Rückkehr nach Montauk

Only the rough plot structure remains of the Swiss writer Max Frisch (1911-1991) and his story "Montauk". The Irish writer Colm Toibin and the director Volker Schlöndorff do their own thing with it. And that's good!

Stellan Skarsgard is convincing as a man of missed opportunities, a celebrated writer who has absolutely no idea about real life. Just compare his performance to that of the redneck in "Breaking The Waves" (1996) to appreciate what a great actor he is.

And then there is Nina Hoss. The magnificent German actress (Silver Bear 2007 for "Yella") makes the screen shine. Even though she has more text here than usual in her films, her looks and gestures say it all. What a movie star!

The Lola Award winner Susanne Wolff, who has long since proven with the phenomenal "Styx" (2018) that she can carry a film all by herself, plays a smaller role. For me, her performance as "Maria Stuart" (2007) at the Thalia Theater in Hamburg will never be forgotten.

New York City is shown in all the beauty and ugliness this city has to offer. The images by the sea are fantastically beautiful and make this surprisingly successful film float.

Extremely worth seeing!

Volker Schlöndorff has made a career out of screen adaptations of major novels. His Death of a Salesman stands out as an excellent work, with Malkovich and Hoffman in some of the best work of their careers. Return to Montauk is his third movie in ten years, based on the story Montauk by Swiss writer Max Frisch, although it deviates substantially from that story and can almost stand on its own, this story about a writer on a book tour in New York catching up with his past.

It is difficult to point out what went wrong here. His French co-workers cannot be blamed as the editing by Hervé Schneid (Amélie) is excellent, and also the cinematography by Jérôme Alméras doesn't disappoint. From the beginning there is tension in the movie after the inventive screen titles, and the first half of the movie sets up the story quite nice: It makes the impression of a more serious Woody Allen movie and the characters are well established. Stellan Skarsgård is good, Niels Arestrup is an excellent but underrated actor.

However from the moment the trip to Montauk starts the movie loses its interest. First, the story-line from that point is so predictable that it becomes boring. Second, Schlöndorff's somewhat mechanical style doesn't help here either. And last, Nina Hoss is a real disappointment here and cannot pull off the kind and level of acting required. It is especially in the omnipresent medium shots and close-ups that her facial expressions and her body language aren't good enough to carry the movie, while she essentially is in the centerpiece of it.

The theme (writing meeting his past) is so worn-out that nothing new is added to the movie universe here. The style and content of the movie feels old-fashioned and out of date. Times have moved on, so this was not well received at the Berlinale, where several festival visitors eagerly awaiting this movie talked about their disappointment afterwards. And the philosophy parts are so pseudo-intellectual it is an insult to the field.

Movie director Volker Schlöndorff has a number of good films to his name. This is definitely not one of them. Inspired by a novel of the Swiss author Max Frisch, Schlöndorff has said in interviews that the contents is basically autobiographic. The main protagonist (Stellan Skarsgård) is a middle-aged, successful, and womanizing novelist from Northern Europe. He returns to New York and links up with one of his former lovers, the one he considers the true love of his life, a German immigrant who is now an extremely successful attorney in NY (the German star actress Nina Hoss). The two travel to Cape Montauk, where they the novelist tries to revive their former relationship.

Throughout the film feels like a mediocre TV production, and never really takes off. Other reviewers have already given their opinion why. Here is mine. First and foremost, it's difficult to empathize with the protagonists. Who would care about the small problems of this super-successful and super-self-possessed middle-aged couple? What's the point for the audience if the novelist chooses his gorgeous former flame over his gorgeous current wife? Second, the dialogue is stiff and unnatural, especially the parts spoken by Nina Hoss. She doesn't sound fluent and natural like a successful attorney would, but rather like someone who has come fresh from Germany and has memorized her lines. That being said, the quality of the acting is generally quite good, as is the photography. So, the failure really comes down to the script.