Wasn't really crazy about this. I was very tired when I saw this so maybe that was why I dozed off multiple times lol I don't really think a rewatch would change my mind though.

I wasn't quite as bored as I predicted, at least it had some semblance of a storyline/characters instead of just being about the visuals, although still not the most entertaining movie in the world or anything. The two main characters seem very materialistic and shallow, just worried about their house, job promotion, flowers, kids, etc., or perhaps it's a way to deny how they got it. I guess it can be seen like a metaphor for living in a country that's doing some horrible things in a foreign place like the Middle East, and we're just emotionally disconnected to it focusing on our own interests, even when we can kind of hear the screams. The movie is pretty nice visually making use of landscape by the river, the black and white parts were cool and the sound is used in a tremendous way.

It's a pretty good film, more so because of its educational value than it's entertaining one. It's cold and chilling with good performances, but it's also artsy, more than it needs to be I think. It intend seems to be to appeal to the senses and imagination, the score is good, and it succeeds to some extent. But there's also long shots without dialogue/ much happening, and it fails to grip me like Schindler's List and the Pianist are able to. Granted, totally different budget and scope between this and those. Glazer has a clear talent for film making, and he adapts a very interesting piece of history, but his taste isn't quite mine.

B+