Fogo Sagrado!

Holy Smoke has two good performances from Kate Winslet and Harvey Keitel. It also has some nice cinematography and some interesting visual tricks, but apart from that, the film is kind of a mixed bag. The story concerns Winslet's family trying to break her from the hold of a religious sect in India. Harvey Keitel is called in by the family to break Winslet and return her to her family. What follows is a three day odyssey that contains an odd transformation from both characters. I'm not sure how I felt after seeing the film, to tell the truth I'm still not sure what the film was saying.

The interesting and important themes dealt with make this movie well worth watching.

First you think that it will be a simple educational movie about cult addiction and recovery - but then the plot starts to get complicated. Maybe even a bit too complicated, because the end part of the movie feels rather artificial.

The story tells about very important and even universal things: meaning of life, feelings of emptiness, relationships of leaders and their pupils, human nature, need of love. But though those themes are thought provoking, the movie itself lacks a lot as a movie. I cannot help thinking that someone could have made this into a much better movie (shouldn't be the fault of the makers though, many of them have had good artistic achievements).

The persons lack enough depth. The truly complicated nature of people is not - after all - portraited realistically enough in this movie. Because of that you never start to take the movie seriously enough despite the many dead serious themes dealt with.

Very difficult movie to rate. In purely artistic sense, the movie: acting, directing, filming etc. is worth maybe 6/10, but because of the important thought provoking subject, I give it a much better 8/10.

Jane Campion takes us to dark territory again in 'Holy Smoke' but this time with a touch of comedy. I am surprised at the negative response so many have claiming that it is anti-feminist blah blah blah or that it is a comedy with no substance. On the contrary, I find 'Holy Smoke' to be a provocative piece full of substance.

The refreshing novel concept is pretty daring and Campion balances both dark humour and intensity. She tackles various relevant themes such as respect and care within the family (the mother is the only one who seems to be concerned about what happened to her daughter in India while the father is totally indifferent), sexual manipulation, spirituality vs brainwash, power control and so on. The viewer is totally absorbed on how the de-programmer 'saves' Ruth but things take unexpected turns and we start questioning who exactly this PJ Waters is. The relationship between PJ and Ruth gradually becomes reminiscent of that between Lolita and Humbert (from Kubrick's 'Lolita'). The dysfunctional family is portrayed in a funny light but the characters's (especially the women's) despair and struggle is evident such as Mom being concerned about her daughter and Yvonne who is unhappy with her sex life. Campion, with the help of the actors, creates this whole mysterious atmosphere through the characters. We are given some nice glimpses of the isolated dry Australian landscape.

The performances are terrific. Kate Winslet, even though occasionally switches back to her own British accent, acts phenomenally. She already made a brave choice by choosing such a risky role and the actress just shows how comfortable she is in the skin of her character and mesmerizes the viewer. Harvey Keitel does nothing short of a fine job but he is obviously overshadowed by Winslet. The supporting cast, especially Sophie Lee (as Ruth's desperate and sleazy sister-in-law) and Julie Hamilton (as the concerned and loving mother).

'Holy Smoke' is a well-made and brave film. Clearly it is not for everyone. There are very few movies that are both funny and thought-provoking. 'Holy Smoke' is one such captivating film.

If you are a Harvey Keitel fan this movie is worth seeing. I felt the story was somewhat confusing and wandered towards the end. Ruth, the Kate Winslet character, seemed to be a dippy spoiled suburban girl who finds some emotional depth in India. Given the family she grew up with she could have found emotional depth in a local Indian restaurant. Once she returns to Australia and gets deprogrammed she falls back into her air headed ways. Did the difference between the two states have to be so overstated? I didn't like the Ruth character. Ruth lacked depth but had the curiosity to seek it out. She used her youth, beauty and ripe sexuality to manipulate PJ. I would have been manipulated. She was hot. Her feminist sayings did not have conviction but seemed like repeated magazine slogans. If she was ten years older and didn't look as good nude would she still have the same effect on people? Would the story have been the same if Ruth was in her 40's. Ruth lacked substance but had beauty. Beauty killed the PJ beast.

This film is highly misunderstood. Reading some of the reviews I found it hard to believe they were related to the film I'd just seen. This is so much more than a battle of the sexes, it covers lots of ground: boundary in therapy, the legitimacy of mystical experience, the complexities of family dysfunction, the ingenuity of the human spirit when heart and individuality are threatened. I regret that many viewers and reviews seem to have seen the humorous aspect of the film as an indication that the film's themes are lacking in substance. This is a worthy film. I regret that it's not getting its due.