CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

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.

runamokprods An enjoyable, well shot (and very well acted by Marie Binnevie in a double role) mind game of a film. It doesn't add up to much emotionally, but it stays pretty fascinating most of the time, as young photographer Alex is repeatedly drawn into an affair with the same woman, only to find reality changing, and that she suddenly doesn't know him. The same with other people in his life. And then suddenly they DO know him again, but seem to see him with new eyes. There's a strong suggestion that what we're seeing is a story being reworked (reconstructed) by a writer, a fantasy that the woman's older husband has in his head. A lot of critics were harsh on this (though a few loved it) for being film-schoolish and deliberately obtuse. I can't argue. But I still can't say I didn't enjoy it's mysteries.

supadude2004 It took me nearly 15 minutes to get into this movie. But (gladly!) once it grasped me, there was no turning back. This is an 'existential angst' inspired masterpiece; a movie with more questions than answers. And, it was also a movie that, quite frankly, I wished hadn't ended so soon. Yes... I definitely enjoyed it that much! 'Reconstruction' was as psychologically perplexing as it was beautifully haunting. And I now find it hard to fault it. So... I won't.However, as is the case with most of the movies I adore, I doubt that all people would concur with my estimation. That being said, it would definitely appeal to someone who enjoyed Memento; or maybe even Irreversible.The core theme explored in this movie is that of knowing oneself and those close to you: Appearance versus reality. The true existentialist never finds profound comfort in the purportedly comfortable. For there are often surprises to be found on deeper reflection... I shall say no more. But if you've just digested a couple of chapters of 'Being & Nothingness', I could think of few better ways to further lose yourself in the problems of the mind and existence, than to watch this film afterwards.The acting, screenplay, direction, score, filming and production all very much made the grade. Overall, Reconstruction is a psychologically challenging movie that any thinker should profoundly enjoy (once, that is, one gets into the psychological mysteries which unfold). Albeit, to paraphrase another reviewer: the intellectually challenged, and/or those who need all questions resolved in any movie, should hastily move along to another film.

Dennis Littrell I was having a lot of trouble deciding which of the two women in this film I liked better, the delicate, pale Aimee or the tan, more working-class appearing Simone. Such a dilemma--and one that confronts and confounds protagonist Alex (Nikolaj Lie Kaas). Turns out that it doesn't matter.Yes, trickery--as Danish film maker Christoffer Boe warns us up front with his floating cigarette and magician's hands--is of the essence in this romantic fantasy. What is played with is reality, which of course is what film makers do.For those of you who haven't seen the movie, I recommend that you stop reading here because what follows will likely spoil the movie for you. For those of you who have seen the movie, you might want to see it twice and then read what I have to say.One thing about movies like this is that if you get the "key"--that is, the director's rationale for the way he plays with reality, you more or less get the movie. That's fine and can be enjoyable. If you don't, the movie can be a bit disconcerting and even exasperating.The key here is to realize that it is Aimee's husband August, the novelist, who is the puppeteer. As Vladimir Nabokov liked to remind us, it is the essence of the novelist's art to manipulate the strings. The fact that this story is experienced from Alex's point of view inclines us to look for the key to understanding the film from his point of view. That is the error. Although Alex's persona dominates the film, at the center of the story is August. This is his fantasy and Alex is really just a prop in that fantasy, unable to understand what is happening to him. Indeed Alex--a charming and attractive young man with advanced pick-up skills--is a "gift" from August to his beloved Aimee. It may seem strange to some people that some men so love their wives that they want to give them something that they as the husband never can--that is, an affair with the perfect stranger.The reality of Alex's existence comes from August's pen. In the scenes where Alex finds that his apartment has disappeared, that people don't know him (even his father doesn't know him), that Aimee/Simone think they are seeing him for the first time, the logic is this: what has happened before has been erased and rewritten, that is, reconstructed. Only poor Alex doesn't know since he is just a character in the story.This reminds me a bit of Vanilla Sky (2001) and Abre los ojos (1997) in which the central character is a protagonist in a larger reality controlled by a software program. Here the control is in the hands of the novelist. Note well who gets the girl as the film ends: the guy who wrote the story, the guy who arranged to be giving lectures so that his wife could meet Alex and spend some time with him. Remember too in the scene where August comes back to the hotel room a bit too soon while Aimee is in the shower, and discovers tell-tale signs of Alex's presence. What does he do? He quickly leaves and returns a few minutes later after she has had time to straighten up.In the final analysis, a patriarchal view of love in inexorably wrapped up in control. The patriarchal lover (the husband, August) wants to control his beloved. In this stylish and attractive fantasy, he even controls her reality.(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

kai81 Reconstruction (2003) is not your standard Danish movie. To begin with, it's not a dogma movie but neither is it a crime/comedy in the style of Flickering Lights. You could say it is something quite different, but that would be to easy...What we get is a story that blends the real with the imagined. Krister Henriksson ("Wallander - Innan frosten") plays a Swedish author/lecturer August who is in Copenhagen with his much younger wife Aimee (Maria Bonnevie, "I Am Dina"). As he is busy all day long his wife seems to get more and more estranged from him. In another part of the city is Alex (Nikolaj Lie Kaas, "Flickering Lights") who lives with his girlfriend Simone, also played by Bonnevie. Alex abandons Simone after a dinner at a restaurant and heads for the train. Then suddenly, by coincidence, Alex meets Aimee and they seem to fall in love immediately. But the next morning everything is not what it seemed to be the night before.What begins like a Danish variation of Unfaithful (Gere-Lane-Martinez triangle) quickly becomes much more like Memento. Everything in Alex' life changes and people he used to know don't recognize him, like Simone and his best friend Leo (Nicolas Bro, "The Green Butchers"). What you get then is a wonderful movie with plenty to think about, and certainly one that won't take anything for granted. What is being written down is all we might get, what is real might be imagined.Beautifully shot and directed by Christoffer Boe, it well deservedly won the Golden Camera and Le Label regard jeune awards at Cannes Film Festival.**** (4 out of 5)