Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

Night Watch (2004)

Director: Timur Bekmambetov

Average user rating

2 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

An ambitious, flawed and ultimately frustrating fantasy/horror movie from Russia. Timur Bekmambetov’s adaptation of a cult novel by Sergei Lukyanenko aspires to be ‘Tarkovksy meets the Wachowski brothers’, combining ‘the energy of music videos and the clarity of commercials.’ With all its talk about the ‘Great One’, and its allegorical pontificating about shifts in the balance of power between the light and dark, one can see how the ‘Matrix’ comparison might apply. Tarkovsky, however, may rest easy in his grave. Reminiscent in part of Alex Proyas’ ‘Dark City’, the confusing plot concerns the eternal war between the altruistic forces of good and the anarchic forces of evil, which is waged while the citizens of modern-day Moscow are asleep (yawn). Caught up in the crossfire between the order-keeping magicians of the Night Watch and the vampires, shape-shifters and warlocks of the Day Watch is Anton (Konstantin Khabesky), a man haunted by his lost son, Yegor (Dima Martynov). Cinematographer Sergei Trofimov’s hyper-realistic visuals and the imaginative special effects lend a fizz of excitement to the scuzzy streets of Moscow, with its battered cars, scuffed apartments and makeshift lives. But these streets are empty of anybody about whom one can give a damn.

Author: NF 2005-10-04 12:28:29

Time Out London Issue 1833: October 5-12 2005

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

atothej said...

Posted on Jun 26 2009 10:26 I'm sorry, but clearly Usman has not read the novels.
This movie has completely messed up the basic message of the novels and sacrificed it on the altar of CGI effects. While I do like the atmosphere created and the action presented because it is so different from Hollywood's usual, it does not excuse the terrible script that basically takes everything out, that's good about the books, while trying to fit in action sequences and story-lines from three or four books. it's just a big mess, loses all contextual relevance. But you have to do it that way if you want to cram 12 books into three movies, don't you?
in my humble opinion, less would have been more, I really like the style of the movies, I guess, that's why I even bother to care, but the script made me just angry!

Report as inappropriate
usman khawaja said...

Posted on Jun 26 2008 15:52 I think that NF did not get the gist of this modern vampire saga and the satire on a modern milieu right ,as for me this is a modern classic on par with Blade Runner ,which was savaged by the critics at the time of release too,
Anton's relationship with his unborn son and the mixing of mythology with a modern day message over the urban evils of Moscow are very relevant in this fantasy horror which immaculately mixes the biblical images of Doomsday with the present day artefacts of doom ,i loved every second of this macabre movie where the vampires can smell and be attracted to the blood of the victims ,in a metaphorical manner it matches the convoluted world of today's state surveillance of individuals being hunted by the corrupt political system .
This is even more relevant for the Putin's russia that induced this classic and explains why this was such a great sucess in that country as it becomes almost an urban legend when seen in that light and the style is visual genius itself ,
The vision of this movie remains unmatched and much superior to the comparable Hollywood sagas which cannot even touch it's dark dynamic energy and psychological phantasm with a Shakespearean aura woven in it's magical charms ,
unmissable .

Report as inappropriate