Even Dwarfs Started Small (Auch Zwerge haben klein angefangen) Reviews

  • Dec 28, 2020

    like having a freakish dream except this wastes an 1-1/2 hours of your time. was hoping Mr. Herzog would create a film that could be added to some of his other great works but it wasn't

    like having a freakish dream except this wastes an 1-1/2 hours of your time. was hoping Mr. Herzog would create a film that could be added to some of his other great works but it wasn't

  • Jul 14, 2018

    Absolutely dreadful. This could have made an interesting short (as the premise of an all-dwarf film is quite arresting) but watching 90 minutes of cackling dwarfs creating mayhem is enough to try anyone's patience. Still, maybe this is what gave Joe Dante the inspiration for Gremlins so something positive may have come out of it.

    Absolutely dreadful. This could have made an interesting short (as the premise of an all-dwarf film is quite arresting) but watching 90 minutes of cackling dwarfs creating mayhem is enough to try anyone's patience. Still, maybe this is what gave Joe Dante the inspiration for Gremlins so something positive may have come out of it.

  • Nov 02, 2017

    This has simply got to be one of the oddest films ever made. It's hilariously unique, establishing some of the running themes in Herzog's succeeding work, and not failing to create a brilliant allegory.

    This has simply got to be one of the oddest films ever made. It's hilariously unique, establishing some of the running themes in Herzog's succeeding work, and not failing to create a brilliant allegory.

  • May 25, 2017

    Werner Herzog's strange film is often compared to Tod Browning's 1932 classic FREAKS, but the similarities stop there. Herzog's film is an oddity in itself, and unlike the cast of FREAKS, never manages to recognize its own stars as normal people.

    Werner Herzog's strange film is often compared to Tod Browning's 1932 classic FREAKS, but the similarities stop there. Herzog's film is an oddity in itself, and unlike the cast of FREAKS, never manages to recognize its own stars as normal people.

  • Feb 14, 2017

    I have to start with the reviews of others who call themselves critics. Before viewing EDSS, as a longtime film watcher from a longtime film family, having a grandfather that was a distributor and an uncle that was a producer "The Blob" etc. I have several comments. As a child I carried reels to theatres and even got called in to run projectors when a projectionist called in sick. I have been around the block with film, and I vended films for 20 years. It is important you know I am not a "reviewer". I hate reviewers, as I find most are self riteous and obnoxious with a holier than thou attitude towards filmmaking. No need to vent further. I am not sure EDSS needs as much discussion as the critics have given it..Like all disturbing films it calls for discussion as to what is this film about? I have learned in my 60 years of watching film that often what a film is about is unimportant. We often forget that film is a "moving picture" in any picture the single most significance is the image itself. Film making doesn't have to be "about" anything. All the discussion about Herzog and the meaning of this visceral film to me is meaningless without understanding that the imagery is the single most important part of any film. The 28 dwarfs who were cast specifically for the script that Herzog wrote are likely not professional actors. They do their parts to the best of their ability following Herzog's lead as a director. Is the film surreal? is the film a farce? I say does it matter? The point being the imagery alone is significantly disturbing enough that it makes the audience think. It makes the critics discuss what they assume Herzog's intentions are. I did not love this film, however, I understand that all good Art makes me think and my reaction whether positive or negative is important in that if I have a strong reaction either way, the film has made it's point in being Art. Without positive or negative reaction film fails. Yes, I found the imagery disturbing even Diane Arbus like in comparing still to moving photography. It isn't imagery I want to own, but it's imagery that I react to when I look at it. Therefor Herzog succeeds in making a good film. It doesn't matter if it is supposed to be surreal or Werner is simply playing a personal joke on the audience. Tearing it apart and guessing why it was made and what it means have little importance to the value of film. That critics have determined it is political or surreal they have lowered themselves to the misunderstanding of the "moving picture"medium. I do think that EDSS was shot in black and white for a reason and the contrast and mood of the film are elevated in the black and white format it was shot in. I hate giving stars, it is so opinionated. I prefer thumbs up or thumbs down. So Herzog gets the thumbs up for this effort even if only for the disturbing imagery he creates in this odd film.

    I have to start with the reviews of others who call themselves critics. Before viewing EDSS, as a longtime film watcher from a longtime film family, having a grandfather that was a distributor and an uncle that was a producer "The Blob" etc. I have several comments. As a child I carried reels to theatres and even got called in to run projectors when a projectionist called in sick. I have been around the block with film, and I vended films for 20 years. It is important you know I am not a "reviewer". I hate reviewers, as I find most are self riteous and obnoxious with a holier than thou attitude towards filmmaking. No need to vent further. I am not sure EDSS needs as much discussion as the critics have given it..Like all disturbing films it calls for discussion as to what is this film about? I have learned in my 60 years of watching film that often what a film is about is unimportant. We often forget that film is a "moving picture" in any picture the single most significance is the image itself. Film making doesn't have to be "about" anything. All the discussion about Herzog and the meaning of this visceral film to me is meaningless without understanding that the imagery is the single most important part of any film. The 28 dwarfs who were cast specifically for the script that Herzog wrote are likely not professional actors. They do their parts to the best of their ability following Herzog's lead as a director. Is the film surreal? is the film a farce? I say does it matter? The point being the imagery alone is significantly disturbing enough that it makes the audience think. It makes the critics discuss what they assume Herzog's intentions are. I did not love this film, however, I understand that all good Art makes me think and my reaction whether positive or negative is important in that if I have a strong reaction either way, the film has made it's point in being Art. Without positive or negative reaction film fails. Yes, I found the imagery disturbing even Diane Arbus like in comparing still to moving photography. It isn't imagery I want to own, but it's imagery that I react to when I look at it. Therefor Herzog succeeds in making a good film. It doesn't matter if it is supposed to be surreal or Werner is simply playing a personal joke on the audience. Tearing it apart and guessing why it was made and what it means have little importance to the value of film. That critics have determined it is political or surreal they have lowered themselves to the misunderstanding of the "moving picture"medium. I do think that EDSS was shot in black and white for a reason and the contrast and mood of the film are elevated in the black and white format it was shot in. I hate giving stars, it is so opinionated. I prefer thumbs up or thumbs down. So Herzog gets the thumbs up for this effort even if only for the disturbing imagery he creates in this odd film.

  • Oct 22, 2016

    Outo mutta samalla omituisella tavalla kiehtova. Kääpiöitä ja heliumia. En tiedä käytettiinkö tässä kääpiöitä hyväksi... Meno oli kyllä todella himmeetä. Tämä leffa vaan pitää nähdä uskoakseen. Ei tätä kyllä toista kertaa viitsi katsoa.

    Outo mutta samalla omituisella tavalla kiehtova. Kääpiöitä ja heliumia. En tiedä käytettiinkö tässä kääpiöitä hyväksi... Meno oli kyllä todella himmeetä. Tämä leffa vaan pitää nähdä uskoakseen. Ei tätä kyllä toista kertaa viitsi katsoa.

  • Dec 04, 2015

    http://filmreviewsnsuch.blogspot.com/2015/12/even-dwarfs-started-small.html

    http://filmreviewsnsuch.blogspot.com/2015/12/even-dwarfs-started-small.html

  • Mar 19, 2015

    The weirdest Herzog.

    The weirdest Herzog.

  • Jan 11, 2015

    "Even Dwarfs Started Small" is a funny, perplexing, and weird experience and this well-shot black and white movie is ninety minutes that are hard to shake, to forget.

    "Even Dwarfs Started Small" is a funny, perplexing, and weird experience and this well-shot black and white movie is ninety minutes that are hard to shake, to forget.

  • Dec 27, 2014

    This early film from Werner Herzog showcases that the director was seemingly always a maestro of both the surreal and the natural. Shot entirely with dwarf actors, the film certainly has enough motif to it already, but combine that with alluring black-and-white filming, bizarre humor and a surprising sense of rebellion, and it's a film that the work of an utmost auteur. Maybe not one of the director's best in the long-run, but slightly lesser Herzog is still a must-see!

    This early film from Werner Herzog showcases that the director was seemingly always a maestro of both the surreal and the natural. Shot entirely with dwarf actors, the film certainly has enough motif to it already, but combine that with alluring black-and-white filming, bizarre humor and a surprising sense of rebellion, and it's a film that the work of an utmost auteur. Maybe not one of the director's best in the long-run, but slightly lesser Herzog is still a must-see!