A Royal Affair (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1276419/

Beginning around 1766 and spanning over several years, A Royal Affair is from the perspective of Caroline Mathilde (played brilliantly by Alicia Vikander) who marries the psychologically unhinged King of Denmark Christian VII (magnificently portrayed by Mikkel Boe Følsgaard). The beautiful young woman abides by her duties as Queen, giving the King a son, but Christian’s jealousy of Caroline’s talent immediately puts a barrier between them and they spend little time together. A local doctor, Johann Friedrich Struensee (Mads Mikkelsen), is employed to accompany the King on a year-long tour around Europe. During this trip Struensee gains the trust of the King and upon their return becomes a regular fixture at the royal quarters, influencing the vulnerable Christian’s decisions and soon establishing a position of authority and power. At the same time he falls in love with the Queen and Struensee and Caroline embark on a passionate secret affair. The two are extremely interested in the ideas of Enlightenment and are soon using their power to change Denmark. But the aristocracy are not pleased with these changes, feeling that their wealth and power is threatened, and soon they are finding ways to bring down the doctor.
Based on actual historical events, the film makes the story extremely accessible and considering I know absolutely nothing about this era, I was riveted from beginning to end. Part tragic love story and part historical political thriller, A Royal Affair successfully amalgamates the genres and is a surprisingly gripping film. Considering its relatively long runtime of over two hours, it never dragged and the characters were likeable and interesting. Caroline is an intelligent woman who naively gets trapped in a disastrous marriage, the audience seeing things from her perspective and immediately siding with her, allowing the following affair to be gripping. Følsgaard brilliantly adds a maniacal laugh to the character of Christian instantly establishing the psychological state of the character, but he also shows an extreme vulnerability which is in both the script and the performance that makes the character fascinating. Mikkelsen is equally great as the doctor who brings about change, his interesting face depicting a fascinating mixture of brooding haughtiness and dedicated passion to both his cause and the woman he falls in love with.
Both Caroline and Stuensee seem to genuinely care for Christian, at one point the three talk excitedly about the changes they can bring about. It is the complexity and likeability of the characters that really hold this film together but the film is also carefully crafted and the story flows beautifully carrying us along with it for the ride. It is easy to become completely absorbed in this lavish historical world. But don’t expect anything out of the ordinary, this is a conventional story told in a conventional manner, however, it is thoroughly enjoyable. There are a few genuinely amusing moments that prevent this film from becoming too serious and boring and the uncertainty of characters and actions allows the film to remain compelling throughout.
A Royal Affair never becomes too focused on the politics but also doesn’t dumb things down for the audience, most of the details being humanised by the three main characters. The political conflicts at the centre of the story paralleled with the love conflicts can be poetically interpreted and adds a particular depth to the film. In a sea of often difficult and pretentious films this one stands out for its appealing clarity and strong storytelling with marvellous central performances.

As Luck Would Have It (2011)

  
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1808240/

There has been much hype surrounding director Álex de la Iglesia’s previous film The Last Circus (2010), the film winning three awards at the Venice Film Festival and receiving some great reviews from doing the rounds at other festivals. So I was very intrigued by the director’s latest La Chispa De La Vida (Spanish title), which, incidentally, takes a look at hype and the sensation hungry media. Roberto (Jose Mota) is an unemployed advertising executive who is reaching a state of extreme desperation. He was once at the top of his game, coming up with the Coca-Cola slogan ‘Life’s Little Spark’, but after two years of no work and unable to pay his mortgage, Roberto resorts to practically begging for work from an old friend. After being turned down yet again, he goes in search of an old happy memory and ends up having a terrible and absurd accident in a very public place. Soon the media have got wind of the situation and are trying to get that all important exclusive. Shockingly Roberto begins to exploit his situation and himself to the media in order to attempt to get what he wants in life and secure a future for his wife (Salma Hayek) and his two children.
With a tendency to focus on the dark humour in life, this film has Almodovarian elements but unfortunately is not as astutely realised or as visually perceptive as the auteur. The story is rather straight forward and far more conventional than I was anticipating. However, the tension steadily built up surrounding the accident is palpable and I really was on the edge of my seat at some moments. There is plenty of humour, often at the expense of Roberto, and Jose Mota, a comedian, is brilliant as the desperate do-gooder, adding light relief to what could have been an extremely dark film. Hayek is not entirely convincing as Roberto’s housewife who has to wait helplessly by his side as doctors try to decide what to do and media moguls put a price on her husband’s life.
The tone of this film is a little confusing. It is clearly attempting to be a humorous satire but it has an extremely poignant tale at the heart of it, the two never quite fusing together well enough, the humour not funny enough and the poignancy not moving enough. There are an abundance of references to the circus with ‘it’s show time’ mentioned too. This overt parallel between the media and the circus is both unnecessary and slightly patronising to audiences.
For all the criticisms this is still a rather enjoyable film but could have, frustratingly, been a lot better. The physical humour is well executed and the central performance is full of depth. The children unfortunately are mere stereotypes. While it is acceptable for the media characters to be such, as that is the point of the story, the children should have a sense of authenticity to them and that is really lacking.
This is a sensational and ludicrous story that needs a little more reality embedded into it to make it emotionally engaging. Considering it was commenting on a real issue it felt extremely removed from reality. However, depending on how squeamish you are, this is an easy to watch film with a lot to enjoy and it does successfully get its message across, albeit in a rather heavy handed way. A playful drama that could benefit from a second viewing.

Iron Sky (2012)

 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/

One of the most talked about films at this year’s Berlin Film Festival has to be Finnish sci-fi comedy Iron Sky, reportedly the most expensive film to come out of Finland with a budget of $10 million. $1 million of this was contributed by online fans that had been following the project for years. So is this why everyone is talking about Iron Sky? No, it is not. This is the film that is about space Nazis, yes, that’s right, space Nazis. The ridiculous premise is that in 1945 a group of Nazis escaped to the dark side of the moon and built vast spaceships in order to invade Earth in 2018. The year is now 2018 and these Nazis are indeed going to invade Earth.
Nazis have made quite a recent appearance in film in comedy horror Dead Snow (2009), where they were in fact zombies. A b-movie that didn’t take itself too seriously Dead Snow has a kind of cult status already due to the so bad it’s good concept and the knowing way it is executed and Iron Sky is set to do the same. But is the latter taking itself too seriously? It is a b-movie spoof and quickly establishes that, but with a luxurious budget and some serious marketing does it work?
This is a guilty pleasure of the highest order. The film opens with a nostalgic song with the lyrics “take me to heaven”, a playful element, and some truly stunning visual effects, it appears to be taking itself quite seriously, but as the film goes on we quickly realise the ludicrous level it exists on. The president of the United States has sent a black male model, James Washington (Christopher Kirby) to the moon in order to get re-elected. James stumbles across the Nazi base and quickly becomes embroiled in their plans to invade Earth. James meets Renate Richter (Julia Dietze), a Nazi teacher who specialises in Earth Studies, who quickly loses her outer garments in an amusingly preposterous moment.
Sure the dialogue is appalling and the jokes are crass, but in a sense that is how this film should be, so incredibly bad that it actually becomes good. That said, there aren’t enough genuinely funny jokes and the film loses its way a little, the ending inarticulate for such a frank and obvious film. There are an abundance of explicit political references, the female President of the USA a Sarah Palin clone, which become tedious after a while but there are also some amusing and astute elements, such as the use of Chaplin’s The Great Dictator, Renate commenting it is the greatest ‘short film’, only later seeing an unedited version.
Later on in the film we see New York under attack, a notion played out in so many movies, and Iron Sky refers to many of them, some visuals in particular reminiscent of Hollywood blockbusters such as Independence Day (1996). Whilst the film’s storytelling is in b-movie territory the visual effects in some scenes are of a higher level. But these contrast significantly with other scenes of a very low budget standard. The scenes set in the Nazi base are the most distinctive and memorable visually, the film not working as well when it is set on Earth.
Iron Sky does not pretend to be something it is not and however farcical and vulgar it is, it remains fun and watchable. It features some bad-taste but perhaps not as much as expected and Udo Kier feels underused as the Fuhrer. For all its flaws, and there are a lot, I couldn’t help but enjoy this film. It’s inclusion at the Berlinale is bizarre but kudos to the programmers for having a sense of humour. Due to the hype the film is receiving, both good and bad, perhaps this film will make it into the commercial realm. This is a fun and laughable film, whether we are laughing at or with it is questionable.

Tabu (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2153963/

Many films have been described as love letters to cinema recently, The Artist and Hugo (2011) both garnering critical and commercial success for being such. Miguel Gomes’ latest film Tabu, the Portuguese director incidentally used to be a film critic, gloriously achieves this but in a much more subtle and poetic manner. Tabu, the name of a mountain in Africa within the film and also the name of the last film made by F.W Murnau, is full of glorious black and white cinematography and has an old fashioned square format that immediately conveys the nostalgic spirit of the film. Whilst The Artist is a light hearted comedy, Tabu is a devastating melodrama with the love story at the heart of it providing the roots for the three parts of the film.
It begins with a sort of prologue, a short film about an intrepid explorer from days gone by (19^th Century) who is haunted by a woman as he treks through the lush Savannah with his entourage. There we also meet the ‘sad and melancholic’ crocodile who becomes a recurring motif within the film. This gorgeously shot introduction utilises music and narration in the style of old silent films, it convincingly appearing as a genuine film when it cuts to Part 1 – Paradise Lost and we see Pilar (Teresa Madruga) who is watching the film at the cinema. Seamlessly, we become involved in Pilar’s life, a modern day story in Lisbon with concrete buildings shot just as beautifully as the previous Savannah. Pilar awaits the arrival of a Polish girl who is going to stay with her and worries about her elderly neighbour Aurora who has a gambling habit and seems to be having a breakdown. This section contains dialogue and plenty of it, beautifully constructed; one particular scene as Aurora describes a dream to Pilar is memorable due to the verbose language and unrelenting shot of Aurora. Pilar’s religion plays a large part in her life but her melancholy cannot be completely disguised as we see her again at the cinema crying with the Phil Spector song ‘Be My Baby’ playing. But Pilar’s do-gooder nature results in her going in search of an old friend of Aurora’s and this leads on to Part 2- Paradise. This is a grainy flashback to Aurora’s story in Colonial Africa in the early 1960s, silent albeit for the isolated diegetic sounds such as insects and birds, no dialogue from the characters only a narration. It is this section that tells us of the devastating love story at the heart of the film.
Full of a wealth of details in both the story and the dialogue, this is an extremely well-written film and is absolutely stunning visually. The poetic love story is intelligently constructed, the three parts of the film are worlds apart but all have an underlying consistent theme that brings the film together as a whole. Plants and nature dominate the images, even Part 1, which is set in Lisbon, has a Bird of Paradise plant and butterflies on the wall in Aurora’s house as a clue to her background. It is these small details that make this film absolutely fascinating. With so much to see and interpret this is a film that will benefit from multiple viewings.
Cheerful pop music is juxtaposed with the melancholy of the story and is cleverly used to link the two parts. The shots of the crocodile in the second part, which is used on the stunning poster for the film, are lingering and thoughtful and hark back to the prologue, the film evocatively ending with the same close up image of the reptile. The beautiful landscape shots of Africa are breath taking and it is a fascinating location to set the love affair. This is a truly rich film, complex in its storytelling and a visual treat.
Each section is so distinctly different that it is a real accomplishment to bring them together so effortlessly and draw the audience into this world. Even though it is yet another film embarking on an old-fashioned way of storytelling it felt completely fresh and original, the interweaving narrative succinctly executed. This is a mesmerising film full of brilliant performances, particularly from Laura Soveral as the elderly Aurora. There are plenty of witty moments which balance out the sadness but not too many so it never becomes farcical.
Tabu is an absolutely magical film, never relying on nostalgia alone to carry the film and filling each frame with lavish visual imagery that gives it a dreamlike quality. With the silent aspects it truly never reveals too much, leaving much to the whimsical imagination of the audience but allowing the beautiful narration to guide us. This is by far the best film I have seen at the festival and I would love to see it win the much coveted Golden Bear award.

Side by Side (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2014338/

This fascinating documentary takes a look at the birth and evolution of digital cinema technology and compares it to film, considering the advantages and disadvantages and exploring the future of both. What makes this documentary particularly strong is the people it acquires to participate in the discussion, no doubt as a result of Keanu Reeves playing interviewer and investigator and also co-producing the film. Legendary filmmakers such as Martin Scorsese and David Lynch happily discuss the topic as well as more controversial figures such as Lars Von Trier. Danny Boyle, Steven Soderbergh, Robert Rodriguez and Christopher Nolan all add their opinions to the equation with David Fincher livening things up with some colourful expletives. But it’s not only high calibre directors included, the documentary gives plenty of screen time to the lesser known but equally as talented people such as cinematographers, editors and colour correctors who are highly prolific in the industry.
This thorough film is not afraid to go in-depth in terms of technology but explains it all simply and effectively. The investigation begins with cinematography and the job of a director of photography, or DP, and how digital technology has integrated itself into this realm. Then editing is focused on, followed by visual effects, then colour correction and projection with an in-depth look at cameras too. The documentary also considers the ever popular topic of 3-D and the complexities of archiving.
Beautifully illustrated with clips from well-known films, points are made and contradicted by others, offering a multitude of perspectives on the current climate. Festen (1998), the first Dogme 95 film, is discussed and considered highly important due to its use of handheld digital camcorder, introducing a new aesthetic to filmmaking. It seems much of the reasoning behind digital comes down to money. Film is money and each take counts. John Malkovich reveals how there is “too much waiting with film”, that you lose “momentum”, with digital you can go on and on. So we see the situation from the actor’s point of view as well. But as a couple of people point out, the use of film and its importance means actors step up their game. It is easy to see both sides of the story presented to us.
Scorsese states that the “real auteur of a film is the projectionist” and we hear how Titantic (1997) played so long in theatres that the film literally fell out of the projectors in bits. It is these little insights into the mythical world of film that make this documentary a league above others for film fans. The film flows consistently and easily shifts from one area to the next, although Keanu’s hairstyles are less consistent, clearly changing drastically from one interview to the next, adding a source of amusement to the film.
Side By Side has a light-hearted but extremely informative approach and any fans of cinema will appreciate the clips and the rare insight into their craft by master artists from a variety of disciplines. Even those who feel knowledgeable about the topic are sure to gain more of an insight into this area and enjoy the interviews. Considering it is a documentary about an art form though it does lack any creative flare and aesthetics of its own but that is the only real criticism.
This would make an excellent resource for teachers and students of Film, although students of a certain age due to the language used, and contains plenty of food for thought, leaving the audience to decide for themselves. It is a thorough documentary with enough entertainment throughout to prevent it ever becoming dull. It was a real treat to see some of the film clips on the big screen and a delight to hear some iconic and also lesser known filmmakers discuss their craft. An extremely relevant and topical documentary.

Keyhole (2011)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1674775/

Guy Maddin’s latest film is loosely based on Homer’s The Odyssey and is a nostalgic piece shot in beautifully expressive black and white. It follows the Pick family, namely one Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric), a gangster who is returning to his house after a long journey. With him he brings the body of a drowned girl and a bound and gagged young man. He has returned to attempt to find his wife, she is somewhere in the house, but this is no ordinary house. It is full of ghosts and memories and changes constantly and Ulysses must journey through each room of the house in order to find his wife Hyacinth (Isabella Rossellini). With the help of the blind drowned girl, Ulysses works his way through the house and its various inhabitants, memories and objects that he encounters along the way.
This description gives the impression that this is a slightly strange narrative story, it is not. Instead it is an extremely bizarre dream-like stream of consciousness experience in the same vein as David Lynch’s Inland Empire (2006). Possibly too abstract for a lot of people, Keyhole is like a Lynchian American Horror Story with some 1930s and 40s noir thrown in for good measure and I found it mesmerising.
It is gorgeously depicted in often soft focus and out of focus black and white with a small amount of colour in a couple of shots. There are an abundance of close ups and each frame holds an image that evokes memories of old films, gangster films and ghostly tales. If you allow yourself to flow with it rather than make sense of everything this surreal film begins to become clear through all the haze.
Gangster’s molls linger downstairs with Ulysses Pick’s entourage, a storm rages outside and a strange naked old man narrates. Fragmented encounters occur as Ulysses embarks on his odyssey, a doctor (Udo Kier) arrives to look at the drowned girl and Ulysses is subjected to a stint on an electric chair, surviving as you can’t electrocute someone who has already been electrocuted. Is everybody dead? Is this house purgatory? Who knows? And if it’s answers you are looking for you won’t get them from this film.
However, I was truly hypnotised by Keyhole, which is both thematically and visually fascinating and as soon as I had seen it the desire to watch it again took hold of me. This is more of an experience than anything else and if it will hold up on a second viewing is debatable. Regardless of that this is a distinct and original film that will become embedded in your subconscious for days on end in the form of voices, images and feelings.

Jayne Mansfield's Car (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781840/

Directed by Billy Bob Thornton, who hasn’t directed a feature film in over ten years, and starring a wealth of talented Hollywood actors, Jayne Mansfield’s Car is one of the most anticipated films at this year’s Berlinale and is also in Competition. Set in Alabama in 1969 it tells the story of the Caldwell family who comprise of father Jim Caldwell (Robert Duvall), a distant war veteran with a penchant for examining car wrecks, and his three sons, Skip (Billy Bob Thornton), Carroll (Kevin Bacon) and Jimbo (Robert Patrick) and daughter Donna (Katherine LaNasa). Jim learns of the death of his ex-wife and mother of his children, who was re-married and living in England, but requested to be buried in Alabama. So, with the funeral to take place in Alabama, the English family, the Bedfords, travel to America and meet the Caldwells. What follows is a clash of cultures and an exploration of a family in crisis with old wounds being opened due to the death and also the Vietnam protests reaching the Southern states.
With a multitude of characters, three generations of Caldwell’s and the Bedfords, there is plenty going on in this drama which examines the aftermath of war on individuals who were involved in the First and Second World Wars and the imminent possibly of serving in the Vietnam War. To begin with the film really focuses on the awkwardness between the two families and is tonally rather light but as the film progresses and we learn of each man’s own war-related trauma, things get much more serious. This juxtaposition of awkward comedy and contemplative and emotional scenes regarding war and death unfortunately doesn’t really work. The audience that I watched this film with laughed a lot all the way through, obviously missing the emotional undercurrents at play and due to the frivolous nature of a lot of it, it is difficult to take things seriously. One particular scene where the father’s iced tea is spiked with acid loses all its emotional depth due to the ridiculousness of the situation.
There are some genuinely poignant moments though, usually involving Thornton’s Skid, who is movingly reduced to a childlike state at the funeral of his mother. The English family are cringe inducing stereotypes, their extremely posh English accents adding to the clichéd way Americans depict Brits. John Hurt is great as patriarch Kingsley Bedford though, appearing as a fragile old man to begin with and then revealing his callous side after a few too many whiskies, whereas Duvall’s Jim does the opposite.
Jayne Mansfield’s Car does have some funny parts and the dialogue is great. The characters are likeable and the three Caldwell brothers are particularly good. Bacon is brilliant as the weed smoking anti-war protesting Carroll and Robert Patrick is equally good as the son who resents his brothers as he didn’t go to war. Skid is the most complex out of the three and it is him we follow the most throughout the film. Thornton successfully captures the look and feel of the era and colours and music are used to great effect.
Jim’s fascination with car wrecks takes him to the exhibited real car that actress Jayne Mansfield died in and this inventive symbol for war runs through the film, Skid at one point commenting that he “never wanted to see wrecks” when talking about the war and Kingsley philosophically stating that “we all have a crash of some sort awaiting us” .
With recurring themes of cars, aeroplanes and war this film has a very masculine feel and the stand out characters are the males, the two female characters not having much to say or do, other than to listen to the men opening up about their feelings and emotions. However, each journey of each character, which is initiated by the death, is interesting and the conclusion is satisfactory.
This is a watchable film about a dysfunctional family with some enjoyable moments but it lacks tonal consistency. Some of the characters are brilliantly written and acted out, with Thornton giving himself the best character, but others feel stereotypical and one dimensional. A subpar drama attempting to address too much.

Sister (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2062969/

In Competition at this year’s Berlinale is Ursula Meier’s second feature film L’enfant d’en haut, or Sister. Set in a popular tourist ski resort in the stunning Alps, the film focuses on 12 year old Simon (magnificently played by Kacey Mottet Klein) who lives in a basic block of flats in a lacklustre town at the bottom of the mountains with his unpredictable and non-present sister Louise, played by French It-girl Léa Seydoux. Simon spends his time taking the cable car up to the resort and sneaking around stealing people’s expensive ski equipment and rummaging through rucksacks for food to eat. He successfully sells the items on to workers at the resort and other kids in the town. The whereabouts of Simon’s parents are unknown and his relationship with his sister is tempestuous. We see as Simon meets people on his way around the resort, a kitchen worker (Martin Compston) who is as intrigued by Simon as we are and a tourist (Gillian Anderson) on holiday with her children, who invokes in Simon a basic desire for a mother.
This is a brilliant film both story wise and visually. There are plenty of beautiful shots of cable cars and mountains contrasted with Simon’s rudimentary place of abode, immediately visualising the luxury versus poverty in such close proximity. It is a great location to set a story and Simon’s story is beautifully constructed, revealing gradually and allowing us to really get to know him. The performances are outstanding, particularly Kacey Mottet Klein as Simon, a wise beyond his years kid who ensures he and his sister survive but yearns for some affection. Léa Seydoux is great as the unbalanced young woman who it seems also craves affection as she disappears for days on end with different men. Anderson’s character gives humanity to the more affluent people whom Simon views as having a disposable lifestyle, simply stating that they don’t miss the ski’s he steals, they can just buy another set.
The story has many emotional peaks for the audience but never dwells for too long on them, just like its protagonist, quickly moving on. Smaller moments in life are affectionately shown, such as Simon giving his sister a stolen coat, as she tries it on he tells her to turn around and again and again. It is these little details that make this film charming. There is a slightly predictable narrative twist but it doesn’t spoil the effectiveness of this tale. The characters are captivating throughout and I found myself immersed in this world completely for the duration. Director Meier and actor Klein successfully create a likeable character doing unlikeable things, and portray a young life full of hardship but with the strength and ability to carry on. One scene where Simon plays and rolls around on the snowy grass on his own reminds us of his real age and enhances the emotional dexterity of the storytelling.
Sister is an observant and often moving drama that explores the underbelly of society, feeding off the rich in order to survive. It is inventive and fresh and offers a completely original viewpoint on the rich and poor dynamic with an emotional depth that is rarely achieved by filmmakers. Meier creates and presents to us a slice of lower class realism in a highly constructed environment amongst an astonishing natural landscape. This is a captivating film which explores a miniscule portion of such a vast world and makes it both believable and significant.

Dictado (2012)

 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1734428/

Daniel (Juan Diego Botto) and wife Laura (Bárbara Lennie) seem happy together but are struggling to have a baby. Laura is desperate and is determined she will have a child. One day when Daniel is at work he is visited by an old friend Mario (Marc Rodríguez) who seems disturbed by something and wants Daniel to meet his daughter Julia (played magnificently by Mágica Pérez) as she reminds him of someone. Daniel disregards Mario’s pleas and tells him to visit a doctor. Shortly after Mario kills himself and his daughter Julia is left guardian-less. When Laura finds out about the young girl who has experienced so much tragedy she insists her and Daniel look after her as he knew her father. Daniel reluctantly accepts, warning Laura not to get too attached. But when he meets Laura he starts to see what Mario meant and becomes convinced Julia is actually someone else from his childhood who died, bringing back memories from his childhood he would have rather stayed buried.
Dictado, or Childish Games which is its English title, is a typical psychological thriller using all the familiar conventions but it is all the more enjoyable for this as they are executed in an intelligent way. Daniel slowly begins to unravel as he spends more time with Julia and his past comes back to haunt him. The acting is of a high calibre particularly from the young actress Mágica Pérez who plays Julia, a charming sweet girl with Laura and a mysterious and creepy girl with Daniel. There are some creepy moments, however this is much more psychological horror than full blown scares horror. The rhyme that Julia recites, the dictation of the title, is suitably haunting and a red ribbon is the typical horror recurring motif.
With the suspenseful atmosphere, haunting music, shadows and dream sequences this film owes a lot to Hitchcock and it knows it, the storyline even echoing Vertigo (1958). This might indeed irk some people but I found the film established its own style and used conventional techniques with it. It is therefore not hugely original but it is entertaining nonetheless. Unfortunately, due to the fact that recent Spanish horror films such as The Orphanage (2007) and Julia’s Eyes (2010) have gained a reputation for being extremely chilling and regenerating the genre, this film appears extremely conventional in comparison.
Whilst it is formulaic, Dictado is thoroughly atmospheric and engaging throughout. It isn’t too predictable but the ending is a little disappointing. It is a solid psychological thriller that will entertain but is perhaps not as memorable as it could have been.

Barbara (2012)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2178941/

It’s 1980 in the East German provinces and Barbara (magnificently played by Nina Hoss), a doctor, is beginning work at a new hospital. It transpires she has been transferred as punishment for applying for an exit visa from the GDR. Another doctor working at the country hospital, Andre (Ronald Zehrfeld), is told to report on her to Stasi officer Klaus Schutz (Rainer Bock) and she is kept track of at all times, with random checks of her shabby flat and intrusive body searches. Barbara keeps herself to herself and gets on with her work, which she is passionate about, while she waits for an opportunity to get out but Andre shows an interest in her and tries to get to know her. Can she trust him? Or is he just trying to find out information?
Barbara is an intriguing character, immediately likeable even though we know little about her. We sympathise with her as she is searched even though we know little about what she has done to result in her being there. This lack of information allows intrigue to captivate the audience as Barbara says little and the film slowly unravels her story and her character. The hospital patients and their stories add another element to the narrative which avoids loss of interest and demonstrates the true character of both Barbara and Andre. Slowly we get to know Andre and we want to trust him, but we are never sure of his true motives until the end, which is satisfying and rewarding.
It is a truly engaging story from beginning to end, unpredictable in nature and informative about a period not so long ago. Tension builds up so gradually that you don’t even realise it’s happening until you are on the edge of your seat wondering how it is all going to pan out. The acting is superb. Hoss is incredible as the untrusting Barbara, detached and putting up barriers to begin with and then slowly revealing a caring and passionate side but never truly letting her guard down. It is such a controlled performance, Hoss revealing so much going on under the surface with just a subtle expression or movement. Zehrfeld’s sheer physicality, his massive frame, contrasts beautifully with his apparent soft nature and adds to the ambiguity of his loyalties. The scene with the painting analysis is brilliant, adding light relief to the film momentarily. Bock is suitably menacing as Klaus, watching Barbara’s every move.
It is refreshing to have a strong female character that is intelligent, quiet and complex and can still hold an audiences’ attention for the duration. Even though we never find out her whole back story the film reveals enough to satisfy and feels just the right length. Visually there are some beautiful moments and interesting location choices. The powerful wind adds to the hostile atmosphere and the hospital is aptly sterile and cold but stylistically the film is not overtly memorable, the story and character the true focus of its attention.
The film is an intelligent and compelling drama with outstanding performances, never giving too much away and building a subtle tension throughout. One of the strongest films at the festival so far.

Caesar Must Die (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2177511/

The film opens with a performance of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. A low budget theatre production is all this appears to be at first until we see the actors leave the stage and enter their cells; they are inmates at a high security prison. Whilst this opening sequence is dominated by the deep reds of the costumes, what follows is in black and white. It is six months earlier and we see the auditions for the roles and the subsequent rehearsals building up to that pivotal performance. The auditions are amusing and we are introduced to each of the men with a close up, much like a mugshot, and text informing us of their crime and sentence. The majority of the film consists of the rehearsals with little real dialogue from the characters, merely them rehearsing and for me this is the biggest problem with this film.
There are a couple of moments which reveal that the prisoners are relating to the text, drawing parallels with their own life and generally being affected by it, but these moments are few and far between. One person comments how he found Shakespeare boring at school, another says that “since I got to know art this cell has become a prison”. However, the film is dominated by the play, supposedly offering a new vision of a classical story but instead just feeling like an amateur dramatics performance, which essentially it is.
Visually the film is beautiful with staggering shot compositions of the prison and the choice of black and white for the preparatory stages contrasting with the colour of the actual performance is very effective and a nice visual metaphor for bringing colour into the prisoners’ mundane existences. Colour is also used when the camera locates a landscape image, reflecting the dreams and desires of the inmates. Unfortunately the formula became boring despite the film’s very short runtime and there was not enough about the characters to really care about what they were getting out of this performance.
The concept of the film is very interesting but gets lost in Julius Caesar and you have to struggle to find the meaning. It is nice to see the prisoners become so immersed in their task but there is not enough substance to keep the audience engaged. If you are a huge fan of Julius Caesar perhaps you would get more out of this, but I found it rather monotonous.
I didn’t even realise until the end of the film, when the aspirations of a couple of the inmates are revealed, that they are actually inmates in a real Italian prison, not that I believe this brings any more depth to the film. Overall, this is a nice idea and an interesting comment on the effect art can have on people as well as life in prison, but there is too much Shakespeare meaning the points get lost. The few moments when we catch a glimpse of the affect the play is having on a person is rewarding and visually the film is also interesting, but it is not enough to prevent boredom setting in.

Marley (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1183919/

Everybody has heard of Bob Marley, whether they are fans of his music or not his legacy remains impressive, a worldwide phenomenon. This documentary aims to explore the man behind the legacy, his roots and his story. Using interviews with family, friends and colleagues, footage of performances, radio and TV interviews and sweeping location shots, the film produces an in depth and extremely thorough portrait of a fascinating man.
Starting at the beginning in St Ann, Jamaica, where Marley was born, and then showing the poverty stricken Trench Town where Marley spent his youth we learn how he and his friends went to bed hungry and were told to “drink some water and go to bed”. He was treated differently for being mixed race, feeling like an outsider, which lead to him finding solace in music. Marley realised that music and his guitar were a way out and the documentary traces his determination and focus to ‘get out’. Gradually we see, through photographs, footage and anecdotes, Robert Marley progressively transform into Bob Marley and the Wailers, and help to create reggae. The film includes details of the Rastafarian religion that became Marley’s focus and the politics going on at that time in Jamaica which influenced a lot of the music. We learn of Marley’s love affairs and attempted killing. The film covers everything in his life through to his death in 1981 at the tender age of 36 and in 36 years this man achieved so much.
The story is interesting and Marley was certainly a fascinating person. As the film covers such a long period of time it is rather lengthy at nearly two and a half hours long and therefore drags a little but it is understandable that director Kevin MacDonald didn’t want to cut out anything. Considering its length it is pretty engaging throughout, even to someone who is not particularly a fan.
Beautiful aerial panning shots of Jamaica break up the interviews and footage and help to paint a picture of Marley’s roots. Music is obviously an integral part of the film but surprisingly doesn’t dominate, the filmmaker choosing to explore the person behind the music and how he reached the level he did. Marley comes across as a genuinely nice human being who just wanted peace in the world and even when we learn of his many love affairs resulting in him fathering eleven children, all is forgiven even by his doting wife.
This is an extremely thorough exploration of somebody who was a positive role model and achieved so much in his short life. His charisma and attitude to life was intoxicating and the documentary captures this throughout. MacDonald is adept at creating absorbing and flowing documentaries and this is no exception. There is a satisfying mixture of people interviewed including record label bosses, two of Marley’s children and the ever eccentric Lee ‘Scratch’ Perry who was a big influence on Marley. The 1970s were a fascinating period musically and it would have been nice to have a little bit of context placed with what Marley was doing, the film instead just focusing on what he did and where he went, never digressing.
Fans of Bob Marley will be pleased with the level of detail and dedication that has gone into this film and people either unfamiliar or just not fond of Marley will no doubt become mesmerised by this man if they choose to go and see the film. It would be difficult to make a bad film about such a fascinating person but as there is so much to cover it would also be easy to focus on the wrong things. For the majority of the time the film does focus on the right things and will ensure plenty more people will invest in the legacy that is Bob Marley.

A Moi Seule (2012)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2194497/

Also in Competition at the Berlinale is this fascinating film about an 18 year old girl, Gaelle, who was kidnapped eight years ago and kept locked away by Vincent her captor. Suddenly Vincent releases Gaelle and she has to learn to deal with the real world and returning to her family and normal life after such an experience. Surprisingly, the place she is sent to to recover has many similarities to when she was with Vincent. The story is told in a fragmented non-linear fashion, so that we see what Gaelle is going through today and what she went through with Vincent, who she developed a dependant and close relationship with.
This topic immediately brings to mind real-life cases such as Austrian Natascha Kampusch, who escaped after being held captive for eight years, and Elisabeth Fritzl, who was locked away by her father for over two decades and gave birth to seven of his children. Even though this topic is extremely disturbing , the film never really feels that disturbing, which is perhaps the most disturbing thing! I expected a really harrowing film, but it doesn’t focus on captor Vincent enough and the relationship that Gaelle and he form is not explored thoroughly. However, this is still a solidly engaging film.
Agathe Bonitzer is outstanding as Gaelle who is an intelligent and feisty prisoner. The actress's face is so unique and versatile making her very watchable. Reda Kateb plays a restrained Vincent who occasionally loses it and Noémie Lvovsky brilliantly plays Gaelle’s mother, who still sees her daughter as the little girl she once was. The film covers a fascinating subject matter in a subtle way rather than being outlandishly shocking. I did find the ending a let-down though and it therefore left me feeling unsure about the film as a whole.
There are some surprising ‘twists’ but the psychological motives of Vincent are never satisfactorily explored. The electronic music sometimes works but often distracts from the story. There is no doubt that there is a truly enthralling story here, with some great acting and a gradual revealing study but not quite enough examination. The parallels between the psychiatric home and the basement where Gaelle was held captive seem to be much more the focus of the film and how Gaelle adapts, but due to the flashbacks there is not enough time to really explore much.
A Moi Seule is an interesting film which seems to have plenty to say but doesn’t quite succeed in saying it.

In the Land of Blood and Honey (2011)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714209/

Angelina Jolie’s directorial debut is set during the Bosnian war and depicts an unusual love story that occurs during a horrific period. The story begins in 1992 where we see Danijel (Goran Kostic) a handsome policeman on a date with beautiful Ajla (Zana Marjanovic). Their dancing and flirtations are brought to a swift end by a bomb attack and soon Danijel is a Serb soldier in the war and Ajla lives in fear of what may happen next as she is a Bosnian Muslim. Soon the worst happens and Ajla is captured and taken to an internment camp where the women have to serve the soldiers, rape and torture a daily occurrence. Danijel is a captain at the camp and soon the two meet again. What follows is their tumultuous and ambiguous relationship that they fall into and how the war is seen from both points of view up until 1995.
It is fairly obvious to say that this is not easy viewing by any means due to the subject matter, and Jolie doesn’t hold back on the horrific and shocking acts that occur during war. It features a scene with an act that is so appalling I will remember it for a long time, but you never actually see the act, your imagination creating something much more horrific. There is a rape scene that we are shown unsparingly though. But this film is not all shock tactics, the love story at the centre of it is intriguing and unpredictable, the characters complex and the situation devastating. This is a conflict I know little about even though it happened in my lifetime so I can immediately see what drew Jolie to set a story during this time. The statistics are shocking and this film is educational and haunting.
Apparently a lot of the cast are real life survivors from the war and actors from the former Yugoslavia speaking their language, rather than doing it in English, which gives the film a much more authentic feel and shows Jolie’s determination to produce something that is accurate and believable. The story is of local people rather than American or English people and the perspectives shown are fascinating, we never quite know if people have ulterior motives or how genuine they really are. The acting, particularly from the two main leads, is tremendous and the casting of Ajla and Danijal is commendable.
There are some nice techniques employed throughout the film, the film never becoming style over substance but there is enough creativity within it to make it visually memorable. A scene where the soldiers are using the women as shields as they close in on rebels is emphasised with the use of slow motion but just fleetingly. Techniques are restrained and used effectively. This is a powerful story with well written characters that whilst morally ambiguous are likeable and watchable. The ethnic cleansing at the centre of this and the way it is depicted echoes the Second World War and the atrocities of this war are just as horrific.
In the Land of Blood and Honey is not really a film to enjoy per se, but it is a film I was drawn into immediately and whilst the subject matter is dark I would definitely watch it again. The love story is never predictable but there are elements in the film that feel slightly familiar, the character of Danijel is particularly reminiscent of Ralph Fiennes’ Goeth in Schindler’s List (1993) but a much more diluted version, his facial features and expressions in particular remind one of Fiennes.
Overall this is a strong first film for Jolie and I would look forward to any future directorial work from her. This is a poignant and informative film covering a conflict that many of us know little about with an engaging and unusual love story at the centre.

Aujourd'hui (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2178935/

Today is the last day of Satché’s life. He is a healthy man with a wife and children living in Senegal, but has been told that he will die, how we do not know. His family and friends give him gifts, most accepting his fate, some screaming ‘don’t go’. We are not quite sure of anything, how he and everyone else knows he is going to die is a mystery. We spend this day with Satché (played by Saul Williams), visiting an old girlfriend who states “you’re going to die before you have lived”, seeing an Uncle who washes the dead and observing everything for the last time.
The film is slow and reveals little but somehow there is enough to keep the audience intrigued. It is not particularly emotive considering the subject matter as Satché finds a kind of peace with it and so do we. The Senegalese culture is fascinating and as we follow Satché on his final day we learn little snippets about him and his past but there are still plenty of questions to be answered. This is a very interesting concept for a film but I felt it wasn’t executed in the best way possible. A moment where a singular tear rolls down his cheek as his Uncle demonstrates the washing ritual on him is as emotional as it gets, but this does make the film fascinating, as we cannot relate to this odd acceptance of unexplained death.
There are charming moments as the protagonist observes everyday life such as children dancing in the street and a scene where Satché  fixes a broken door handle at home reiterates the mundane aspects of life that become all the more important when life is imminently over. A nice montage depicts Satché spending time with his wife and imagining his children grown up. Extreme close-ups depict eyes, feet and the arm of a child, literally showing us the human body and contemplating what comes after that.
Aujourd’hui is not an impact film, it is subtle and leaves a lot for the audience to work out. However, if you go with it, it is quite satisfying and will leave you with that same feeling of peace that the protagonist reaches. It will make you contemplate your own mortality but not in a depressing and morbid way, rather a reminder of the things we should and want to do. It is an interesting study of the Senegalese culture and of humans and how we deal with death, particularly if we know, or think we know, of our own mortality. Despite the simple story there is plenty of depth if the audience wants there to be, you can get out of this story as much or as little as you want.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (2011)

 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477302/

I was sceptical about this film after hearing and reading many a negative review of it despite its Oscar nomination. But I am a huge fan of Stephen Daldry’s work and consider The Hours (2002) to be one of my favourite films and let me tell you, Daldry did not let me down. Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn) is not your typical nine year old boy. He doesn’t really have any friends, enjoys mapping tasks and treasure hunts set by his dad (Tom Hanks) and is afraid of bridges and swings amongst many other things. He was tested to see if he had Asperger’s but the test was inconclusive, he states. Suddenly Oskar’s world is ripped apart by September 11, 2001 as his dad is killed in the World Trade Center. When looking in his father’s closet Oskar finds a strange key in an envelope with the name Black on and realises he has one more mission set by his father; to find the lock for the key. What follows is Oskar’s systematic approach to finding the ‘Black’, out of 472 listed in the New York phonebook, who would know about the key, and in turn he embarks on a journey of how to deal with grief and loss and how to make sense of a world that doesn’t always make sense.
At over two hours long I really expected this film to drag, but it didn’t. I was enthralled by the story and the way it is told throughout. We follow Oskar on his mission and see the people he meets and also go back in time and see his close relationship with his father. For some, this film may be about September 11^th but for me that side of it wasn’t the focus, this is a film about a young boy learning to deal with the loss of his father and learning to deal with the scary world. That said the scenes featuring the Twin Towers gave me goose bumps as I remembered that horrible feeling when I first heard the news.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is a coming of age tale with imagination and heart. Imagination can be seen throughout the film in the set design and props and costumes, reflecting both Oskar’s and his father’s vivid imagination and fondness for objects. These characters are immediately interesting and I found myself drawn into their world straight away. One scene where Oskar is out on his mission sees paper birds animated on top, reflecting his imagination and creativity, the birds later appear in a beautiful book Oskar has created about his task.
Thomas Horn does a tremendous job of playing Oskar, one particular scene where he breaks down is absolutely heart-breaking, he is an incredibly talented young actor. Tom Hanks is his usual affable self and Sandra Bullock is surprisingly good as Oskar’s mum dealing with the loss of her husband but having to remain strong and look after her struggling son. Max Von Sydow plays The Renter, who occupies Oskar’s Grandmother’s spare room and has lost the ability to speak. Sydow’s face is extraordinary and the actor portrays a mass of emotions in his weathered face, a face I could explore all day. His silent performance is brilliant and supplements the apparent new trend for silent movies, with The Artist (2011) and Hugo (2011) both huge success stories.
As with all of Daldry’s films music is integral and in this film it really adds to the emotional impact of the story. Film composer Alexandre Desplat creates such beautifully emotive music and this film has several extremely poignant moments. But there are plenty of laughs as well, and the balance feels just right. Whilst the subject matter is serious there is plenty of frivolity as well. My only criticism is that the ending is rather neatly tied up and has a slight twee feel, but a film like this needs an uplifting ending and the resolution is satisfying.
This film could have just been about New York and its inhabitants but it has so much more going on as well and each part fits together perfectly like the right key in a lock. It is beautifully constructed and captures the humanity that can come as a result of tragedy, something we all need to be reminded of.  Overall Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is a great achievement and a worthy Oscar contender.

Farewell, My Queen (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1753813/

 As the opening film to this year’s Berlinale and one of the competition films, Farewell My Queen (Les Adieux a la Reine) has high expectations placed upon it. Unfortunately this historical drama was rather underwhelming. Set in Versailles in July 1789, the film follows Sidonie (brilliantly played by Léa Seydoux), a servant and reader to Queen Marie Antoinette (Diane Kruger). Chaos slowly takes over the palace as France is on the brink of revolution and we see the effect it has on the servant’s quarters and behind the scenes at the palace. The Queen is rather fond of her reader Sidonie and confides in her as panic is setting in and rumours are aplenty. Marie Antoinette tells of her love for a Duchess (Virginie Ledoyen) and soon is asking a final request from Sidonie. But just how devoted and loyal is she to her Queen?
The element that struck me immediately about this film is the high level of realism and with a period piece this is quite startling. Lighting is a huge part of this film, each scene’s mood depicted by the type of light. To begin with we see stark daylight, revealing the itching scabs on Sidonie’s arms and in a later scene with the reader and her Queen, the scene is lit by firelight, illuminating Marie Antoinette in a dreamlike way, perhaps how Sidonie sees her. The look of this film is opulent realism, with lush fabrics and the setting of the magnificent Versailles shown in a realistic way, with no gloss or artificial lighting. Visually the film is stunning, with interesting camera angles and an abundance of close ups of the beautiful ladies’ faces.
Diane Kruger is a marvellous Antoinette and the ambiguous sexual tension with Sidonie is delicately crafted. Lea Seydoux is an excellent lead and makes the best out of her role as Sidonie, however, as one servant states they know nothing about her and we as the audience don’t either. This for me was the biggest problem with the film, I neither liked nor disliked the character and it really needed more investment in order to care about what happens. It feels like quite a distant viewpoint even though we are supposed to be seeing everything from the servant’s perspective and eavesdropping with them. Perhaps this is intentional in order to allow the audience to feel the confusion that the people at Versailles felt, but it didn’t work for me.
I found the ending rather abrupt, with no real climax or conclusion. That said the film didn’t drag and was engaging enough for the duration but it left me feeling perplexed as to why it was good but not great. The acting was strong throughout but the lead character was not strong enough and the story felt rather shallow. There were plenty of beautiful landscape shots and visually this film is creative with imaginative use of lighting, often contrasting total darkness with bright daylight. But unfortunately the film didn’t have the impact it could have had with such great actors and a fascinating story. There are some light humorous moments so that it doesn’t become a stale historical piece but there’s not enough to make it memorable.
All in all a beautiful and enjoyable enough film but lacking anything to make it remarkable.

Death Row (2012)

 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1843894/

This documentary series is a companion piece to Werner Herzog’s 2011 film Into the Abyss and is part of his death row project. The series is in four parts, each part focusing on one person on death row and each section paints a portrait of the human behind the crime, the crime itself and the justice system. Herzog divulges the fact he is opposed to the death penalty immediately, he ‘respectfully disagrees’ with it, but this does not mean what he has created is a biased piece of filmmaking. He is a master documentarian and never lets his personal opinions dominate the piece. As with Into the Abyss Herzog allows the people and their stories to play out for themselves so that the audience can make up their own mind about what is right and what is wrong.
The first portrait is that of James Barnes who is on death row in Florida. We hear about the horrific crime from a detective and this is juxtaposed with the vulnerable man we see Herzog interviewing, the complexities of the situation are immediately apparent and summed up by Herzog “a monstrous crime but he doesn’t seem like a monster”. As we learn more details we see beautiful landscape shots of water and birds, the latter a recurring motif throughout the series as we see images of flocks of birds flying in the sky, evoking the inmates dreams and desires. We see the gruesome photos of one of the crimes Barnes committed, which he admits to, the murder referred to as burning bed due to the nature of how he tried to destroy evidence. A detective discusses the generic profile of a serial killer, an arsonist who likes to harm animals, it seems clichéd but Barnes fits the bill. This first instalment portrays a man on death row who admits the crimes he has committed and yet the abuse he may have suffered from his father and his redemptive nature allow us to feel for him.
The second portrait is set in Texas and takes a look at Hank Skinner who has been on death row for 17 years. We hear how he was within 20 minutes of being killed and how he was “looking at death”, but his lawyer managed to get it withdrawn at the last minute. We hear about the death house team and the transportation to the death house, Skinner himself having a wicked sense of humour but profoundly noting that the ‘death team’ are the serial killers. The film crew take the same trip, filming beautiful landscapes in wide angle as the vehicle moves. We hear from a journalist the details of the triple murder Skinner supposedly committed, he states to this day that he is innocent. Skinner is a mesmerising character, one who references Herzog’s film Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe (1980) and a Twilight Zone episode. This second instalment introduces a very different perspective on death row, one where a perhaps innocent man has suffered for 17 years, with dates of execution set and then withdrawn. The point is not that he may be innocent but is more a comment on the system in place, is it right even if he did commit the crime?
Joseph Garcia and George Rivas are the focus of the third portrait. Also in Texas, they are two of the infamous Texas 7 who were part of an elaborate prison break which resulted in the death of a police officer. We hear of a previous event that Garcia was involved in which landed him in prison to start with, an event that could have happened to any of us, a fight about a girl that got out of control. The fascinating thing about all these stories is the fact that we hear from unreliable narrators, never truly knowing what really happened, just having to come to our own conclusions from the information presented to us, just like a jury would. We also hear about the military precision planning that Rivas did in order to prevent anyone from being hurt during the break out, only to find out it was him who shot the policeman. These men are multifaceted, and it is that element of the human being that seems to intrigue Herzog.
It is not only men on death row though, Linda Carty is the subject of the fourth part and her story is perhaps the most confusing and difficult to come to a conclusion about, a fitting end to the series. She claims her innocence and that she worked for the DEA, whereas others tell a story of a manipulative woman who was desperate for a child. We hear how she had practically no defence at her trial, and that if her lawyer had spoken to a key witness she would not have been on death row, regardless of whether she was guilty or not. The state failed to give her a proper trial and the system failed. All the subjects have no date set for their executions as of the beginning of 2012.
Whatever your beliefs about the death penalty, this series will give you plenty to consider and different levels to explore, each case so dramatically different. For those that have seen Into the Abyss, this series is very much the same formula, with almost identical exploratory shots of the death gurney and static mid shots of the ‘monsters’ on death row as Herzog chats to them off camera. This would appear to be a criticism, but it is not. Each story is so different from the last that the films never feel repetitive, even if the introduction is the same for each, and watched together as one long film, as I did, just enhances the depth and complexities of the contentious subject matter that Herzog is exploring.
As with his previous films, Herzog’s narration is perfection. He states he “doesn’t have to like” the criminal immediately to their face, and probes family members, encouraging one to elaborate on a dream where she was visited by god; Herzog says “please explain, that’s what I want to hear”. There are typically Herzogian moments with plenty of animals and as inmate Hank Skinner has a tendency to go off on a tangent, Herzog’s narration interrupts one of these tangents with that fact and summarises for us what Skinner is rambling about. The filmmaker reveals that he found one of his subject matter, Joseph Garcia, whilst interviewing Michael Perry for Abyss, and from that comment we can see the story behind this series, Herzog stumbled upon a wealth of fascinating people and stories, each one all the more haunting for being real life. Herzog clearly doesn’t get tired of this realm and if you were fascinated by Abyss or the subject matter of death row presented here then you certainly won’t get tired of this monstrously delightful series.