დედე ([Dede], 2017, Mariam Khatchvani)

This year I have seen three films from Georgia. This is the least successful of them. What is it about?
David and Gegi return "from the war". Gegi once saved the live of David. Going back to their community, Gegi tells David that he fell in love with a girl,but he lost track of her and doesn't even know her name. Soon he will find out that his love interest is David's fiancée, Dina.
The men react both in traditional ways: Gegi is prepared to give up his love and David immediately wants to defend his property. Not to follow the traditional ways might result in a feud, says everybody. David, however, understands at last that Dina despises him. Theirs wouldn't be a happy marriage. He commits suicide and stages it as accident. - Dina's family isn't happy with her decision, but she marries Gegi. Fate chases them and a few years later Gegi dies. Who will now get the custody on their child. The patriarchal society has an answer for every question.
There is a lot of folklore in this film. Actually it is almost like a guide to the patriarch customs in that society. The outer world is almost non-present, only in form of a TV impulses from outside reach those villages - and only if the power supply is working. Dede is somewhat in the tradition of Robert J. Flaherty.
Almost all actors in Dede are amateurs. People are playing themselves. This adds to the authenticity of the film, but unfortunately it does not enhance the artistic quality. Probably you need a director with greater skills or talent to make amateurs work. It is painful to watch a film with overacting and stilted dialogues.
5/10

Ostfriesich für Anfänger (2016, Gregory Kirchhoff)

Ein Mann namens Uwe

Griesgrämige alte Männer gibt es nicht nur in Schweden, sondern auch in Ostfriesland. So wie Ove hat auch Uwe seine Probleme mit den Behörden. Dazu mag auch beitragen, dass er offensichtlich die Kommunikation verweigert, sodass sein Anwesen schließlich von der Kommune eingezogen wurde.  Außerdem jobbt der Alte auf einer Tankstelle, wobei er durchaus eigenwillige Vorstellungen davon hat, wie diese Tätigkeit ausgeführt werden soll. Uwe will sich von niemandem in seine Lebensführung reinreden lassen, wobei sein brüskes Wesen eher hinderlich ist. Und aufgepasst: jetzt wird es lustig. Die Stadtverwaltung hat sich Fördermittel an Land gezogen und will auf Uwes vormaligem Anwesen ein Zentrum für integrationswillige ausländische Facharbeiter einrichten. Man verfällt auf den Gedanken, dass Uwe de Utländers unterrichten soll.
Selbstredend ist der brummige Alte dieser Aufgabe nicht gewachsen. Schließlich bringt er ihnen aber die einzige Sprache bei,die er beherrscht: Ostfriesisch. Wat mutt, dat mutt.
Und jetzt wird es schon wieder lustig, denn Abdullah, Swetlana, Feelgood, Carls und Lientang sprechen auf einmal Friesisch, in der Annahme, dies sei Deutsch,
Ja gut, diese Komödie wurde nicht von der AfD produziert, sodass Uwe seinerseits einen Lernprozess durchlaufen darf. Er lernt nämlich, dass sich unter der andersfarbigen Haut auch Menschen befinden. Und wir lernen, dass sich unter Uwes vergrämter weißer Haut ein vereinsamtes, aber liebenswerten Wesen verbirgt. Und werden dank Bauernschläue und interkultureller Kommunikation letztendlich alle noch auf ihre Fasson glücklich.
Man sehe diese Komödie am besten leicht angetrunken, um mild um die klischeehaften Darstellungen und Plotschwächen hinweg zu sehen. De Utländers sind flache Karikaturen ohne Hintergrund. Die Bürohengste und die mannstollen Bürokratinnen aus der Verwaltung sind auch irgendeiner Jauchegrube für vergärende Witze entsteigen. Zweifelsohne bedienen die Klischees die Vorurteile eines gewisssen Publikums. Wenn sich dieses Publikum die Feelgood-Botschaft zu Herzen nähme, dann wäre dieser Film nicht völlig vergeblich gewesen.
4/10

Učiteľka (2016, Jan Hřebejk)

This is an astonishing film. Originally it was conceived for, but captures fast our imagination. The TV only, but because of its outstanding qualities it was shown at the Film Festival of Karlovy Vary, harvested prizes and has received a much wider scope than intended originally.
The teacher recreates very subtly the atmosphere in Slovakia  in the end of the Communist Reign. You can have a good live, if you abide by the their rules. Rule #1: Don't attract attention. Rule #2: Don't disagree with the official opinion. If you are consenting with them, you might have a good life. Maybe you will have somebody with some kind of influence around. But maybe you will also encounter somebody who likes misuse that influence for personal benefit.
The teacher in this movie is such a person. When she gets a new class, she makes meticulous notes about the professions of her new pupils. She employs her children to clean her apartment and used their parents to do her favours, like obtaining rare medicine, giving free taxa rides, doing the shopping or repairing her washing machine. You don't want to do that? Well, your kids will pay the price. Their marks will fall quickly. Those in power can destroy your career, your life.
The Teacher starts somewhat slow, but captures fast our imagination. It shows in a clever way, how the system always finds something to put possible criticism to silence. There is a fine balance between the teacher and how those who are victims of the her caprices react.
On a broader scale this is, however, not only a story about misuse of power in communism. With some adaptations this could bhave happened anywhere.
In a Q&A Zuzana Mauréry, the main actor, said that this film from Slovakia did not fare very well in the Czech Republic. There was no explanation why it was not so successful with Czechs.
8/10

Stigmata (1999, Rufus Wainwright)

This is not guilty pleasure, just guilty of watchinbg a mediocre horror thriller. This is the snot that types like Dan Brown spread as caviar. This is the rubbish that claims to restore the original Jesus and to undermine the Church. However, as ignorance rules, there is also an audience for this kind of stuff.
The script is a hodge-podge og diverse things. In the beginning og the film a statue of Mary starts to weep blood after the death of a certain pater. A boy sells the rosary of that pater to a tourist, who in turn send it to her daughter Frankie (Patricia Arquette). There is also a priest, Father Andrew Kiernan (Gabriel Byrne), who is sent out by the Church to find natural explanations for alleged miracles.
Once Frankie has received the rosary things start to become strange. While she is taking a bath, a pigeon flies into her apartment and she gets her first set of stigmata. More strange visions occur, also ècriture automatique. We are asked to believe that Frankie writes down passages from the Gospel of Thomas in Aramaic (sic!) and that those may be sayings whose author could be Jesus himself. While the Church tries to keep those sayings secret, Frankie is furnished with an almost complete set of stigmata. In the end a bishop tries to kill her, the messenger, but during some kind of exorcism normality is restored.
Yes, nothing fits together in this hot pot. Yes, it's conspiration and mystique with fast clippings and an enervating soundtrack. Somewhat stylish. Recommended for people who like to see blood coming out of Patricia Arquette.
4/10

Amour fou (2014, Jessica Hausner)

I wonder if you can for a refund when a description of a film is completely misguiding. This has been introduced as "romantic comedy". Seriously! Did the writers of that introduction think they could fool some people into the cinema by giving the film this label? Others called it "stylistically confident". I become more and more convinced that this is in most cases used as synonym for pretentious bullshit - which is true in this case. Some observers have traced "sharp wit". If there is any it was wasted on this observer.
This film does not do justice to Kleist or the romantic era in general. Yes, the pictures are well composed (and sterile), but looking at a painting is more interesting than watching these doll-like actors hovering around. It seems that Hausner wants them to act as artificial as possible. Add the stilted language of the script and you get 96 minutes of dullness. Usually I avoid those terms, as dullness is an impression and not a description. But I really don't know any other term. Toy theatre is more vivid than this one.
OK, Kleist wanted to find somebody for a suicide pact - but why does he have to perform like a sleepwalker?
The more I write about this, the more I hate it.
1/10

Extra Terrestres (2016, Carla Cavina)

A film from Puerto Rico is a rare view in this part of the world. The critics seemed to be positive, so why not give it a chance? Extra-Terrestrials seems to be told with the conventions of telenovela in mind. There is a plot with a bundle of subplots, but not all are developed properly. There are also rough editings and fast clippings which a viewer of soap operas might like, but which went on my nerves after some time.
So what's this about? Teresa works as astrophysicist. She is about to marry Daniela and now she wants to break the family tradition of secrets and lies, but she finds herself very fast trapped in the old family conventions. But it is tough to find the kairos for truth, as there are plenty of problems at home. Her father's poultry farm has serious problems, as some gringo laws jeopardize the future existence of the farm. What is going on exactly remained unclear to me. It was like having missed some episodes and stepping into the middle of something. - Teresa's nephew shares Teresa's love for science. The boy is portrayed with solidarity, only at the end he is, however, converted to a ridiculous figure in a plot development that did not support the plot in any way. (As far as I can it remains a family secret who is the father of the boy.)
There is also Teresa's sister, Andrea, who is to marry somebody who is interested in banking, but may go into government. She is, however, having an affair with a handsome mechanic.There is also someone called Junior, an olderd brother (probably) an completely undeveloped figure.
So there is plot enough, but in my opinion too little focus on what I consider the main plot.
At odd moments Cavina throws in some stunning 3D-animations of planets, time lapses and eagle views. These could serve to give structure to the film, but thet are just there - in my view for no particular purpose.
So, though there is some good material the film suffers from a hopelessly messed-up script. Pity.
6/10