Certainly, one has to go deeper when talking about this movie. The scenes of violence are not the subject themselves, but rather "vehicles" to get you to a certain point. However, does that make a good movie?<br /><br />I experienced this movie as a big metaphor to many issues that were/are present in the Balkans. The quality of the movie is doubtlessly reflected in Paskaljevics ability to manipulate various elements and compose them to make effective points.<br /><br />One of the points that are being made by the movie is that everybody is getting hurt. And Paskaljevic makes it clear that there are no exceptions. As many of previous comments pointed out, one of the main themes of the movie is the question of guilt. As somebody previously noted, even the most innocent characters end up doing very wrong things (the bus driver). Is the whole thing somebody's fault? How did it all start? It seems to me that Paskaljevics wants to get across that it was all an accident!!! (The very beginning and the car accident scene). Are accidents anybody's fault? Why would somebody hunt you down, even want to hurt you if you scratched his old beetle?<br /><br />If one of the premises is that this movie comments on the situation in the Balkans (very likely does) at the end of the 20th century (And The Balkans include Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo among others), than I would feel very UNCOMFORTABLE in Paskaljevics shoes making such statement about accidents or everyone getting hurt equally with no exceptions. If you're not clear about what I am trying to say, try finding CREDIBLE history books about the events that followed the split of former Yugoslavia (what happened in Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo among others).<br /><br />The moral dimension of such statements greatly destroys other interesting points like the History of Balkans in terms of "war/peace" cycles (The Boxing/Drinking scene "as long as we're in good health" mentality, etc.., - i think it was already mentioned before)