Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

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

silentgpaleo Vilmos Zsigmond was the cinematographer for several 60's exploitation films, as well as art films. He's worked with some great directors, and his skill with the reflected image is undeniable(who else could make BLOOD OF GHASTLY HORROR look so good?).But, I'm afraid, THE LONG SHADOW is a wash-out. This is not entirely Vilmos' fault. The script is kind of predictable, in the sense that it goes nowhere.Michael York (just a few years away from AUSTIN POWERS) stars as the son of an actor. The father has died, and York(a dead ringer for his father) takes over the role in his father's last, unfinished film. Liv Ullman plays York's father's old lover, and she falls for the transformed York.Strange? Yes, a little. But, the film is so subtle that it hardly makes any points with these plotlines. I had to watch the film twice just to understand what it was all about. Perhaps that was the idea, although I didn't think it was really intentional.Once again, I blame the script. York is good in his part, and Ullman(who I cannot say enough praises about)is solid in a role that seems difficult for anyone to grasp.There are also some very slow-moving portions, which slow any plot progression down to a halt. What little plot there is never comes to a satisfying conclusion, anyhow. Some of the dialogue makes no sense(I'm sorry, maybe I'm numb).So, I still wonder if I'll ever fully understand THE LONG SHADOW. But, the cinematography is great, and I can't wait to see Vilmos next film. Maybe something with more of a heartbeat to it.Because THE LONG SHADOW is kind of a odd, cold fish.