While the concept is curious and apparently thought-provoking, "Lezruk" is half-way righteous and half-way controversial and I might be alone on this, but I
think the movie should make a decision for its cause while questioning the problematic of another movie, which is "Nitram". Instead, we have a couple discussing
about the controversial movie and we have to decide for ourselves who's right or not on the issue of a film that presents the story of the mass murdered of Port Arthur
massacre in 1996, made over the victims family protests.
I liked of seeing a film discussing another film for its whole majority, it's not like a movie that references another movie with a superficial discussion. Here, a man invites a woman to see the movie, which just had opened in theaters, and pretty soon the woman has its reservations about the story, the making of it claiming to be disrespectful to the victims and their families, and apparently she has vivid memories about the incident.
The whole discussion about Justin Kurzel's film is quite interesting since you get to experience the couple's reactions and mood which gradually changes as the conversation progresses. And not just, the thing that matters to film lovers out there is too see a great debate about a movie that's destined to generate inflamed discussion about its importance or not. So you have divided opinions between a curious individual who thinks it's important that a tragic story like "Nitram" should be told and have support from other viewers and the views of someone completely opposed to a horrendous idea that gives voice to a killer and ignores his victims (it's quite a point she has since "Nitram" is a retelling about the killer, greatly played by Caleb Landry Jones, instead of presenting his victims and even his actions).
As for whom I'm siding with...the guy (though I understand the girl's reaction. I don't see her as your typical curious movie buff, there are issues she wouldn't want to see in a movie while a more cinematic person would be more inclined to accept all kinds of topics - and that's a matter for another great debate). But I think he's right about wanting to see the movie, to have such story presented on the screen - and I've seen "Nitram" before the short so I'm even more inclined to invite audiences for it because Mr. Kurzel made an impressive movie with all the right choices and avoided the conventional storytelling format of blood and guts real-life tragedies tend to get presented yet he kept me in suspense through the whole time.
And again, the challenge is on you: tragic stories should be avoided? Should never get made? The victims families should be consulted beforehand? Is the town habitants also have a saying when they're being portrayed on the big screen? Telling about the villains of our society, should they have their stories displayed for people's view and call it entertaining or there are lessons to be learned? Just see it and find someone of whom you can discuss those issues. 8/10.
I liked of seeing a film discussing another film for its whole majority, it's not like a movie that references another movie with a superficial discussion. Here, a man invites a woman to see the movie, which just had opened in theaters, and pretty soon the woman has its reservations about the story, the making of it claiming to be disrespectful to the victims and their families, and apparently she has vivid memories about the incident.
The whole discussion about Justin Kurzel's film is quite interesting since you get to experience the couple's reactions and mood which gradually changes as the conversation progresses. And not just, the thing that matters to film lovers out there is too see a great debate about a movie that's destined to generate inflamed discussion about its importance or not. So you have divided opinions between a curious individual who thinks it's important that a tragic story like "Nitram" should be told and have support from other viewers and the views of someone completely opposed to a horrendous idea that gives voice to a killer and ignores his victims (it's quite a point she has since "Nitram" is a retelling about the killer, greatly played by Caleb Landry Jones, instead of presenting his victims and even his actions).
As for whom I'm siding with...the guy (though I understand the girl's reaction. I don't see her as your typical curious movie buff, there are issues she wouldn't want to see in a movie while a more cinematic person would be more inclined to accept all kinds of topics - and that's a matter for another great debate). But I think he's right about wanting to see the movie, to have such story presented on the screen - and I've seen "Nitram" before the short so I'm even more inclined to invite audiences for it because Mr. Kurzel made an impressive movie with all the right choices and avoided the conventional storytelling format of blood and guts real-life tragedies tend to get presented yet he kept me in suspense through the whole time.
And again, the challenge is on you: tragic stories should be avoided? Should never get made? The victims families should be consulted beforehand? Is the town habitants also have a saying when they're being portrayed on the big screen? Telling about the villains of our society, should they have their stories displayed for people's view and call it entertaining or there are lessons to be learned? Just see it and find someone of whom you can discuss those issues. 8/10.
