With the intention to break free from the strict familial restrictions, a suicidal young woman sets up a marriage of convenience with a forty-year-old addict, an act that will lead to an outburst of envious love.
Katja's (Diane Kruger) had met Turkish-born Kurdish Nuri Sekerci (Numan Acar) when she bought hashish from him during her student days. They got married when he was still in prison, although their parents were against the marriage. Since her son Rocco (Rafael Santana) is born, Nuri is no longer working as a drug dealer, because he studied business administration in prison and now runs a translation and tax office in Hamburg. One day Rocco and Nuri are killed by a nail bomb, which was deposited in front of the office. This has shredded everything. Because her husband was in prison for drug possession, the police investigated in the red light district. The investigators do not see that the tracks point in a completely different direction. Then they happen to be the real killers on the net. The main suspects are the neo-Nazi spouses André (Ulrich Brandhoff) and Edda Möller (Hanna Hilsdorf). But the trial is developing differently than Katja had hoped. Although her lawyer Danilo (Denis ...Written by
This is a solid drama about a woman who has to confront a sudden death of her close ones. There are two things that really prevent me from giving this movie anything more than 5 stars. One is the topic of the movie. If the movie was shot 7 years ago, I wouldn't even think about it, but in a current geopolitical context the subject of the movie makes you wonder. The other thing is the camera work. I almost left the cinema, it was that annoying. I don't like shaky cam as a concept, I think it destroys immersion, as we are constantly reminded there is a camera, and also is simply annoying. It's not such a big problem if the scenes being shot are dynamic and full of movement themselves, because you don't see it that much, but when you look at the scene where two people sign some papers and the camera is shaking all over the place, you can't help but notice it. There is plenty of good shots in this movie, plentu of creative ones and plenty of interesting ones, so I really cannot understand, how a director with such a good eye decided to use this cheap effect. Do not do this. It looks amateurish and takes away from the movie. That being said, all thos interesting shots... Maybe this is a problem? That the director/camera man was to creative and tried to cram as many shooting technics as possible? I realized just now that some of the shots were one off, they appeared only once not to come back in any other part of the movie and so they stand out. It would reinforce the idea, that they could not say to themselfs that's enough and just put there everything they could think about.
29 of 60 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this