Dead Mountaineer's Hotel

I have to say "Hotel of Dead Mountaineer" is ahead of its time. OK, script was pretty anachronistic in 1978, because the basic book was written 1970, after social turmoils and "revolutions" in USA and Europe and some moments weren't so obvious in late 70s anymore. But after 9/11 is pretty sure that questions like "terrorist or freedom-fighter?" isn't so stupid at all. So the idea of naive alien helping terrorists doesn't look weird anymore.

Movie's special ultramodern design, cold style and dark atmosphere looked maybe a bit over the top in late 70s but became mainstream in 80s, especially in sci-fi and A- category horror movies. "The Hunger" for example has very similar visual style but was filmed 5 years later. The Grünberg's music isn't typical 70s movie soundtrack, the cold and synthesized soundscape became popular also in 80s and later. Theatralic, unnatural, openly strange acting became popular also years later. I like "HUH" ("HODM") because it works, it looks cool and timeless and the movie is overall unforgettable. Like its one its influence, "Zabriskie Point", "HUH" is panned by critics from premiere but has remained cult classic anyway.

I like quite a lot the book which movie is based on, one of Strugatski's best (it's a bit too short tho). Strugatski's wrote also movie script, but it's much weaker. Some details are changed, some left out, and the changes just don't make much sense. Any way, even if I don't like movie much, most of the cast is good, and helps visualizing characters when reading the book. Maybe except Mrs. Moses... and du Barnstocre who simply isn't in movie. Glebsky also looks a bit fake at times, partly maybe because of dubbed voice. Also, was it that hard to make something that looks like alien robot power source, so they could actually show it? That and some other scenes look quite cheap...

Unfortunately, some of the other reviews and especially their titles somewhat give away ahead of time what the audience really doesn't come to know until towards the end of the story. So, I guess my first suggestion would be to be careful which reviews you read about this movie.

It is a very unusual film, that sets off being somewhat of a Crime/Mystery story, which it definitely is, but later transforms somewhat into something else. Like I mentioned, I do not want to give anything important away.

I don't think I've ever seen an Estonian film before, it is an interesting language. I expected it to sound more like Russian and Polish, but it didn't really. I wonder what the roots of the Estonian language are?

Especially for the time and I'm assuming by filmmakers that didn't have a ton of experience, I felt it was quite a stylish and sharply written/directed movie that really kept the audience in suspense as to what was actually going on.

There are some really nice Surreal touches that many times in films like this may come across as a bit dated and pretentious, but quite honestly I was rather surprised that the cinematography, sound design, and the editing contributed to a pretty solid atmosphere that I think perfectly blended a Crime/Mystery with more Surreal aspects.

Someone else mentioned the movie 'ALPHAVILLE', and I would say that there are some similarities in the look and mood of the film. But, the eventual reveals are more subtle.

So, a bit on the 'Artsy' side, but for this type of movie done at that time, I think it was put together in an engaging and effective way. It may not appeal to everyone, but to ones who perhaps like movies that are a bit more on the Surreal and somewhat understated side, then you might find this one intriguing...

I gave it a '7' due to its quality and effectiveness, perhaps leaning more towards it's artistic slant. But, maybe considering 'Mass Appeal' some may consider it more of a '6'

The setting - a secluded mountain lodge high in the Alps - contributes a great deal to the appeal of this film. The nominal story centers around a police inspector called upon to investigate a murder and the diverse group of colorful characters he encounters during his stay. Apparently it's based on a novel by the authors of the book from which Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker was adapted. Even as the plot becomes gradually more bizarre, there were a lot more positives than negatives in my opinion. The absurd tone of the movie reminded me a bit of Godard's Alphaville. Though it perhaps adds up to less than the sum of its parts, the film has a disarming quality about it which charmed me.

I basically hate sci-fi, but I was still fascinated by the design of lighting and shadows in this film. The high-key, high-contrast exterior of the snowy mountains acts obviously opposite to the low-key, low-contrast interior of the hotel. The lighting of the interior scenes can be described as "dazzling," not dazzling brightness, but dazzling colour and weirdness. The director seemed to deliberately avoid any establishing shots; thus, the audience would still be confused about the internal structure of the hotel until the end of the film.

There are the typical blinds of film noir, but they don't cast the classic shadow of the blinds onto the characters, despite the shadows from other frames and obstacles being abundant in this film. Also, there is a noir-style narration of the protagonist throughout the film. The narration begins in the past tense of memories, while slowly turning into the immersive present tense. After arriving at the hotel, the protagonist enters his room for the first time, and there are several typical splitting reflections of him in mirrors, which craftily foreshadow that he would be the one who will eventually encounter a dilemma, morally.

The film ends with the protagonist questioning himself against the fourth wall - should individuals within the institution and authorities carry out duties diligently, or should they hold their sympathy high for the objects?