"Dobermann" is a challenging film on several accounts. The film is a dark actioner that provides highly stylized violence being done by unlikable people in the context of a simple story. The challenge is not really in understanding the film; rather it is coming away from the film liking it. The reason this film causes some distaste is that lofty goals of portraying moral relativism are shoddily executed. The following will discuss some of the films underlying assumptions and both bad and good points.
There are two main assumptions that this film makes. First, there is some positive value to showing a slice of life in which near all characters are unlikable. From start to finish, the characters with the most screen time are unlikable at best and despicable at worst. In all fairness, this is somewhat of an accomplishment. To populate a film world with characters that alienate the majority of the audience does take planning and a certain finesse to render. It does, however, beg the question, "why do this?" The answer is two-fold. On one hand "Dobermann" is a film that is trying very hard to shine a light on the oft untouched realm of moral relativism. In some circles, the idea of absolute good and evil is specious at best. This film gives us an hour and a half of actions done by people who have very little in the way of a moral system. Attempting to analyze action with any moral framework is quickly frustrated. Rather characters seem to act based entirely on pragmatic and selfish reasoning that is grounded wholly in the moment. On the other hand, and the second assumption, grossly taboo behavior is intended to be entertaining or have some positive value. This is a difficult area to work with. Action films are violent almost by definition. That said, there is often some context that justifies the violence and killing. For example, Bruce Willis in "Die Hard" strikes most of us as a defender of the innocent and thus sanctioned to take life. In "Dobermann" I found myself hoping that everyone would die at just under the one hour mark. The film made every character so despicable that any pleasure that could have come from viewing broken taboos was directed more into hoping that anyone who had more than five lines was shot in the head.
That this film is shocking and upsetting is not the reason that it deserves a fairly harsh critique. One would hope that an audience is capable of admiring skill and quality storytelling even if the story itself is unliked. This film not only tells an unsettling tale, it does so rather poorly. The acting for the most part, and especially by the dobermann character, is hollow and outright obnoxious. These are stock bad guys doing clichéd things. In addition, the story is too simple to sustain a serious look at moral relativism. Basically, some crooks rob a bank and are hunted and then fight the police. That is the entirety of the story. A childishly simplistic story populated with vapid characters severely limits this films ability to explore any meaningful ideas or philosophical questions. The above mentioned limitation also has the possible effect of causing a terrible disconnect with the audience. Should one loose connection with the poorly thought out and muddled ideas at the core of this film, the experience as a whole becomes one of viewing stylized mediocrity.
It may seem that I have nothing good to say, but that is not the case. From a technical standpoint, this is a well done film. The score, cinematography, shot composition and editing are well done and professional. The extreme violence, while somewhat dated, is uniquely stylized and enjoyable to watch. The movie is also very humorous at times. The opening sequence is worth viewing for its humorous kitch value alone. The penultimate aspect of this film is the bad cop. If there is one truly redeeming character, it is the police officer Christini. He is far and away the most believably evil human being to have been portrayed in an action movie. While this film fails in a great many areas, the Christini character alone makes it almost worth watching.
On a personal note, I will only recommend this film to core action buff friends. It would probably be better received if seen in a group as opposed to alone. 5 stars.
There are two main assumptions that this film makes. First, there is some positive value to showing a slice of life in which near all characters are unlikable. From start to finish, the characters with the most screen time are unlikable at best and despicable at worst. In all fairness, this is somewhat of an accomplishment. To populate a film world with characters that alienate the majority of the audience does take planning and a certain finesse to render. It does, however, beg the question, "why do this?" The answer is two-fold. On one hand "Dobermann" is a film that is trying very hard to shine a light on the oft untouched realm of moral relativism. In some circles, the idea of absolute good and evil is specious at best. This film gives us an hour and a half of actions done by people who have very little in the way of a moral system. Attempting to analyze action with any moral framework is quickly frustrated. Rather characters seem to act based entirely on pragmatic and selfish reasoning that is grounded wholly in the moment. On the other hand, and the second assumption, grossly taboo behavior is intended to be entertaining or have some positive value. This is a difficult area to work with. Action films are violent almost by definition. That said, there is often some context that justifies the violence and killing. For example, Bruce Willis in "Die Hard" strikes most of us as a defender of the innocent and thus sanctioned to take life. In "Dobermann" I found myself hoping that everyone would die at just under the one hour mark. The film made every character so despicable that any pleasure that could have come from viewing broken taboos was directed more into hoping that anyone who had more than five lines was shot in the head.
That this film is shocking and upsetting is not the reason that it deserves a fairly harsh critique. One would hope that an audience is capable of admiring skill and quality storytelling even if the story itself is unliked. This film not only tells an unsettling tale, it does so rather poorly. The acting for the most part, and especially by the dobermann character, is hollow and outright obnoxious. These are stock bad guys doing clichéd things. In addition, the story is too simple to sustain a serious look at moral relativism. Basically, some crooks rob a bank and are hunted and then fight the police. That is the entirety of the story. A childishly simplistic story populated with vapid characters severely limits this films ability to explore any meaningful ideas or philosophical questions. The above mentioned limitation also has the possible effect of causing a terrible disconnect with the audience. Should one loose connection with the poorly thought out and muddled ideas at the core of this film, the experience as a whole becomes one of viewing stylized mediocrity.
It may seem that I have nothing good to say, but that is not the case. From a technical standpoint, this is a well done film. The score, cinematography, shot composition and editing are well done and professional. The extreme violence, while somewhat dated, is uniquely stylized and enjoyable to watch. The movie is also very humorous at times. The opening sequence is worth viewing for its humorous kitch value alone. The penultimate aspect of this film is the bad cop. If there is one truly redeeming character, it is the police officer Christini. He is far and away the most believably evil human being to have been portrayed in an action movie. While this film fails in a great many areas, the Christini character alone makes it almost worth watching.
On a personal note, I will only recommend this film to core action buff friends. It would probably be better received if seen in a group as opposed to alone. 5 stars.