one of films with status of trip. because it is a large, complex, precise map. to one of the most popular themes of Medieval Germany. to an art gallery. to the Romantic stories about impossible love. to the admirable Russian dramas. to the Flemish paintings. to the delicacy of beauty and known tragedies who are mile stones of history. a film for feel more than for understand. this is its virtue. and its sin. because it is one of films who, in precise manner, selects its audience. that is all. and the motif to say, after its end, only - it is a beautiful film. but....

"Het Meisje en de Dood" is a Dutch movie from 3 years ago written and directed by Jos Stelling. It crosses the 2-hour mark, but unfortunately it cannot deliver enough material to make these 125 minutes really worth a watch. This is especially a shame as I really liked Sylvia Hoeks in "The Best Offer" and Didi Hallervorden is also an actor that I quite approve of. Russian actor Leonid Bichevin plays the male lead, but I don't know him and I also did not find him very memorable in here. Same goes for Hoeks. Hallervorden, on the other hand,, did a fine job with the mediocre material he was given here. Maybe it helps that he only has a handful scenes and is a supporting player who does not have to carry the movie. Still, the scene near the end where he has that heavy makeup on is really the lowpoint of this film, but that's also not his fault really. Another negative aspect here is that I personally did no really get emotionally involved with the characters or the story. The male central character I actually found rather unlikeable. All in all, this is not a great film by any means unfortunately. I recommend the Hoeks movie I saw before where she also plays a somewhat mysterious character, but that film has a brilliant lead performance by Academy Award winner Geoffrey Rush and also a much better script. "Het Meisje en de Dood" could have needed improvement in both areas. Not recommended.

a love story. like many others.stereotypes,dialogs, faces, few special images.slow, fragile, dark, sad. cold beauty. only virtue - maybe, atmosphere. but it is far to be enough. or seductive title.short, a beautiful common movie. the story is not impressive, but almost touching. the acting is part of story, gray, usual. and the emotions, the translation of emotions is the problem. because the circle is broken. the old beauty ,the passing time, the music, gestures, words, silence and the atmosphere are ideal ingredients but always something missing. for a state of soul, like a kind of absinthe, it is perfect. but it is not easy to remember it. because it seems be an ice piece - the time, the sun destroys each by each images, impressions. I admit, I like it. but it is difficult to say than I love it.

This seems to be one of the longest movies I've seen in years. But where some long movies have complex stories and plot lines, this film has a very simple story, that could comfortably be told in half the time. The fact that there is very little dialogue in the film doesn't exactly help the flow either. So the film has a slow pace, and that's obviously by choice. I guess the director wants us to enjoy the beautifully lit scenes, the slightly overacting faces in close-up and the meritorious artwork. Maybe he wanted the film to have a pace fitting to the period the story takes place, and thus drag the audience into it. For me it didn't really work. The ideas maybe fine, but the elaboration just isn't powerful enough to account for the time spent. It didn't help that both the story and it's portrayal are loaded with platitudes and stereotypes. I guess this is also by choice, for the story could be seen as kind of a fairytale, but again: for me it didn't really work.If you're a hopeless romantic or in need of some serious cooling down you might enjoy this film, but I could imagine nicer ways to spend all this time.