Mads M delivers his usual wooden performance; Bruno Ganz shows up to add some acting pith.
But I think the director was smoking something.
The film is slow, and I mean s-l-o-w. I don't mind slow films - Wings Of Desire is one of my all time favourites, and it's very gentle and stately. But this just seems to dwell on things for no apparent reason.
Then it gets to the actual story, including the parts with action and ... jump... jump again... more jump cuts... jumpy jump jumpy jump. Leaving the audience going: Who were those guys? Where are they now? What point in the main character's life is this?
Its very confusing.
Then it gets to parts that may not matter... or perhaps they do? How do you tell?? ... and it goes s-l-o-w again.
Half way through I paused it and went and looked up the actual history - a 19th century novella describing a true story (as far as anyone can ascertain the truth) from the 16th century (about a Hans, rather than Michael Kolhasse, forgive my spelling).
Now that I've seen this film through, I'm disinclined to give it much of a mark. It just seems to have been a vehicle for the director to showcase their visual skills at the expense of the story (a case of the Jane Campions).
I think, with this particular story, a much better film could be made. There was one done in 1969, I'm going to take a look at it.
But I think the director was smoking something.
The film is slow, and I mean s-l-o-w. I don't mind slow films - Wings Of Desire is one of my all time favourites, and it's very gentle and stately. But this just seems to dwell on things for no apparent reason.
Then it gets to the actual story, including the parts with action and ... jump... jump again... more jump cuts... jumpy jump jumpy jump. Leaving the audience going: Who were those guys? Where are they now? What point in the main character's life is this?
Its very confusing.
Then it gets to parts that may not matter... or perhaps they do? How do you tell?? ... and it goes s-l-o-w again.
Half way through I paused it and went and looked up the actual history - a 19th century novella describing a true story (as far as anyone can ascertain the truth) from the 16th century (about a Hans, rather than Michael Kolhasse, forgive my spelling).
Now that I've seen this film through, I'm disinclined to give it much of a mark. It just seems to have been a vehicle for the director to showcase their visual skills at the expense of the story (a case of the Jane Campions).
I think, with this particular story, a much better film could be made. There was one done in 1969, I'm going to take a look at it.