Rapportpigen (1974, Knud Leif Thomsen)

 In Denmark all Danish productions are called "pearls", so today I watches a "pearl from the Danish film trasure". Let's have a look what ia considered pearl level in Denmark.

Vivi is a factory girl. Her boyfriend lives off her and else he is most of the day in bed. It seems that he is ploughing through classical poems that could become texts for a song. Vivi's salary is not enough to feed his need for steaks. In short, there is a need for money. So he persuades her to pose for a sex magazine. Those were the "liberated 70s". She asks, however, if people are talking too much about sex - probably this is meant as a touch of reflection. 

A stalker spots Vivi as she tries to get away, the stalker just in time manages to jump on the bus. Interesting to see that then you were allowed to smoke on a bus. Interesting as well that the stalker openly reads his sex magazine. Those were the times.

On the bus is the man hater Harriet, a woman in her 40s.  Before  we know it Vivi is in Harriet's house. Harriet intends to bring the war of the sexes to a new level. And indeed also the script reaches new levels of stupidity when Harriet tries to seduce the stalker. 

This film doesn't know what it wants to be. A comedy without jokes? A thriller without suspense? A sex film without sex? Or just a reflection on stupidity in society.

IMDb attributes 118' to this junk. Thankfuly my vefsion has 40 minutes less.

Never to be seen again.

2/10

 

Vores lille by (1954, Henning Ørbak)

Ligegyldig hvad nogen smider på marked hedder nu om dage "filmperle", eller endnu værre "perle fra den danske filmskat". Denne tynde omgang nøjes med at være bare en filmperle.
Den lille by er strengt taget bare en klynge huse med nogle ualmindelig frustrerede beboer. Bygden er knyttet til den øvrige verden med et lille tog. En solrig eftermiddag bliver vagabonden Laust ansat som togbetjent. Da ha bosætter sig i samfundet, vækker han det erotiske begær i nogle kvinder. Han er mest interesseret i ung kød. Da han beruset forveksler sin elskede med lærerens kone, kommer der lidt mere gang i handlingen. (Ja, det går nok heller ikke i vores metoo-tid, bare at tager en kvinde i mørke.)
Mændene er nok også erotisk underforsynet. En varm sommerdag er holdet på jernbanen nødt at stoppe toget for at belure piger, som tager et bad. Handlingen er usammenhængende, mere som enkelte situationer og den ender meget brat med et happy ending.
2/10

Danmark (2017, Kasper Rune Larsen)

This film had three screenings at CPH:PIX and the day after the festival closed it appeared already on TV. In other words: it won't appear i normal distribution. In other word, it has been estimated that people won't care to see this in a cinema hall. Should they or is this really not fit for the big screen?
It is about a group of slackers in a provincial town in Jutland. These are, says Urban Dictionary, young people who don't feel like doing anything. Vitelloni, thus, if they had lived in the 50s. They hang out, drink, have parties and one night stands.
The main protagonist is called Norge. His flat looks as if he just moved in or is about to move out. In true Oblomov manner he sleeps until daylight, drinks and smokes, shags and listens to death metal rock. One day the girl Josephine enter his life. She seduces him. Later she tells him that she is pregnant. Now Norge discovers his responsibility as a father to be. Norge and Josephine become a  couple.
Larsen is one of the instructors who uses mumbling to attract the attention of viewers in central scenes. In a scene with extreme mumbling Josephine tells Norge that he is not the father of the child and that his was just a tactic to get close to Norge.
The dialog is realistic. (fucking as intensifier etc.). Camera work follows these people as if it was a documentary. But ultimately this is not very relevant. I would have given this a 3, but give it a 2 for extreme mumbling.
2/10

Naked people as marketing strategy

Thorn (2017, Gabriel Tzafka)

It's the day of Jacob and Lise's marriage. They run away from their party to a lonely farm yard. Here they are going to celebrate their honeymoon. There is only a strange neighbor, He tells them that he has been hunting a thief for more than 30 years. The young couple makes a trip to the forest. Jacob has a strange encounter with his neighbor. When he returns, Lise tells him that she has lost her wedding ring. Strange meetings between the neighbors occur.
After some time we see that present and future tense are happening at the same time. The old couple is a projection of the young Jacob and Lise. Reality and projection are mixed, but actually: what is reality and what is projection.
It is also disclosed that she actually never lost the wedding ring. She invented the story to ensure the love of her husband and after 30 years she has given up that hope. Hope is patient, but 30 years to reach this insight seems a bit long.
I saw this at CPH:PIX. Thorn has the same structure as Le ciel étoilé au-dessus de ma tête by Ilan Klipper which I saw on the same occasion, thus a story that starts in a realistic way and then questions what actually is real. However, it seems to me that Klipper has more to tell, more strings to play with, while Tzafka's story is relatively simple and in its own way straightforward.
 3/10

Lille soldat (2008, Annette K.Olesen)

Så fik jeg set den alligevel. Det føles også lidt som et must, at man burde interessere sig for danske film. Medens jeg prøver at have "nye talenter" lidt på afstand, har denne allerede et par år på puklen. Den har ikke opnået en blivende position i repertoire. Derfor bliver den sendt i TV midt om natten, når det nu alligevel er ligegyldigt hvad der bliver progamsat.
Lotte har været soldat. Vi hører ikke meget om hendes mission, men, ja, hun har sine synlige og usynlige sår. Hendes far er vognmand og lover hende noget arbejde. Han driver også hjemmeservice-prostitution. Heldigvis mangler han lige en chauffør som kan køre hans favoritluder og privatmaitresse til kunderne.Og så passer det jo, at private arbejdsgiver skaber velfærd. Lotte synes derimod, at luksusluderen burde være hjemme og skulle passe sit barn. Derfor slår hun en særlig kræsen klient ud. Hendes far og luderen Lily synes derimod ikke, at det er den rigtige måde at skabe velfærd på.
Gad vide hvorfor man fortaler sådan en historie. Lily er glad for sit arbejde. Hun er måske ikke ligefrem en happy hooker, men alligevel fuldt integreret i servicebranchen. Eller skal filmen give os et mere nuanceret billede af prostitution? Se, der er da ikke så slemt. Jo, en gang imellem bliver de slem tilredt, men det holder op, når de har lært at makke ret.  Eller skal den fortælle, at man kan ønske det gode, nemlig at rede en pige fra at være nødt til at sælge sin krop og alligevel bevirker man det. Lige meget hvad, det bliver utilfredsstillende.
4/10

Fuglene over sundet (2016, Nicolo Donato)

The story of saving the Danish Jews from deportation to Nazi extermination camps is well-known. It's a story of how a people united their forces and fooled the occupation forces. It is a story of how a people helped the neighbors to escape and survive. It is a glossy story of the common man's heroism. In recent years there came scratches to this tale. We have heard about fishermen who took overprice for sailing their Jewish countrymen to Sweden. There have been failings also. Not only "German Nazi pigs" were hating and hunting Jews, but there were also Danish Quislings. Thus an interesting situation, even with clear parallels to current affairs.
Is this converted to a relevant film? Donato tells the story of Arne Itkin, a successful jazz musician, His wife hears in the synagogue that the German occupation forces are going to deport the Jewish citizens. Arne, however, is carefree - this cannot happen in Denmark. Instead of preparing their escape, he suggests domestic coziness in the bed. Thus we know that he is an artist and not seeing what is going on around him. However, also Arne cannot close his eyes when the Germans actually come to deport them. Within a second they change from citizens to refugees. They are told that the best chance is to take to the harbor of Gilleleje. (The rest of the plot is history. I won't tell it here; Google knows it already.)
This is a film one should like, but there are different factors  that make it difficult to enjoy it.
First - the photography and cinematography. Large parts of the film happen in darkness in a matter that make it difficult, sometimes for me impossible, to see what is going on. OK with "natural light", but we need to know what is going on.
Exaggerated use of close-ups focus on parts of the faces, as if this was a chamber play. Presumably the intention was to show us the despair of the sudden homeless family. But to see a cut-off face without surrounding does not really work, at least not for me. Another reason is that the actors - and they are mostly really good actors - don't have much to work with. This leads to ...
Second - the dull script. The Itkin family is at best sketched, character development is missing. All stereotypes from films about Nazis are used. Dialogues are like speech bubbles and stilted statements. The actors seem to read from a batch card.
Across the Waters - thus the English title - is mainly interesting because of the plot twist  hinted at before. Take it as superficial time pass without expectin much from it.
5/10

En enkelt til Korsør (2008, Gert Fredholm)

For watching such films TV is enough. It was shown on our domestic culture channel, probably because a PhD student is involved.
It is kind of romantic comedy set in a school for grown-ups. It is going to show us, how an intellectual who has only read about love, is going to meet romance in reality. Bad luck he falls in love with a lesbian and destroys their relationship. (And what is the point of this? To show that dykes don't stay together anyway? And why does she call him a pig? Clichés queuing, waiting until it is their call.)
The film is set in Korsør, a provincial town in Denmark. Thus it is again a good opportunity to present us with a selection of weirdos, losers and other sad characters, as usual in Danish movies set outside the metropolis.
A film nobody needs.
3/10

Den bedste mand (2017, Mikkel Serup)

Jeg har det svært med biografiske film. Problemet er vinklingen: hvorfor skulle jeg interesse mig for lige netop denne person. Dette spørgsmål stillede jeg mig selvfølgeligt også i forbindelse med denne film. Filmen lægger op til en sportsbegivenhed fra 1977. Er det ikke ørkesløst at genfortælle sådan en gammel event fra 40 år siden? Hvorfor er dte relevant? Efter jeg har set filmen, blev jeg ikke meget klogere på Jørgen "Gamle" Hansen.

Mikkel Boe Følsgaard giver et solidarisk portræt. Han har nærmest alderen, selvom han fysisk mest ligner en stor dreng. Det siges at Søren Malling spiller manageren Mogens Palle overbevisende. Det kan være. Da de var store navne, var jeg endnu ikke i Danmark. For min skyld kan det altså være lige meget, om de spiller op til deres reale skikkelser. Alt i alt en jævn præstation.
Om plottet er der ikke særligt meget at sige. Alle kan læse om "de virkelige begivenheder" på Wikipedia eller hvor det nu skal være. Der skal selvfølgeligt klistres en privat detalje på. I Sommeren af '92 var det køkkenet som Møller Nielsen ville tømre for sin kone. Her har Hansen lovet sin kone en svømmepøl. Så nu ved vi, at de også er private mennesker.
I bund og grund en ørkesløs film. På IMDb gav jeg den 5/10 og skrev dette:
This is a biopic "inspired by true events" and as such it can hardly contain spoilers. Anybody can check any dictionary and get informed about the story line. And even if you didn't check out the biography of the boxer Jørgen Hansen, the chain of events can hardly be surprising. The question is thus: why should I be interested in the life of a boxing event that occurred more than 35 years ago. Actually I don't know either. The movie seems to follow its hero with solidarity. Jørgen Hansen faces all critical situations with some sort of rural whit, which seemed to be his trademark. Right from the beginning the focus is on the age of the main character. Hansen is contrasted with an aspiring boxing champion from Uganda. Their rivalry develops into a nice friendship and in the end he helps him fight the phantoms of the past. Nice movie for lovers of sport. 

Manden bag døren (2003, Jesper W. Nielsen)

Det er et meget mærkelig tilfælde, at de to nærmeste kirker starter en filmklub hver. I dag var det Ålholm Kirke. De viste en dansk film,.jeg så den for fuldstændigheds, skyld men kunne lige så godt have ladet være.
Så har vi Svend (en Nikolaj Coster Waldau med farvet hår) som er kæreste med Lizzie (Iben Hjeile). Svend er sygelig jaloux og har en snert af psykopatolog med voldelige tendenser. Hans bror hedder Bølle og er komplet faldet ud af samfundet. Svend og Lizzie afvikler ders sociale liv på et værtshus, hvor Torben er bartender (Lars Hjortshøj får en chance at vise sine ringe skuespilleriske evner i en seriøs rolle, for en gangs skyld). Svends forældre er gået fra hinanden. Der er faren, en senil alkoholiker (Per Oscarsson) og moren, en pillemisbruger (Rita Angela, som normalt kun optræder i uopsigtsvækkende biroller).
Svend prøver at holde sammen på denne rablende gale menageri, men da han også trænger til at få strammet adskillige skruer går det selvfølgeligt galt. Faren har ofte fablet om, at han ville tilbage til Pisserenden, hvor han i meget yngre dage var den ukronede konge. Svend lover ham hele tiden, at det skal de nok, men så dør faren. Svend vil så gerne at alle forsones, og derfor kører han med liget alle de steder hvor faren har et mellemværende. Til sidst bliver det oplyst for Svend, at Pisserenden egentligt er farens betegnelse for sin hustrus kønsdele. Ja, fy for en ulækker joke.
Svend vil så gerne at alle tilgiver hinanden, men han har selv alvorlige problemer med den der tilgivelse. Han mener hele tiden, at bøssen Gunnar "har kneppet kæresten i røven", endog uden at spørge om lov, hvilket i hans verdenssyn er påkrævet, når der er tale om røven Da kæresten så tilstår, at det gjorde hab faktisk, så går han beserk igen.
Der er gode kræfter i denne kraftløse film. De prøver at få det bedste ud af dette håbløse manuskript. Manuskriptet kommer næsten afsted med hvad son helst, da alle personer i denne cage aux folles er rablende gale. Men der kommer ikke en god - og vedkommende ! - film ud af et menageri af vanvittige eksistenser. Også editeringen ved ikke hvad den skal stille op med dette ualmindelige underlødige oplæg.
Den får 2/10, men kun fordi der er et par kraftfulde præstationer af gode skuespiller. Hvem finansierer dog sådan noget juks?

Under sandet (2015, Martin Zandvliet)

There is a lot to say about this film. In Germany some critics complained about the depiction of Germans as victims without mentioning that Germans also were committing atrocities. This is a typical pc-criticism. Of course everybody  knows about German atrocities, but frankly, these are two different stories and why mingle them? Those Germans who suffered from atrocities typically did not commit atrocities.So these boys or young men who are forced to disarm land mines in this movie, very likely did not commit atrocities in other places. They were even to young to have voted for Nazis, they were indoctrinated since the first day of their lives, victims of the regime in short.
These men, soldiers, enlisted during the last days of the war, were POW's. POW's have rights; to force them to do such a dangerous work is a war crime. It is understandable, but still a war crime. Of course else other people, Danish people would have had to "tidy up" after the Germans. Yes, it was a risky job. Yes, the hatred on the Danish side was understandable, but was it also excusable? A historian should be able to record facts without putting them in an equation. Those who hated "the Germans" and took private revenge were maybe generic victims of the occupation and not definite victims of a specific persecution. Again, this sentiment is understandable. However we don't have to offer excuses also.
Usually I don't watch films about WWII or Holocaust movies.I have seen too many of them. However, sometimes a director can transcend the description of a certain historical event into something general, from the specific the window to universally valid is opened. Is Under sandet such a film? At least the director attempts to say something generic about being in the wrong uniform on the wrong side of the front. Some user reviews I have seen don't extend the formulation of the question - they see only the illustration of a forgotten or even suppressed event. If a viewer can be convinced to think again about pre-conceptions and prejudices, then the film obviously int that category.
8/10