Is this movie confusing as hell or is it just me? - Dnevnoy dozor (2007) Discussion

[–] ryulu999 16 years ago

No, I don't think you're alone.
It's better to get some background information, then re-watch it. That certainly helped me a great deal.

reply

[–] LonelyPhantom 15 years ago

I'm a little confused myself. I'm getting the books soon so I'll read them then re-watch it lol Overall I still thought both movies were pretty good. Been awhile since I've seen a movie I thought was decent.

"Got to run I've got a... thing. Well, four things. Well, four things... and a lizard."

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 14 years ago

if you saw the first part, you wont be confused by this one, if you havent, you will.
well if your still confused after watching first part, thne you better stick to Disney movies.

----------
"Common sense is not so common."
- Voltaire

reply

[–] thelordtantalus 15 years ago

The movie is complex and not a straightforward action flick like advertised. You have to watch it more than once to get everything. It can get a little confusing because you have to really have to pay attention and it's in another language. Ultimately it is well worth it. I just wonder how they will do the third one though?

reply

[–] IMDBIron 15 years ago

I followed the first film quite well but this seemed a different kettle of fish all together. I found it digressed from the main story line and other lines were intersecting that the viewer may not be aware of and in the end sort of getting it but not quite.
I don't think it tied in too well with the original but it had been a while since watching the first and then the sequel.

reply

[–] lovingthelie 15 years ago

Yes I agree. Very confusing. Alot of potential, not realized.

reply

[–] west3210 15 years ago

Agree. I really enjoyed great visual style but story was rushed and confusing.

Imagine the world where people speak only about things they know. Imagine that SILENCE...

reply

[–] Evil_Flip 15 years ago

yeah it's a complete mess. I got the story (though sometimes had to rewind. but I seriously think this is just bad editing/directing. I truly love the first one, but this one is just mess

reply

[–] scuffpuppy 15 years ago

I agree with everyone's points here. Although Night and Day Watch are essentially pretty good movies, they're hardly the master pieces some profess them to be. If these had been western films, exactly the same actors, scripts etc, people would think they were awful. But because they're Russan, suddenly we're supposed to ignore the bad acting (Anton has two states, drunk for no reason or stunned and stupid), bad script and pacing, and a totally confused story telling technique.The essence of these movies is engrossing, but the execution is terrible. Russan or not, a bad film is a bad film.

reply

[–] russellsolomon 15 years ago

It's RUSSIAN not RUSSAN you nitwit!

reply

[–] Evil_Flip 15 years ago

yeah but scuffpuppy is right. but the fact that people 'take' more from a foreign movie is maybe a good thing. with Hollywood only making crap/remakes these days we should give these movies some extra chance.

reply

[–] Sxilderik 14 years ago

I think you all get it wrong. In my opinion, the movies were never intended to be enjoyed, let alone understood, by those who did not read the novels first.

The usual (hear, Hollywood) way of making a film after a book is to restate the obvious for those who already know the books in order to be understood by a larger audience. Boring, reducting, overly simplifying the story to appeal to those who dont read / dont intend to. The disgusting motto is : watch movies, don't read books.

I reckon this is the first blockbuster to be actually directed at a readers' audience. The books are a huge international success anyway, so the risk was not that big, but still, I find it bold and worth appraising.

____________________
'Cause what you hears today you got to tell the birthed tomorrow.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] daja_ace 15 years ago

To the OP:

Well, it can be confusing at times if you're distracted but in all honesty, I do believe that these films (Night Watch and Day Watch) were deliberately made to be watched very carefully.

The first time I watched them I understood the basics of what the movie was about but because I was distracted at times (because I had company), I had to rewind on some parts here and there.

Upon a second viewing, the events in the movie were more clear to me until the DVD started skipping scenes because it was scratched/damaged.

I finally got a chance to see both Night Watch and Day Watch in their entirety again a couple of months ago with no real distractions and now I understand basically everything in both films. I even raised my initial rating of both films. So, I guess it just depends on the individual. If I'm actually paying attention to what is going on in a film (and most of the time I do, very carefully) I am able to understand it.

These two films are mostly no exception. I just wish that the editing had been handled better to make things flow more smoothly. I can imagine that's what the problem was: the editing of the film made it harder for you follow what was going on.

I hate to use this piece of advice but maybe you should watch it again more carefully. Stick with it and I think you may be surprised with how much you understand or appreciate the film if you watch it with no distractions.

If you still don't like it after that, then to each their own. At least, you would be able to say that you gave the movie a fair chance.

Peace out.

reply

[–] aghinem 14 years ago

*** spoilers below ***

Could you explain what was going on with the butcher? I didn't understand the license for his son -- was it to allow Kostya to drink blood from a person (vs. drinking pig's blood)? Why was the father against it? What did he want Zavulon to do?

My best guess is that Kostya's father didn't want Kostya to kill someone. He regretted turning him into a vampire, and he wanted Zavulon to turn Kostya back into a human. But surely Kostya's father knew that nothing could undo it? Or maybe I've misunderstood the whole thing?

reply

[–] mad_weather 14 years ago

More or less yes. He couldn't undo it (at least now, but we also know from Alisa that Kostya majors in biology, supposedly to study vampirism; BTW, in one of later books Kostya actually invents a way for a vampire to ascend without killing), but he could postpone it. Live hunting, though, is essential for vampire's "coming of age".

reply

[–] daja_ace 14 years ago

Like mad_waether just said you're pretty much right about that part. The Butcher deeply regretted turning his son, Kostya, into a vampire. He also was hoping that Zavulon could use his power to revert Kostya back into a human because of his regret and also to prevent Kostya from potentially being accused and prosecuted by the Night Watch sometime in the future. This is why he was so anxious and afraid when Sveta came looking for Anton at the apartment, overexplaining to her that Kostya had a license.

Zavulon took advantage of the Butcher's regret and the situation in order to frame Anton for the murder of Yegor's teacher.

reply

[–] cubasfinest 14 years ago

It has been quite a while since I saw Nightwatch but I really liked it..this was just pure drivel. I was bored and had trouble keeping up with all that was happening.

This really lost the way from the first film, with little to do with the essence of vampire and little time spent in the gloom.

reply

[–] daja_ace 14 years ago

Is there some specific question that you had to direct to me or are you just randomly ranting in response to me?

reply

[–] MaceGriffin 13 years ago

i understood the film just fine but it was absolute garbage badly directed the most over use of special effects when their really didnt need them. just one big mess of a film soured an excellent first film.

reply

[–] daja_ace 13 years ago

Good for you, you get a medal.

reply

[–] Katiedot 13 years ago

So glad you said this OP. I keep catching parts of it on HBO and can't make head nor tail of it. Good to know that I need to see the first film first.

George Clooney forum, news & gossip updated daily: http://www.clooneysopenhouse.com/

reply

[–] avex_13 12 years ago

As i put in another thread:

A big part of that "randomness" comes from the fact that it adapts 5 short stories. It gets the main storyline from 2 of them, and then throws most of the themes of the other 3 as side stories and details.

Night Watch adapts the first short story of the book Night Watch (which is made of 3 short stories). Day Watch then adapts the 2 remaining short stories of Night Watch, and the 3 of Day Watch. And that happened because Fox wanted the movie to be Day Watch, instead of Night Watch 2, and both Bekmambetov and Lukyanenko (writer of the books) where like "*beep* that, we are putting EVERYTHING in the next movie".

reply

[–] Husskade 12 years ago

I got slightly mixed up after about 20/30 minutes but stuck with it.....and to be honest paused it every now and again to sort out the storyline and try to work out for myself what was going on ( haven't seen Night Watch so came to it with no foreknowledge ) then it suddenly all fell into place....
Loved the film...loved the craziness,laughed a lot.
Realised at the end that careful attention....and I mean real attention at the beginning gives you the clues you need to navigate the action but it certainly isn't 'spoon fed' to you.
All good.

Don't worry ever, because this is just a ride.It's just a ride. Bill Hicks.

reply