First of all, I'd like to congratulate the creators of this film on daring to make a murder mystery drama in a country where this particular genre is practically non-existent. I, for one, think that it has great visual style and mood. It is very hopeful to see commercial Greek cinema bidding farewell to the shallow aesthetics of the 90's and early 2000's and setting higher quality standards. These things, however, are not enough to distract our attention from some of the film's problems.
First of all, the film is somehow uneven in the way it constructs its characters. Apart from professor Lainis, played quite aptly by P. Dadakaridis, all the other characters come across as cliched and largely static.
Another problem is the overly pretentious dialogue. I realize that the film wants to be something more than a usual detective drama and tries to philosophize about the concept of crime and punishment, but I don't think that this was the most effective way to do it. People never talk so pompously in their daily conversations, unless the film wants us to think that everyone in Athens is a philosopher and has always something profound to say, even if it's about getting a couple of beers. The scenes where the professor converses with his mentor are, in this respect, the most ridiculous to watch, as the lines the actors exchange are no better than fortune cookie quotes. There are also parts where the writing could have been more daring, like the scene where the professor meets the disfigured boyfriend or the graveyard scene, where the big reveal takes place.
This brings us to the film's plot. I must confess that for its most part the film is very good at building up tension and suspense. When I first watched it, I was quite impressed by the way the story developed and I was so intrigued by it that I could overlook the static characters and the pompous lines. However, everything fell apart, when the graveyard scene came along and the killer's identity was revealed. I was extremely disappointed. Is this really what the Pythagorean quotes and numbers were in aid of? I couldn't help feeling a little cheated. For about 90 minutes the film was giving us to understand that something mind-blowing was going to take place. It even brought a French mathematician to increase our appetite for it. But, sadly, all five complicits are murdered before Lainis can intervene (thus rendering the Pythagorean clues useless and killing whatever tension the film has until that point) and, as if this wasn't off-putting enough, we see the professor and the killer exchange one platitude after another about God! I know that the purpose of this scene is to make a comment on self-administered justice (and present it in a rather artsy way), but in this case I think that the creators could have made their point without having to sacrifice a good plot.
All things considered, "Eteros Ego" sets high expectations visually, but fails to deliver the goods, in terms of action and dialogue. The fact that it's a long-awaited addition to the Greek crime genre with good graphics, should not blind us to its obvious shortcomings.
First of all, the film is somehow uneven in the way it constructs its characters. Apart from professor Lainis, played quite aptly by P. Dadakaridis, all the other characters come across as cliched and largely static.
Another problem is the overly pretentious dialogue. I realize that the film wants to be something more than a usual detective drama and tries to philosophize about the concept of crime and punishment, but I don't think that this was the most effective way to do it. People never talk so pompously in their daily conversations, unless the film wants us to think that everyone in Athens is a philosopher and has always something profound to say, even if it's about getting a couple of beers. The scenes where the professor converses with his mentor are, in this respect, the most ridiculous to watch, as the lines the actors exchange are no better than fortune cookie quotes. There are also parts where the writing could have been more daring, like the scene where the professor meets the disfigured boyfriend or the graveyard scene, where the big reveal takes place.
This brings us to the film's plot. I must confess that for its most part the film is very good at building up tension and suspense. When I first watched it, I was quite impressed by the way the story developed and I was so intrigued by it that I could overlook the static characters and the pompous lines. However, everything fell apart, when the graveyard scene came along and the killer's identity was revealed. I was extremely disappointed. Is this really what the Pythagorean quotes and numbers were in aid of? I couldn't help feeling a little cheated. For about 90 minutes the film was giving us to understand that something mind-blowing was going to take place. It even brought a French mathematician to increase our appetite for it. But, sadly, all five complicits are murdered before Lainis can intervene (thus rendering the Pythagorean clues useless and killing whatever tension the film has until that point) and, as if this wasn't off-putting enough, we see the professor and the killer exchange one platitude after another about God! I know that the purpose of this scene is to make a comment on self-administered justice (and present it in a rather artsy way), but in this case I think that the creators could have made their point without having to sacrifice a good plot.
All things considered, "Eteros Ego" sets high expectations visually, but fails to deliver the goods, in terms of action and dialogue. The fact that it's a long-awaited addition to the Greek crime genre with good graphics, should not blind us to its obvious shortcomings.