A Hole in My Heart

I chose Moodysson's film out of another 200 at the Jerusalem Film Festival because of the good impression of Fu__ing Åmål. Apparently, he has gone to a totally different place meanwhile...

Even before genres and modes, I believe there are two basic elements for any film whatsoever: there has to be a reason, a motivation for what you see, and there needs to be some effective cinematic language in use. Some good films do well with just one, sometimes one feeds the other. My problem with Ett Hål i mitt hjärta, and eventually what made me give up watching halfway through, was that I found none.

A blatant, border-breaking experiment? nice, but after 15 minutes it got boring. A manifest against the porno industry? OK, but the shattered style blocked any attempt of mine to get closer to the characters. If anything, it reinstated how essential it is to identify with your protagonists on the screen in order to feel empathy.

I don't mind seeing labia all over the screen - there just has to be a REASON. It's the fine border between noise and music, scribbles and art.

Just when you think that the film has done everything it can to shock and disgust you ... it gets worse ! Thinking about scenes in isolation, they shouldn't be too bad - but I guess it's the whole development of the characters that make events so disturbing.

The director was on stage afterwards (London Film Festival) and said that he thought there were something like 68 different messages in the film, but wouldn't expand on any of them, and wouldn't answer questions about why he had blanked out all the logos - other than to confirm that he had done it on purpose. He also claimed that he didn't understand the film himself, and that he would much prefer to be making children's movies rather than this type of film.

Before the film he had predicted that 9% of the audience would walk out during the film - he seemed pleased that the dropout rate was lower than expected !

Worth seeing, if you like being made to feel uncomfortable ...

Having loved 'Together' and admired, for the most part, 'Lilya 4-Ever' (as well as his short films), I was dreadfully disappointed with this new work from Moodyson. In an interview about 'A Hole On My Heart' Moodyson stated that he thought it was his best and most complex film, before saying that he didn't know what the film was supposed to be about, not offering any explanation other than 'it has many layers'. Such statements reveal entirely the reason behind the film's failure. Depsite Moodyson's assertion of complexity, there is simply nothing in this 90+ minute film that could not have been adequately communicated in a short. Simply juxtaposing unpleasant images of cosmetic surgery and action men figures with home-made pornography does not constitute a complex statement on anything. In fact the film is hopelessly meandering and one has the increasing feeling that it was 'discovered' in the editing room. I'm very interested in non-narrative film-making, and I don't need a 'story' to communicate events to me, but it is evident to me when there is a severe paucity of drive and ideas, and that feeling was evident throughout a viewing of this film. It concerns me that this film will be defended by people who feel that sitting through the unpleasant content constitutes some sort of test of intellectual rigour and that those who didn't like it are not prepared to 'face up' to the reality this film purports to present. In fact the simple truth is that this is an empty film, with a painful lack of understanding of how to dramatise ideas. I really hope Moodyson comes up with something better next time - I think his talents outstrip nonsense like this.

It's a promise. Clickbait. All movie long you're just waiting for something to happen. At least evil people do evil, but these ones are actually doing nothing at all, as if stuck in a void filled with assumption and tension for a war that is never to come: next to some loud music and naked girls, there is nothing but anticipation for a non-satisfaction. Like the Rolling Stones, because Mick Jagger also has become pretty old. It just doesn't come. You can wait for it or spend a beautiful evening doing something else. This movie is better than your random scary movie but never reaches the level of Saw; rather, it's like Liz Truss: it promises, it promises, yet when the going gets tough, the tough gets going.

In many ways i can understand why people would take a disliking to this film, it is very difficult... but it's also one of the most human films i've seen for a long long time.

It's a film for people who don't want to go to see a film to 'enjoy it' it's a film that is what it is, it's not a sing and dance, it's not an entertainment piece.

I found this film very interesting indeed and found all the characters to have a lot of depth to them. This film is much closer to Lilja 4-ever rather than Together, so that may sway you to one way or the other. What makes this harder than Lilja 4-ever is that it isn't addressing issues in a very forward manner, it isn't always clear what this film is 'trying to say'.

But yeah, if you give it the chance and don't come to this film for a laugh or to enjoy yourself and are actually interested in film in it's purest form, then this should prove of worth and an interesting purchase.