Dahomey

The documentary, elevated by poetic undertones, narrates the journey of historical artifacts returning from France to Benin. It highlights the debates among the Beninese about the significance of this event, showcasing a broad spectrum of perspectives. Particularly captivating is the technique of narrating from the artifact's point of view, adding depth and complexity to the audience's understanding. From a technical standpoint, the project is exceptionally well-crafted, impressing with its image quality, thoughtful pacing, and mesmerizing sound.

As a viewer from Europe, I felt a slight lack of explanation about what modern Benin is like beyond its capital, which would have helped form an opinion on the discussions presented by the Beninese in the film. However, it's clear that the filmmaker did not set out to provide a comprehensive overview of the country's current state.

A vital reflection on colonialism and the loss of identity of nations plundered throughout history, and the plundering nature of countries that rose from the suffering of others.

Dahomey raises important questions about cultural assimilation and the wounds of colonialism that remain open in many cultures exploited by European powers that shield themselves from responsibility in a society that does not care much about the impact of the exploitation of first world countries on the rest of the world.

Despite the short duration, the dense theme makes the experience a little longer than it seems, but this discomfort is necessary.

The film captures very well how artifacts from our culture tell our story.

But online reviews can be hilarious. . .

So a certain muppet in the user reviews said the movie is "overhyped" because a movie that lacks character development can never be a good movie. That's very derp.

So, I was scratching my head for a solid eight minutes, trying to figure out how he focused on character development in this pertikular docu about France repatriating artifacts from Dahomey. And I think I unpacked it. See what you think of my figuring. . . Thank you.

I reckon said usder-reviewer thought "Dahomey" us the a story about a homie, as in "The Homey" and so fully expected to see a movie about some homey's life journey. Or some exciting chapters in such a life and to be fair, that would be a story that demands character development from the git go. Frustrated expectations naturally led to a raw deal sorta disappointment.

Find out that "Dahomey" is actually a nation and all of that simply did not make up for the short fall, hence the windy, irrelevant remarks/review.

Then I was thinking, "Alrighty, had it be me who had no clue about the nation "Dahomey" and had watched the movie all bummed out and crest fallen, what would I do, besides writing an embarrassing review?

And the answer that came to me was ironic. I would watch the movie again. But I can imagine how that sounds like punishment in certain ears. My mom used to say, when she was still above ground, "The day you stop learning is the day you quit living."

Based on critiques, I was not sure whether I should dislocate to the next cinema to watch this film. One compelling reason: around 1960, the then called Dahomey was the focus of developmental aid by a Swiss supermarket cooperative, as depicted in that bi-weekly magazine. So by watching, I hoped to revive this past experience. Professional ratings are also quite good, and the short duration of only 1h+ would make a bad surprise bearable. It is anyway a weakness of contemporary film-makers to try to give 'substance' by making films of 2hours or more.

Contrary to some critiques here, the final scene with the discussions by the students was everything else than boring. The question is: what is the truth behind their assertions 'Only some dozens have been brought back, but there were thousands robbed'? I assume, the majour works have been returned.

Even though this is a short film it seemed to me to contain a lot of filler. It gained some interest about halfway through with in the public forum segments. With such an interesting subject matter, I felt myself wanting to learn more about the artifacts, the process that got them back to Benin, how and why they were stolen. I found myself annoyed with so many lengthy shots of security cameras, hallways, airports, and moving equipment.

Listening to Beninese talk about the significance of gaining these pieces back and all of the relics still in France was the meatiest part of this film and the most engaging for me. Often, I feel that a unsubstantial film could be edited for improvement. In this case, I feel that a lot of substance could have been added.