Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Red-Barracuda Religious dramas are pretty uncommon in movies these days. I am guessing this is on account of this being a highly contentious subject which is tricky to bring to the screen, while serious studies of the subject tend to only appeal to a small demographic. Not being religious myself, I was a bit wary when approaching this one and wasn't entirely convinced I was going to like it. So, it was a pleasant surprise for me when I discovered that Stations of the Cross was a very engrossing film indeed. The story follows a teenage girl from a fundamentalist Catholic family who simultaneously tries to meet the strict demands of her faith while dealing with her more human desires. The events occur during the highly intense period when she prepares for Confirmation.Ultimately, this film warns of the destructive potential of organised religion, in particular religious extremism. In this instance the fundamentalists believe in old school Catholicism which disregards any forms of modernism. They espouse a view that popular music and social media are satanic and personal sacrifice is to be encouraged. The film opens with a scene where a priest teaches young teens that sometimes death is better than moral failure. When I watched this opening scene, it did educate me in matters pertaining to religious practise and belief, yet it also reminded me how absolutely none of it makes the slightest bit of sense to me. It is detailed and ingrained yet highly absurd and illogical to me.The movie itself is divided into fourteen chapters, which seemingly tell of the various 'Stations of the Cross' that detailed Christ's path to crucifixion. These scenes are dealt with cinematically in a manner which is simultaneously extremely minimalistic yet very bold. They take the form of fourteen long single takes, with all but three featuring static camera shots from one angle. It is a very austere method, yet the form accentuates the content and never feels for its own sake at any point. The intensity of the drama is enhanced by these extended takes and the serious tone of the material amplified. By the very nature of this approach, this calls for strong acting and excellent acting is what we certainly get here. Lea van Acken puts in a beautiful performance as the highly sympathetic tragic central character of Maria; it is a very mature turn from a teenage girl and highly effecting. Franziska Weisz is the other significant presence as her fundamentalist mother; a frighteningly monstrous character whose blind intolerance drains the life and vitality of all that surrounds her.All-in-all, this one definitely qualifies as a very powerful bit of cinema. It challenges yet engages, has interesting things to say and does so using a very bold presentation. Definitely one to take a chance on.

de_Biafra I find it hard to understand the positive reviews attributed this film. The themes religious fanaticism, paraphrases of Jesus' sufferings are interesting - as always. A movie with one camera position is daring, and requires... something else, which I'm afraid this film doesn't offer. It's film wasted on a story - perhaps as a play it would work much better. Roy Andersson knows this when he adds small diversities to each new position of his camera, but in this case there's no play with tension, no surprises. And yes, I do know of 'Via dolorosa' - there's no comedy there, and no one expects it here. The actors do well, although, they cannot save the story. From the first scene, one already knows how it will end, how it's gonna get there, and there are no surprises, except from the negative. If this was music, it would have no verses, no chorus... perhaps no sound - it's minimalism at its worst. I do enjoy the works of Dreyer, Bergman, Trier, and Andersson - not this - there's only religion linking Brüggemann with the other directors. Had I not been seated in the middle of an almost full theater, I would have walked out on this. This has to be my worst movie experience in... 20 years.

Reno Rangan It was surprisingly an amazing movie. Related to the religious thing, but science had a fair amount of display in the narration. You don't have to be religious to watch this film. You know I enjoyed the movie as a subject that portrayed in a conflict manner. In the end, whatever happen or wins are the best conclusion for a cinematic story. The contents are supposed to be the path the human walked through the past 2000 years, not on the interest to raise the issue. The film was clear on the matter, that is how the movie had the upper hand to receive respect everywhere.The story was told in the multiple episodes. The story deals on the basis of the each episode's title that I can clearly say it had something to do with the Christian faith. Because it follows the same order. Since I don't belong to any, it became a study material. From the introduction to the conclusion, it was well maintained pace, that is slow. But in the middle, I was almost drifted away from my concentration. Somehow managed to hold back my position like I always do and finished watching it by liking it very much.You can take the movie and its contents in many angles. It is up to you, but either way the movie succeeds in balancing and revealing the facts. Leaves you make your own verdict, because you know what's right and wrong being a human to believe in religion or in science, which both were the creation of ours. Sometimes these both do not require to understand life, just like the animals which survived alongside us for very long without civilization revolution, religious faith and proper law and order. The point is the one who understands the life and those who don't bother about knowing it, lives better than being confused between the line and seeks the shelter of religious.An easiest camera work for the cinematographer. All he has to do was to place the lens in a right position and that's it, the rest would be monitored on the television screen where the director seated, I believe. Because there is no camera panning except in a couple of places, other than that it was motionless and the characters appears in the front to perform. The cast has to memorise the lines of those scenes that covers up to non-stop 10 minutes."My religion has put a ban on running in circles in a gym."More like a stage play where setting for one frame (view) is always there and keeps changing for each scene with the different backgrounds what the script demands. My initial thought was, it might have been based on the play, but I still don't know the answer to that. Probably not, because it won an award for the script at the Berlin film festival. Yep, I loved the presentation, it was so cool and beautiful.From this what I have learnt was the involvement of minors in the religious ceremony is kind of inhumane. It's okay to teach them, but some rituals and sacrifice are way beyond acceptable. Those innocent minds have no experience of the difficulty of life, they're yet to explore it. Being poor or someone in the family is very ill should not be the reason to force them to take part. It is the great issue in all the religion. I think physically and mentally affecting take part in the religious ceremony must not be allowed for the underage.I had mild doubt over opting it to view in the earlier, but went for it to refresh from my regular kind of cinema and it did not fail to have my full attention, well I managed, did not I? I am happy I tried to have a different cinema, in fact the filmmakers given the distinct one, so I appreciate them. In the todays world, young film fanatics are addicted to either Hollywood/British or Korean films, but there are plenty of hidden gems in front of us that they're neglecting to have a glimpse. I would recommend this for the adults, they need to watch this more than children and young adults.7/10

david lincoln brooks This movie will make your blood absolutely boil. If ever you needed proof that organized religion is a destructive, delusive, maniacal force that brings misery to people's lives, this movie is it.Almost anything I might say here about the movie would be something of a spoiler... You just need to see it, from the beginning, and let the story make its simple, compelling case.This movie is almost kind of a modern, real-life, thinking-man's CARRIE-- (the Stephen King story). It is sly, smooth, seamless, cool and compelling in tone and style.Filmically, this movie carries on in the recent tradition of German films like REQUIEM (2006, dir. Hans Christian Schmid) and PARADISE:FAITH (dir. Ulrich Seidl, 2012) which deeply question the value of Christian brainwash in modern society, especially a society like Germany's, with its devotion to science. Essentially, these three movies show how religion... makes people batshit crazy, and makes them do cruel, mindless, absurd things.If you're not foaming at the mouth by the end of this picture-- with indignant rage-- check your pulse. Some have blithely blathered that this movie is a religious tale of a girl's sainthood. That's SO not what this movie is saying; the director wanted to light a torch under your backside, pure 'n' simple.