Inmersión

Seriously, this movie ended without any destination being reached. It set it up quite well, but there was no point, no conclusion, no deep reveal, no destination traveled to, I really enjoyed the scenery and some of the dialog, it was like a class on marine biology, and some average concepts on life, but then it just left it there, nothing...... Bit of a waste of the journey if you either don't have anything to say or you don't know how to convey it.

Trust me, the question in my title is leading somewhere with regard to this movie. And I'll reward you with my favorite art joke at the end of this review. But for now just indulge me. Have you visited an art gallery, or would you like to if you had the chance? All the NOs may leave the building (no hard feelings, I'm just trying to save you 112 mins of your time). All the YESs and MAYBEs and I GUESS IF I REALLY NEEDED TO USE THE BATHROOMs, please read on.

"Submergence" is a powerful film which, much like a painting, defies any attempt to sum it up in 500 words or less. Even the genre that it's listed under, "drama, romance, thriller", is as misleading as calling "2001: A Space Odyssey" a scifi flick. The story follows 2 people on 2 opposite sides of the world, each coming to grips with their own likely death, their own duty to a cause that no one cares about, and the thing that binds this whole story together: their love for each other. Thus "Submergence" is the ultimate long-distance-relationship, but with a clever existential spin: neither one knows if the other is alive, or even if the other person is still in love with them.

That's all that needs to be said about the plot because the plot is secondary to the real power of this film. I don't need to tell you about the guns, grenades, suicide bombers, sinking submarines, psycho soldiers, or James McAvoy's cute pet centipede. All that stuff is just dressing atop the great lines and magnificent imagery. If you watch this flick, I highly recommend turning the subtitles on so you don't miss any of the wonderful dialogue and poetic thoughts that are peppered throughout.

Back to the art gallery, as promised. It shouldn't come as too much of a surprise that director Wim Wenders considers himself an artist/photographer foremost, while to him being a filmmaker is almost secondary. It's evident in all of his films that he's telling us stories through visual composition rather than action. If you're new to Wim Wenders, this is a pretty good place to start because "Submergence" is very poetic and challenging, but it's not so abstract that it might lose you (such as his earlier masterpieces from the 1980s "Paris, Texas" and "Wings of Desire"). Wim Wenders is really like a classic painter who happens to have the technology to make films. So with that in mind, I think if you're ready for an "art gallery" experience, then this flick is for you.

Oh right. I promised you an art joke. Ok, here goes. A woman and her dumb boyfriend from (insert name of place you want to ridicule here) go to an art gallery. The dumb boyfriend looks at a painting and says "that looks like something the cat threw up." Woman says: "That's a Monet." Dumb boyfriend moves to the next wall and says "that looks like some chick stuck her face in a blender." Woman says: "That's a Picasso." Dumb boyfriend moves to the next wall and says "that looks like a monkey picking his nose." Woman says: "That's a mirror."

In spite of its very low 19% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, I watched it because of the lead cast, namely James McAvoy and Alicia Vikander. It's indeed not a great movie, but I didn't feel it deserved such animosity. It's just a plain, "meh", movie. A man and a woman meet during holidays in some sort of vacation village at the French Atlantic coast. He's an agent from the MI6 and she's a oceanographer (he presents himself under the cover of another job). They each take a few days off before an important mission; for him to go obtain intelligence about an IS leader in Africa and her to dive in a deep-sea submarine to find about life at the bottom of the ocean. They fall in love and promise that they'll see each other again. As she engages into the sea, he is taken prisoner, and somehow... (insert some sort of mystical, spiritual stuff). Well, the movie doesn't quite deliver on the spiritual part; the two story-lines just have really nothing in common.

I didn't really mind this lack of overall consistency. There is the first part which is the long, full-fledged love arc in the vacation village. There are some cheesy dialogues and mood music that are reminiscent of weekdays afternoon TV movies but the important cast and the thematic around their characters' jobs (MI6 agent an oceanographer) gave me enough goodwill to care and find some sort of chemistry in their relationship. The second part alternates between him being a prisoner of IS and her going to her day-to-day oceanographic research (before the final dive). Again, it's quite superficial and nothing really stands out, but it's followable. There are nice shots of the sea and of the submarine.

On the technical side the sound mixing was bad and it was hard to understand the dialogues over the background sounds. Some of the framing was awkward, again evocative of TV movies. I watched it without minding, and went on with my life. I've seen way worse and endured way more boredom in films that are considered way better.

I am shocked at the negative feedback to this film. It is by no means perfect, but I was moved and genuinely enjoyed it.

The Good: -The acting is fantastic from every performer. -the MUSIC -it's beautiful to look at

• James's story I felt to be very interesting and compelling.

The Negative: -I feel they took too long introducing the characters and letting their love form. On one hand, yes it's nice to not see feelings rushed and force you to try and care. But on the other hand the film isn't about them falling in love, it's about their passions for their respective causes, and that bringing out the best in both of them by seeing it through their love. -Danny's story wasn't near as interesting to me as James's was. Not because of the performances, but I believe the script could have used some tightening, and focused more on the purpose of her expedition instead of her not being able to focus on it because he hasn't replied to her.

Overall:

Solid film, I think it is a bit too long but at the same time I didn't expect it to end, it is very sad and makes you think for awhile after. It's honestly in my opinion, a great film to watch by yourself and just invest yourself into.

7/10

I watched it at Göteborg film festival som days ago. I really wanted to like this but its just didnt click for me.

The actors fail to sell the love story, they dont connect on the screen and that technobabble from Alicia Vikanders character doesnt make it better.

Two parallell stories at once. For this to work the love story need to be sold, but it just doesnt work. I dont belive it when the main characters get outburst, the reaction feels to theatric and it becomes a make belive reaction for show.

To really make the terrorist look bad and evil they put in things that just oversell the evilness of the terrorist. Yes I get it, they are the badguys but it becomes a bit to much.

Sorry. I really wanted to enjoy this but it didnt work for me.