Moffie

What is it like to be a 16-year-old, having to spend 2 years in the army? It is 1981 South Africa, and Nick is due for army service, undergoing basic training, then joining the border clashes with the communists in Namibia. The biggest rule in basic training is to not catch the attention of the Sergeant. Also, in a hypermasculinized culture, don't get caught doing anything "moffie", i.e. "faggot".

Because of the taboo against homosexuality, there is little in the nature of a gay story - just some hints here and there. It would not take much cutting to remove the gay angle, except to show that the army considers moffies to be people to be beaten and sent for psychiatric treatment.

Also, while it was useful for recognition for Nick to look the youngest in his squad, it just seems weird that what should be a group of 16-year-old recruits would look so old.

Let's start by saying what this film is not. It's not an historical film. It's not a gay drama. It's not a documentary. It's not a war film.

What is it? It's a picture of a young man who barely understands that he is attracted to guys negotiating his way through military training, relationships in a brutal and macho culture, actual patrols in the bush and a strongly forbidden relationship. Worse, he is doing this as a native English speaker with an Afrikaans name.

I started like this because I think several reviewers may have wanted different things from the film as mentioned in their appraisals of it. That they didn't get it speaks, for me, to the excellence of the film which holds the interest throughout. We didn't need bludgeoning with details of the border war, a weepy romance, grisly scenes of gore and shattered flesh. Thank goodness we didn't have them.

We see, despite the in-your-face military training and the rudeness of barracks life, something that is almost impressionistic in its alighting from scene to scene some of which are respites from the relentless horror of instilling hard, soulless conformity into a company of disparate kids and some of which are flashbacks. The film is happening, we know the outlines of the situation, but it's as if it's happening outside the bounds of the events in the world at large which are incidental yet essential to the film's progress.

The loathsome oppressiveness of life in South Africa in the 80s is shown - obligatory church services, indoctrination, no dissent brooked, patriotism compulsory, psychological torture for those who do not conform, medical interventions amounting to abuse for those suspected of being gay.

In this poisonous atmosphere, Nick finds fleeting happiness with a fellow recruit Stassen.

After the conscription period, Nick returns home and fulfils his promise to see the sea together. The ending is perfect and equivocal and it leaves the viewer to use his or her own mind as to what might have come after.

As for the alleged inaccuracies in the script, so what? It's a film. I didn't care that the guys hadn't been shaved to a number two. So what if the sergeant would have normally been a corporal doing the basic training?

It's a film that will certainly stay with me.

Moffie is an Afrikaan slang word for being Gay. Throughout this film and especially during the atrociously brutal army training it is used along with many other anti-Gay words, and the numbing repetition of the damning words are meant to brainwash the new army recruits. Those who commit homosexual acts are ' sent away ' and are brutalised: one having endured so much under this torture blows his brains out in front of a group of soldiers. Each country has its hushed up and taboo issues and no doubt South Africa would no doubt not have entirely agreed with this brave and extraordinary film. I can also understand why certain Gay/Queer people would be unhappy that the homosexuality was toned down, but then I am not. The few scenes of intimacy are heartbreakingly tender and the most one sees is a tentative kiss on the mouth. This is enough in a film that shows how all tenderness between men is punched, hit, and inwardly murdered out of them. This is a War film that has little heroics and if some of the directors and actors of the spate of War films in the 1950's/60's could see this masterpiece they would probably shudder away from it. I will not give away spoilers about the War scenes but only mention that one killing of one ' enemy ' burnt itself into my brain. This was no hero stuff, but an authorized murder, and the ' killer ' looks numbly down at what he has done and the dying man in his agonizing last breaths stares up at him, telling us more about War than any other film I have seen. Only a great and sensitive director could have shown the inward horrors of War so clearly, but not emphatically. In the same way the lack of emphasis rather than the sexually explicit showing of homosexuality. Overall it is a heart breaking film about what men are forced to do. The ending for me was desolate, but then what else should I have felt ? The fatal word ' Moffie ' destroys in so many ways. As for the acting it was perfect. An Oscar contender ? I sadly doubt it.

I saw this film at the Glasgow Film Festival. The film is beautifully shot and tells the gripping tale of 16 year old Nicholas's two year of conscripted service in 1980's South African army. At the same time Nicholas is coming to terms with his sexuality. The film pulls no punches in setting out Nicholas's initial experiences. The acting by all concerned is very good and the film moves along at a reasonable pace. My only criticism is that the ending is a bit dragged out but overall that is minor as the film is a very good watch.

This South African film would appear to tread a well-worn path; and it's certainly true that the military training (and also war itself) is hell genre is one that can often feel over-familiar. Many of the tropes we know well are there, but this stands out for a couple of reasons. Telling the story of the white male experience of conscription in apartheid South Africa is an under-explored context in cinema; and to do so from a South African, coloured director makes this all the more striking. Also served by a disciplined running-time, the film manages to examine a particularly (Afrikaans) brand of white South African toxic masculinity with an unflinching but compassionate eye. That the legacy of this still haunts South Africans of all ages and races makes this all the more important. The title is an Afrikaans slang word used to offensively denigrate gay people, and it's this territory that the film specifically deals with; it's often a hard watch, but never relentlessly so and never excessive. Though it is very much rooted in the local context, it will work well for viewers no matter their nationality. This film suffered from an abbreviated cinema release due to lockdown, and deserves a wider audience.