Portrays bad, better. A child-murder with style is "good"?

Rating: 1/10 (17 May 2007)

What a well made horrible little movie. Is everyone zeroing in on the technology, seeing how amazing it is, yet not even considering the content? If one considers content, this is a technically well made movie about an awful nightmare and a set of childhood traumas leading to severe psychological degeneration with only negative effects. We are already aware of the pain and suffering war causes. We are already well-worn out and often reminded about the trauma Europe has suffered, as any country has in any war and also about terrible people doing terrible things to those who cannot defend themselves. Is feeding us this stuff in a different, more visually advanced way doing anything but making us lose respect for those who foist it on us, one more time? It is devolving the subject into a trivialization of the real, historical horrors that DID happen, but doing it better. How is that a good movie? Is all that is required to qualify as a good movie about a child traumatized into psychotic withdrawal, then murdered, that it is done with style? It is a good movie because the visual style of the presentation of the events leading up to a child's psychotic withdrawal from reality and then just plain being murdered in front of our eyes is so well done in an imaginative and new way? NOT! What kind of people would ever like this movie? It worries me.