sobot
The topic of this movie is very interesting, and it is the main reason for seeing it. At the beginning we arrive to South Africa at the moment of the fall of the apartheid. All we know about it are several fuzzy shots of violence during the opening credits, and now we listen to testimonies of victims and their families.This is a powerful experience, and the good side of the movie. The fact that there are people believing in peace and not revenge, despite of all the evil they suffered, affected me strongly.Unfortunately, the movie also has many flaws. Although Boorman is one of my favorite directors, this looks like a TV film from an inexperienced author. One of the reasons may be the fact that he used natives for most of the roles.But also there are some outrageous scenes. The main example is the one in which a boy whose parents were killed before him, and who couldn't speak for years because of this, hugs their murderer at the hearing. That practically ruins most of the impression gained up to that point.So I guess this is not a good movie, but not something you should avoid either. See it and decide for yourself.
jinty-reid
Country of My Skull/ In My Country was a movie I watched only this week on TV and I thought it was an intelligent look at Truth and Reconciliation in South Africa through the eyes of a male black South African, an Afrikaan woman and a male black American which was a very interesting comparison. It showed that life and oppression has various shades of grey. The movie showed the oppressors that were really not repentant and rationalized and mouthed the words hoping to avoid retribution and those who were truly sorry. It put forth the argument that all the whites that did not speak out against the Apartheid regime and its policies were also guilty and profited from it. The movie then let the audience see that the Afrikaan writer, Binoche came from an Afrikaan family that had treated the black South Africans with respect and dignity yet had also profited from being a member of the privileged ruling class. Finally, in a sudden twist Dumi's death added another dimension to the story showing us that some black South Africans were not willing to forgive their own people. It also begs the question that inaction and actions are often motivated by fear and if we have not lived with this kind of daily fear then can we judge? The movie does not give us any easy answers. A movie for us all which will hopefully stretch our minds and broaden our perspective.
bernhardzils
Why 8 stars ? John Boorman has made more "cinematographically" significant movies, in terms of artistic creation, but the grandness of a nations people shown in this movie dealing with its terrible wounds, is a great lesson in humanity.This movie just reached Belgium. It was never shown in our theaters, it was released as a DVD. I really would have loved to discover this picture in a theater. John Boorman conveys the magnificence of this country and its people, thus giving us breath enough to bear the unbearable. The rather sober way of acting leaves room for our own emotions.Thank you, Mr. Boorman !
Enchorde
Recap: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is about to start in South Africa in a try to start a healing process in the divided country. People are able to bring their stories, their questions and their grievances before the commission and the responsible perpetrators is granted amnesty, if they tell the entire truth and can prove that their action were politically motivated, i.e. they were following orders. Journalists from the entire world travel to cover the event and so Anna Malan, an Afrikaan poet working for a South African station meet with American reporter Langston Whitfield. Together with Anna's sound technician Dumi Mkhalipi (and a lot of other journalists) they follow the Commission that tours the country and listen to the appalling stories.Comments: A interesting and catching movie trying to heal some wounds that tore through South Africa. Most appalling stories are brought to the front, but also forgiveness and images of a beautiful country. Binoche and Jackson perform beautifully as the reporters but the best acting performances is done by Menzi Ngubane as the charming sound technician Dumi and Brendan Gleeson as the cold calculating apartheid colonel De Jager, whom Whitfield interviews. That interview is told parallel to the main story and those subplots interact in a very interesting fashion.It is a good pairing with Binoche and Jackson, and one could feel early on that there was something between their characters. But when it started to get a little warm I thought, "Luckily she is married (happily) and has three boys, and he is probably married too (we only know that he has one kid)". Ten seconds later they went at it. I think it was unfortunate and unnecessary to bring in a love/cheat story into this as it steals attention and focus from the main cause, the commission. I guess the team wanted some drama, added to the main story that almost is a dramatized documentary. But they are wrong, the main story is strong enough on its own, and it was a mistake to introduce the love story. They should have stuck to the main story alone, it would have been better.7/10
AD
