23 reviews
Second-time Icelandic director Baltasar Kormákur presents "The Sea", a film that, if you have a positive view of people, will make you think a second time about human qualities.
As this is only the fourth film I see from Iceland, my view of Icelandic cinema has not changed- it's very good, actually. Kormákur continues where he left off with "101 Reykjavik", and plunges into Ólafur Haukur Símonarsons play with fierce misanthropy. There are two characters with a few positive traits (Morten and the French woman, forgot her name), but these two are outsiders and only supporting characters. I hated each and every member of this family, but that didn't stop me from enjoying the film, which is a peek into the most base instincts of human behaviour: adultery, greed, racism, incest, apathy and hate. "The Sea" is a bit over the top at times, but it is never ruined by digressions or by lack of reality with which it treats its characters.
The Icelandic people seem to be treated by their directors (again I'm generalizing a bit since Fridrik Thor Fridriksson and Kormákur are the only directors I know) as a very tough, ruggish people who don't let mistreatment ruin their joy of life. Early in the film, the youngest son of Thordur (the patriarch and owner of the fishing industry), tells his French girlfriend that when his sister was raped as a young girl, their father reacted more aggressively towards her because she became upset, than with the rapist who ruined his only (or is it?..) daughter's life. "An idiot raped by an idiot", their father claimed. This statement is very characteristic of the film. The plot is constructed around Thordur, now an ageing man who wants to gather all his children and their families to tell them something important: They are greedy and they'll get nothing from him. His children with their partners, his wife and his mother are then gathered at his house, and we get to know them bit by bit, until we learn how they became this family and then your sympathy will just decline. The opening hour is extremely funny, which is one of this film's best assets. But it's funny in a cruel way, and the cruelty is just escalating throughout the motion picture, until there is nothing but cruelty left at the end. Thordur's mother, Kata, is portrayed as very funny, but totally ignorant of the world and she is not nice to the people around her. Thordur's three legitimate children were born by a dying mother, and throughout her illness Thordur kept his wife's sister (Kristin) as his mistress, in their house. The children's mother's sister (Kristin) is presently Thordur's wife, and she also has a grown up daughter (Maria), who is in love with Thordur's youngest son (I've forgot a lot of names, even if I saw the film yesterday! sorry), even though they grew up as brother and sister. This theme of incest is perhaps the most sickening theme in the film, but it's nice compared with the greed of Thordur's children and Thordur's inhuman, megalomaniac behaviour towards his kids.
This is a film which is at times hard to watch because of the uncomfortable human relationships. But the actors, the direction and the cinematography is impeccable; brilliant. Jean-Louis Vialard has captured Iceland's wild but beautiful nature magnificently: especially when Thordur's daughter Ragnheidur, her Norwegian husband (Morten) and her son drive through the mountains to get home to her father- the photography struck me as superb. The sense of a decaying village is perfectly portrayed by Kormákur. The themes of this film is reminiscient of a master like Rainer Werner Fassbinder, and it struck me as just as misanthropic as Ulrich Seidls brilliant "Dog Days".
As this is only the fourth film I see from Iceland, my view of Icelandic cinema has not changed- it's very good, actually. Kormákur continues where he left off with "101 Reykjavik", and plunges into Ólafur Haukur Símonarsons play with fierce misanthropy. There are two characters with a few positive traits (Morten and the French woman, forgot her name), but these two are outsiders and only supporting characters. I hated each and every member of this family, but that didn't stop me from enjoying the film, which is a peek into the most base instincts of human behaviour: adultery, greed, racism, incest, apathy and hate. "The Sea" is a bit over the top at times, but it is never ruined by digressions or by lack of reality with which it treats its characters.
The Icelandic people seem to be treated by their directors (again I'm generalizing a bit since Fridrik Thor Fridriksson and Kormákur are the only directors I know) as a very tough, ruggish people who don't let mistreatment ruin their joy of life. Early in the film, the youngest son of Thordur (the patriarch and owner of the fishing industry), tells his French girlfriend that when his sister was raped as a young girl, their father reacted more aggressively towards her because she became upset, than with the rapist who ruined his only (or is it?..) daughter's life. "An idiot raped by an idiot", their father claimed. This statement is very characteristic of the film. The plot is constructed around Thordur, now an ageing man who wants to gather all his children and their families to tell them something important: They are greedy and they'll get nothing from him. His children with their partners, his wife and his mother are then gathered at his house, and we get to know them bit by bit, until we learn how they became this family and then your sympathy will just decline. The opening hour is extremely funny, which is one of this film's best assets. But it's funny in a cruel way, and the cruelty is just escalating throughout the motion picture, until there is nothing but cruelty left at the end. Thordur's mother, Kata, is portrayed as very funny, but totally ignorant of the world and she is not nice to the people around her. Thordur's three legitimate children were born by a dying mother, and throughout her illness Thordur kept his wife's sister (Kristin) as his mistress, in their house. The children's mother's sister (Kristin) is presently Thordur's wife, and she also has a grown up daughter (Maria), who is in love with Thordur's youngest son (I've forgot a lot of names, even if I saw the film yesterday! sorry), even though they grew up as brother and sister. This theme of incest is perhaps the most sickening theme in the film, but it's nice compared with the greed of Thordur's children and Thordur's inhuman, megalomaniac behaviour towards his kids.
This is a film which is at times hard to watch because of the uncomfortable human relationships. But the actors, the direction and the cinematography is impeccable; brilliant. Jean-Louis Vialard has captured Iceland's wild but beautiful nature magnificently: especially when Thordur's daughter Ragnheidur, her Norwegian husband (Morten) and her son drive through the mountains to get home to her father- the photography struck me as superb. The sense of a decaying village is perfectly portrayed by Kormákur. The themes of this film is reminiscient of a master like Rainer Werner Fassbinder, and it struck me as just as misanthropic as Ulrich Seidls brilliant "Dog Days".
There is not one performance in this film that isn't well done and captivating. The unusual rustic settings and photography are constantly engrossing. The direction is excellent and the editing keeps the film moving at a good pace.
So what's wrong? I've seen it before. The dysfunctional Scandinavian family film is a genre unto itself. You get kung fu films from China, you get Bollywood musicals from India and you get dysfunctional family films from Scandinavia.The problems in this film are unique but the whole story arc that leads to a climatic blow-up is typical of the genre.
That all said, I enjoyed the film and recommend it with the warning that you might have seen it all before.
So what's wrong? I've seen it before. The dysfunctional Scandinavian family film is a genre unto itself. You get kung fu films from China, you get Bollywood musicals from India and you get dysfunctional family films from Scandinavia.The problems in this film are unique but the whole story arc that leads to a climatic blow-up is typical of the genre.
That all said, I enjoyed the film and recommend it with the warning that you might have seen it all before.
Greetings again from the darkness. No "Happy Days" here. The best compliment I can pay this movie is that I stayed interested despite the pathetic individuals and families portrayed. Very little human redeeming value in any of the characters with the possible exception of the french girlfriend and the daughters husband, Mortin, played by Sven Nordin (who was excellent in last year's "Elling"). Sad, desperate, isolated. These describe not only the characters, but Iceland as portrayed in the movie. What kind of airport is that? There is sufficient biting humor among the family that one initially believes that there might be some deeply buried love, but as the movie progresses we begin to understand why this is really not a family - just a bunch of loose cannons connected by fate. Wonderful camera work and sharp dialog make this one worth seeing, just be prepared for an emotional challenge.
- ferguson-6
- Jun 9, 2003
- Permalink
Douglas Sirk spends a family weekend in an Icelandic outport. Tyrannical father, dissipated children, conspiracy, destruction, alcohol, incest, and as a contemporary touch some spray painting. No Rock Hudson, though.
Iceland always seemed to me to be the place of exotic mystery. The lonely island in the middle of Atlantic ocean. This movie was little more realistic than my assumptions. The story is old and seen many times before - father and children on two completely opposite sides. The battle between tradition and progress , between lifelong dreams and reality. Mr.Kormakur sets his movie on the harsh and beautiful landscape making the nature an active participant. All in all it is a well done film, with strong acting, but with one significant shortcoming. All the characters are so despicable that is hard to take any of it seriously. And than maybe that was the intention.
- sergepesic
- Jul 18, 2006
- Permalink
This film has been made before,its about a family reunion. With all the hidden emotions, frustations and dark secrets
that are revieled. But the most interesting aspect is the location. A small fisher village in Iceland it give us an idea how
people survive, or not it a cold dark place. If this is real life it is not surprising that everybody
has a secret in the film. At the end the aim o everybody is to take the money and run away from everyone and anything. Even the sheep in the film tries to escape.
that are revieled. But the most interesting aspect is the location. A small fisher village in Iceland it give us an idea how
people survive, or not it a cold dark place. If this is real life it is not surprising that everybody
has a secret in the film. At the end the aim o everybody is to take the money and run away from everyone and anything. Even the sheep in the film tries to escape.
It's great to go into a film knowing nothing about it before hand. This was the case when I saw "The Sea." While you can easily see it was adapted from a play the themes are consistent and handled cinematically for the most part.
The first thing that is apparent is that the casting in this film is ridiculously perfect. No actor feels out of place. Speaking of which neither are any of the scenes. It is rare to watch such a multi-character film and never be left confused about who's who. All the characters are sharply defined and they all illustrate the struggle amongst family, between the generations and the joining or avoidance of a globalized world.
The scenes in the pool and the scenes with the black sheep are accessible symbolism that serve comedic or story functions such that the audience is never lost. Another amazing thing is that even though all the characters have undesirable traits they're all funny and identifiable. The only place the film falters in anyway is that the father has a speech that's a little too long at the end. With the way the film cuts the framing of the story is very surprising.
The acting all around is great but those who stand out are Gunnar Eyjólfsson, Hilmir Snær Guðnason, Hélène de Fougerolles, Guðrún Gísladóttir and Elva Ósk Ólafsdóttir.
Whenever watching a foreign film, especially one from a culture I'm not that familiar with, I always look for two things: 1. does it seem indigenous and not overly influenced by Hollywood? 2. While being indigenous does it communicate a universal message and/or theme. "The Sea" succeeds in both cases.
The first thing that is apparent is that the casting in this film is ridiculously perfect. No actor feels out of place. Speaking of which neither are any of the scenes. It is rare to watch such a multi-character film and never be left confused about who's who. All the characters are sharply defined and they all illustrate the struggle amongst family, between the generations and the joining or avoidance of a globalized world.
The scenes in the pool and the scenes with the black sheep are accessible symbolism that serve comedic or story functions such that the audience is never lost. Another amazing thing is that even though all the characters have undesirable traits they're all funny and identifiable. The only place the film falters in anyway is that the father has a speech that's a little too long at the end. With the way the film cuts the framing of the story is very surprising.
The acting all around is great but those who stand out are Gunnar Eyjólfsson, Hilmir Snær Guðnason, Hélène de Fougerolles, Guðrún Gísladóttir and Elva Ósk Ólafsdóttir.
Whenever watching a foreign film, especially one from a culture I'm not that familiar with, I always look for two things: 1. does it seem indigenous and not overly influenced by Hollywood? 2. While being indigenous does it communicate a universal message and/or theme. "The Sea" succeeds in both cases.
This film has been made before,its about a family reunion. With all the hidden emotions, frustations and dark secrets
that are revieled. But the most interesting aspect is the location. A small fisher village in Iceland it give us an idea how
people survive, or not it a cold dark place. If this is real life it is not surprising that everybody
has a secret in the film. At the end the everybodeis aims is to take the money and run away from everyone and anything. Even the sheep in the film tries to escape.
that are revieled. But the most interesting aspect is the location. A small fisher village in Iceland it give us an idea how
people survive, or not it a cold dark place. If this is real life it is not surprising that everybody
has a secret in the film. At the end the everybodeis aims is to take the money and run away from everyone and anything. Even the sheep in the film tries to escape.
Though the setting is Icelandic, the themes of this familial drama are universal. An aging fishing mogul invites his estranged children home and all hell breaks loose as dark family secrets are revealed and the future of the family and community at large is decided. While there is something to despise in every character (except for perhaps the French girlfriend of the youngest son trapped in the fray) the viewer is left feeling sympathy for almost everyone when all the family feels in the end is apathy for each other. The director seems to be saying that may be the greatest tragedy of all. Dark humor and small glimmers of hope (some family members escape to new lives abroad and the community seems to survive the meltdown and trudges forward) keep the film from becoming too depressing. A beautiful music score and some nice cinematography highlight the often bleak Icelandic landscape. Great direction and powerhouse performances from the international cast help the film soar to operatic heights. A must see for any fan of familial dramas.
Also recommended: "Angels and Insects" and "American Beauty."
Also recommended: "Angels and Insects" and "American Beauty."
- WriterDave
- Aug 6, 2004
- Permalink
There were some funny parts, too. And some hackneyed parts. And some awkwardly written parts. And some clumsily edited parts. A few honest, good parts. But lots of parts that tried way, way too hard to push the audience's buttons. There were some astonishing, forehead-slapping, gaps in logic. But the acting was decent--within the confines of the script and the direction--and the cinematography was professional-looking. There were lots of good pictures of Iceland, and that's why I went to see this film. I can only give this film a 4/10, but it was an engaging train-wreckish sort of 4/10. I suppose there was enough I liked about the film that I'd be willing to give the director another try some day.
- plaidpotato
- May 29, 2003
- Permalink
I think this is an excellent movie. If it was released in an English-spoken version it would probably have been a great success. I think this movie was never released in the Netherlands. Luckily it's now available on DVD. The movie is mainly Icelandic-spoken; some parts in English and French. The only problem I have with this movie is that it's hard to like any of the characters in this movie. They are all anti-social, selfish and cruel. I hope this movie is not an accurate portrayal of Icelandic social life. The only human person Françoise is from France (is there a message here?), played excellently by Hélène de Fougerolles. But her character is annoyingly passive at the crucial points at the end of the story; I found this not very convincing because at the start of the movie she's showing a lot of initiative.
When I saw this film for the first and last time, I found it to be one of the worst films that I've seen from Scandinavia. Of course I am not saying that this is THE WORST movie to be exported from our Nordic cousins, but because I found it to be so pretentious. Every single one of the cast members were trying to pronounce Icelandic as clearly as they could and they felt that every single facial expression had to be expressed to the fullest. Hence, leaving the performance to be flat and flamboyant.
Not to mention that director Baltasar Kormákur is a total egotist and apparently he was more conscious of letting everyone know that he directed this instead of actually directing this film (his credit appears 3 times as the director).
However this film does project a dark image over rural-Iceland and it examines the Icelandic fishing industry as the same source of corruption as the family as both suffered and witnessed. This MELODRAMA tries to fit into the footsteps of the Danish film "Festen" but fails because you feel like you are watching a knock off of the Danish masterpiece.
Kormákur generalizes the Icelandic family and portrays it as grimm trolls lurking from the mountains in the dark.
May I suggest to Icelandic filmmakers and actors to act like you are not acting and that directors should at least make an effort to direct instead of telling everyone that he is directing it.
The only one who deserves any praise in this movie is Film editor Valdís Óskarsdóttir, who coincidently edited Festem and must of felt just like home during the making of this excuse of a movie.
Not to mention that director Baltasar Kormákur is a total egotist and apparently he was more conscious of letting everyone know that he directed this instead of actually directing this film (his credit appears 3 times as the director).
However this film does project a dark image over rural-Iceland and it examines the Icelandic fishing industry as the same source of corruption as the family as both suffered and witnessed. This MELODRAMA tries to fit into the footsteps of the Danish film "Festen" but fails because you feel like you are watching a knock off of the Danish masterpiece.
Kormákur generalizes the Icelandic family and portrays it as grimm trolls lurking from the mountains in the dark.
May I suggest to Icelandic filmmakers and actors to act like you are not acting and that directors should at least make an effort to direct instead of telling everyone that he is directing it.
The only one who deserves any praise in this movie is Film editor Valdís Óskarsdóttir, who coincidently edited Festem and must of felt just like home during the making of this excuse of a movie.
- terrymcginnis21
- Sep 27, 2002
- Permalink
The Sea is Baltasar Kormákur's second movie as a director. He showed real prospect with his debut, 101 Reykjavik, and now he's ensembled a big part of Iceland's most respected actors for another shot at an Icelandic community. THis time he goes out into a small fishervillage and follows an emotional showdown in the village's richest family. I'm not going to reveal the whole plot at this point as not to spoil the experience of seeing the film. Instead i'm trying to share my experience of it.
Firstly, the acting and directing is quite something. Gunnar Eyjólfsson, a respected stage-actor, gets his first big movie-role here, and absolutely takes my breath away with his powerful performance. Hilmir Snaer Gudnason, the star of 101, establishes himself as one of Iceland's best actors. Actually, there are too many leading roles here to name them all, but there's nowhere a weak link in the cast.
The cinematography is very good, and does nothing but enhance the mood in the film. No flaws in editing, or any other technical aspect of the film.
The only minor flaws I noticed were that when the movie is reaching its climax, one tends to get a little confused, with all those characters and all, but it didn't really bother me much.
So, I saw this movie as extremely powerful, both visually and emotionally, with great musical score, real feelings, and a very black and cool humor.
Nine out of ten!!!
Firstly, the acting and directing is quite something. Gunnar Eyjólfsson, a respected stage-actor, gets his first big movie-role here, and absolutely takes my breath away with his powerful performance. Hilmir Snaer Gudnason, the star of 101, establishes himself as one of Iceland's best actors. Actually, there are too many leading roles here to name them all, but there's nowhere a weak link in the cast.
The cinematography is very good, and does nothing but enhance the mood in the film. No flaws in editing, or any other technical aspect of the film.
The only minor flaws I noticed were that when the movie is reaching its climax, one tends to get a little confused, with all those characters and all, but it didn't really bother me much.
So, I saw this movie as extremely powerful, both visually and emotionally, with great musical score, real feelings, and a very black and cool humor.
Nine out of ten!!!
So this is the third Icelandic film I see in a very short time and it's the worst. The director made a pretty good job with 101 Reykjavik, although I was not that impressed by it, it's still miles ahead of this film in every respect. Quite frankly I had a strong feeling that the people involved in this film were trying to make the ultimate European art house formula, which in my opinion is at times even worse than the most formulatic Hollywood films. Well the formula fails dramatically here. This film has it all, outdoor sex scenes in snow covered lagoons, pretensious dialogue, the hardship of life in the north. It tries to hard to include everything a film festival would want from a foreign film and it ends up being a second class version of the Danish film The Celebration. There is nothing original in anything, it's flat and boring at times and the acting and direction at the best of times border on the very pretensious. I really think scandinavian cinema needs to find a new direction if this is what they want to offer us.
This movie was totally amazing. i loved all of the characters, and the scenery was breathtaking. Also, the scene in the hotspring was so beautiful. Great music all throughout the movie... i wanna go see it again. enough said.
- dogbertios
- Jun 1, 2003
- Permalink
This has to be someone's nightmare version of a family reunion. What an ugly, repulsive bunch of human beings - and it's all daddy's fault!!! While I give credit to the actors, this just isn't my idea of entertainment. I'm a big DALLAS fan so I can certainly enjoy a classic dysfunctional family setting, but this was just sordid and nasty. I felt queasy at the end and was glad it was over. I also feel the beauty of Iceland was fleeting at best - instead we see the suffocating house scenes, the inside of the fishery, and the local pub with assorted barflies acting like barflies everywhere. And did I mention the bored sullen spoiled teenagers - apparently a universal affliction wherever you may go. These people are what remains of the mighty Viking race - Thor should put them all out of their misery with his mighty hammer!
This movie is one of the most original films from the arctic north in 2002. Baltasar Kormakur is a directing genious! Its actors are just so amazing and excellent. I just hope this movie goes all the way to be Oscar nominee as the best foreign film of the year.
I gave it 9 out of 10. Should have been 10, but I have not given any movie 10, ... yet. I do believe this is the best film ever made in Iceland. And, being from Iceland, I am proud of this new masterpiece.
I gave it 9 out of 10. Should have been 10, but I have not given any movie 10, ... yet. I do believe this is the best film ever made in Iceland. And, being from Iceland, I am proud of this new masterpiece.
- DennisLittrell
- Feb 7, 2006
- Permalink
I saw Hafid (The Sea) during a visit to Iceland. The film screens once per day with English subtitles.
Made me laugh. Made me cry. Sorry, always wanted to write that.
The Sea was a step forward for the director, proving his ability to handle mature and nuanced themes.
A wonderful narrative on small town life, the film also explores the darkness behind familial relations. But while the family's dirty laundry was being hung out to dry for all to see, the characters were at the same time treated with compassion.
Too often in ensamble films, one or more of the characters comes off flat, and the audience grows bored when that character is on the screen. In The Sea, the director spun the individual stories together so well that the viewer could find a little bit of themselves in each character. Unlike most films, the director wasn't afraid to expose the flaws of each character. As a result, they were human. And while the tone of the picture was dark, it was also uplifting, hopeful.
I also enjoyed the cinematography. And the way the town became more than a backdrop to the story, but an integral piece of the narrative. Sure, the town came across as desolate, depressing and sometimes just a God awful place to live. And the question becomes, are towns like this worth saving? Thankfully, the director left that up to the audience to decide for themselves, as the credits rolled.
Made me laugh. Made me cry. Sorry, always wanted to write that.
The Sea was a step forward for the director, proving his ability to handle mature and nuanced themes.
A wonderful narrative on small town life, the film also explores the darkness behind familial relations. But while the family's dirty laundry was being hung out to dry for all to see, the characters were at the same time treated with compassion.
Too often in ensamble films, one or more of the characters comes off flat, and the audience grows bored when that character is on the screen. In The Sea, the director spun the individual stories together so well that the viewer could find a little bit of themselves in each character. Unlike most films, the director wasn't afraid to expose the flaws of each character. As a result, they were human. And while the tone of the picture was dark, it was also uplifting, hopeful.
I also enjoyed the cinematography. And the way the town became more than a backdrop to the story, but an integral piece of the narrative. Sure, the town came across as desolate, depressing and sometimes just a God awful place to live. And the question becomes, are towns like this worth saving? Thankfully, the director left that up to the audience to decide for themselves, as the credits rolled.
- HoltJohnson
- Dec 6, 2002
- Permalink
Despite being set against the paralyzing beauty of the Icelandic
coast, "The Sea" is nothing more than standard family reunion
drama. We've all seen this movie before whether in high form
"Celebration" or the more banal "Home for the Holidays." Although
"The Sea" shoots for the high form, it fails to surpass the banal. In
Baltasar Kormakur's sophomore feature (he also directed the
critically acclaimed 101 Reykjavik), he explores the explosive
relationship between parents and children. The plot revolves
around an aging owner of a small-town fishing business, more
specifically, his narrow vision of the future and the forces of
progress and time that stand in his way. While Kormakur's
themes are explicit and the tension apparent, the transitions
between moods and the dramatic arc are confused and sloppy.
The film begins by introducing us to the perils facing the mom and
pop store equivalent of the fishing industry: technologically inferior,
inefficient and out-performed by the corporate competition. In the
face of outstanding loses and potential bankruptcy, the stubborn
aging owner who built the enterprise and consequently the town
that has grown from its existence refuses to sell out. Instead, the
weak man calls upon his children in hopes that they will be
inspired by a duty to family and home, resurrect the dying industry
and restore the business to the father's imagined version of its
glory days. The children, who have long abandoned any sentimental connection with home land, have different ideas. The
reunion and father's request only reminds them of the years of
suffering and mistreatment they endured while under his roof and
the repressed anger they harbored after all of these years.
The film undergoes a major transition as it shifts between the first
and second acts. The first is designed as some light introduction
to the backward ways of the Icelandic rural society and the
incompatibility between the coca-cola city kids and the coarse
nature of the unruly outback. However, as the film shifts from perils
of the practice to perils of the past, and as the comic relief is
substituted with explosions of anger, the emotional outbursts and
the venomous shouting matches seem ill-explained. The cause
lacks the force to bring about the ensuing eruptions, which in the
end seem almost farcical on account of their extreme nature.
Nevertheless in light of several outstanding shortcomings,
Baltasar does shoot some very beautiful scenes and framed a set
on par with poetry. Unfortunately, there was no bite to the
provocative premise.
For more foreign film news, reviews and interviews check out
www.au-cinema.com
coast, "The Sea" is nothing more than standard family reunion
drama. We've all seen this movie before whether in high form
"Celebration" or the more banal "Home for the Holidays." Although
"The Sea" shoots for the high form, it fails to surpass the banal. In
Baltasar Kormakur's sophomore feature (he also directed the
critically acclaimed 101 Reykjavik), he explores the explosive
relationship between parents and children. The plot revolves
around an aging owner of a small-town fishing business, more
specifically, his narrow vision of the future and the forces of
progress and time that stand in his way. While Kormakur's
themes are explicit and the tension apparent, the transitions
between moods and the dramatic arc are confused and sloppy.
The film begins by introducing us to the perils facing the mom and
pop store equivalent of the fishing industry: technologically inferior,
inefficient and out-performed by the corporate competition. In the
face of outstanding loses and potential bankruptcy, the stubborn
aging owner who built the enterprise and consequently the town
that has grown from its existence refuses to sell out. Instead, the
weak man calls upon his children in hopes that they will be
inspired by a duty to family and home, resurrect the dying industry
and restore the business to the father's imagined version of its
glory days. The children, who have long abandoned any sentimental connection with home land, have different ideas. The
reunion and father's request only reminds them of the years of
suffering and mistreatment they endured while under his roof and
the repressed anger they harbored after all of these years.
The film undergoes a major transition as it shifts between the first
and second acts. The first is designed as some light introduction
to the backward ways of the Icelandic rural society and the
incompatibility between the coca-cola city kids and the coarse
nature of the unruly outback. However, as the film shifts from perils
of the practice to perils of the past, and as the comic relief is
substituted with explosions of anger, the emotional outbursts and
the venomous shouting matches seem ill-explained. The cause
lacks the force to bring about the ensuing eruptions, which in the
end seem almost farcical on account of their extreme nature.
Nevertheless in light of several outstanding shortcomings,
Baltasar does shoot some very beautiful scenes and framed a set
on par with poetry. Unfortunately, there was no bite to the
provocative premise.
For more foreign film news, reviews and interviews check out
www.au-cinema.com
Reasonably well acted and written, and it had what I went to it for, namely Iceland, but otherwise it was the same old dysfunctional family melodrama I've seen 500 times before. It was occasionally interesting to note parallels to the old sagas - Icelandic writers seem to be constitutionally incapable of not referring to them, but I guess if you have a living 1000 year old literary tradition, you might as well use it.
If it was set in New York, I wouldn't have wasted my time on it though. If you've seen a lot of movies, you'll probably be thinking things like "not the freaking dinner-table meltdown scene again" as you watch it go through all the standard dysfunctional-family plot devices.
If it was set in New York, I wouldn't have wasted my time on it though. If you've seen a lot of movies, you'll probably be thinking things like "not the freaking dinner-table meltdown scene again" as you watch it go through all the standard dysfunctional-family plot devices.