Brúðguminn

I saw this last month at the 2009 Palm Springs International Film Festival. This is the fifth film from writer/director and noted Icelandic stage director Baltasar Kormakur. Baltasar and Olafur Egil Egilsson wrote the screenplay as a loose adaptation of Anton Chekhov's stage play Ivanov and the film was developed simultaneously with a stage play that featured the same cast. This was Iceland's official entry as Best Foreign Language Film to the Academy Awards. It has won several awards in Iceland and worldwide and was one of Iceland's biggest domestic box office hits. The setting is on the remote Flatey Island off the north shore of Iceland. University professor Jon (Hilmirsnaer Gudnasson) has an impending marriage to Thora (Laufey Eliasdottir), a former student of his and a girl half his age and only one year after his wife committed suicide. Thor's parents Laurus (Johann Sigurdarsson) and Sisi (Olafia Hronn Jonsdottir) run the islands only store, hotel and tavern and have had a bad business arrangement with Jon. A great cast and a great performance by Thorstur Leo Gunnardsson who plays Jon's rowdy and overbearing friend Borkur who has arrived on the island for the wedding. Great character development central cast and peripheral characters in this romantic drama/comedy. Excellent cinematography by Bergstein Bjorgulfsson and editing by Elisabet Ronaldsdott with art design by Atili Gretarsson and Gretar Reynisson. I would give this an 8.5 out of 10 and recommend it.

This Icelandic comedy takes part on an island outside the northwest coast. They have a church, a priest, German tourists, a grocery, a white trasher who wants to start a golf business and most of all...they've got this middle-aged philosophy teacher, who wants to start a new life with his mentally weak wife.

But he meets this young girl and the circus is on. Or the chaos. The first half of this film is full of flashbacks. The content is both very tragical and most comical, but in this case, they don't match.

A good try perhaps, but not enough of it to make this a good movie. And the flashback technique could have been used with some moderation.

Director of 101 Reykjavik Kormákur wants you to think there will be dark nights and an expensive wedding by misleading you with the title. However there are no dark nights in this Icelandic setting only a married bachelor, a disgraceful golf course, and a money hungry ogre. This dramatic comedy hailed as the most popular Icelandic film of 2008 has the funny dysfunctional family of meet the fockers paired with the drama of a mid day soap opera.

The setting of the movie takes place in beautiful Iceland which was settled by the Norwegians in the 9th century. It's a really interesting place for a setting because it always seems like its day time due to the plentiful amount of sunlight. This movie was filmed during the summer solstice where Iceland experiences 24 hours of sunlight or just every morning to get this affect. With that being said we get to experience both the city and country life in this movie.

Kormákur takes an interesting approach simultaneously showing you the past/present throughout the movie as you get to know the goods about each character. For example we get glimpses of Jon teaching and walking the streets of Reykjavik which occurred earlier in time line. As we're taken back and forth we get to witness first hand the struggles Jon had with his traumatic marriage and how he struggles in the present days before his second marriage. Jon is a man full of problems because you soon find out that he is debt with the mother of his future wife and we get to see how the escalated situation got to this point. I've always enjoyed this approach because in my opinion it has helped me better understand the movie. These "flashbacks" serve as a reminder to me and help me follow the movie. Just like in the epic Fight Club, the past/present film technique really helps you understand the struggle Jon is having with himself and not his wives.

I think its way to easy to label Jon as a bad a husband or a bad man but honestly I saw his actions as a warning. It's not like he tried to get his ex student to fall for him but with that being said he doesn't prevent it and that causes the whole mess. Jon is just a writer looking for inspiration and cant handle being both a husband and a writer; I think this movie is a perfect example of a man torn between his two loves; work and pleasure.

Oh the golf course and how significant it is, in my opinion it is a huge factor that lead to the domino effect. It all starts with the move away from the city and when Jon feels he needs something to do up pops up the GOLF COURSE IDEA. This leads to the debt, enhances his marital problems, and possibly a second wife…..

In conclusion White Night Wedding has imperfect characters in an imperfect world that everyone can relate too. With that being said I think Jon is just a guy who knows what his worth as a partner is and doesn't want to hurt anyone. He understands that he is not suitable for the life as a husband but more of a bachelor. In my eyes this movie was the story of George Clooney getting hustled into a marriage and what becomes of it. The fun is in the chase or being chased after.

Hmmmmm. And an admiring hmm at that. First thing I thought of is the same kind of emotional juxtaposition or almost confusion that rings through this movie as Reykevik 101 (the director's first film). Back then I was very uncomfortable with that, now still not normal per se but more manageable yet kind of refreshing.

Base on an Chekhov's Ivanov, the film alters back and forth wonderfully over time on events before and immediately leading up to a wedding on an island between an professor and a young girl. While the story's theme obviously stated in the movie and told by the director in Q&A, is about searching for happiness and doing the "right" thing, many hilarious moments are interjected directly with the dramatic moments and vice versa. And these moments of emotional swings are very immediate creating a push and pull effect. And this might affect some audience immersing into the story.

Q&A also brought out the same cast also acted in a stage production of the same play during the same time as the film's release in Iceland and was a very successful run. At times though, I did find a certain "lecturing" aspect in a few of the scenes. So although good, still a very idealistic or somewhat protruding kind of meandering.

I don't get why anybody thinks this is a comedy. Comedies are funny. Is it different in Iceland? Well acted but unrelentingly depressing.