The Killing of a Sacred Deer

Yorgos Lanthimos shrewdly uses very modest means (with a modest budget) to create a hypnotic yet quite tense atmosphere. In fact, he makes ample use of distant and seemingly detached long camera shots and a musical motif that burrows under the skin and is a terrified jumble of a few simple sounds. The ambivalent presentation of Martin's character adds to the clearly hard-to-define (but very effective) atmosphere. At first glance, he looks and acts like a nice and innocent boy, while in reality he represents an evil similar to "that nice and innocent Damien" from The Omen. (08/02/2019)

The Killing of a Sacred Deer has a very strong denouement that is simply great. It's disgusting, it's ugly, some people won't even want to watch it, but the script has put the characters in that state really well. This is not violence for violence's sake, but it's important in terms of the story. So even though Lanthimos' visuals are a bit repetitive, he still manages to wow the viewer. (16/03/2018)

A wonderfully and amusingly strange film that will be appreciated especially by lovers of plenty of black humor and unusual films with crazy plots. For anyone who has already had the honor of watching Lanthimos’s films, this is simply another of his original and imaginative satirical images of human society, governed by absurd rules and funny-freezing cultural habits, and their creator does not need to explain in any way. Bizarre art. The best in Lanthimos's filmography so far (for me). (02/11/2017)

Saw for intellectuals. The Killing of a Sacred Deer is a cruel, disturbing and, in filmmaking terms, precise morality tale and perhaps even class satire (rich people destroy the lives of the poor and refuse to accept responsibility for it), but I found its second half to be monotonous in terms of both the characters’ suffering and style (slow dolly shots, overhead shots, close-ups of faces, unpleasant atonal music, over and over again). I understand that the mechanical nature of the structure and the acting is part of the director’s malevolent concept (forget about gradation or catharsis), but it deprives the film of dramatic tension and gives the impression that it doesn’t develop along with the characters, while also weakening the message. I didn’t get the impression that the film had anything else to say after the central dilemma had been revealed (which was possibly why Mirka Spáčilová providentially left the press screening after the scene in which Farrell forces a donut on his son). Instead, it distances itself from reality and thus diminishes the power of its message. The similarity to Kubrick or Haneke is mainly external, not in the effect that the film has on the viewer. 70% (30/10/2017)

What drew me to watch the film was the cast. The bearded Colin Farrell was almost unrecognizable, only his eyes gave him away, and Nicole Kidman appeared slightly older, although her youthful charm couldn't be denied. It is the story of a cardiac surgeon who made a mistake during an operation in the past, which led to the death of a patient, whose son is now seeking revenge. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. However, you have the option to choose: sacrifice one of your children or your wife for the death of my father. Although it was somewhat cold and emotionally devoid in terms of acting, it was brilliantly filmed. I was fascinated by the eerily disturbing music that crept through the plot and greatly enhanced the depressing mood of the film. Barry Keoghan, playing the vengeful teenage son, portrayed his role so repulsively that I swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. (75%) (11/03/2020)