Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

alxbby *some spoilers are included* After I've watched this for the first time, I was confused and not very happy. I liked the movie, but I expected it to be a total sacrifice movie because I was enchanted by Lars Von Trier movies and his work which is pretty cruel in my opinion ( and that's why I adore him) and then this movie gave me some kind of easy, light, kinda sleepy heavenly feel. It slowly introduced me to the world of the eternal beauty of nature, subtle philosophy teachings and the kindness of Alexander (I loved his personality all the time). It is not perfect because of the sacrifice itself, but of the glorious images which are also some very strong symbols. I adored the fire, it really touched me and I thought of some philosophy statements about the fire itself. If you want a total sacrifice I recommend "Breaking The Waves" (Lars Von Trier), but if you want an art treasure and nature yelling at your face, this is the great movie. I gave it 9/10 because the plot was little weak, maybe that is why I love this? I don't know, but this movie will have its hands on my mind for a long, long time.

t-viktor212 It is difficult to watch a Tarkovskij film if you are already tired (having his films only in subtitled editions doesn't help), I actually fell asleep during this at a certain point in the film, had to take a pause, and continue when I got back awake. I also liked other Tarkovskij films better, like Andrej Rubljev or Stalker, but still liked this a lot.Nonetheless, Offret is really a good film, both from a cinematographical point of view, both from the story and the storytelling point of view. It's one of those Russian films where not much happens during the story, some of the scenes might seem awkward to a modern- day audience, but you still feel blown away. This and Nostalghia actually required me to check a few analises to understand better the story. They're way more hermetic than other Tarkovskij films, but no less good. I particularly loved the choice for the setting and the music (Despite it didn't show up much in the film). Anyhow, I suggest to watch Offret twice, and to read a good analisis of the thematics in the film before the second view. It helps a lot in understanding the story, the reason of certain things, and to appreciate better the movie.

drarthurwells This movie is beautifully filmed, in the style of I. Bergman. That is enough to make the critics rave about it.However, it is, as Shakespeare might say, sound and fury signifying nothing.An insane man becomes delusional and thinks that a nuclear WW III has started, but he can make things revert back to peacetime if he makes a sacrifice.Actually if we all would kill ourselves there would be no more war. One person's sacrifice is not enough to assuage the gods, however.If you like nonsensical films, like "Tree of Life" or "Holy Motors", you might like this one.Too bad a beautiful production was wasted on this film.

Cosmoeticadotcom Watching Russian film director Andrei Tarkovsky's final 1986 film, The Sacrifice (Offret Sacrificatio), is an exercise in cinema appreciation; not because it is a great film, but because it has great moments and moments of sheer monotonous boredom. It is one of those rare films that goes to the antipodes of what is good and bad in that art form. Overall, it's a film worth seeing, but it is in no way, shape, nor form a great film; much less a masterpiece. Tarkovsky, who had fled the Soviet Union, filmed The Sacrifice in Sweden, using Swedish actors- including Erland Josephson, the star of many Ingmar Bergman films, and used Bergman's longtime cinematographer Sven Nykvist, as well. This was a wise choice, as The Sacrifice is one of the more arresting visual works anyone is likely to see on screen, especially in its interesting choice of medium shots as the dominant frame, or mis-en-scene. Yet, where the film falters is by, instead of maximizing the positive traits of Tarkovsky and the Bergman contingent, the film brought out the worst elements of Tarkovsky and Bergman. As example, Tarkovsky wrote the screenplay, and like most Tarkovsky films, The Sacrifice is long (142 minutes on the Kino DVD), but it lacks all of the subtle poesy in earlier Tarkovsky films (Solaris, Stalker) and instead indulges on overwrought scenes of terror and regret. There are early scenes where philosophic banter occurs, but the last three quarters of the film is filled with some astonishingly bad acting, which has to be laid at the feet of Tarkovsky. Bergman, who was possibly the greatest screenwriter of the Twentieth Century, was always concise in his screenplays. However, whereas that strength of Bergman is ignored, Bergman's greatest weakness is employed, and that is a relentlessly depressing view of life and the characters. One knows from the beginning that they are all doomed, and, save for the youngest character in the film, this comes to fruition, although, this is only so if one renders the most positive interpretation of the film possible. In all other ways, that ending is likely a delusion, which means Bergmanian dourness combines with a dearth of Tarkovskian poesy to make the film dark, despairing, and oftentimes dull.