Guldkysten

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.

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!

I saw this film yesterday with my family. It was s-l-o-w, boring for about 90% of the time, largely pointless and way too long. On top of this, my entire family agreed with me that there is more than one plot hole which really topped it all off. Disappointing to say the least! Oh yeah, and the music is the most inappropriate I have ever experienced. It is so totally out of touch with the film and the age of slavery - some strange pounding techno. At times it goes into much more soothing and pleasant style, which I really likes, but I totally stopped concentrating on the film at least 5 times, because I was wondering what the hell that style of music was doing in that scene?!

The only good thing I can say about it is that it's really really beautiful and it makes an effort to show the geography and nature of Africa. Jakob Oftebro is a terrific actor but he can't save this film.

I was actually surprised I only fell asleep once, and after the film I was relieved to find out that mom, dad and brother felt the exact same way. This film is slow, boring and totally without a flow. Several of the characters are really poorly worked through and very unimpressive. On top of all this, there was plenty of that pointless thing I really hate: hand held camera! 98% of the footage is shaky because it is not filmed on a tripod or steady-cam, and I just absolutely abhor it!! I see no excuse for all that shaky footage when it doesn't seem to serve any purpose - here it is being used through even the most peaceful and tranquil scenes, so it is obviously just there to make the director appear more intellectual. Failing miserably, I must add.

I highly recommend giving this one a miss. It's the poorest film I have seen in years.

No one enters the tropics unpunished. Joseph Wulff, a young and talented entrepreneur, naturalist and all around progressive type, is eager to put this tired old saying to bed. Armed with a coffee plantation patent from the King of Denmark, Wulff is determined to beat the odds in an 1836 Danish colonial outpost in West Africa. However, his companions have other ideas in mind. Wulff soon learns that even while Denmark was the first European country to ban the slave trade, evil and human cruelty still flourish as strong as ever.

The film is stylish, sensory and resplendent. I was immersed in the ocean swells, tropical light, exotic dances and forest flowers. The story is loosely based on an actual character and Wulff is admirable. He empowers others, sustains the natural world, promotes the good of the community and romances his new bride, Flitsbue, from afar. "Plants are a part of you," maintains Wulff "fruits belong to all." Despite a great theme and an intriguing main character, the film is hampered by unrealistic acting. It is hard to imagine the actors straying far from a tin of Danish butter cookies much less entering the African frontier. Outside of the beautiful imagery and storyline, the film lacks depth and substance. Seen at the 2016 Miami International Film Festival.

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.