Leonera (2008, Pablo Trapero)

This is a sort of Orange is the New Black, but not with the voyeuristic male viewer in mind. Trapero went to real prisons and filmed with real inmates and not in rebuilt sets in a studio. It's rough and raw, not slick and polished as the US serial. And while I got tired of the US personnel, I felt that I wanted to know more about the destinies of the people in this film.
Julia might or might not have killed her boyfriend; the clues are vague, the statements contradictory, the memories distorted. There was another man in the flat. Julia's boyfriend might have had an affair with that man. Many things remain in doubt. Anyway, Julia is pregnant and in jail she gives birth to a boy. Her mother arrives. She wants to take care, at last she takes away the boy. Julia wants to have custody again. When she is granted  a guarded trip outside to see her child, she profits from the occasion and flees to Paraguay.
A simple story, contemporary social realism, but without preaching and agitating.
9/10

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

1735 km (2005, Nghiem Dang Tuan Nguyen)

As soon as you go away from the main road of cinema nations, the flood of information very soon getting very thin. I haven't been able to gather much information about this movie, its director or the main actors. It is barely mentioned in IMDb, but else extensive silence.
This is a pity, because the film is worth the viewing. It is a blend of Before Midnight and A Railway Station for Two (yes, the old Ryazanov film). It combines road movie elements with "romantic comedy". Sounds as if we al have seen it before and that thus there is no necessity to view this one also. Well, basically I hold the opinion that we cannot invent new plots anymore. Any situation has been described before, now it is only possible to re-arrange those existing elements. The writer Lê Phuong Khanh Nguyen arranges a clever plot.
1735 km - that is the distance between Hanoi and Saigon. In the express between these cities Kien and Tram Anh stumble upon each other. Kien is charmer, a man has many talents and doesn't make anything with his gifts. He improvises his life. Tram on the other hand is throughout an orderly person. Yes, the departure is like that. In between we also see different aspect of modern Vietnam, the jeunesse dorée, the middle class. The meeting of these two persons is like a dialectical process, both change and become more complete persons. The process is not straightforward, which makes this film quite charming and highly entertaining.
This is a link to the movie on YouTube
8/10

Fifty Shades of Grey (2015, Sam Taylor-Johnson)

OMG, I watched this junk. Being curious enough to have an informed opinion has its price. Sometimes I just wished, I would give to my prejudice and just throw items like these on the garbage can right away.
So this is about a BDSM relationship. I don't understand why it could be stimulating or even fun to be dominated. I don't see the pleasures in being beaten up, so this film could have made me understand what is the exciting about this. I am not disapproving, let alone feel disgust, because people can do whatever they want in the privacy of their homes, but I would like to understand. After seeing this film, I feel even more confused than before.
What do we have here? Anastasia, a virgin, falls in love with Christian, who loves torture better than romance. They make a contract which contains terms like "butt plug" and "vaginal fisting" as ingredients of their pleasure trip. This Christian has the opinion that pain occurs in the head, but actually we stand by as observers without knowing why Anastasia agrees to play the submissive part in this relationship. We get a chance to see butts and nipples, but there is no exploration of their relationship.
At the end we get a little bit of insight why Christian finds pleasure in giving pain, but then the relationship is already over. This is the same observer angle as in Lars von Trier's big failure Nymphomaniac - and probably we will see the same miserable result in Gaspar Noé's Love -- although these films are more graphic than these shades of boredom. At one time Christian Grey realizes that he is different shades of being fucked up, but he doesn't do anything to change this situation. We get a hint, that the writer maybe thinks that this relationship is not the real thing, but again - there is no analysis of the status quo, no moving on, just giving the viewer a chance to see skin. And that is just not enough to make a watchable film.
What about craftsmanship? The film is nicely shop. The skyline  has more shades than the protagonist. Acting: Jamie Dornan as Christian Grey delivers his lines without modulation and completely emotionless. One critic noted that his butt has more expressions than his  face. Dakota Johnson is the one who saves the film, but of course her attempts at acting cannot conceal that the script is just so miserable.
It is hard to understand that this was derives from a book. I won't read this book. And then the majority of the critics say that the film is better than the book. A film must walk on its own legs, function as a film without background knowledge that only a reader of the book would have. Yes, this film functions also alone in its own miserable way.
1/10

Christian puts his shades into boxes ...

... and when relaxed he goes out without a tie

This is what is Anastasia likes to see

but she doesn't get romance

A threesome between the couple and the viewers

Naked (1993, Mike Leigh)

O my orphaned blog. November went by surprisingly fast and I am thankful for that. Of course I saw films, many, but I would have liked to see even more. But time and energy are limited.
So where to start my backlog? I think, today I want to write about Naked. I saw this already some time ago and I am re-viewing it now.
Everybody says that this is an eminent film. But it's also extremely hard to watch. There is bleak all around and misery. The intellectuals say it is a fascinating portrait of British post-Thatcher society. Anything can reflect that society. even a film like Lake Eden can be made a political movie.
How does Naked work as a movie? How do I feel about it out of the context of the beginning of the 90s in the last century?
First of all, the acting is quite superb. Johnny is a thoroughly unsympathetic character, verbose and abusive, a rapist - and a character who would have become a loser even without Thatcher.
To me this is a period movie; maybe it had a certain impact when it was published, but what  does it have to say now, after 22 years. Most of al we learn, that some people then were bastards without future. So what?
4/10

Misery, Misery, Misery

The yuppie of the set

More misery

The yuppie is a bit like British Psycho

Let's have a look at a self-contented bastard

Still more misery

Evenmore misery

Limping misery