Fuckland

I will confess that once I started watching this movie, it had a hold on me that forced me to watch it through to its conclusion. Quite possibly this was some latent voyeuristic tendency in me that wanted to see our hero get it on with his victim, or maybe fascination that they got funding to make, distribute, and show this film that kept me searching it for merit, or possibly some bizarre wish-fulfillment fantasy that there might be a point at the end of all the pain. But no such luck.

So you are warned to not start watching it in the first place, lest the same thing happen to you. There's nothing here worth wasting your hour and a half on.

The first-person mockumentary and the schtick about Fabian's "quest" to impregnate women of the Falklands comes out even more like a sophomoric (maybe Freshman - high school Freshman, that is) film student project than you might imagine. The effect ends up being both sneering at the local inhabitants (who, other than the two professional leads, are in fact real people) as well as engaging in rather disgusting sexual politics (no matter whether you take it all literally or symbolically, it's pointless and sexist).

The reason I ended up watching it all the way is the same reason that once one starts to pick at a scab, there's an irresistable fascination of continuing to do so until it's completely off, even when you know it's bad for you. You just want to see what happens.

In the end, this is rather dishonest filmmaking, because it seems ultimately to have no moral center, no elucidation of the local political situation, nor any place in the type of political-sexual-personal film universe a la Goddard. In short it's got nothing to say and spends a long time pretending it does. Smug would be the one-word tagline.

I'd suggest the filmmakers rent 'Waiting for Guffman' a few times, or hell, even 'Blair Witch Project' if they want to pursue the schtick with a little more style and a little more genuine emotion. Or at least entertainment value.

What the "first 4 letters of this movie`s title" was the director thinking? This movie is crap, and the worst thing is that it tries to be smart or innovate filmmaking when all `Fuckland` does is make the Argentines look stupid. 1/10

I started watching this movie a bit after it started. I guess I might have missed 20 minutes, maybe less. It said docudrama in the onscreen guide...so I wasn't sure if it was real or a drama made to look like a documentary. Or maybe it was a dramatic documentary? I was buying it, believing it was all real. It's not at all exciting...it's actually pretty boring watching the jiggly camera work (I guess it was a hidden camera or something most of the time?) and seeing this boring story play out, with a lead character who is clearly insane...wanting to impregnate a woman to start the argentine line of heritage or whatever his plan is. Tho, it was fairly boring, it's one of those movies you cannot take your eyes off of. I wanted to start watching something else...I was waiting for the next movie on Sundance Channel, but I couldn't turn the channel...and ended up watching till the end. I HAD to force myself to get up and check this site to make sure it was fake...because, if it were real, I would be sick by this guy's behavior with, what seems like, a nice girl who seems to be falling for his crap.

The two lead actors do really nice jobs...until the final scene where Camila tells him the stuff on his camera, they seemed real and honest. During that scene, it was obvious that she's an actress and it was all fake...from what I saw on this site, I still wasn't 100% sure (I only read the summary on the main page.)

It's an okay movie to see once...but, only because it keeps ahold of you. It's not a good movie overall- just one of those rare things that keeps you watching just to see what weird stuff will happen next, and how these people that seem so real yet so fake could do the things they do (fall so quickly into having sex and starting this relationship and all.)

I guess the filmmaker had his point, and he made it...or maybe he was trying to make entertainment, and he failed...either way- not great, but not the worst either.

I watched "Fuckland" a long time ago. I lied if I'd tell that I remember it in detail; what I remember most vividly is the irritation it provoked me and the feeling of a total waste of precious money and time, not only my time and money invested in watching the movie but also the director's.

Supposedly, "Fuckland" is a critic of Argentinians, presenting us (I'm an Argentinian too) as little people who take credit for and even boast about petty, ridiculous victories, and think we're the best thing that God (who is also an Argentinian) created. I'm not going to argue that. It's probably a true statement about a quite big part of the population (the part I despise, by the way). And even if this weren't true, that's not my point. The worst sin "Fuckland" committed was to express such a statement about its own director.

The continuous impression I received was that the director was too busy trying to impress us for sneaking a camera inside the islands to worry about making a good (even a mediocre) movie. Many of the takes made with a hidden camera are pointless. The director chooses to show off with a silly edition of old war takes and his own ones. And there's no plot at all.

Moreover, this movie proudly presents a Dogme certificate before the opening titles, only to disrespect its principles afterwards (for example, by including the director in the credits - another sign of his pride?).

I found the movie offensive, not as an Argentinian, but as a watcher. I felt underestimated. "Fuckland" is simply one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Fuckland is an interesting film. I personally love the Dogma movement. I wish it had lasted longer. It seems to have already died. Many critics tried their damndest to shut it down. I don't know why. It's the most interesting movement to happen in the cinematic world since the French New Wave. Besides Fuckland, I've seen the first three in the series, Festen, Idioterne, and Mifune. They were all great, Festen being a masterpiece, in my opinion. Fuckland isn't up to those others. I was just fascinated with the filmmaking. It's played as if it were a real documentary, with a real person who was so obsessed with his camera that he refused to put it down. At a few points in the film, it becomes clear that it is a work of complete fiction, but that illusion was protracted for an amazing amount of time. I wish that the filmmakers would have come up with something a bit more interesting to put onscreen. It is basically about this guy, Fabian, who is an Argentinian visiting the Faulkland Islands. Argentinians were only in the last couple of months allowed onto the islands, and Fabian plans to impregnate the women with Argentinian children. He sets his eyes on one, and most of the movie is spent on her seduction. The two actors are very natural. Camilla Heany only kind of hints that she is an actress. Fabian Stratas seems completely real. The politics of the film are somewhat confusing to me, since I have only an inkling of the situation surrounding the island and its recent history. I was 3, I think, when the Faulklands were invaded. The final bit of the film doesn't work at all. I don't get what the filmmakers were going for there. Still, Fuckland is an interesting Dogma experiment. It does break some Dogma rules, though, notably the no extra-diagetic music rule. There is a lot of that. 7/10.