Review: In the Land of Blood and Honey

In the Land of Blood and Honey (2011) is not the sort of film you would expect Angelina Jolie to make. As war films go it's bleaker, gorier and more shocking than most.  It tells the story of Ajla (Zana Marjanovic), a Bosnian Muslim living in Sarajevo at the outbreak of the war in 1992, and her relationship with her Bosnian Serb prison guard, Danijel (Goran Kostić), as the war progresses.

It’s a daring premise for a film about so recent a war.  When it premiered in Sarajevo, audiences were moved to tears by the memories that film brought to the surface; it is certainly jolting to see images of Sarajevo under siege again.  The treatment of women during the Bosnian war is a topic that is being explored more and more, in academia and literature, and although it is laudable what Jolie is trying to do with this film, unfortunately, it just doesn’t work.  Watching it, you feel you are being shown a clumsily polemic humanitarian lecture rather than a work of any true artistic value.

For starters, the film doesn't appear to know if it's a love story or a psychological exploration of the relationship between captor and prisoner.  Viewers are unsure if we are supposed to feel sympathy for Danijel, as a man overtaken by his circumstances, or to abhor him as a weak-willed misogynist.  If the former, then sadly Danijel is such a creepy and unlikeable character that it is impossible to feel sorry for him.  The chemistry between the two leads throughout is uncertain, as though they are equally unsure how to feel about their characters.

Aside from taking some locational liberties with Sarajevo, there are number of dubious directorial calls in the film.  Including gratuitous female nudity in a film about the objectification of women and juxtaposing quasi-romantic sex scenes with scenes of systematic rape seem nothing more than distasteful.  The war was awful.  It was messy and confusing and people did terrible things to one another, and any film about it will necessarily be harrowing.  In the Land of Blood and Honey, however, dwells on the violence with very little exploration of the motivations and feelings of the individuals involved.

The film caused outrage amongst Serbs on its release and it’s easy to see why.  The Bosnian Serbs are portrayed as cartoonish villains filled with Nazi-esque levels of vitriol towards their Muslim neighbours, whilst the Bosnian Muslims are exclusively shown to be helpless victims clinging idealistically to a vision of a multicultural Bosnia.  I am by no means an apologist for the actions of the Bosnian Serb Army, but the film does little to demonstrate the complexities of the wider war, other than a brief allusion to Srebrenica, and the Muslim-Croat war is never mentioned at all.

Of course, these complaints would have been obscured by a stronger story.  At heart, this is a weak story, poorly told.  The action jumps from scene to scene, seemingly too desperate to educate and shock in equal measure; there is no build-up of suspense and we are never given the opportunity to really get to know the characters.  The result is that the unsettling relationship between Danijel and Ajla is utterly incomprehensible.

The title itself is a controversial choice, evocative of Robert Kaplan's Balkan Ghosts and the myth of ancient hatreds that influenced John Major's thinking during the war.  Presumably the honey is supposed to be the sweet antithesis to the blood soaking the land, but there is very little sweetness in this film.  Coffee might have been a more appropriate choice.

It is estimated that up to 60,000 women were raped in prison camps during the Bosnian War. Their suffering, and that of women in all wars, is a commendable cause to highlight, but there have been better films made about the impact that this sexual violence had on Bosnia’s women (Esma’s Secret/Grbavica (2006), for one). Since In the Land of Blood and Honey was released, when people find out that I have studied the Bosnian War they often ask if I have seen it. Now I can say that I have – and that I wouldn’t recommend it. If you’re looking for good films about the Bosnian War, Hollywood has done it far better in Welcome to Sarajevo (1997), and Bosnians excelled at it in No Man’s Land (2001). In both educational and artistic terms, this film has sadly little to offer.

Originally posted at www.elliewilsonwrites.co.uk

Silent Classic: The General

Received poorly on its release in 1926, The General really is an extraordinary film. Buster Keaton's superb physical comedy and relentless energy in performing all his own stunts (undertaken with considerably fewer safety measures than today's actors enjoy) shine throughout a film that will make you laugh at loud at the escapades of Keaton's hapless Johnnie Gray, a railway engineer working on the Western & Atlantic Rail Road in 1862.

Johnnie has two loves in his life - his steam engine, General, and Annabelle (Marion Mack).  To impress Annabelle he tries to enlist to fight for the Confederate forces, but is turned down because he is more useful to the south as an engineer.  Annabelle declares she will not speak to him again until he is in uniform like her heroic father and brother.  When Johnnie's beloved engine is captured by Unionist spies, he sets off on a disaster-laden one-man pursuit of it behind enemy lines, unwittingly rescuing Annabelle in the process.  They make their escape from the Unionist forces and Johnnie is hailed as a hero for warning of the attack.

Keaton's physical exertions are well-matched by Mack, who manages it all in a cumbersome frock.   The battle set pieces at the end are hugely impressive, considering the limited editing techniques available at the time.  When a bridge and steam engine collapse into a river, in the single most expensive scene of the silent movie era, you'll forget that you're watching a film made nearly 90 years ago.

The slapstick gags are sometimes predictable but always hilarious.  The story is dragged out a bit towards the end and in the re-released version from January 2014 the ragtime piano soundtrack becomes a little repetitive, since no attempt has been made to match the music to the action.

Overall, however, this an excellent film that more than holds it own against today's action blockbusters and delivers a lot of laughs along the way.  Well worth seeing.

London is the place for me

I’ve only ever seen two films twice at the cinema. One was Mission: Impossible 3, which was entirely accidental (I hadn't even seen the previous two films, and still haven't). The other was Paddington, and it was entirely of my own free will.

Michael Bond’s Paddington books were my favourites when I was a young child; I chortled away at them until tears ran down my face. So when I heard they were making a big screen CGI version of my favourite bear, I was a little apprehensive. However, having heard good things from others who had seen it, noting its impressive cast list and that Bond had given his blessing to the film, even appearing in a brief cameo, I decided to brave it.

I had no need to worry.  The film is utterly charming from start to finish.  The CGI Paddington is endearing and perfectly voiced by Ben Whishaw, in all his hat-wearing politeness, and the story itself stays true to spirit of the original tales.

As is the fashion with films these days, it opens with a backstory for our ursine hero in Darkest Peru, with his Aunt Lucy and Uncle Pastuzo, and a British explorer, who manages to civilise the bears through marmalade and talk of a London that will always give them a warm welcome.  The gentle satirising of Britishness begins within the first few minutes and is littered throughout the film.  An earthquake that ruins the bears' home is the catalyst for Paddington to stow away on a cargo ship headed for London in search of that warm welcome.  However, when he arrives at Paddington station he is disappointed to find a London where “hardly anyone wear a hat or says hello.”

Fortunately, the young bear is taken in by the Brown family, played superbly in their eccentricities by Hugh Bonneville, as Mr Brown, who likes all his stationary in order, and Sally Hawkins, as Mrs Brown, an illustrator who struggles to keep her emotions in check.  Julie Walters puts in an excellent turn as Mrs Bird (in the books the Browns' housekeeper, but here an elderly relative) who likes everything ship-shape, keeps a hoover for all occasions and doesn’t trust the microwave.  Madeleine Harris and Samuel Joslin are also excellent as Judy and Jonathan.  ("You have literally just brought home a random bear", says Judy, aghast with teenage horror.)

As Mr Brown scrambles to get a bear added to his home insurance, mayhem ensues, from a spot of bother with the facilities, to a misunderstanding with a pickpocket and a mishap on the escalators in the Underground.  The slapstick is never overplayed and Paddington's genuine good intentions mean it never grates.  Jim Broadbent as Mr Gruber adds a touch of magic too, with his labyrinth of an antique shop and his train set delivering tea.

To add drama to the story, Nicole Kidman plays a villainous taxidermist out for revenge, aided by creepy nextdoor neighbour, Mr Curry (Peter Capaldi, in a wonderful cringe-worthy turn).  When Paddington finds his life in danger, the Brown family realise that they need Paddington every bit as much as he needs them, and band together to set out and rescue him.  (Supplying the 'mild peril' which, along with a flirtatious security guard and a spot of cross dressing, earned the film its scandalous PG certification).

The soundtrack is provided in part by D Lime, a Cuban band who perform live in the film, encapsulating the vibrant multicultural atmosphere of the London that Paddington comes to embrace - a place where “nobody’s alike, which means everyone fits in.”

Lessons about immigration aside, Paddington is an absolute delight, with plenty of humour for children and adults alike.  If you want something to make you chuckle and warm your heart this Easter, look no further.  This bear has been well and truly looked after.

Paddington was released on DVD today.