Efterskalv

Auteur Magnus von Horn has created something that is quite deeply troubling to watch here as we follow the struggles of the young "John" (Ulrik Munther) as he returns home after a period of incarceration. Whilst we are uncertain as to quite what he did, we do know that he was locked up for two years and that his return home and to school is being treated with pretty universal disdain by his small, tightly-knit, community. What now ensues is a delicately presented evaluation of mob rule. Initially using more psychological tools like shunning before that particular pot over-boils and heads inevitably towards more extreme and dangerous behaviour. Munther delivers a really quite poignant performance here as does Mats Blomgren as his distraught and increasingly conflicted father "Martin" and the assembled supporting cast who offer up an effective degree of animus and toxicity that resonates more as the story asks questions that we know cannot be answered straightforwardly by anyone. I did wonder, on the plausibility front, if the absence of the police or other authorities to keep an eye on this young man either for the protection of himself or his community didn't quite ring true, but perhaps their omission from the thrust of the story managed to further illustrate just how brutal even the most ostensibly civilised can be when their wagons get circled. Not an easy watch, nor a conclusive one, but worth an hour and an half.

Sadly, this debut is very mediocre and Magnus' skills to handle work on a film set are even poorer. The film is a wasted potential of a good idea. Magnus Von Horn has little to offer as a filmmaker.

We, the "good people", believe (from religious or pure moral, humanitarian reasons) that crimes and transgressions should be forgiven (at least if the criminal shows signs of remorse), prison should not punish but rehabilitate, everybody should be given a second chance, etc. etc.

What this movie does is to stand those beliefs on end. The protagonist, John, has committed a murder. His punishment is extremely lenient; he has spent two years in a rather comfortable detention center for minors. He is released and returns to the small town where his family lives and to the school that was the scene of the crime. Naturally, he faces rejection from his fellow students and from the townspeople in general. Even more disturbingly he does not reveal any obvious hint of remorse or even understanding of his crime and shows sociopathic tendencies (obviously, rehabilitation did not work). Thus the people who reject him (especially the family of the victim), although superficially in the wrong are more justified than the "good people."

This is the first feature film by director and writer Magnus von Horn. He has put the tale on screen impeccably; there is no sentimentality, nothing is missing, no scene is prescindible. Acting is first rate; in particular Ulrik Munther brings John to life chillingly. Cinematography by Lukasz Zal fits the action perfectly. A movie to watch.

John has committed a crime but being a juvenile he is only sent away to detention for two years. On his release he returns to his home, father and younger brother Filip. The crime he has committed is one that is too much for the local community and more over his school companions to bear with whom he wishes to remain. This is a community long on memory and short on forgiveness.

Things change when he meets a new girl who has, seemingly, been untouched by his past behaviour and it looks like he might get a second chance. What follows is the slow creeping to the inevitable and desperate acts of a community and family in crisis.

Now that is really well made the acting is excellent and the production values are really high too. It is the story that pulls you along but that only works because the acting is soo convincing and compelling. This is one that is easily recommended to anyone who likes Nordic Noir or even a good teen drama.

This is a film, which struggles to make clear what it wants to be. It is also riddled with inconstancy's which leaves the viewer wondering just what they are being offered. The first part, the arrival, John arrives home from an unspecified period of time, in an unspecified institution, his monosyllabic part of the overall script, quickly lead this watcher to wonder if they might be better off leaving the viewing and reading a newspaper? Moving onto the next part, which fails significantly to clarify the muddy mist, which has descended over the screening. Whilst the action improves significantly, with the arrival of some form of normality, the lack of any relationship between father and son is slightly clarified by the arrival of granddad, but remains boring. The final segment of the film is no clearer than the rest, but at least by then we do have a fuller idea as to just what is going on, but only just. I understand that the film maker, was making an analogy of Swedish Society and the problems that unchecked immigration is bringing Sweden and there way of life. But there are far better ways of getting your message across, that migration is a massive problem and is causing no end of problems between Swedes and uncle tom cobly and all.