These days, this director is very famous. I was wondering about the director's first films. I found this movie and watched it. This is not a movie. It didn't make any sense, I waited until the end, maybe something different would happen. It has no value as a movie, nothing happens in the movie. I do not recommend. But strangely, I have never regretted watching this movie. I wonder why ?
10 Reviews
Great For Yorgos Lanthimos Fans
mshackletonchavez31 December 2018
Ending the year on this is a silent high note. I was pleasantly entertained by Lanthimos' first outing as a solo director.
Lanthimos' has changed so greatly through his career, yet here in this 94 minute feature, his DNA, his mark, his stamp is prevent all throughout. I must profess that I watched this film with only Italian subtitles (On Youtube), while I can somewhat read that language, I luckily didn't find any problems as this film is surprisingly sparse in the dialogue department. There is perhaps less than ten minutes of dialogue, all in Greek of course, and I got the gist of it from my dodgy Italian reading. Yet, this film is intensely visual, Lanthimos' trademark (By this point), is a language of its own.
The film is set in a small Hellenic resort, with three nameless characters. The chambermaid, he BMW lover and the photography man. A great deal of these performances is non-verbal, and based solely on bodily expression with a few from the face. Much of the framing os focused on bodies, the lens is in a funny aspect ratio and it (I believe) is in 35mm film. This sounds awfully like perhaps the foundations of the "Greek Weird/New Wave" of film style.
The performances were all of a good quality, particularly so as there was so little dialogue, this was well performed in that regard. In particular I found for Evangelia Randou to stand out as perhaps the best.
The Cinematography is primarily handheld, and the beginning's of Lanthimos' distinctive style just begin to creep out in some spots during this film, particularly during the first act and towards the very end of the film. But i must criticise that a lot of hand held work was extremely shaky, in some places it was almost too shaky, and how this then contrasts to the very level and more classical Lanthimos' style is rather jarring in places, and a fault in the editing, quite a deep one at that measure.
At times this film went twenty minutes without uttering a word, while this made for a quiet and strangely engaging experience. At times it felt a little sparse, as some of the contemporary reviews of the time called it 'nihilistic' - that it stands and believes in nothing. And I must disagree, seeing this film from the arse end of 2018 perspective, I believe that it actually a message about the monotony of life. How the world just turns and turns, eventually leading the main character to do what she finally tries at the end. After everything that happens, that is the snap. This films message, I think to be, is about life, it is about how we spend our time. And I think the critics from when this film was released got it wrong, this film is not nihilistic.
The direction of this film, like in the Cinematography is small inklings of Lanthimos' later work. This feels like Proto-Lanthimos, it was highly intriguing to see, the things which stuck, the things that changed, and the aspects of his style that are still the same to this day. The change from this to his mastery in 'Dogtooth' just four years later, shows his incredible growth and maturity and a director, a change so dramatic that it is rarely seen from many directors.
Overall this was a little fun experience, but this films jarringness, and lack of dialogue made it for a tonally quite inconsistent film. While some aspects are forgettable, others are so distinctly Lanthimos that it is quite fun to behold. But this still feels like a style in growth, thus the final product is stunted, and somewhat weak. This film is worth seeing of you are a fan of Yorgos Lanthimos, or are interested in the forming of the new Greek wave. I give it a 3/5.
Lanthimos' has changed so greatly through his career, yet here in this 94 minute feature, his DNA, his mark, his stamp is prevent all throughout. I must profess that I watched this film with only Italian subtitles (On Youtube), while I can somewhat read that language, I luckily didn't find any problems as this film is surprisingly sparse in the dialogue department. There is perhaps less than ten minutes of dialogue, all in Greek of course, and I got the gist of it from my dodgy Italian reading. Yet, this film is intensely visual, Lanthimos' trademark (By this point), is a language of its own.
The film is set in a small Hellenic resort, with three nameless characters. The chambermaid, he BMW lover and the photography man. A great deal of these performances is non-verbal, and based solely on bodily expression with a few from the face. Much of the framing os focused on bodies, the lens is in a funny aspect ratio and it (I believe) is in 35mm film. This sounds awfully like perhaps the foundations of the "Greek Weird/New Wave" of film style.
The performances were all of a good quality, particularly so as there was so little dialogue, this was well performed in that regard. In particular I found for Evangelia Randou to stand out as perhaps the best.
The Cinematography is primarily handheld, and the beginning's of Lanthimos' distinctive style just begin to creep out in some spots during this film, particularly during the first act and towards the very end of the film. But i must criticise that a lot of hand held work was extremely shaky, in some places it was almost too shaky, and how this then contrasts to the very level and more classical Lanthimos' style is rather jarring in places, and a fault in the editing, quite a deep one at that measure.
At times this film went twenty minutes without uttering a word, while this made for a quiet and strangely engaging experience. At times it felt a little sparse, as some of the contemporary reviews of the time called it 'nihilistic' - that it stands and believes in nothing. And I must disagree, seeing this film from the arse end of 2018 perspective, I believe that it actually a message about the monotony of life. How the world just turns and turns, eventually leading the main character to do what she finally tries at the end. After everything that happens, that is the snap. This films message, I think to be, is about life, it is about how we spend our time. And I think the critics from when this film was released got it wrong, this film is not nihilistic.
The direction of this film, like in the Cinematography is small inklings of Lanthimos' later work. This feels like Proto-Lanthimos, it was highly intriguing to see, the things which stuck, the things that changed, and the aspects of his style that are still the same to this day. The change from this to his mastery in 'Dogtooth' just four years later, shows his incredible growth and maturity and a director, a change so dramatic that it is rarely seen from many directors.
Overall this was a little fun experience, but this films jarringness, and lack of dialogue made it for a tonally quite inconsistent film. While some aspects are forgettable, others are so distinctly Lanthimos that it is quite fun to behold. But this still feels like a style in growth, thus the final product is stunted, and somewhat weak. This film is worth seeing of you are a fan of Yorgos Lanthimos, or are interested in the forming of the new Greek wave. I give it a 3/5.
If you expect another Poor Thing or The Favourite, skip this one
meinwonderland10 February 2024
I met Lanthimos in 2016 with Dogtooth, but what really made me love his filmmaking was The Killing of a Sacred Deer. I loved the ambiguity, the unsettling feeling, and, of course, the deadpan delivery of the characters. In Kinetta I found very little of that Lanthimos. The movie has little dialogue, and I see it more as an experience than a story. We don't get to know too much about the characters. Hell, we don't even know their names. The plot is nowhere to be found. A lot of times it seems that nothing is happening at all: people walking, cleaning the hotel rooms, eating ice cream, and so on. The pacing is extremely slow, and many scenes drag on for too long. The camera is handheld, sometimes too shaky, and far away from the pristine visuals in Lanthimos latest films. However, I do believe that there's something here. The constant discovery of who the filmmaker is that many years later will develop all of those idyosincrasies and end up making some of the best movies ever.
Dreadful! Couldn't bear more than 40 minutes of this terrible film!
hmakrinos5 February 2006
One rarely gets a chance to see a Greek film in Greece, never mind the United States! So, when I found out that the Harvard Film Archive was showing "Kinetta" as part of a new European film series, I ran to see it. The fact that it was in the International Competition section of the 2005 Thessaloniki Film Festival gave me some assurance that it would it be a good film.
Was I wrong! The film opened with a silent montage of scenes that was bewildering. The few of us that were in the audience wondered whether there was a problem with the sound system. There was no problem with the sound system, but it was emblematic of what was wrong with the film. From the soundtrack to the jerky hand-held camera work, there seemed to be no justification for Giorgos Lanthimo's choices. It all seemed to be part of an intellectual exercise that repelled the viewer, rather than draw him in to the drama that was unfolding in front of him. Well, if repelling the viewer was Lanthimo's purpose, he was certainly successful! After 10 minutes, I wanted to walk out, but my masochism kept me in my seat for another 30 minutes. Finally, I gave up on the film and left. Another 50 minutes of watching it would have been unbearable. I was sorry not to have been the first to walk out; several others of the dozen or so in the audience preceded me.
While I was trying to give the film a chance to draw me in, I was thinking that in some way it was quite accurate in its depiction of how drab and meaningless life in Greece can be these days. But, it made that point within the first 20 minutes or so. The rest of the film lacked any artistic merit.
Michelangelo Antonioni said in an interview some years ago, that a filmmaker should not be concerned for the entertainment value of his films or be concerned of what the audience will think. I agree with Antonioni, but Lanthimos is definitely not an Antonioni!
Was I wrong! The film opened with a silent montage of scenes that was bewildering. The few of us that were in the audience wondered whether there was a problem with the sound system. There was no problem with the sound system, but it was emblematic of what was wrong with the film. From the soundtrack to the jerky hand-held camera work, there seemed to be no justification for Giorgos Lanthimo's choices. It all seemed to be part of an intellectual exercise that repelled the viewer, rather than draw him in to the drama that was unfolding in front of him. Well, if repelling the viewer was Lanthimo's purpose, he was certainly successful! After 10 minutes, I wanted to walk out, but my masochism kept me in my seat for another 30 minutes. Finally, I gave up on the film and left. Another 50 minutes of watching it would have been unbearable. I was sorry not to have been the first to walk out; several others of the dozen or so in the audience preceded me.
While I was trying to give the film a chance to draw me in, I was thinking that in some way it was quite accurate in its depiction of how drab and meaningless life in Greece can be these days. But, it made that point within the first 20 minutes or so. The rest of the film lacked any artistic merit.
Michelangelo Antonioni said in an interview some years ago, that a filmmaker should not be concerned for the entertainment value of his films or be concerned of what the audience will think. I agree with Antonioni, but Lanthimos is definitely not an Antonioni!
One!Of!The!Worst!"Movies"!Ever!
kosmasp24 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I had the "pleasure" of watching the movie at the Berlinale (2006). I have this deal going on, where I watch a movie till the end, even if it ain't any good, so I always stay until the (bitter) end of a movie. In that case too, so I can assure that nothing works here! I mean why did I bother to go see it in the first place?
Well the premise sounded more than promising. There were three people who would recreate criminal events that had happened. And then something goes bad. On paper that sounded like a nice little thriller. In reality it was just a mess, that shouldn't even had been filmed in the first place.
Where should I begin? With the people that were in front of the camera (to call them actors, would not only stretch that word, but be the biggest insult even to someone like *add-here-the-name-of-your-favourite-bad-actor*!!!)? With the "script", if there even was one? Two people worked on that one? That's what is stated here on IMDb? I mean come on Dude, who are you kidding? He said himself, that there was only a loose storyline that they followed while filming ... With a "direction" that the director explained after the movie was finished, that was under the influence of "music" (I'm pretty sure if they'd have taken drugs, the movie could only have been better, but don't try this at home!) ... With "fight" choreography that even a 1-year old baby would have been insulted if you'd ask it to perform it? (ok granted they didn't choreograph the fight scenes ... Why this is a good thing? It just isn't!! Yes it is/looks real ... real stupid and looks exactly like that)
Now there is one thing that at least future filmmakers can take with them after watching this movie ... You can walk out of the movie knowing that if a bad movie like that (I do apologize to all the movies in the world that I even call this "bastardly" thing a movie) is shown at the Berlinale or at a Toronto Film Festival, than even you can make it happen! You know a location that looks good? Have some friends that don't mind being in front of a camera looking and acting stupid? Even if they mind, who cares? Just get them in front of the camera and "shoot" them. Make only one take (why bother spending to much money on the film, when you can explain later ... nothing at all?!), use some psychedelic music ... and you're on your way to a film festival. If the people don't understand your motives (like you had some in the first place!! Ha!), just tell'em that the viewer is allowed to interpret every thing as he/she likes ... (in other words feed them BS, 'cause you just don't know any better) ... So next up ... the man who's responsible for this ... "movie"
The director was wondering, why nobody in Greece will pick up his movie (distributor and or people, who couldn't handle his "vision" ... Vision?!?! You've gotta be freaking kidding me!!) ... he should be wondering how it's possible that they haven't taken his passport yet and exiled him ... Not only from Greece, but from this earth ... maybe he'll find some aliens that will find their own meaning for this "movie".
I can only tell you that if a director doesn't know what he has done, than it's more than a bad sign. And again using the word director in association with that man is not fair. Even to Ed Wood, who made bad movies no doubt, but at least kinda made them entertaining, even if that was unintentional, so that you could have some fun. After this movie though, this director said things like "You can see in the movie whatever you want" (yeah right, the movie is a piece of crap, which by the way at least half the audience thought too and they showed it by leaving before the movie ended, the other half stayed, but most of them were just as curious as I was, to what that man had to say in his defense ... unfortunately for him and us who waited not that much). And when he got into "details" he kind of said things like "this was like that, or whatever" ... That's probably the best word to describe the whole "experience" -> Whatever!
Now there are people who call this "art" (i.e. the Berlinale woman who introduced us to this ... "thing" = "movie"). They even say that it's cool that the actors don't talk that much. Now that is one point I fully agree with them! My ears are very thankful for that. But seeing body language in here? Good camera work?!? From a man with a camera on his shoulder and headphones that played music, so that he couldn't hear the director?! (come to think of it, a smart move on his part! Not that this director would've given him any good instructions anyways!)
If you're smart, you won't watch this movie and save the time and stress that other people had ... like myself (if there would've been a zero, this movie would've earned by all means!)
Well the premise sounded more than promising. There were three people who would recreate criminal events that had happened. And then something goes bad. On paper that sounded like a nice little thriller. In reality it was just a mess, that shouldn't even had been filmed in the first place.
Where should I begin? With the people that were in front of the camera (to call them actors, would not only stretch that word, but be the biggest insult even to someone like *add-here-the-name-of-your-favourite-bad-actor*!!!)? With the "script", if there even was one? Two people worked on that one? That's what is stated here on IMDb? I mean come on Dude, who are you kidding? He said himself, that there was only a loose storyline that they followed while filming ... With a "direction" that the director explained after the movie was finished, that was under the influence of "music" (I'm pretty sure if they'd have taken drugs, the movie could only have been better, but don't try this at home!) ... With "fight" choreography that even a 1-year old baby would have been insulted if you'd ask it to perform it? (ok granted they didn't choreograph the fight scenes ... Why this is a good thing? It just isn't!! Yes it is/looks real ... real stupid and looks exactly like that)
Now there is one thing that at least future filmmakers can take with them after watching this movie ... You can walk out of the movie knowing that if a bad movie like that (I do apologize to all the movies in the world that I even call this "bastardly" thing a movie) is shown at the Berlinale or at a Toronto Film Festival, than even you can make it happen! You know a location that looks good? Have some friends that don't mind being in front of a camera looking and acting stupid? Even if they mind, who cares? Just get them in front of the camera and "shoot" them. Make only one take (why bother spending to much money on the film, when you can explain later ... nothing at all?!), use some psychedelic music ... and you're on your way to a film festival. If the people don't understand your motives (like you had some in the first place!! Ha!), just tell'em that the viewer is allowed to interpret every thing as he/she likes ... (in other words feed them BS, 'cause you just don't know any better) ... So next up ... the man who's responsible for this ... "movie"
The director was wondering, why nobody in Greece will pick up his movie (distributor and or people, who couldn't handle his "vision" ... Vision?!?! You've gotta be freaking kidding me!!) ... he should be wondering how it's possible that they haven't taken his passport yet and exiled him ... Not only from Greece, but from this earth ... maybe he'll find some aliens that will find their own meaning for this "movie".
I can only tell you that if a director doesn't know what he has done, than it's more than a bad sign. And again using the word director in association with that man is not fair. Even to Ed Wood, who made bad movies no doubt, but at least kinda made them entertaining, even if that was unintentional, so that you could have some fun. After this movie though, this director said things like "You can see in the movie whatever you want" (yeah right, the movie is a piece of crap, which by the way at least half the audience thought too and they showed it by leaving before the movie ended, the other half stayed, but most of them were just as curious as I was, to what that man had to say in his defense ... unfortunately for him and us who waited not that much). And when he got into "details" he kind of said things like "this was like that, or whatever" ... That's probably the best word to describe the whole "experience" -> Whatever!
Now there are people who call this "art" (i.e. the Berlinale woman who introduced us to this ... "thing" = "movie"). They even say that it's cool that the actors don't talk that much. Now that is one point I fully agree with them! My ears are very thankful for that. But seeing body language in here? Good camera work?!? From a man with a camera on his shoulder and headphones that played music, so that he couldn't hear the director?! (come to think of it, a smart move on his part! Not that this director would've given him any good instructions anyways!)
If you're smart, you won't watch this movie and save the time and stress that other people had ... like myself (if there would've been a zero, this movie would've earned by all means!)
I hope this is the worst movie I'll ever see
doug-69731 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this movie at the 2005 Toronto International Film Festival. Let me say right off, not only is this the worst movie I have ever seen, I hope to God it's the worse movie I will ever see. I've walked out of movies before, but this is the first time so many people walked out before me. The movie, if nothing else, was bad with a very consistent style. Essentially, characters would either be doing something, inevitably something not at all interesting and something for which you had no idea why they were doing it and they would continue to do it for a very long time. Worse, I had no idea what the purpose was, or what connected all these individually repetitively boring scenes. In one scene two people practice throwing each other to the ground. Perhaps they are actors practicing a scene. But, first, we have no idea why they are throwing each other to the ground, second it is not in the least interesting to watch and third
IT GOES ON FOREVER! And scenes like this make up the entire movie, or at least the first 60 minutes I suffered through.
I clicked that "Contains spoiler" option here, but it was hardly necessary since nothing happens to spoil. Please, do not be tempted to see this movie in the hopes it will be so bad it will be good. Or don't see this movie because you got the tickets for free. If you're an usher in the theatre where the movie is playing...quit! Basically, don't see this movie.
If you wish to see art, where none exist, lay on the grass on a warm sunny day and see pictures in the clouds.
I clicked that "Contains spoiler" option here, but it was hardly necessary since nothing happens to spoil. Please, do not be tempted to see this movie in the hopes it will be so bad it will be good. Or don't see this movie because you got the tickets for free. If you're an usher in the theatre where the movie is playing...quit! Basically, don't see this movie.
If you wish to see art, where none exist, lay on the grass on a warm sunny day and see pictures in the clouds.
Kind of movie that I love
josevic_taddeo10 October 2023
Well. I'm not sure why, but I love movies like these.
Not a plot going on, not a very known backstory, lots of experiments... Great.
I do love this director, but never heard about this one.
Decided to take a look and... well. I truly enjoyed It.
I never went to Greece so... maybe there's a lot of things that make sense only for the locals but, still, I loved the ambience, the rythm, the silence.
It touched me in a strange way.
I'm not sure If this is a movie to recommend, but give It a chance.
Maybe, who known, it's your kind of movie too?
And, for sure, it's a great introduction to Yorgos cinema.
Not a plot going on, not a very known backstory, lots of experiments... Great.
I do love this director, but never heard about this one.
Decided to take a look and... well. I truly enjoyed It.
I never went to Greece so... maybe there's a lot of things that make sense only for the locals but, still, I loved the ambience, the rythm, the silence.
It touched me in a strange way.
I'm not sure If this is a movie to recommend, but give It a chance.
Maybe, who known, it's your kind of movie too?
And, for sure, it's a great introduction to Yorgos cinema.
Visually intriguing nonsense.
slammerhard5 September 2019
99% percent of 21st century Greek filmmakers would not be able to direct a good film even if their life depended on it. It's no coincidence that the crowning achievement of modern Greek cinema-Dogtooth-borrows its plot and visual style from other films. Left alone to his own devices, the best someone like Lanthimos can come up with is rubbish like Kineta and Alps.
Despite an impressive visual style, Kineta is one of the worst films ever made. No story, awful acting, terrible pace. What's even worse is that every Greek filmmaker is trying to imitate the Lanthimos style, hoping to get some exposure at a European film festival.
It's been a long established fact that none of these films get their money back. The only reason they keep on getting made is because of state funding. This is one more of the failures of European socialism. Funneling taxpayers money to support art of dubious quality. It wouldn't surprise me if the directors made the film with a fraction of the allocated budget, pocketing the best. There was once a time when commercial films made in Greece were able to fill the cinemas. Quite naturally those films were considered low level because they were made strictly for entertainment purposes. Unfortunately this system has been destroyed and replaced by organizations with a political agenda. This is a general problem that occurs all over the European Union. Just take a look at the type of films that are promoted in European festivals. Filmmakers hoping to become the next Lanthimos don't dare to experiment. It would be equal to suicide.
Bear in mind that there is no such thing any longer as an European art film. None of the films getting the main prizes in European festivals are "art". They are just a product created by people who follow established guidelines. It doesn't matter if nobody goes to the theater to see it as long as funding for the next project has been secured. This is how the system works.
Despite an impressive visual style, Kineta is one of the worst films ever made. No story, awful acting, terrible pace. What's even worse is that every Greek filmmaker is trying to imitate the Lanthimos style, hoping to get some exposure at a European film festival.
It's been a long established fact that none of these films get their money back. The only reason they keep on getting made is because of state funding. This is one more of the failures of European socialism. Funneling taxpayers money to support art of dubious quality. It wouldn't surprise me if the directors made the film with a fraction of the allocated budget, pocketing the best. There was once a time when commercial films made in Greece were able to fill the cinemas. Quite naturally those films were considered low level because they were made strictly for entertainment purposes. Unfortunately this system has been destroyed and replaced by organizations with a political agenda. This is a general problem that occurs all over the European Union. Just take a look at the type of films that are promoted in European festivals. Filmmakers hoping to become the next Lanthimos don't dare to experiment. It would be equal to suicide.
Bear in mind that there is no such thing any longer as an European art film. None of the films getting the main prizes in European festivals are "art". They are just a product created by people who follow established guidelines. It doesn't matter if nobody goes to the theater to see it as long as funding for the next project has been secured. This is how the system works.
Avoid at all cost !!! You've been warned.
steve_stizzy23 May 2022
The most frustrating and pointless movie I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot of trash in my life.
The most frustrating and pointless movie I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot of trash in my life.
The most frustrating and pointless movie I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot of trash in my life.
The most frustrating and pointless movie I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot of trash in my life.
The most frustrating and pointless movie I have ever seen, and I've seen a lot of trash in my life.
sometimes, know nothing about places and people is a good start.
simosark30 November 2005
at last, something new is going on Greek cinema. i was disappointed by reading the summary in Thessaloníki film festival. it is not a film that tells a history, thus it is not worth searching for academic forms just to try to fit in a category. i was excited that a Greek film can touch me without listening thousands words by the actors with the dictionary of hard meanings on my legs. the film is using, simply, the language of body, helping it with an excellent camera work and if you are not afraid of leaving yourself free, watching the minimum cinema "effects", you 'll get the sentiment. i saw three kind of people in the film, i saw different kind of people's loneliness and people's imposition of power. risky but very efficient the direction-editing throws to the recycle bin whatever isn't really essential. brilliant music replaces lost people's senses without been overused. imaging there was a lot of improvisation on shooting i am curious of how a choice was taken because the film is running consecutively and nothing seems kicked out. after all, it's a hope that some guys load some 16mm magazines don't wait the big production budgets and do some new cinema.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
