It is easy to start telling a story by weaving in all sorts of compelling threads. It is a lot harder to bring those threads to some kind of satisfactory end.
This film starts out interestingly, with the arrival of a public prosecutor in a remote Turkish town punctured by mysterious sink holes, supposedly caused by the abuse of the corrupt mayor's water management.
It appears to be the prosecutor's first assignment. He seems to be arriving from another planet, as he is alien to the type of corruption his country had to endure for decades.
Maybe the director was steering towards making a political film. It is not.
It is no crime story as well. Neither is it a thriller. It might be about a greenhorn prosecutor from the city thrown into the snake pit of law ignoring locals, finding himself between a rock and a hard place. There are a lot of symbolic images, like dead boars being pulled through the street accompanied by illegal gunfire salves and dead rats all over including rat poison in bread boxes.
Many edits seem to be designed to symbolize the main character's confusion. Last but not least there is a thread of the character's sexual confusion. It goes nowhere. The longer the film lasts, the more the film confuses the confusion of the main character with the virtues of clean storytelling.
Somewhere after midpoint, conflicting threads stop making sense. More threads of storytelling are added from there on while existing ones pivot randomly. None of these threads are coming to a conclusion or resonate in a surreal way like films by David Lynch nor others do.
At a certain point two characters try to kill each other in one of the lakes. This is in a region where we have learned that the main problem is lack of water. It is not clear why they want to kill each other. In the next scene they drive down a road peacefully like best friends, without further ado.
I cannot imagine this was in the script. A lot of people are financing a film or working on a movie. Someone most have said something like: "Why do they do this?" I also would have liked to know because i really liked the beginning and I got pulled into what seemed to be a great story.
The only explanation I could come up with was that I did not see a final version or a version that was approved by the producers. The copy of the film I saw might have been somehow fragmented, missing some vital scenes here and there. Maybe what I saw was a movie fragment where scenes having been omitted without the director's or the producer's knowledge. The full film could have been a 10.
This film starts out interestingly, with the arrival of a public prosecutor in a remote Turkish town punctured by mysterious sink holes, supposedly caused by the abuse of the corrupt mayor's water management.
It appears to be the prosecutor's first assignment. He seems to be arriving from another planet, as he is alien to the type of corruption his country had to endure for decades.
Maybe the director was steering towards making a political film. It is not.
It is no crime story as well. Neither is it a thriller. It might be about a greenhorn prosecutor from the city thrown into the snake pit of law ignoring locals, finding himself between a rock and a hard place. There are a lot of symbolic images, like dead boars being pulled through the street accompanied by illegal gunfire salves and dead rats all over including rat poison in bread boxes.
Many edits seem to be designed to symbolize the main character's confusion. Last but not least there is a thread of the character's sexual confusion. It goes nowhere. The longer the film lasts, the more the film confuses the confusion of the main character with the virtues of clean storytelling.
Somewhere after midpoint, conflicting threads stop making sense. More threads of storytelling are added from there on while existing ones pivot randomly. None of these threads are coming to a conclusion or resonate in a surreal way like films by David Lynch nor others do.
At a certain point two characters try to kill each other in one of the lakes. This is in a region where we have learned that the main problem is lack of water. It is not clear why they want to kill each other. In the next scene they drive down a road peacefully like best friends, without further ado.
I cannot imagine this was in the script. A lot of people are financing a film or working on a movie. Someone most have said something like: "Why do they do this?" I also would have liked to know because i really liked the beginning and I got pulled into what seemed to be a great story.
The only explanation I could come up with was that I did not see a final version or a version that was approved by the producers. The copy of the film I saw might have been somehow fragmented, missing some vital scenes here and there. Maybe what I saw was a movie fragment where scenes having been omitted without the director's or the producer's knowledge. The full film could have been a 10.