I can't even begin to tell you what this movie was about because the photography was so bad. A good 65% of it is so dark that you can't discern anything going on. Watching this crap, many questions spring to mind. Was the DP trying to emulate the work of Nestor Almendros on DAYS OF HEAVEN by shooting only ambient lighting? How could the director, after watching several days of pitch black dailies, not decide that it might be time to invest in one lighting kit? How did the editor so seamless cut scene after scene of pitch black on pitch black so effortlessly? What photography does come through is muddy and ugly as hell. Had the cinematographer ever SEEN a movie before? I doubt it. Otherwise, concepts like "composition" and "backlight" might have played a part in the framing. When you look up cinematic incompetence in the dictionary, you'll find this second only to BACKWOODS. At least in THAT movie you could see what was going on.<br /><br />Worst movie I've seen in years. And yes, I've seen Turkish STAR WARS.