see anything like it again. Watch it and find out.
The plot kicks off with the narrator explaining that Belgrade cannot yet claim to be a world metropolis. It is, as the calm female voice informs us, missing a vital ingredient: a master criminal! Petty hoodlums aside, Belgrade is about to get the king of criminals: a Strangler (and as the title suggests, not one but two).
The strangler is the overweight, middle-aged Pera Mitic (Tasko Nacic), still living with his mother and earning a meagre living by selling carnations. Tragically, at the time our story is set, carnations are out of fashion and Pera's flowers are often refused by women, sometimes rudely. To get his revenge, Pera begins strangling beautiful women - especially the ones with a dislike for carnations. The futile investigations of the Belgrade police force are led by the competent (but mentally fragile) inspector Ognjen Strahinjic (Nikola Simic). His prime suspect is a dissatisfied youth named Spiridon Kopicl (Srdjan Saper), whose rock band rides the controversy by releasing the hit single 'Come here baby, so I could strangle you'.
As the above paragraph suggests, the plot is utterly ridiculous. However, the movie (and especially the earnest voice-over) is played absolutely straight, giving this film a touch of comedy genius. Moreover, as the increasingly bizarre events unfold, the film takes on a distinctly unsettling path, with the conclusion being almost out and out horror. The laughs are still there, but they take on a slightly nervous quality.
Most of the actors are at the top of their game. Tasko Nacic is funny and at the same time disturbing as the monster-man-child, talking to his customers, his mother and his victims in the same plaintive, whiny voice. Srdjan Saper is not as effective, but adequate as the deeply confused, talented but quite stupid young man. Nikola Simic is absolutely hilarious as the put-upon inspector, growing increasingly more manic and unhinged during the course of the film, often acting far crazier than the supposed madmen he is supposed to be pursuing. Arguably, the standout is Rahela Ferari, who, as Pera's mother, essentially offers a glimpse at what Mrs. Bates might have been like in her livelier days.
This is also one of the only films I have ever seen where a voice-over narration is used effectively. Delivered in a deadly earnest, reporter style voice, the narration manages to add to the overall mood and also provides some of the funniest moments, including the excellent conclusion.
It is difficult to know who to recommend this film to, as I can think of nothing I can compare it with. Maybe if the Monty Python guys decided to remake Psycho the results might have been similar. Or maybe it was a product of its time and place and we will never see anything like it again. Watch it and find out.
The latest incarnation of the Mike Mignola's once underground, now seemingly omnipresent and unstoppable, comic book masterpiece, 'Hellboy', now comes into the world of animation. The first of the several planned animated films, 'The Sword of Storms' takes Hellboy and drops him in a fantasy world of Japanese folklore.
The voice acting is excellent. Ron Perlman has now become the de facto voice of Hellboy, and if this ever becomes an animated series, his presence will be crucial for its success. More surprisingly, considering her usually rather flat and whiny voice, Selma Blair delivers a finely nuanced performance. The best of all however, is Doug Jones. Seemingly perennially cursed by his background as a mime, the man has been seen in several great films in recent years but never heard. He has a pleasant, deep-ish voice, which entirely suits Abe Sapien. David Hyde Pierce acquitted himself well in Hellboy but will not be missed in the sequel. Hopefully Mr Jones' fine performance here will encourage studio execs to leave him be as the voice of the Silver Surfer.
The character designs are deliberately different from Mignola's and in my opinion, that is a smart decision. Hellboy himself remains relatively faithful to the original concept, but shown in a more stylised form, reminiscent of Bruce Timm's drawings. For the most part, this works, apart from an occasional slip where Hellboy's face takes on an exaggerated facial expression, lapsing into caricature. Abe Sapien, Liz Sherman and a few of the supporting characters are more radically redesigned and remind of the current pseudo-manga style of 'The Batman' or 'Jackie Chan Adventures'. Personally, I am not a great fan of this particular approach, but I acknowledge it is popular and in context, effective. Mike Mignola's original drawing style is not completely ignored and is most clearly evoked in the design of Hellboy's various skeletal and monstrous opponents. There are also some attempts to emulate the comic's use of shadows (most notably in the "Heads" sequence).
There are however, some problems. The animation itself is very hit and miss, and apart from the already mentioned weird facial expressions, there are occasional strange and unnatural movements from the characters. Some scenes feature noticeably poorer animation quality than the overall film. They appear jerky and cheap and look as though they were completed in a rush.
The plot itself is not overly engaging. Although a story about cursed ancient lovers shows promise, it is severely underdeveloped, in favour of some nonsense about Thunder Gods and Dragons. The majority of the actual film shows Hellboy wandering around Wonderland (or something), fighting assorted monsters. Some of these action sequences are great fun but it all gets repetitive so that the overall effect is episodic and only occasionally compelling (I'm going to mention "Heads" again here that segment is excellent). The other half of the film deals with Abe and Liz, but they are not given much to do, and their action sequences are nowhere near as interesting as Hellboy's. There is some attempt to deal with Liz's distrust of her powers but it largely falls flat, especially compared to the comics and film. However, the fact that there is some characterisation at all, as well as the presence of some rather mature themes and some unflinching violence mark this as more than just a kids-only film. Hopefully, the creators are just hitting their stride, and some of the wrinkles will be ironed out by the next instalment.
The voice acting is excellent. Ron Perlman has now become the de facto voice of Hellboy, and if this ever becomes an animated series, his presence will be crucial for its success. More surprisingly, considering her usually rather flat and whiny voice, Selma Blair delivers a finely nuanced performance. The best of all however, is Doug Jones. Seemingly perennially cursed by his background as a mime, the man has been seen in several great films in recent years but never heard. He has a pleasant, deep-ish voice, which entirely suits Abe Sapien. David Hyde Pierce acquitted himself well in Hellboy but will not be missed in the sequel. Hopefully Mr Jones' fine performance here will encourage studio execs to leave him be as the voice of the Silver Surfer.
The character designs are deliberately different from Mignola's and in my opinion, that is a smart decision. Hellboy himself remains relatively faithful to the original concept, but shown in a more stylised form, reminiscent of Bruce Timm's drawings. For the most part, this works, apart from an occasional slip where Hellboy's face takes on an exaggerated facial expression, lapsing into caricature. Abe Sapien, Liz Sherman and a few of the supporting characters are more radically redesigned and remind of the current pseudo-manga style of 'The Batman' or 'Jackie Chan Adventures'. Personally, I am not a great fan of this particular approach, but I acknowledge it is popular and in context, effective. Mike Mignola's original drawing style is not completely ignored and is most clearly evoked in the design of Hellboy's various skeletal and monstrous opponents. There are also some attempts to emulate the comic's use of shadows (most notably in the "Heads" sequence).
There are however, some problems. The animation itself is very hit and miss, and apart from the already mentioned weird facial expressions, there are occasional strange and unnatural movements from the characters. Some scenes feature noticeably poorer animation quality than the overall film. They appear jerky and cheap and look as though they were completed in a rush.
The plot itself is not overly engaging. Although a story about cursed ancient lovers shows promise, it is severely underdeveloped, in favour of some nonsense about Thunder Gods and Dragons. The majority of the actual film shows Hellboy wandering around Wonderland (or something), fighting assorted monsters. Some of these action sequences are great fun but it all gets repetitive so that the overall effect is episodic and only occasionally compelling (I'm going to mention "Heads" again here that segment is excellent). The other half of the film deals with Abe and Liz, but they are not given much to do, and their action sequences are nowhere near as interesting as Hellboy's. There is some attempt to deal with Liz's distrust of her powers but it largely falls flat, especially compared to the comics and film. However, the fact that there is some characterisation at all, as well as the presence of some rather mature themes and some unflinching violence mark this as more than just a kids-only film. Hopefully, the creators are just hitting their stride, and some of the wrinkles will be ironed out by the next instalment.
The Magic
I have found that many of my friends seem incapable of enjoying magic tricks. They have an overwhelming desire to guess how the trick is performed if they succeed, the trick is essentially ruined as no element of mystery remains. If they should however fail, they feel frustrated and cheated. It seems that the only way to truly enjoy magicians is if you let them fool you. In the last fifteen years a genre of films closely following the pattern of the best magic tricks has begun to emerge films that incorporate a shocking "twist" ending which often change the nature of everything that had gone on before. Arguably the best (and one of the first) was the excellent "Usual Suspects". The film's twist was largely unexpected (not just the nature of the surprise ending but also the fact that it even exists) and as consequence was an immense popular and critical success. After that, many films have taken up the strategy, with varying degrees of success. The trap that many of them fall into is that the twist ending overshadows everything else in the film. If the audiences know that a twist ending is coming they might overlook the film itself in trying to guess the ending. M. Night Shyamalan's "Unbreakable" suffered from the disease. Despite being possibly the most intelligent dissection of superheroes ever committed to film, a disproportional amount of attention and criticism were directed against the relatively weak surprise in the end, largely due to unreasonable expectation of following up or even outdoing "The Sixth Sense".
At least in one part of the reviews and responses, a similar response is shaping up for "The Prestige". This is deeply unjust. The film's point above all else is the characterisation of two obsessive characters: Angier and Borden, and that is accomplished brilliantly. And the ending might not that be that bad either.
The Rivals
As others have stated the film revolves around the conflict of two magicians of the XIX century, which starts after the death of Angier's (Hugh Jackman) wife for which Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) is partially responsible. From then on, the two engage in an escalating and destructive game, which largely revolves around the "Transported Man"- a trick they both perform. This cat and mouse game leads to some extraordinarily tense scenes that Christopher Nolan directs to perfection. Because the film relies heavily on trickery and misdirection, we are never clear where the events will take us. Furthermore, since there are no clearly defined heroes and villains, the expectations of each character's fate are further confounded.
The cast is phenomenal. First and foremost, Christian Bale gives an acting masterclass. His Alfred Borden is a deeply obsessed, cold and conflicted personality etched with remarkable clarity by Bale, especially considering the relatively constricting screenplay. His character is not inherently sympathetic but Bale is able to infuse it with enough charisma that he threatens to completely take over the viewers' sympathies. His scenes with Rebecca Hall (who plays Borden's wife) are especially effective Bale is equally believable as a loving husband and a man too obsessed with his magic to care for his wife.
Hugh Jackman does almost equally as well (although he can't quite match Bale's powerhouse performance). He has a more interesting role and a better-developed character arc. Angier starts off as a relatively positive figure, a light-hearted showman and a more obvious protagonist than the brooding Borden. The main plot of the film shows his growing obsession with Borden and his more increasing disregard for anything or anyone else. By the time the film pulls into the final third, his character has undergone a deep transformation into a much more sinister and unpleasant figure an almost out and out villain. Jackman more or less pulls it off and only seems out of his depth in a few scenes opposite Michael Caine where he, and anyone else, are reduced to scenery as Caine gives a deeply human and above all effortless performance.
The most curious of all however, is David Bowie. How he chooses to portray Nikola Tesla is inspired, fiercely original and unexpected. His Tesla functions perfectly in the context of the plot Bowie giving him just the right tone so that the Tesla of the film can be reconciled with the Tesla of reality. In addition, Bowie's performance is sufficiently layered to leave an open door for a more satisfying interpretation of the "surprise" ending.
The Twist
The film, by the time it ends, gives an explanation of how both versions of "The Transported man" are performed. Borden's version is the film's central mystery and some viewers may feel cheated because the solution is relatively easy to guess (personally I was completely fooled up until the very end and as consequence was tremendously entertained).
Angier's version is also clearly explained and represents the films biggest weakness. The explanation offered is a major disappointment and it mars the tone of the film significantly. However, at second glance, there is another interpretation that the film seems curiously unwilling to completely deny. Apart from a single shot, which gives credence to the "official" explanation, the film chooses to be ambiguous. Every other scene that takes us behind the scenes of Angier's trick is either deliberately unclear or depicted in flashback. Considering how obsessive the Nolan brothers are about tying up loose ends, it is difficult to believe that the "alternative" explanation is accidental. As the film itself puts it: "Once you explain the trick, you are nothing." Is it possible they deliberately left it unexplained? After all, that's what a prestige is for.
I have found that many of my friends seem incapable of enjoying magic tricks. They have an overwhelming desire to guess how the trick is performed if they succeed, the trick is essentially ruined as no element of mystery remains. If they should however fail, they feel frustrated and cheated. It seems that the only way to truly enjoy magicians is if you let them fool you. In the last fifteen years a genre of films closely following the pattern of the best magic tricks has begun to emerge films that incorporate a shocking "twist" ending which often change the nature of everything that had gone on before. Arguably the best (and one of the first) was the excellent "Usual Suspects". The film's twist was largely unexpected (not just the nature of the surprise ending but also the fact that it even exists) and as consequence was an immense popular and critical success. After that, many films have taken up the strategy, with varying degrees of success. The trap that many of them fall into is that the twist ending overshadows everything else in the film. If the audiences know that a twist ending is coming they might overlook the film itself in trying to guess the ending. M. Night Shyamalan's "Unbreakable" suffered from the disease. Despite being possibly the most intelligent dissection of superheroes ever committed to film, a disproportional amount of attention and criticism were directed against the relatively weak surprise in the end, largely due to unreasonable expectation of following up or even outdoing "The Sixth Sense".
At least in one part of the reviews and responses, a similar response is shaping up for "The Prestige". This is deeply unjust. The film's point above all else is the characterisation of two obsessive characters: Angier and Borden, and that is accomplished brilliantly. And the ending might not that be that bad either.
The Rivals
As others have stated the film revolves around the conflict of two magicians of the XIX century, which starts after the death of Angier's (Hugh Jackman) wife for which Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) is partially responsible. From then on, the two engage in an escalating and destructive game, which largely revolves around the "Transported Man"- a trick they both perform. This cat and mouse game leads to some extraordinarily tense scenes that Christopher Nolan directs to perfection. Because the film relies heavily on trickery and misdirection, we are never clear where the events will take us. Furthermore, since there are no clearly defined heroes and villains, the expectations of each character's fate are further confounded.
The cast is phenomenal. First and foremost, Christian Bale gives an acting masterclass. His Alfred Borden is a deeply obsessed, cold and conflicted personality etched with remarkable clarity by Bale, especially considering the relatively constricting screenplay. His character is not inherently sympathetic but Bale is able to infuse it with enough charisma that he threatens to completely take over the viewers' sympathies. His scenes with Rebecca Hall (who plays Borden's wife) are especially effective Bale is equally believable as a loving husband and a man too obsessed with his magic to care for his wife.
Hugh Jackman does almost equally as well (although he can't quite match Bale's powerhouse performance). He has a more interesting role and a better-developed character arc. Angier starts off as a relatively positive figure, a light-hearted showman and a more obvious protagonist than the brooding Borden. The main plot of the film shows his growing obsession with Borden and his more increasing disregard for anything or anyone else. By the time the film pulls into the final third, his character has undergone a deep transformation into a much more sinister and unpleasant figure an almost out and out villain. Jackman more or less pulls it off and only seems out of his depth in a few scenes opposite Michael Caine where he, and anyone else, are reduced to scenery as Caine gives a deeply human and above all effortless performance.
The most curious of all however, is David Bowie. How he chooses to portray Nikola Tesla is inspired, fiercely original and unexpected. His Tesla functions perfectly in the context of the plot Bowie giving him just the right tone so that the Tesla of the film can be reconciled with the Tesla of reality. In addition, Bowie's performance is sufficiently layered to leave an open door for a more satisfying interpretation of the "surprise" ending.
The Twist
The film, by the time it ends, gives an explanation of how both versions of "The Transported man" are performed. Borden's version is the film's central mystery and some viewers may feel cheated because the solution is relatively easy to guess (personally I was completely fooled up until the very end and as consequence was tremendously entertained).
Angier's version is also clearly explained and represents the films biggest weakness. The explanation offered is a major disappointment and it mars the tone of the film significantly. However, at second glance, there is another interpretation that the film seems curiously unwilling to completely deny. Apart from a single shot, which gives credence to the "official" explanation, the film chooses to be ambiguous. Every other scene that takes us behind the scenes of Angier's trick is either deliberately unclear or depicted in flashback. Considering how obsessive the Nolan brothers are about tying up loose ends, it is difficult to believe that the "alternative" explanation is accidental. As the film itself puts it: "Once you explain the trick, you are nothing." Is it possible they deliberately left it unexplained? After all, that's what a prestige is for.