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

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Not a single word or image is futile, every human issue is debated (love, parenthood, family, religion, art, faith, society, politics, belonging, friendship, money, principles, etc.), how did they do it?

As a big fan of Nuri Ceylan, my expectations of this movie was very high. However, it had too many unnecessary conversations from the beginning to the end. I felt really boring and I could not find any scenes to watch. All I can say is that I was very disappointed with it. And it is not worth to spend your time and money.

It has been 21 years since Ceylan shot his first feature film Kasaba, whose main theme was an intellectual young man's desperate, family-stuck life in the countryside with no way out. After this film throughout his film career he focused on different themes as well of course, from middle class criticism (Climates) to film noir (Three Monkeys). But, being from Turkey, eventually in his last movies he returned to the countryside tales again. Especially this movie, The Wild Pear Tree, seemed to me as if Ceylan suffered from a partial amnesia and forgot that he shot the movie Kasaba. So he blended this "brand new film idea" with his recently developed film aesthetics and here we have The Wild Pear Tree.In his first movies Ceylan barely had a story, he only had "themes". The rest of the movie was wonderful photography and this is what he got famous for. Then, founding clever collaborations, he learnt how to tell stories as well. But the question here is: does he really have a new story to tell? Turkey has changed a lot since Kasaba, but Ceylan's representations look like they are here to stay eternally. For instance, while Ceylan still hold on to the "intellectual stuck in the countryside" stereotype, intellectuals in the Turkish countryside either made it to the metropolises or they are replaced/outdated by the emerging religious elite.So instead of telling a new story, Ceylan seems like he chose to "garnish" what he already has, with neverending dialogues unattached to each other. Dialogue with the girl, dialogue with the mayor, with the businessman, with the writer, with the police friend, with the imams and with this and this and this. Kind of a video game, one "countryside monster" at a time. So I think this movie is a rococo remake of minimalist Kasaba.So if you tolerate the theatrical lines in the first dialogues, the movie is a nice one to see. But in comparison to the last 2 movies of Ceylan, this is certainly a step backwards (and surprisingly, this backwardness is evident also in the photography).

As a lover of Nuri Bilge Ceylan's (NBC) previous professional works, i found this one rather raw comparing the other films of him. First and biggest con of Ahlat Agaci is, NBC's approach to Anatolian people. He looks like he becomes more and more ignorant to Anatolians and sees less good inside them, so you can clearly feel as NBC's popularity among EU and other world climbs higher, his vision of his people got blurred and twisted by his political and ideological views.He once said while receiving greatest prize ever; "I dedicate the prize to my lonely and beautiful country." But now, without his plain and crystal clear artistry, his country is more beautiful but lonelier.As the others cons of the film, all the followers of NBC's works would agree that technical specifications and awe inspiring photography is clearly absent when you compare Ahlat Agaci to Bir Zamanlar Anadolu'da or Kis Uykusu.Conclusion; not a very bad movie but, not arguably worst of his.