Guldkysten

'Guldkysten' exposes the viewer to life at a Danish fort on West Africa's Gold Coast (now Ghana) in 1836, focusing on a young Danish officer who goes out to start a coffee plantation as an alternative to taking slaves. The slave trade had officially stopped but was covertly continuing, which he discovers during his stay. The film then focuses on his reaction to that, and how those around him respond in turn.

The plot is vaguely based on the life of a real person, but was poorly received by some critics for mixing a historical character with a lot of fiction. This was apparently because the main female character became ill during filming, and so the plot had to be radically altered.

I personally think the result is a sensual masterpiece in creating the powerful and conflicting emotions you would have had if you had been on the Gold Coast in 1836 – the elegance of the early 19th Century costumes contrasting with the utter depravity of many of those living on the fort; the beauty of West Africa's landscape and nature against the spectre of disease that killed so many who dared to visit; and of course the conflict between the ideals of Christianity and the Enlightenment against the base exploitation of slavery.

One of the most visually spectacular and haunting films I have ever seen. I have only given 9 stars because I thought Wulff's descent into madness was over-exaggerated. He could have become very withdrawn instead, which I think would have been more realistic.

All in all, a much needed film to bring home to today's audience an experience of one of the darker sides of Denmark's past.

Oftebro is a great actor. The setting (the Danish slave colonies) is interesting. They are willing to experiment with music. But sadly, the movie is quite bad.

With heavy handed symbolism (flags, horned skulls, etc), good-or-evil characters, a messy storyline and ill fitting soundtrack, Guldkysten will sadly become another failed Scandinavian epic movie. A movie about a slaving colony with a protagonist ahead of his time (sharing the viewer's opinions on slavery) standing up against evil old fashioned slavers - we ought to be past these kind of stories by now. While I did enjoy the more experimental music, I had a hard time relating it to whatever was going on in the story. The movie is at its best when its characters borders on the insane, and the last quarter of the movie is by far the best one.

Oh well. Onwards and upwards, Scandinavian movie makers!

This is not a real review, it should be understood more as a collection of impressions on the film.

Who knows what to say about this film, well surely one word that describes it well is boring, but not boring in the classic sense of the word because many interesting things happen in the film, but boring because the film alternates parts where literally everything happens in a very confusing and films where absolutely nothing happens and where the spectator's attention span is lowered to truly minimal levels. This is not to say that the film is insufficient, for goodness sake it is very interesting, but if it had been even more entertaining it would have been better.

Method acting? Check! Two actors actually urinating on a third. Actor starving himself half to death? Check! Jakob Oftebro lived on an almond a day. Provoking? Check. At least some Danish nationalists will raise eyebrows at characters singing royal hymns while group raping African slave women.

I could go on with the bullet points that many critics will check off before arriving at a higher than average review. But these common features are far from enough to entice me.

This movie was, however, close to capturing me. By its sometimes dreamlike filming; the naturalist main character's musings; the imminent conflict between the scientist and the religious fundamentalists pushed aside by their common basic decency opposing the brutality of slavery; the long overdue treatment of that historical period and place.

But then there is the very special and in my opinion horrible techno music soundtrack which at the very least is completely alien to the time and setting. There is the slow, abrupt progress of the story. The lack of belief in most of the actors. The apparent difference between historical facts and this fiction; i.e. the main character being a pure hero while the historical person was actually a slave owner.

And at the end of the day: How much do the descendants of the victims of slavery care for a movie about it, that portrays a white man as the sole hero and liberator of slaves?

Didn't like it. Hated the music.

The movie does not have great resources and not even excellent actors but it is made following the cruel and inhuman reality of what has been the history in certain unfortunate places and there is always the usual story of evil black and white men going against justice and law for personal enrichment.

The scenography of Ghana is very beautiful because nature is very beautiful and man is the one who destroys it.