The Promised Land

I watched this movie at the Busan International Film Festival this week. I went into it, without much information and didn't know what to expect. And oh wow, it blew me away. I straight away put it on my "Top 10 Favourite Movies of all Time" list.

First of all Mads Mikkelsen is a phenomenal actor and the perfect choice to play Ludvig Kahlen. He shines especially in the scenes, where he "only" acts out pure emotion with his facial expressions without having to say a word. There is one scene at the very end, where he sits all alone in his farm house, eating at a table and the camera zooms into a close up shot onto his face. It is a captivating scene, were no words are spoken but so much was said. He is a superb actor.

Throughout the movie you feel all kinds of emotions yourself: anger, hatred, sadness, frustration, disgust, joy, relief,.. I felt it all. It is a rollercoaster ride of emotions.

I felt strong hatred for the villain of the story played by Simon Bennebjerg, who was also a perfect cast for this. You really start to hate his character pretty early on, his arrogance, greed and disrespect for all people around him, make him a despicable character.

After watching the movie, my friend and I had a long discussion about human greed and what our motivation in life is. Is it worth to betray, let down and/or loose loved ones over a title, money and/or fame?

10 out of 10, worth every second.

Rating: 8.7 Overall, a very polished period drama that is executed well on many fronts as the direction, cinematography, and performances from Mads Mikkelsen and Amanda Collin help create a very captivating movie, but the writing and story construction hold it back from being something great.

Very Good Direction (Does a great job on a macro-scale as some of the scenes look stunning as he effectively uses cinematography and editing to capture their grand nature (like in the palaces and especially in the farming scenes; does a very good job on a micro-scale as he develops sequences very well; gets a lot out of his actors as they all work well with Mikkelson to drive the story forward; the biggest drawback is the storytelling as it is kinda predictable with what is going to happy next (especially with the conflict between the protagonist and the antagonist as its pretty generic and cliche with how its told), Good to Very Good Acting (Very Good to Great from Mads Mikkelsen (Has somewhat of a grit to this performance that helps show who his character is; he controls every scene he is in and really lifts the performances around him as he acts as someone to work off of; shows his experience and why he is one of the most renowned Danish actors in cinema history), Very Good from Amanda Collin (Very Good female lead to Mikkelsen as the two have great chemistry, but she also has moments where she shines on her own (especially in the climax); really embodies someone who is of the working class and looking for revenge), Good from Simon Bennebjerg (Plays the pompous prick role well as he does his best effort to make sure everyone hates him (though this makes his performance a bit one-sided as he is written pretty shallowly), Good from the rest of the cast (does their job helping move the story forward and working with Mikkelsen to make the scenes more interesting)), Pretty Good to Good Story (The concept uses a baseline source material that is very interesting and draws your attention because its based on a true story; The story construction is kinda an issue because the conflict between the protagonist and the antagonist is pretty shallow since it just follows many cliches about the power trip of royalty, and this affects the plot as it has to construct itself around this major conflict (although the overarching storyline between the protagonist and the king and the protagonist developing relationships with the female lead and child are written well); the flow of sequences is fine and does a good job in making the story interesting; the character writing for the protagonist, the female lead, and child are good as their grit present them as more well-rounded characters trying to achieve something, but the writing for the other characters (especially the antagonist) is very shallow that you do not really care for them towards the end of the movie), Good Screenplay (The dialogue is well written and comes off very polished (staying true to 1700s vernacular); the humor is used decently well to lift the tension in some of the traumatic scenes (especially with the antagonist to show how twisted he is); the use of symbolism is decently present, but the message just feels like it isn't clearly conveyed with the direction they chose in the end; the foreshadowing is pretty good)), Very Good Score (Felt really similar to Joker and used well to set the tone), Great Cinematography (Really polished and helps show the vastness of the world and the emotions of the characters), Very Good Sound (Felt very crisp and helped with building tension), Very Good Editing (Used well in conjunction with the Cinematography to deliver a polished product), Very Good Visual Effects (The use of practical effects makes the move stunning (especially the use of fire and blood)), Great Production Design (Helps with setting the time period as they build these grand palace sets as a dichotomy to the rural landscapes to show the separation of the classes), Very Good Costumes (Helps with setting the time period and showing the juxtaposition between the upper and lower classes), Plot Structure was fine for the most part as all the overarching plot elements were there and built on each other in a standard fashion; the main issue is the conflict between the protagonist and antagonist is just a bit too cliche and forced that it has a major impact on how the rising action develops (but it does help with the climax though); the exposition just drags a lot and is very unnecessary/forced (could have been removed and the movie would have been the same), Pacing was a bit on the slower side as it followed the pace of other period dramas (but it does move faster than most movies in its genre), Climax was very good itself and executed well (especially with Collin's performance); the exposition just really dampers this climax as it ruins the momentum built up by a well-executed sequence, Tone was very similar to other period dramas (does not provide anything new on this front), Saw a premiere at Austin Film Fest.

Possibly one of the most engaging and powerful European movies of the year. Great storytelling, acting, directing, cinematography, art direction, costumes, make up.

This film uses all the tools of the western genre. Wide landscapes, settlers developing harsh lands, the fight against greed, injustice, cruelty and impunity of the ruling class, a stubborn loner who learns to follow his heart and old vs. New technologies, in this case agricultural, settlers fighting rich landowners, racial prejudices and of course a showdown with a powerful obligatory scene.

For the longest time I have been waiting for a period piece set in Europe with the look and feel of epic westerns. There have been a few efforts so far and they all failed on me in one part or another. This one could be leading the pack. Do yourself a favor and go see it on a very, very big screen.

This was a surprisingly good movie. I've been disappointed by quite a few period drama pieces from the last years, so my expectations going in were not very high, especially given the description of it being "Western set in 18th century Denmark". But going out of the theatre I had to admit that I had a near perfect cinema experience. The movie was beautifully filmed with nearly each frame being a work of art. The acting was superb and the characters were interesting and well-developed. Mads Mikkelsen was stellar in his role, and I loved Ann Barbara, Anmai Mus and the priest. Simon Bennebjerg was great as the unhinged, but charismatic Frederik de Schinkel. The plot wasn't particularly original, but it kept you invested in the story, and was logical and well-rounded and the ending left no loose threads. The love story was compelling without being overly dramatic - because most love stories aren't! Another reviewer commented that it felt unnatural to him but to me on contrary it felt very realistic that these characters would seek out each other's warmth and comfort in the circumstances they were placed in. Other parts were well-balanced too - it had just enough blood and fighting and torture scenes to get the story across, but none just for drama's sake. The movie borrowed a lot of elements from the Western genre, but it felt authentic and in no way like a Hollywood clone. All in all, it was fantastic, well rounded film and a great cinematic experience.

In 1755, retired soldier Ludwig Kahlen (Mads Mikkelsen) decides to attempt the impossible - to cultivate the Danish Heath. This is a bleak and infertile wilderness which produces nothing but gorse and heather (though there are forests nearby, for some reason). He hopes to win honour and renown thereby.

Kahlen builds his house, and collects a motley crew of workers, including a priest, a pair of runaway serfs, and some lawless folk akin to gypsies. He sort-of adopts a gypsy girl. With much labour, he clears some land, then unveils his secret weapon - the potato.

Unfortunately, he runs foul of a sadistic local landowner (a wonderfully sinister performance by Simon Bennebjerg), who considers himself above the law and has no problem with violence.

The film follows Kahlen through one growing season, at the end of which his feud with the landowner reaches a bloody climax.

The epitaph on screen seems to suggest that this is based on a true story, but I don't know if that's the case.

The performances are excellent throughout; the landscape is compelling, and the cinematography superb.