A week in Istanbul (1)

Around this time of the year, when it's most dark, I need a vacation. Usually I take to a country where I might have a chance to get some warm weather and some sun. Last year I had already Istanbul on my list, but then I traveled to Athens instead, so  Turkey seemed to be the obvious choice. It's very off-season now, though there were many other travelers already. That's probably the reason why travel and accommodation were extremely cheap.
The Hotel
I stayed at the Sirkeci Emek Hotel. It is perfectly placed, close to the train station and other public transport and the most important sites, the Blue Mosque, Hagia Sophia and Topkapi are within walking distance. The staff is very friendly and helpful. For example, i arrived early in the morning and was hoping for some room where I could put my luggage, instead my room was ready after some few minutes, while they gave me a cup of tea.
Some reviewers at booking.com seem to expect five star service for three star price. Of course you get what you pay for. Emek has the basics and that is what I need. The breakfast buffet is modest, but sufficient. WiFi occasionally absent - altogether minor features which don't spoil my holiday. So actually I have nothing negative to say about Emek.  Another time in Istanbul, I would certainly want to stay there again.

View from the terrace of Sirkeci Emek

Getting there
I am not the luxury traveler, so I always prefer public transport when possible.
Sabiah Gökcen was a female aviator and she gave name to the second airport in Istanbul, the one on the Asian side. From there buses are going every 30 minutes to Taksim Square, the central square. Actually they stop behind the Point Hotel, but Taksim is near. As a newcomer I wanted to play safe and took a cab to the hotel. The driver of cab number 34 TEH 29 was an idiot and an asshole. His English was almost non-existent - which is OK when you know your limits - but he said that I didn't understand English. So be it. But he tried to screw me also and worst of all, he just dumped me somewhere and pointed at a direction where the thought that the hotel might be. And so I wandered about, a newcomer in an unknown city. Most people were trying to be helpful, but most of the time they gave incompetent or incomplete information. At last a friendly shoe shiner pointed out the correct direction. I never used a cab in Istanbul again. Rather walk than to depend on another bugger like that driver.
By the way: when time is important and you need to be at the airport, better be there in time. When returning I was there on time, but many people had been there before. The bus was full and I had to wait until the next bus. During busy times you hardly move. It took me 90 minutes to come from Taksim to the airport on a Friday evening.
Getting acquainted with the place
I didn't have a to do list, so the first day I just strolled around the historical center. Even off season there is a considerable queue to get into Hagia Sofia, but many are local tourists or travelers from the Middle East. Many, too many people want to offer their services, drag you into their restaurant or show you their small business. I lost patience very soon and just ignored them. It's a pity, but sometimes it's necessary to be rude to these people. Yes, many people live by tourists, but nobody wants to give their money to professional cheaters.
At the Blue Mosque they are giving you explanations or offering help and then they try to drag you to their shop with "no obligation" to buy, yeah yeah yeah.
It was such a nice day, so nI decided mainly to walk around and feel and smell the city. But I went to see the Sultan Ahmed Mosque, also known as Blue Mosque. There is one entrance for whose who come to pray and another one for visitors. This is OK, since visitors are not required to take the ritual washings. There are no limitations - everything is accessible to everybody. But everybody is required to take off shoes, which fills the air with a subtle odor of foot perspiration. This mosque is a master piece of architecture. I won't copy here what I have read from guide books. However no description can replace the  first-hand sight; the blue Iznik tiles and the light flooding in makes you believe that the roof has been blown off and that you ar elooking at the sky.
I walked only in the Hippodrome Area.

Infinity seems to be at hands in Sultan Ahmed Mosque

Approaching Modern Istanbul
The second day the weather was still fine and so I walked across the Golden Horn, first to the Galata Tower and then to Taksim Square. I didn't climb the tower, because they want an extra fee from foreigners. Usually such an attitude is called discrimination.
From different tales I got the impression that this square is the hub of drug dealers, prostitution and illegal immigrants. I walked there without any special plan, just following the general direction. There were different manifestations, one by Africans who asked to be treated as human beings and that they didn't come as tourists. There was also a manifestation by the AKP party, but I didn't care to ask what they were for or against. They made a lot of noise as if they were supporters of a soccer team. Policemen, ready to fire were also there. I wonder what our local demonstrators in peaceful Denmark would say when confronted with such a sight.
Taksim Square as such is boring. Yes, there is room for many people, there is Burger King and Starbucks, but else very little to attract attention. However, in that area you see most modern people, whereas around the mosques most are pre-modern or even  pre-pre-modern. The walking street Istiklal could be in any other city of the world. And that's how the future is going to be. Everything will resemble each other. You don't have to go to places in the far future, instead they wiull come to you.

Busy walking-street Istiklal in Istanbul.

Mord hinterm Vorhang (Schweiz 2011)

Man könnte ja mal, dachte ich mir, auch einen Film aus der Schweiz sehen. Der Schweizer Film ist mir eine weitgehend unbekannte Größe. Sogar an die Gotthelf- Verfilmungen erinnere ich mich nicht, denn dann hätte ich sicherlich - hoffentlich - eine Erinnerung an Stephanie Glaser (1920-2011) bewahrt.
Glaser ist umwerfend großartig in diesem Film, ja das Manuskript ist um ihre Person in diesem Film, die alternde Krimischriftstellerin Lydia Walliser geschrieben. Sie führt seit 55 Jahren eine Ehe, an der Strindberg seine Freude hätte haben können. Weiterhin ist sie mit ihrer Familie verkracht, jedoch eines Tages klopft ihr Sohn an ihre Tür und ersucht sie, den Enkel dort eine Zeit lang wohnen zu lassen. Nach diversen Granteleine sagt sie zu.
Der Knabe sieht dann auch gleich einen Mord hinterm Vorhang des Nachbarhauses, was von der Großmutter und der Polizei aber als Spinnerei eines phantasiebegabten Kindes abgetan wird. Als dann aber die Großmutter eine Leiche findet, erwacht der Spürsinn in der Krimiautorin und sie will der SAche auf den Grund gehen.
Zwischendurch spricht sie bereits Abschnitte in ihr Diktaphon. Ja und natürlich endet alles gütlich und versöhnlich, und der Stoff zu einem neuen Roman hat das Kicht der Welt erblickt.
Mord hinterm Vorhang wird durch die überragende Leistung von Stephanie Glaser erträglich und das ist hoffentlich Absicht. Das Drehnuch trieft vor Nostalgie, Erinnerungen an Miss Marple Scmunzelkrimis, gemischt Elementen aus den deutschen Verfilmungen von Edgar Wallace, zusätzlich kommen noch Versatzstücke von Kinderkrimis hinzu. Heraus kommt eine Hommage an eine quicklebendige Greisin, ein Abgsang auf die Unterhaltung von vor 60 Jahren. Auch wenn das nicht alles besonders originell ist und wenn auch niemand vor Spannung bebt, so kann man diesem Film nicht böse sein. Worte wie charmant und amüsant beschreiben diesen Film recht treffend.
Ohne Untertitel ist der Film eine Herausforderung für Hochdeutsche. Ich glaube, ich habe vielleicht 70% verstanden.
4/10

Force Majeure (Sweden 2014)

The original title of this film is Turist - quite trivial as opposed to the hinting at unleashed powers in the international title.
The life of Tomas and Ebba changes in less than a second while they are on a ski holiday in the Alps. An avalanche seems to approach the hotel. Tomas runs away, saves his I-Phone and forgets about his family. This triggers a conflict  between the couple. At last Tomas realizes, that he ran away like a coward. This leads to a complete break down of his macho image. He reconstructs his status as role model when he saves his wife who had an accident.
There is an epilogue glued to the main story. The holiday is over and a bus is going to bring them to the station. But the bus driver is an incompetent  fool, who seems to jeopardize the lives of his passengers. Now Ebba gets hysterical and wants to get off the bus, forgetting about her children. Tomas, who has reconciled himself with his failure acts prudently and the couple walks into a ameliorated future.
It seems that I recently watch many films about the father role. In this film men can be weak, can be deconstructed and they can still be like a role model. In this respect he resembles Mason Sr. from Boyhood, who is a blend of buddy and guidance, a modern father. Not the authoritarian type of The Return. It seems that male self-understanding has different aspects. The most likeable one comes from open societies. It seems then that the father figures reflect the respective society.
8/10

Save youself and your I-Phone,

The Blues Brothers (1980)

Department: Did I ever watch this?
I think I might have watched this film, which in certain circles certainly is considered to be a classic. However, I am not hooked so much on this music, so it has evaded my memory completely. Sometimes the ability to forget is merciful.
So the Blues Brothers need to collect some money to save the convent where they were supposed to have received some education. And they have to earn it honestly. They try to re-unite the old band, they once had. While doing this, they make a lot of enemies. This triggers a lot of car chases, which are clever choreographed, but become tiresome in the long run. It's not so interesting, let alone funny seeing them again and again racing through a shopping mall.
Of course the manuscript is a rhapsodic stringing together of small episodes and the rather thin plot is stretched out with musical numbers, which may be good for those who like this sort of music.
For lovers of musical comedy this will be cult, for me it's 4/10.

Men in Black playing the Blues

I Was Born, But (1932) [生れてはみたけれど]

As amateur film lover, there are always new discoveries ahead.  Before I never heard of Yasujiro Ozu. Today I saw this movie, a true gem among the heritage

of world cinema. In 1932 they made strill silent movies in Japan.
This is about coming of age and about the traditional father role. Two boys move to a suburb and have to find their place in the peck order of the local youth gang. They imitate the behavior of their father. When those boys find out that their father plays the role of a buffoon, they no longer see him as a role model. However, they realize that their father is humiliating himself, so that they might have a better life.
It just comes across my mind, that I have seen quite a few films about the father role recently. There is the absent father in Tarkovsky's The Mirror, the returning father in Zvyagintsev's The Return and the complete deconstruction and partial reconstruction of the father figure as role model in Force Majeure.
In I was Born, But we see a society that is relying on obedience and respect of those in command.
10/10

Father makes a foll of himself - for the sake of the children

The Hunger Games (2012)

I am not very familiar with the products of popular culture, so I didn't know what to expect. I also don't like film series, where a series of books is made into a series of films -  in the manner of Harry Potter e.g. With these precautions I started to watch the first delivery from 2012.
So The Hunger Games is a dystopian film with elements from the fantasy genre. In some distant future young people from various districts have to fight to death. The winner will bring to the district sufficient food supplies. That regime is obviously using hunger as an efficient method to control the people. The battles are televised and popular entertainment for desensitized audiences.
The film focuses on Katniss and Peeta from District 12. Most of the film is young people killing each other until only Katniss and Peeta are left. Instead of fighting each other they are about to commit suicide, but are then allowed to be shared winners of the Hunger Games.

If the movie has a point, it is tough to figure out which one. The dystopian theme is mentioned, but we don't get an idea how this society is structured. There is an acerbic side kick at reality shows where people can make a fool of themselves, here layed out as death-match. Yes, there is a sleazy presenter, as those shows need to have, but also this thread leads to nothing. Katniss is a female action hero, but also this potential is left unused.

Some critics suggest that this film is inferior to the book. This may be. However, this film didn't give me motivation to read the book. As The Hunger Games appear now, they are exciting entertainment, but the suspense is gone as soon as the film is over. I think there is nothing more.
I wonder though if the Japanese original is as poor as this version.
5/10

The Hunger Games aim at nothing

Leviathan (Andrey Zvyagintsev 2014)

“I will not fail to speak of Leviathan’s limbs,  its strength and its graceful form. Who can strip off its outer coat?   Who can penetrate its double coat of armor? Who dares open the doors of its mouth,    ringed about with fearsome teeth?  Its back has rows of shields  tightly sealed together;  each is so close to the next  that no air can pass between."

The monster Leviathan is a powerful symbol for the totalitarian state.Greediness, longing for power, ruthlessness, corruption. And a legal system that stages the scenarios of power-mad politicians. We have seen these mock-trials many times before, recently against director Oleg Semtsov who is put into jail on fabricated evidence. Who can strip off the outer coat of Leviathan?

Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité -- values under attack

Nikolaj (Aleksej Serebryakov) tries to battle against Leviathan in the form of the obnoxious mayor (played brilliantly by  Roman Madyanov). The municipality has expropriated Nikolaj's property. A comrade from army days, a lawyer visits him He still seems to believe in the legal system, but is also quickly confronted with the reality in the countryside.
Nikolaj has a younger wife and a son in puberty. For a time they consider moving to Moscow, but this is no alternative for Nikolaj . As  another Michael Kohlhaas he fights for justice.The end: as in real life. Justice as the handmaiden of politics...
The film starts with a sumptuous shot of the sea and the stranded skeleton of a whale - a powerful picture of Leviathan. Then we pan to the world of the humans - houses falling apart, young people hanging out in ruins, human ruins, fueled by vodka, human ruins everywhere.
On top of this human residuum is the political elite that rules with the blessing of the Church, preaching the values of truth and secretly encourages politicians to lie.
Bleakness, misery, not oine glimpse of hope anywhere. While Elena still had a  potential seed of hope, here is nothing -- all is lost.
10/10

Die Brücke (DDR 1949)

This is not the famous film from 1958 about young boys during the last days of the second world war, but a film from East Germany.
This is astonishing, as refugees or even resettlers from the former German territories in the east are generally not a subject in GDR's topography. It is said that this is the only film that deals with the subject.
The resettlers from unmentioned territories arrive at a village over a rotten bridge. The villagers are hostile. The resettlers try to conserve their village community, but also strive to make their skills useful in the new surroundings. There is also developing a romance between one of the refugees and the villagers. At the end the the refugees help the villagers to extinguish a fire.

Never forget: our civilization is under attack

The film has good intentions, but also serious shortcomings. The fire at the end is poorly motivated and only helps to bring the movie to an end. It starts as an epic and ends trashy.
It is made clear that the resettlers are victims of the lost war, but it seems that the villagers hardly realise that there has been a war at all. Certainly the writer and director Arthur Pohl had to navigate between was admissible on screen and what everybody knew.
So the result is highly unsatisfying. It is neither educative, dramatic, touching or even worthwhile to remember.
4/10

Jeanette Schultze and Fritz Wagner (who are these people) on the cover of the DVD release

Soul Kitchen - (Fatih Akin 2009)

Manches bleibt eben etwas länger liegen, so auch dieser Film. Es wird immer schwieriger, fast unmöglich, sich bei allem, was mich interessiert, auf dem laufenden zu halten.
Vor einiger Zeit sah ich das Buch Soul Kitchen im Goethe-Institut; ich nahm es mit und las es mit Genuss. Ein Coming of Age der anderen Art, dem sich Zinos der Grieche unterwerfen muss. Am Ende macht er dann das Speiselokal Soul Kitchen auf. Fatih im Roman findet das eine geile Idee. Soweit das Buch vor dem Film.

Shayn, der Koch, ist zielbewusst.

Und dort setzt der Film ein. Soul Kitchen wird ein Junk-Food-Restaurant mit mäßigem Erfolg. Zinos muss sich mit diversen Widerwärigkeiten des Lebens auseinandersetzen. Seine Freundin beklagt, dass er zu wenig Zeit in deren Beziehung investiert und nimmt eine Arbeit in Shanghai an. Er zieht sich außerdem einen Bandscheibenvorfall zu und hat danach Probleme mit dem aufrechten Gang. Sein krimineller Bruder kann auf Freigang kommen, falls er eine Arbeit vorweisen kann - und er bringt gleich seine kleinkriminellen Freunde mit. Außerdem ist ein fieser Spekulant an dem Grundstück interessiert. Und zudem bleibt das Stammpublikum weg, nachdem der neue Koch Shayn (großartig von Birol Ünel gespielt) das Restaurant auf Spitzenküche umstellt.
Zinos will alldem weglaufen und seiner Freundin hinterher reisen. Er überschreibt das Restaurant seinem Bruder, der sich gleich vom Grundstücksspekulanten übertölpeln lässt. Schließlich wird Nadine zum rettenden Engel und das Restaurant eine Goldgrube.

Immer dran denken: unsere Zivilisation ist das Ziel von Fanatikern

Ja, der Film ist eine Komödie, unprätentiös, charmant, warmherzig. Außerdem wird das dürftige Drehbuch reichlich mit Musikeinlagen gestreckt. Oder mit irrelevanten Szenen. Die Orgie, die sich im Soul Kitchen abspielt, hat nur oberflächlich mit der Haupthandlung zu tun. Naja, es ist der Vorwand für die Dialogzeile, dass der Grundstücksspekulant das Finanzamt "gefickt" habe, aber insgesamt ist das bloß Selbstzweck.
 Der Film ist in der Tradition von Kleiner Mann - ganz groß, wo sich sich die weniger Privilegierten gegen alle Widrigkeiten durchsetzen und letztendlich dann doch noch ihr Leben auf die Reihe kriegen.
Dabei aktualisiert Akin auch das Genre Hamburg-Film (ich denke da etwa an Große Freiheit Nr. 7).
Der Film lädt nicht zum Nachdenken ein, braucht er auch nicht, denn es nicht mehr (und nicht weniger!) als gepflegte Unterhaltung.
6/10

Jaja, das Leben findet statt, während wir Pläne für was Anderes schmieden

Stranger by the Lake (L'inconnu du lac) - Alain Guiraudie (2013)

The plot of this drama is rather straightforward:. summer - holidays - men are hanging out on the beach in the nude, sometimes they have sex with each in the nearby woods.
One of the visitors to the beach is isolated. He doesn't participate in the cruising activities, is just sitting by himself. Franck, a guy  who visits the beach for sex, talks to him and something like friendship is emerging between them. They talk or sit just in silence, looking at the lake.
One evening Michel leaves later. he observes that Michel, one of the regulars on the beach, is drowning his lover. The next day his things are still there - but the others seemingly don't care. They continue their usual activities.
Franck is fascinated by Michel. He starts an affair with him, but Michel is not interested in a relationship. He says that he has his own life.
An inspector calls trying his best to solve the case. Franck says that he saw nothing. Michel doesn't even mention that he was the lover of the deceased. Henri has the suspicion that Michel is dangerous and he warns Franck. While Franck is swimming, Henri approaches Michel and tells him that the inspector probably soon has enough evidence to arrest him. Then he tells Michel that he will go for a walk in the woods.
When Franck returns, the beach is empty. Franck finds Henri who has been stabbed. Franck tries to to his life, but Henri says that he got what he wanted. Franck flees from Michel. he sees that Michel also stabs the director.Franck is hiding, while Michel calls him. Then Franck calls Michel -- no answer.

Strangers meet and nothing happens

The production of this film relies entirely on natural light, so the end is set almost in darkness. That's why the audience has to make their own ending. Of course, viewers who are spoiled by Hollywood like that everything is laid out neatly.
The persons in this drama are types without much of an individual life. Franck is only infatuation, devotion, but also seeking the thrill by playing with unknown risks. Michel is only an object of desire and represents the fascinating, Henri is representative for those who play secure - and don't have other perspectives than the grave ahead. The inspector may be the voice of reason - nobody listens to him.
Alain Guiraudie succeeds in creating an outdoor chamber play. Yes, this film is extremely graphic, but the actors are not exposed. In other words, the film is not suitable for voyeurs.
Ultimately it's a film about loneliness.
8/10

There were people who thought this was too explicit - what would they have said about the film itself?

Ida (2013) - Pawel Pawlikkowski --- strong but unsatisfying

Ida is an exceptional film, also an unusual one. It's in black and white, has an old 4:3 ratio, has barely any  camera movcement.
The Holocaust is the background of this story, yet it is  a movie without yelling nazis and concentration camps. It is a film about identities -- and a very Polish one.
Poland in the 1960's. Anna is novice in a nunnery and about to take the vows. Her family perished during the Holocaust, but then an aunt announces herself and informs that Anna is actually a Jew and that her real name is Ida.
This aunt and Ida embark on a travel to find the burial place of Ida's parents. This aunt used to be a high-ranked communist and persecuted "enemies of the people". Now she is a heavy drinker, a bitter woman, having casual sex with whoever pleases her. The aunt makes attempts to talk Ida from taking the vows. Her argument is that she must know what she is renouncing before taking the vow. After they have found the mortal remains of her parents, Ida returns to the convent, but doesn't perform the ritual.
The aunt commits suicide; Ida tries the life style of her aunt, but returns finally to the convent.

In my view there are different issues with this film:
The identity conflict is not between Catholic and Jewish spirituality, between Christianity and Communism. In the 1960s it not surprising that Ida chooses the convent, as totalitarianism had nothing to offer. The fact that Ida is a Jew is actually pointless in the context of this film.
Ida is played like with angelic innocence by Agata Trzebuchowska. Every development, if any, is hidden behind the beatific appearance. I wished the script had given Ida an extra dimension. The life she is offered is definitely empty compared to her experiences in the convent. As her one-time lover announces what the future is going to be: "Don't know. Just life." This is, as we see, definitely not enough for Ida. But still, why can't Ida be more complex?

Musician Lis (Dawid Ogrodnik) offers Ida 'just life'.

And to me it is very problematic that this film is made in 2013.and still presents the Catholic Church as a place of refuge. This is true from a historical POV, but NOW the church in Poland has herself become a suppressor in s democracy. An institution that shamelessly uses  laws against blasphemy to promote her own reactionary agenda.
Nevertheless, this is still a great film, radical in its barren ascetic, proving that there are  many more than 50 shades of grey.
6/10.

Ida is finding her own way.

Indien (Österreich 1993)

Ein großartiger Film - hätte ich diesen Film wohl mitbekommen, wenn ich noch im deutschen Sprachraum leben würde? Vielleicht eher nicht, denn diese Dialoge sind so mit Österreich verwoben, dass es uns Piefkes schon schwerfällt, das Gemurmel richtig zu deuten. Es wäre falsch, diesen Film mit Untertiteln zu versehen, ich denke, er verlöre dadurch seine Authentizität,.
Also: zwei Restauranttester sind im Auftrag der Regierung unterwegs, der grantige Heinz Bösel (Josef Hader) und der Streber-Yuppie Kurt Fellner (Alfred Dorfer). Sie sind wie Feuer und Wasser. Während der eine daherplappert, schweigt der andere verbissen. Wenn Bösel zu einem Monolog anhebt, schweigt der Andere dazu. Das ist ausgefeilte und präzise Entlarvung durch Sprache. Die beiden knapp an der Feindschaft vorbei schlitternden Außendienstler kommen sich näher, als sie bemerken, dass ihre Biografie dann doch nicht so verschieden sind. Trotz ihres unterschiedlichen Gebahrens werden beide von ihren Frauen betrogen. Sie kommen einander näher
Dann wird bei Fellner Krebs im Endstadium diagnostiziert. Bösel ist der Einzige, der ihn im Krankenhaus besucht. Sie arbeiten eine Bucket-List der noch zu erledigenden Dinge ab.
Am Ende dauert diese Männerfreundschaft über den Tod hinaus.
Ein wunderbarer Film. Ich habe bislang nicht mitbekommen, dass es eine Edition mit österreichischen Filmen gibt - schon um die 250 DVDs sind erschienen. Diese Filmen scheinen auxßerhalb der Grenzen Österreichs nicht besonders bekannt zu sein. Dieser Film verdient es, auch einem nicht-österreichischen Pubkikum vorgestellt zu werden.Wenn wir Hans Moser verstehen, wird es für diesen Film wohl auch noch reichen
Ja, humoristisch, schwermütig, aber nicht albern oder sentimental. Eine Komödie mit tragischen, aber versöhnlichem Ausgang, eine Tragödie, die die Banalität des Daseins erträglich macht.
9/10

Die erträgliche Schwerfälligkeit des Seins -- heute: Österreich

 

Türkisch für Anfänger (2012)

Über diesen Film kann ich nur auf Deutsch schreiben. Ich kann mir nicht vorstellen, dass er erfolgreich in ein anderes Medium überführt werden kann. Und tut man es dann doch, erreicht man bloß, dass Halbstarke und Halbgebildete sich dann auf IMDb darüber auslassen, dass es "den Deutschen" an Humor gebricht.
Ich hatte mir von diesem Streifen nicht viel versprochen, bin dann aber doch angenehm unterhalten worden. Es handelt sich hierbei ursprünglich um eine Vorabendserie. Es ist mir egal, ob die Umsetzung des Serienkonzepts ins Filmmedium "gelungen" ist oder nicht - ich will bloß einen Film sehen.
Ja, richtig, kein Klischee wird ausgelassen: eine Nachfahrin der 68-er (Doris Schneider wurde genau 1968 geboren); ihre Kinder, die öko-spießige Lena und der der Welt abhandengekommene Nils. Und dann Freundinnen aus dem Orgasmus-Kurs, dann ein türkische Kernfamilie mit dem Alfa-Männchen Cem, der Kopftuchträgerin Yagmur und dem Vater, der bei der Polizei arbeitet. Ihre Wege kreuzen sich auf dem Weg zum Flughafen, denn sie wollen nach Thailand. Dann stürzt die Maschine ab und sie darauf angewiesen zu interagieren.
Es dürfte mittlerweile deutlich sein, dass dies keine Personen, Persönlichkeiten sowieso nicht, sondern Typen sind, etwa wie in der Commedia dell'Arte. Man erwarte also keine feinsinnigen Porträts. Hingegen kann man sich darauf freuen, dass alle Charakteristika vorgeführt und ironisiert werden. Ja, das ist köstlich und der Dialog hat durchaus Pointen und nicht nur Gags. Diese würden in einer Übersetzung an Biss verlieren und lediglich plump rüberkommen.

Lost -- die Tropen können auch erfrischend sein (Elyas M'Barek)

Am Ende zeigt sich, dass die Typen die Zwänge ihrer Schablonen abstreifen können, eigentlich ohne großen Aufwand und somit zu Individualität kommen können.
Mit anderen Worten: eine hübsche kleine Komödie, unambitioniert, dann aber doch erfrischend keck, ohne in Seichtheiten zu verfallen. Geeignet für einen verregneten Winternachmittag.
6/10

Lena und Cem im Paradies

PK (2014) - Hindu nationalists are dumbasses

This morning I read a short notice about Hindu nationalists vandalizing cinemas that  had shown the movie PK.Browsing on I saw that this film would be shown today in Valby Kino.
Valby Kino is a strange place. I love the enthusiasm of the staff, but first you have to go in a backyard, then up a staircase. Actually it looks more like a porn cinema than a regular cinema hall. I wish they would concentrate more on movies that are not shown by every other cinema.
Now to PK, the biggest blockbuster Bollywood ever had. Yes, this is proof of popularity, but not proof of quality. Actually I have a problem with Bollywood comedies, as many are less than sophisticated. They often engage in very physical humor, like the fat guy stumbling, farting, compulsory peeing etc. Laughing about fat guys and big noses is  not comedy, maybe farcical, but not comedy.
Rajkumar Hirani used these devices in Three Idiots from 2009, but he had also a superb blend of pure comedy and touching drama. Judging by the trailer I expected that the jokes in this movie would be far from elegant. However, the reaction of Hindu nationalists made me curious. Ultimately I watched the movie for their sake.Actually the trailer collects the least memorable scenes from this film.
So, what is this all about? An alien is stranded on earth; he needs his remote to call a space ship that will bring him bring to his home planet. But the remote is stolen from him and - as it turns out - sold to a leader of a sect, who then presents it to his devotees as personal gift of God. The alien - he doesn't bring a name from his home planet - is told that only God can help him.
So the alien tries to address God to help him get back his remote, but he is in a state of thrownness (as Heidegger would have called it), he is a stranger and has no clue how this planet is organized. Slowly he recognizes patterns, but he also questions all conventions with childlike (or autistic) logic. At last he comes to the conclusion that all those "managers" of God dialed the wrong number and got connected to some prankster. He also unmasks the holy man who has his remote, so that he at last can return to his home planet. But he returns after one year, to explore the gap between the gap between words and meaning (yes, langue and langage). Example: when we say 'I love chicken', we don't mean that we love animals, but that we put them on our menu).
Rajkumar Hirani has given us a very subtle film, with sentimental and funny elements, drama and comedy, laughs and tears - and "food for thought". His message is ultimately gnostic;: The real God is evading our perception, we reveal petty pretenders.
Amir Khan plays his PK with the scrutiny of a philosopher and the curiosity of a child. There are great supporting performances (e.g. by Anushka Sharma and Sushant Singh Rajput as a potential Zaara/Veer-couple -- Bollywood always manages to bring new and fresh faces to the screen) . But also Saurabh Shukla as the man and Sanjay Dutt as his disciple bring great supporting performances.
I left the cinema hall happy, almost elevated - very few films bring me in that state. Yes, this is a great film, with a few concessions to the crowd, but nevertheless a most lovable film.

Some have been waiting for this: Amir Khan in the nude

Seis puntos sobre Emma (2012)

This film by director Roberto Pérez Toledo was on Arte, which is a recommendation in its own right. There is virtually no information available on this film. It seems that the director is mainly known for short movies In a way this is a long short movie.
Emma (Verónica Echegui) is blind.She feels that she cannot fall in love, but she wants a child, as she feels that a kid might add meaning to her life. She is an independent women and uses men for her purposes. She attends meetings of a therapy group of people with different handicaps. She decided that the leader of this group (Alex García) should be the one who involuntarily begets that child. In the neighbor flat is Diego (Fernando Tielve) , who also gets infatuated with Emma and starts stalking her. He discovers that the therapist is married and that he also films their intercourses. Break and then she seeks comfort with Diego. - In the end she pregnant and moves away.

Alex García, a visual highlight of this film.

So in a trivial manner the plot could be summed up in this way: Emma is blind, but thinks that she sees clearly, but then she realizes that not only her vision is blurred. Not very intriguing.
Rating: 4/10
PROJECT: See the films completely you didn't watch the first time, because you fell asleep during first viewing.

Emma should pick her psycho therapist.

Measuring the World (2012) -- a pathetic failure

Daniel Kehlmann is one of Germany's leading authors, not even of the age of 40 he already published a series of modern classics. And there is still no sign that his talent is ebbing out. His elegant style makes the most exquisite literature, a celebration for those who can enjoy his charming irony and chiseled prose. How can this become a good movie?
In the hands of Buck it couldn't. He is mainly known for robust comedies and routine works for TV, so this subtle piece of literature degenerates in the hands of this director. Kehlmann collaborated with the script and he finds an easy solution - he retells the story off-voice.
The novel Die Vermessung der Welt is about two of the greatest scientists of their time, Alexander von Humboldt and Carl Friedrich Gauß. The first one a natural scientist, the other a mathematician.
The visual part is opulent, and relies to a large extent on Humboldt's travel to South America, but then it seems to become like an extended National Geographic biopic. Thus the visual is there for its stylishness and nothing more. And in-between stumble the young actors who try to give their vision of the characters they are supposed to portray; the director doesn't have a vision of the characters either.
There are some brilliant scenes in the film, e.g. when Gauß explains to Humboldt his view on science, but in the whole this is comedy that has turned slapstick.
Remember: only a congenial director can make a successful adaptation from a brilliant book. Detlev Buck is not that director.

Gauß is played by Florian David Fitz. I saw recently his TV-movie Jesus liebt mich (Jeus loves me). I felt intrigued to watch it because of the representation of Doomsday for puppets - but this movie leads nowhere. It is supposed to be about the second coming of Christ and the ensuing apocalypse, but the film doesn't knwo where to move. It is neither provocative, nor entertaining, just like an episode from a never-ending soap. This is the routine thing TV stations provide for unambitious audiences. A film you can easily watch while ironing, chatting on the phone and where it doesn't matter when you fall asleep while it's on the air.

How to make a tabloid version of an elegant book.

The Pear Tree (1998) - a poetic film from Iran

So it is 2015 now. Second time I am alone during New Year's Eve. The absence of social engagements makes me independent. As I enjoy my solitary life, it doesn't matter if I write something in my blog while 2015 is only 30 minutes of age - nobody cares anyway.
Another note: I saw The Flower Girl - a a film from North Korea a few days ago. The title song IS a catchy tune and has become one for me. This is kind of irritating, as I want to be water proof against their shitty propaganda.
OK
Now about the Pear Tree. Everybody who has a just a basic interest in movies, has to know that Iran is a country that at least once in a while produces most watchable movies. I have seen some more than watchable movies from the 2000's, but not a movie from the past millennium.

Mahmoud is an intellectual with a writer's block. At the same time a pear tree refuses to fructify - aha, parallelism! The gardener alerts Mahmud, but he he prefers to stay inside. So we have inner life and outer life. Will Mahmud stay in his house - will he go out and confront The Pear Tree? The gardener's talk triggers images from the past of Mahmud. He was in love with 'M'  but she is far away away. She promised to wait until he would become of legal age, so that they could marry. But she goes away and he sees her never again. Mahmud engages in politics, becomes a Marxist, but as Marx said in his theses on Feuerbach, he does not want only to interpret the world differently, he wants to change it.
From childhood dreams Mahmoud jumps into present-day adventures... TBC
At that point I fell asleep. While I was proud to keep myself awake until midnight to greet 2015, I faded out soon after that...
So back to this remarkable work by Dariush Mehrjui. ... Mahmud wants to achieve something before contacting M, but in prison he learns, that she perished in a car accident.
Back in the present tense, he is still busy with his unspecified, but ground-breaking book. Angrilyhe orders that the gtree should be cut, but the gardener supposes that the tree still deserves a second chance. At last Mahmud finds peace and is enjoying the moment between past and future.
Enjoying the moment between past and the future -- could there be a more suitable film for New Year's Eve?
There are very poetic moments, e.g. when Mahmud and M meet for the last time and she tries to dry his tears -- this is a moment of sheer beauty.
However, the transformations stay unclear to me. i don't understand why he changed from a left-wing activist to a present-day intellectual and I don't see what made him at last confront the outer world. This part seems like attached to the film.
The philosophical content of this film is also rather trivial, but this can also be because the male protagonist acts like a woodcut, without any emotion.
On the whole this is still a very watchable film.
6/10.

Artistic department wasn't very busy to make this film attractive.