Le Tableau

When visiting Haugesund and The International Norwegian Film Festival there, we saw the film 'The Mill and the Cross' ('Brueghel, le moulin et le croix') by Lech Majewski. In that film we 'enter' the painting and get to see how it was made and who the different characters are. As Brueghel we saw Rutger Hauer, far from the psychotic and troubling roles he often plays.

In this film we also get to enter not only one but several paintings and in the end the question could be summed up as: Who has painted or made the painter?

Before this we are presented one single painting.
We see a castle, flowering gardens, a threatening forest (why are forests so threatening?) but the painting is not finished.
In this painting three different kinds of people are living with different degrees of completion: It's the 'Toupins' who are being finished in their entirety, the 'Pafinis', not entirely finished as it's still some colours missing and lastly the 'Reufs' only being sketched so far.
This creates a struggle for power where the 'Toupins' regard themselves as the superior part of 'the population', chasing the 'Pafinis' out of the castle and using the 'Reufs' as some kind of slaves or servants.
At this point in the story we get to meet Ramo, Lola and Plume ('Pafinis') who are all convinced of that only the painter is able to restore the harmony by finishing his work.
They therefore cross the 'dangerous' and very living forest and all of a sudden they are at the end of the painting, jumping out from the very same and into the painters study or studio. Unfortunately they also jump into another painting and another, hereby experiencing more adventures and more places than they've ever could have imagined.
During this 'excursion' the questions multiply: What has happened to the painter? Why has he abandoned them? Why has he started destroying some paintings? Will they ever find him and unfold his secrets and thereby bring peace to 'their world'?

There were many children in the cinema theatre and I'm not quite sure they understood all the subtleties in the film.
It's not only the question about the painter but of course seen in a more universal perspective the question of The Creator, the human beings as creators not only of art but of artefacts, the world around us, the lives to come etc.
It's also the question about sovereignty and subordination in a society and the often stupid reasons for the one or the other.
We also got to see a scene where a woman is trying to cross the forest and the plants surround her and make her relax in a way that was clearly erotic: The living forest, it's plants being equipped with stamens and pistils and often resembling human parts of the body, not seldom genitals.
It's however a very thought provoking film, very beautiful and almost thrilling.
Questions about responsibility and the fact that if one has started something, one most often have to finish it. The consequences of not doing so and thereby assuming ones responsibility as a 'maker', could be disastrous.

Director: Jean-François Laguionie.

Dementia 13

This is one of Francis Ford Coppola's first films, at least within - what we can call - the 'horror genre', if one exclude 'The Terror' (a film we've written about before). The latter was however primarily directed by Roger Corman who instead produced this film.
First it was ment to be called only 'Dementia' but as a film with the same name had been made in 1955, they added 13.

The film starts with a young happy(?) couple rowing a boat in the middle of the night.
It's a couple by the name of John Haloran (Peter Read) and his wife Louise (Luana Anders) and they are not as happy as one might have thought.
They are actually discussing John's rich mother's will and the fact that every penny of it is designated to charity and this in the name of a certain Kathleen.
John tells Louise that if he dies before his mother, Louise will not be entitled to anything of the heritage and of course he dies there and then in the boat, a death caused by a massive heart attack.
Louise can't return to the family saying that her husband has died so what can she do?
She throws him overboard (of course) and then writes a letter to John's mother Lady Haloran (Eithne Dunne) in which she invites herself to the family's Irish castle while pretending that John is away on business, something that couldn't wait.
John's family is however not like an ordinary family and soon she witness that John's two brothers Billy (Bart Patton) and Richard (William Campbell) are taking part in a strange ceremony with their mother, a tribute to their younger sister Kathleen (the heir), dead through drowning.
When Louise now realizes that Lady Haloran is a psychologically overstrained person and also very superstitious, the former tries to convince the Lady that Kathleen is trying to communicate with her from 'the other side'.
In doing so she puts out objects belonging to Kathleen, things she has found when doing an 'inventory' in the house.
One night she plonges into the pond, in order to attach these belongings to something on the bottom, where they easily could surface but when doing so she finds, what she thinks is the perfectly preserved body of Kathleen.
When coming to the surface she is axed to death by someone. Who?
The family doctor Justin Caleb (Patrick Magee) arrives and starts his own 'investigation' in order to find the killer and solve the mystery with Kathleen's death on the same time.
Like Hercule Poirot he starts interrogating the family members and of course we find them all somewhat suspicious.
The killer is however found - after having found a wax model of Kathleen first. Who made it and who is the assassin and is it the same person?

The film contains some good ideas and material even if it's not made in a way preventing the viewer from anticipate the answer beforehand.
The aim of the director is to make everyone look suspicious but often this kind of approach lead to the fact that one concentrate on those seeming to be the 'least bad' among a group of suspects (think 'Usual Suspects').
It's however quite a 'kind' and harmless horror story but in spite of that worth seeing.

Brandbilen som försvann

The literal translation of this film title is: "The fire engine that disappeared". The story is however not centred around a fire engine even though fire plays a certain role in this drama, as well as a small toy fire engine.

This is a story built on a book by two of the very first - and very best - 'crime writers' in Sweden: Maj Sjöwall and Per Wahlöö.
As its principal individual we find the police inspector (superintendent) Martin Beck and his tough, hardhitting colleague Gunvald Larsson. In this version Beck is played by Gösta Ekman and Larsson by Rolf Lassgård.
One of their police colleagues is assigned a routine task, surveilling a house where one believe men are buying sex.
All of a sudden the house explodes and Larsson tries to rescue some of the men and women being trapped inside the building.
At first it looks as a suicide through gas being inflamed and exploding but one also find a bomb adapted inside the house, wherefore it's obvious that someone planned to kill one or more persons in this house. In that case a regular murder.
From now on the investigation grows and all of a sudden Beck et consortes find indices pointing towards a narcotic syndicate.
A far too important case for Beck?

As a Swede I'm used to see Gösta Ekman in comedies and therefore I don't find him convincing in the role as Beck but on the other hand, I'm not impressed by Peter Haber in this role either, wherefore I still search for the 'perfect' Beck.
Rolf Lassgård is perhaps more congenial as Larsson, seen in relation to the books but Mikael Persbrandt is much more entertaining with a lot of punch lines that he delivers in a wonderful way.
This version is not bad at all but - as we've written before - it's not at all the same professionalism and 'flow' as in the American or British crime films or -series.
Well, I don't know if I/we can add anything more to this film. Judge for yourselves. What one can add is: Read the books by Sjöwall/Wahlöö instead, they are great!
Director: Hajo Gies.

Julefrokosten

julefrokosten par chrosstv12

This is a Danish crazy comedy with a 'family drama' as a backdrop.

Anders Bo (Thomas Voss) is hired as a car salesman in a big company but as one of his first tasks, his boss tells him to infiltrate the annual Christmas party in the small competing shop 'Holger's Auto'. Why? To steal their custom file, of course.
When succesfully working 'undercover' he realizes that the task given to him has something to do with a family feud where father and son happen to be on the opposite sides of this car dealing business.
During the party a lot of more or less strange things are going on and one of the employee's, Buller (Kim Bodnia), is hit in the head, loosing his memory, not knowing who he is he and not knowing who the others are either. One of the female workers takes advantage of this so satisfy her needs.
After a lot of confusion and mistakes, involving Santa Claus, an SM-interested female employee (above mentioned), a very pragmatic boss at the car company and his vengeful son, they all unite in the end.
This not least thanks to love, the love between Amalie (Julie R. Ølgaard), the daughter of owner Holger (Dick Kaysø) and Anders Bo.

After seeing this film and in spite of Kim Bodnia who we appreciate very much (even though he's too type casted) and other fine actors, we concluded that comedy is perhaps not the Danish film industry's strongest card.
Drama, social conflicts, somewhat violent films about socially handicaped persons, they succeed very well makaing.
When it comes to comedies there are some good actors or rather have been but today I feel more as if one can find good comedians in Norway and - in a more tragically comical way - Finland.
It's not at all a bad film but - again - the screenplay is not sufficiently strong and the gags in the film, not as funny as to compensate for the weak story. Better luck in the future!

Intouchables

This film is inspired by the real life story of Phillippe Pozzi di Borgo, quadriplegic since 1993 and totally dependant on others for his survival, both physically and mentally. The most important person in his life is Abdel Yasmin Sellou, his domiciliary care.

Pozzi di Borgo has written a book called 'Le Second Souffle' ('The Second Breath', my translation) where he tells the story about his life with Yasmin Sellou and it's from this book the directors Olivier Nakache and Eric Toledano made the adaptation for the screen.

In the film they are called Philippe (François Cluzet) and Driss (Omar Sy).

The film starts during a nocturnal car trip with Driss driving the Maserati Quattroporte of Philippe in highest speed, in a slalom-like way, through the streets of Paris. Very soon they are apprehended by the Police and when this happens, Philippe simulate a seizure of some kind and Driss starts to argue with the police saying that they were on their way to the hospital.
The police thereby accompany them, leaving them outside to wait for the personel they have called. The police disappears and before the doctors and nurses get to the car, the two men leave.
After this we are introduced to these both characters, beginning with the story about how they met, told through flashbacks.
Driss needs an unemployment paper signed and in order to get this done he turn up at Philippe's house when he is having interviews with potential domiciliary cares.
All of these candidates are very serious-minded and they display their credentials but Philippe doesn't seem to be satisfied with their 'performances' anyway.
The day after their first meeting, Driss - who's mother has thrown him out of the apartment as he hasn't shown himself in a long time, not taking his responsiblity for economy and his younger siblings.
Of course Philipp hire Driss, not because of his qualities in the capacity he is in but more because he adds something totally different to the everyday life of Philipp who is an extremely wealthy person but also rather blasé.
At the beginning Driss doesn't seem to know anything about how to handle a person with this kind of handicap and he is both nonchalant and ignorant.
They get along well however and Philipp as well as Driss learn from each other and get to see a part of life they've never come in contact with.
Problems of different types occur of course but even if separated for a time, they stay with each other for many years, as in the real-life story.

This film has to this date (I'm writing this, not the same night as we saw the film but the 5th of Janury 2012) become the third most viewed French film in France and the 5th most viewed film, counting all films screened in France since 'the dawn' of The Seventh Art. Almost 17 million Frenchmen and -women have seen it!
Was it that good?
Well, let's say that the story - also being a true one - has its interesting angles but on the same time, there are to many sterotypical images in this film, preventing it from becoming really interesting and touching.

It's the black man from the suburb, not seeming to know anything outside the social context in which he lives and then the white upper class Frenchman, knowing his whereabouts in 'his world' but not much about what's going on in Driss' world.
In addition to this, Philippe is also a very priviliged person, being extremely rich and therefore being able to buy what he wants, consult any specialist he wants or hire whoever he wants.
It's of course not a enviable situation the one Philippe's in but with money you can alleviate the burdens of you're daily life, something the poor can't.
When driving the car like fools through the town, being stopped by the police, lying about the reasons for driving so fast, blaming it on Philippe and his handicap, it sends out signals that if you're rich you can do what you want, not having to pay the price for your mistakes. Isn't it like that in real life? Of course it is. Rich and/or influential people can always buy themselves out of situations but it might have been better to display that the law - for once - applies to everyone, rich as well as poor?
On the whole, these stereotypes in combination with to much of feel good ambience combined with the very foreseeable screenplay makes this film somewhat charming but fairly uninteresting. It's not at all a film that will stay on in your memory for long.

(Photo Phillippe Pozzi di Borgo and Abdel Yasmin Sellou http://www.lefigaro.fr/medias/2011/11/10/dfb9d11e-0bc4-11e1-852e-cea02dc2c30f.jpg)

(Photo François Cluzet and Philippe Pozzo di Borgo copied from: http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/francois-cluzet-and-philippe-pozzo-di-borgo-VsiFsv.jpg)