Actuakers
One of my all time favorites.
Mjeteconer
Just perfect...
Dynamixor
The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
darcymoore
A near-death experience gives Dr Perkov the ability to see and feel in the discordant dimension between life and the eternal grave. While the idea is by no means novel, enough new elements, and changes of pace and location, were included to maintain my interest. I particularly liked the exploration of the dysfunctional relationships between Dr Perkov and both his wife and mother. I also enjoyed the, at times rapid, see-sawing between the bright, busy living and the grating and edgy undead. (The fact that it's not always apparent who's horizontal and who should be vertical makes for some humour upon reflection.) And Dr Perkov's ignorance of what the hell is going on, and why, goes one better than the Bruce Willis character in "The Sixth Sense". However viewers who like mounting suspense and sustained terror may be disappointed as the excitement comes in short spurts rather than long draughts. Also some might be irritated, as I was, by Dr Perkov's rather slow awakening, and the high tolerance of people around him as his behaviour (and grooming) degenerated. My final niggle is a question to the director. If characters are shown in closeup talking in a car, why suddenly screen the passing countryside as viewed from a low flying aircraft; especially when it's obviously meant to be from their viewing perspective as you return straight back to the car interior. Several times. The acting was excellent throughout, "Shadows" was beautifully filmed with some mouth-watering shots of the Aegan, and I fell in love yet again with an unattainable woman.
vladokos
I think that there are problems with the plot regarding the disconnected sex scenes, and the generally missed point in the movie. It could have been made better. I don't think it is a replica of the "Sixth Sense", I see no resemblance in the plot between these two movies. Also, as far as the Aegean Macedonians are concerned, I think the the movie does not mention the exodus of the 1913 and the use of the napalm bombs at that time. It just scarcely mentions the events following the partition of Macedonia. It mentions the exodus during the WW II, and especially during the Greek civil war following the WW II, when indeed there was an exodus of the Aegean Macedonians and the Greek forces and its allies did use napalm bombs to destroy forces of the Communist led coalition, but instead mostly civilians and villages were hit by those bombs. Those who survived were exiled into Eastern Europe and today's Republic of Macedonia (then part of federal Yugoslavia). So those are the facts briefly mentioned. So the movie does not say at all that this exodus happened in 1913, but after 1913 when part of Macedonia was seized by Greece. In any way, most viewers will not focus on that part of the story as those events are just scarcely treated, and implied. They are secondary to the main story. I think it is absolutely unfair and wrong to see that as propaganda.
milan_xsago
When i first heard about Manchevski's next project to be in the horror genre i was a bit skeptical to be honest. I mean a European horror? What was the last good one you've seen? The hype, however, surrounding this movie here in Macedonia inevitably took over me so i become interested in it too. And after watching it's fantastic trailer, "Shadows" suddenly became my most anticipated movie of the year. So my expectations were as high as they have ever been when i decided to go and see it. And it was worth the wait. It's nothing i thought it would be though. It has Manchevski written all over it, meaning this is not your typical "go and have fun" movie. It's dark and funny, simple on the outside, yet the complexity of the inside is what makes it special. It's a love it or hate it one. It's simply different from everything you have ever seen. It's more of a thriller than horror in my opinion and it's a movie that you have to see a few times to understand it's whole meaning. The symbolics used in it are brilliant(though too often ruined by the obvious explanations) and the cinematography is great. The acting was OK(I liked the performance of Sabina Ajrula as the mother) and the storytelling was good too. I felt like it was more of a collection of scenes than an actual movie to be honest but let's face it, as commercial as this movie sounded this is still in the art department. True, there are too many unnecessary sex scenes that are a distraction from the general idea, but i think it's something that should be overlooked. And even though the theme of the movie is not very original it does a good job by showing those same things, used so often these days, from a different more realistic "angle". All in all it's something that i heartily recommend you to see and despite it's few flaws it's still another great movie from a great director. Friends of thriller horror movies with a deeper even philosophical meaning, you'll be satisfied. 10/10, even though i have to admit not Oscar worthy as some have suggested
WendyKJ
'Shadows' is a confection of images, evoked smells, fascinating faces, pitch-perfect acting, and unnerving events--with perhaps the best crash scene I have ever seen in film. My observation re: the accident might sound like hyperbole, but the psychology of the scene is sheer perfection. Its details are choice. I felt horrified, too, empathizing with all the people in the reaction shots, but at the same time exhilarated because it all looked so damn interesting! (The film has great cutaways!) I love it when a movie takes control of my moods and this has a driver's opening. There is also some great counterpoint with scenes and music. Really, very masterful. This film is better with a second viewing--like watching The Conformist--one always notices new and fascinating details in the frame, in the psyches of its characters.
