Review by pygospa

Daniel, the Wizard 2004

I've heard that this was bad, I've seen the ratings, but I had to make up my own mind. I mean, in the end Daniel Kübelböck was a polarizing character, that did invite a lot of hate, so it might just be that: people hating him for the person he was?

But well... where should I even begin to start? The story fits onto a beer mat, and the plot does not follow any logic (weird scenes like the ones with the trumpet, or the scene at the graveyard?), the dialogues are a joke. Nobody speaks like this, half the sentences didn't even make sense (e.g. the entire dialogue at the graveyard - wtf are they talking about? Nothing made any sense at all). The characters themselves where all one-dimensional without any depth, totally cliche and without any motivations. And the actors where really - really - bad. There's probably a reason why you've never seen any of them in anything of relevance, and why - if you look them up - some of them have no acting career at all while others have done a dozen or so films, but all of them rated really low by the audience.

The worst part, however, is the horrible directing, camera, and post production. I've never seen any Ulli Lommel movie, but his profile lists nearly a hundred film productions. You'd think that there would be some kind of progression towards professionalism. But I cannot see any direction - there's no other explanation for this "accident". The camera is erratic, does not follow a plan, feels rather random; there apparently was no good lightning in many scenes, and also no post production in sense of color grading, etc. Some scenes even have background audio static.

I would say, for an amateur film, this would actually be quite all right - I've seen other moves that where similar, or even worse in quality. BUT bear in mind, that this was marketed as a Hollywood-grade movie that even got cinema releases in Germany, with over 100 copies being sent out to Cinemas all over the country.

loading replies
Loading...