Islands

Jan-Ole Gerster's Islands 2025, a German film screened at Berlinale, isn't aiming for grand cinematic statements, and that's precisely its strength. This psychological drama, co-written by Gerster, Lawrie Doran, and Blaz Kutin, gracefully explores a personality crisis against the backdrop of a Spanish seaside resort, weaving in a criminal subplot and questions of infidelity with impressive subtlety.

The acting in Islands 2025 isn't flashy, but it's remarkably effective. Each performance feels natural and nuanced, adding layers of depth to the narrative. Stacy Martin is particularly captivating, exuding an almost aristocratic air. Her on-screen chemistry with Sam Riley is palpable from their very first scene together, creating a compelling dynamic.

One of the film's most intriguing aspects is its use of unspoken narratives. The past is hinted at, a forgotten event that resurfaces to influence the present, but the details are never explicitly revealed. Gerster masterfully avoids cliché devices like flashbacks or exposition, instead leaving it to the viewer to piece together the fragments and interpret the characters' motivations. This delicate approach is both engaging and thought-provoking.

Minor characters, like the local and federal police officers, and especially a camel, leave a memorable impression, adding to the film's rich tapestry. The visuals and sound design effectively immerse the audience in the setting, enhancing the overall atmosphere.

Islands 2025 doesn't pretend to be a masterpiece, but within its chosen scope, it achieves near perfection. Beneath the surface story lies a subtle exploration of exploitation - how we are exploited by others, how we exploit ourselves, and the choices we make in response. This subtext, while understated, adds a layer of depth that lingers after the credits roll. It's a film that stays with you, inviting reflection and interpretation.

Currently, the film holds a rating of 6.7 which is quite fair. It is a solid drama which unfortunately is marketed as some kind of psychological crime thriller which clearly it is not. It is more a drama about your purpose in life and the thriller elements used are a means to cause disruption of the protagonist's every day life. The cinematography looks great, the actors are all delivering very convincingly. I read a review where someone regards even the supporting cast such as the local police man as very memorable - and I do agree.

Coming back to the beginning: The marketing of the movie feels misleading and it is unfortunate because the setting and idea of the plot is quite interesting and unique. A good drama for a calm evening that keeps you thinking about your life afterwards.

No pun intended - some movies hit you the right way, some do not. And this one ... I assume most will either be super excited about it, others will be super annoyed by it. The trailer probably made the movie look differently. And while I try to avoid watching trailers ... well I had no choice but to see it - tough to look away when you sit in a cinema.

Anyway, the being different than one thinks is a good, but maybe also a bad thing. There are many ingredients that should make this a movie that hits it right out of the park (which would be more of a baseball term, but wait for it) ... yet it seems to fail and hit the net (there you go with the tennis pun).

The which one is yours (and I may not be talking about the tennis racket here) and many other more subtle things (you said that) ... and many ... many indications that we as viewers can put together to get a picture of things way before the movie started ... those things are really well done ... but funnily enough not ...enough to be super convincing.

There is history - and there is her story ... and their story in this case too. The movie does not make a big fuss about the relationship (especially the past one) ... but you have to wonder if there was an elaborate plan after all? Well you can decide that - and in the meantime really hate the main character for doing almost everything one shouldn't be doing - even things he has been explicitly told not to do (watch out what you tell them - there is a witness) ... so while there is mystery ... the bigger mystery remains: where is this supposed to be going? Or him? Or them of course ... not sure if ... a character finally put two and two together and acted upon it ... I just know that it did not feel as satisfying as it should ... or I thought it should ...

The film aims to dive into the deep sea of emotions, offering a psychological portrait of a man adrift-without goals or direction-set against an otherwise idyllic landscape. As he finally gets confronted by his past, the story presents him with a chance to change his life.

*** However, in the end, the film fails to fully deliver. While the cinematography is solid and captures the beauty of its setting, it isn't enough to compensate for the script's inconsistencies and narrative leaps. The film treats its viewers as smart enough to understand what is implied by the script but most crucially, it struggles to forge a real connection between the audience and its main characters. Just when it feels like something significant is about to happen, the momentum deflates, creating a persistent sense of detachment.

*** The final result feels like a missed opportunity. While Islands had the potential to be a compelling character study, it ultimately leaves a bitter aftertaste, making one question whether the two-hour runtime was truly worthwhile.

A burgoise film about middle class people with burgoise problems. An unhappy marriage, a bored tennis instructor. Is this really what the world needs right now?

It's mostly boring and very, very repetitive. In the typical way of german movies, conflicts are only touched on, but do not break out. Nothing is really spoken out, nothing gets resolved. You could charitably call it "subtle", but I find it rather gutless, bloodless and boring. It may well be that in reality things go down so tame, and yes, in reality most of the time nothing really stark happens in a secure middle class life. But why should I pay admission and sacrifice two hours of my life? I at least want to learn SOMETHING new, have SOME kind of experience or revelation. The only thing I really took away from the movie were superficial things like beautiful landscape shots. And I could look at attractive actors for two hours. What I found most interesting were the interactions between the tennis instructor and the camel farm owner and the policeman. Something like real life shone through in these moments.

Of course, the frustrated tennis teacher who doesn't care about anything is likeable, especially being portrayed by this magificent actor Sam Reilly. After the first third of the movie, you have high hopes for some exciting events unfolding. The music also prepares us for a Hitchcock-style thriller, and the images as well foreshadow something tragic about to happen. But unfortunately, it doesn't happen. You get the feeling that the music was added by the distributor to sell the audience a thriller.

In the end, the movie more or less comes to nothing. Neither the marriage problems are solved, nor does the tennis teacher find meaning in life, nor is the stupid husband punished for his egoistic behaviour. The film leaves the viewer baffled. What was it all about?

I give five stars for beautiful cinematography and precise acting.