Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

jcalladm I cannot recommend this documentary, but I'm afraid that, like me, you'll find yourself drawn into it. Watching "Vakvagany" is sort of like rubber-necking when you drive by the scene of an accident; it's human nature to gawk at others' misfortunes. The scenario is truly intriguing: the directors comes across a family's often disconcerting home movies and attempt to track down the children in them. What they find are two badly damaged human beings who belong in a mental institution. The film features three "analysts," who spend far too much time trying to figure out the home movies and the children. They state the obvious, ramble, and over-intellectualize. Worst of all is the utter contempt the directors show for the now-adult children, going so far as to break into one's home. Even the music, some kind of crappy neo-Hungarian cabaret, trivializes the daily struggles of Erno, the male child. Had the directors kept their vile attitudes out of the film, it would have been a solid documentary.

Chung Mo The subject is a Hungarian family at first only known by a set of "found" home movies. The filmmaker (who apparently has commented here about his own movie) goes off on a search to find the subjects of the home movies. He does and films the wretched lives of the children, now grown and in their middle ages. Apparently not enough comes of this so the film maker enlists an unusual trio of commentators to view and react to the footage; a novelist, a psychiatrist and an avant-garde film maker. The result?A very disturbing glimpse into a ruined family. The commentators' opinions come at the same time as your own as they react to footage at the same time you see it. Some times they are insightful, other times just confused. Interestingly, the avant-garde film maker's comments are frequently the most insightful. Many things are not explained as a standard documentary would try to do. Perhaps the film makers were at a loss at what they had filmed when it was finished but that's not a drawback. You have to involve yourself with the mystery to really watch this film.A word on the "disturbing" end, namely the son's visit to his sister and the drinking binge right before it. It's clear that the film maker didn't know that the son would consume two full bottles of wine (gifts from the film maker) before the trip to his sister. Filming it was part of the story. The break-in happens after the son (who is mentally retarded) starts to worry about his sister who lived with him all his life, but hasn't spoken to him for a while now that they live apart. The actual entry into the house is done by a neighbor of the sister and the first view of her filthy kitchen made me think that she had been deceased for a long time. The sister is first seen sleeping, oblivious to the noise in her house, as if dead. She is extremely paranoid and quite crazy. she refuses to talk about her father except for a last comment that says tons about the man.A great film about the results of parents who smother the emotional growth of their children. The method of delivery, however, will not please many people.

am2star This is a fantastic piece of filmmaking. Benjamin Meade has taken something as mundane as the home movie and created a stunning work. What is fascinating is that there is so much in this quasi- documentary that is shown. We follow a family, but like all families they have their history and live in a world that has history. They are their own world, and part of the world around them.The narration- comments that occur durring the film remind us of that. The family has their life, but part of that life is in the world in which they live.Then, we seek the family today. We wonder what happened to that family that we watched and became interested. This is where we literally jump into the screen. The director meets the son depicted in the home movies. We see what has happened to the son, raising questions about the rest of the family. We seek the daughter. This is where the director Meade shows what kind of film this is. Instead of being a dispassioned reporter, he has involved himself in this family. When there are questions about the wellbeing of the sister, the director involves himself, and the audience via the camera, in finding the answer.Does he take things too far? That is what each of us have to answer of ourselves. I guess it all depends on whether you can be compassionate with a camera in your hands. But, the audience should be greatful that they were taken on the journey.It also raises another interesting question. While much of the film takes place in Hungary, there is nothing that says that it could not happen in New York, or California, or Kansas. What do our home movies tell about us. What have we done since we were children? Are there hints in anyone's childhood that says where they are going?See the film, make your own judgements.

John Seal The found films that serves as the basis for Vakvagany are fascinating, and the commentary by special guests James Ellroy, Stan Brakhage, and Roy Menninger at times is thought-provoking, but filmmaker Benjamin Meade crosses a dangerous line with this film in the final reel, as he literally breaks into someone's home in order to film them. Perhaps that would have been justified if the subject were a secluded war criminal. Unfortunately, Meade's victim is a slightly disturbed though quite coherent middle aged woman who is thoroughly aware of the pornographic intentions of the director's camera. In an afterthought segment aired after the film on the Sundance Channel, Meade admits that he went too far. Self awareness is important, but it came too late to save an otherwise fascinating piece of work, making Nick Broomfield look like Miss Manners in comparison.