Change Your Image
kragerup0
Reviews
Gys og gæve tanter (1966)
Gys og Gæve Tanter/Old Maids
Imagine a somewhat dark sanatorium in the countryside. A big villa, pristine yet it somehow still feels dilapidated. Perhaps it's the inhabitants rather than the house itself that ooze a sense of something not quite at its peak; something a bit run down. Perhaps it's the northern fall weather that gives off that dank and dark fall feeling that creeps in and settles in a foreboding mood. Whatever it is, we get tons of it in this wonderful scary-old-house-in-the-woods film.
Detailing the plot of these kind of films isn't necessarily all that important. What is important is that the mystery can uphold the tension and that the actors, cinematography, score and set design can create the kind of mood that is essential for a light horror film like this. So, does Methling et al, succeed? The answer is a resounding yes!
When Methling was on point he could create these often-overlooked cinematic nuggets of gold. Fem og Rosa is another great example, although not a horror but a heist flick, there too Methling hits it out of the park.
Helle Virkner in the character of Betina, the niece of well-to-do uncle Theodor who finances the santorium that is the center of our film, is yet again a tad bit over the top but yet somehow wonderfully effective as the slightly nervous but otherwise solid straight man in this mystery horror. Virkner is the center of the proceedings - the plot crank pin which we rely on to move things along. Because someone is out to get her. So, when her uncle turns up dead, this someone makes Betina the fall guy. Or attempts to, because Betina has an ace up her sleeve or rather two - sisters in fact, played by Maria Garland and Else-Marie which means we're in for a treat. One a wit so sharp Miss Marple might have cut herself on it; the other sassy and given to this world with fingers so nimble anything in her vicinity might go missing. And with these two heavy weights in Betina's corner, our killer has their work cut out for them.
The film's gallery of characters is in general perhaps a bit on the nose with doctors, lawyers, careers and last but not least the patients whose ailments is perhaps difficult to understand could be helped in this isolated locale away from the world, but there we are. But no matter as that isn't all that important and as we get actors such as Arthur Jens, Bjørn Puggaard-Müller and Lars Lunøe to bring these stereotypes to life, we quickly understand we're in good and competent hands. These stalwarts of Danish cinema won't fumble the ball.
Yes, Methling knows what he's doing. Having penned the script himself, he'd have no-one but himself to blame if things didn't stack up. Well, they do. Very much so. From casting to the score by the underappreciated but genius Ole Høyer to the competent cinematography all in black and white, we're always in safe hands. Always along for the ride and what a great and lovely ride it is.
This is the kind of film I'd wish there were more of. A film that is best viewed with a bit of longing; a bit of nostalgia for something you're not quite sure of what is. But you know this one will scratch that nostalgic itch for you. If you let that is. I suggest you do.
Min kones ferie (1967)
Escapist fun
If you were to ask one hundred Danes about their favorite top one hundred Danish films, chances are they'd mention a fair share of the same films. And a great deal of those will probably star Dirch Passer, Ove Sprogøe and Ghita Nørby and have been made mainly in the sixties. It's strange, then, that you can be fairly sure none or at least very, very few of those asked would mention this film. And I simply can't give good reason as to why.
You see, to me, this film is such a fine, little wonder. It's a classical sixties sex comedy, and it's as classically hypocritical as any from that age when it comes to gender and sex. If that bothers you, skip it. If, on the other hand, comedies from that age by such directors as Billy Wilder, Stanley Donen or Robert Mulligan are your thing, I suggest giving this one a chance.
The plot itself barely bears to be mentioned and really just serves as the base for a nice escapist venture in snowy Norway. Strøbye as the well-off Alan is tired of routines and his wife and her routines as well. His solution is as tired and trite as you might well imagine. An affair he's certain should be made permanent. To that end he needs out of his current marriage, but as he learns, that can be costly. So why not push her, gently, into the arms of a new lover that'll relieve him of any financial woes in a contentious divorce? And where better to meet such a man than on a nice holiday? And we're off on a ski holiday to lovely Norway.
Axel Strøbye never quite reached the career heights of Sprogøe, Passer or Nørby although he was their equal in every way, and here he once again proved it. His character is the crux of the story and Strøbye carries it off marvelously. Nørby and Sprogøe flanks him wonderfully, though, and it's in this trifecta that the film lives and breathes.
Sprogøe is perfect as the slightly caddish pharmacist who's on the prowl on the slopes while Nørby brings her effortless charm to a role that admittedly doesn't have that much gravitas. We're in luck, then, to have Nørby in the mix as any less than her extraordinary charisma could have sunk the film.
While the plot might be trite and seem flat on the outset, the script itself is better than you'd have thought. Because what we get is dialogue between these three masters of their craft that'll seduce and beguile if you let it. It's endlessly quotable, along with intonation and look. Again, the plot itself is not the strength of the film and as it ventures into farce, we do see the limits of the film and the direction. But that's forgivable as what we're given along the way is more than enough to carry it home.
The supporting cast is made up of stalwarts of Danish cinema of the time and as such more than lives up to the main players while having less to do. And as it was with such films back then, we even get two memorable songs - the theme song sung by Bundgaard and a wonderful crooner style piece by the competent crooner, Dario Campeotto.
I suggest watching this one on a lazy, rainy Sunday afternoon for an experience as nice and cozy as the locales of wintery Norway themselves.
Fem mand og Rosa (1964)
Fem mand og Rosa
As a subgenre, the heist film is not a particularly common one. More than once I've set out to find a good heist flick and failed. In other words, listing the good ones won't take you all day as evidenced by a search here on IMDb or Google. It's welcomed, then, that Fem mand falls among those heist films I'd put near the top of the list.
Directed by Sven Methling one wouldn't automatically assume Fem mand to be as good as it is. Not that Methling wasn't an able director, but perhaps because that's how you'd describe him - as able. Then again, making films in Denmark during the fifties, sixties and up to the early nineties must have been an exercise in sidestepping one crap project after another. And in that respect Methling by and large exonerates himself. That he two years later yet again forged a wonderful classic, the horror comedy Gys and Gæve Tanter, showed what he might have been able to do had he been born with a passport from a bigger country than Denmark. No matter.
At first glance, Fem mand might not be the obvious gem that it so truly is. I credit Methling and Boje's tightly crafted and economical script, and it's especially admirable as this is essentially an ensample cast who for large parts of the film is confined to a hospital room with only dialogue to hold the tension and move the plot forwards. But it works! Wonderfully!
As the premise is set up, we quickly understand that this heist movie is not to be taken all that seriously. Methling is at home here, having directed a slew of light comedies for the 'whole family' he knows when to let up for a laugh and when to go for the kill. We're in safe hands.
Although a film with an ensample cast, there's one character who stands above, and he has to for it all to work. Morten Grunwald is the hero here; in more than one sense. Although a criminal, a con man laid up with a broken leg and guarded by members of the Copenhagen Police Force right outside the doors of his and his fellow bedridden cohorts' hospital room, Smukke-Arne is a man with a heart of gold. And Grunwald is wonderful as Smukke which is lucky, because if he fails, the film fails. The rest of the cast, stalwarts of Danish films of the period, all do well, some more well than others - Judy Gringer was never a natural talent but her over-the-top delivery sort of works here in the guise of the titular Rosa, Smukke's better half and his, if not exactly equal, then certainly indispensable companion and a through and through professional who takes a backseat to no-one.
The characters in this neat black and white caper generally rise above what you could expect. Never dull or surplus to requirements.
But the real standout is the score by Ole Høyer. Mancini ain't got nothing on this dude! You'll be reminded of the Pink Panther theme, but in my opinion, Høyer does it better. More subtle and tense than Mancini, yet so melodically dense and elegant you'll be humming the theme for days after.
In the end, Fem mand og Rosa is a fast paced, fun little film that sits so neatly in the heist genre that it's a shame it won't be discovered by more people.
Døden kommer til middag (1964)
Death comes to dinner or, for some reason, at high noon in English
Film is a classic murder mystery told in a tight and controlled manner by Balling, always moving the plot along and thusly managing to sidestep the pitfalls his stock characters could so easily fall into by themselves had they been left in the hands of a lesser director.
Poul Reichardt plays the unfortunate author of crime novels who on a dark, wet, and cold evening runs out of petrol and so happens upon murder most foul in one of those houses deep in the forest such films are aplenty with. As the murderer puts him out of play without revealing him or herself after our hero discovers the body, he comes to the morning after only to be told there was no murder but a suicide. The police won't be told otherwise and so begins our hero's quest to prove it was in fact murder.
Reichardt is teamed up with Helle Virkner, a pairing that would later become iconic although in a much lighter setting as the Olsens in Huset på Christianshavn - yet again guided successfully by Balling. Virkner is effective if at times a bit over the top as the slightly rebellious young literary reviewer decked out in black. Her profession is as on the nose as is the conflict it's meant to spur between the pair via her bad review of his latest crime mystery.
Virkner's character quickly reveals the main suspects, herself one. And so, we're off. The characters in this murder mystery aren't all that interesting, but they serve their purpose well enough, superbly supported by one of Bent Fabricius-Bjerre's more atypical scores creating a foreboding atmosphere heightened by the film being shot in black and white.
This type of film is interesting not because it breaks new ground - it doesn't, but because it was a rare venture into a genre mostly avoided but the Danish film industry. That we saw another murder mystery two years later in 'Gys og gæve tanter', an excellent pairing with this film for an evening of light horror, was unexpected but as the rising score of both films here on IMDb suggests, very welcome.
A traditional and well told murder mystery by the incomparable Erik Balling - beloved by the people, overlooked by the those who should revere him most. If, like me, you're increasingly impressed by Balling's output, this film is a must so don't hesitate if you get the chance.
Tour de France: Unchained (2023)
Why cheat?
I suppose that as a fan of pro cycling from the age of twelve, this Netflix documentary series could only ever disappoint. Why? Well, pro cycling is perhaps one of the easiest sports to explain on a strictly rule-based level, but it's perhaps one of the most difficult sports to understand without experiencing it continually over many races and many seasons. As is so well explained in this series, it's a sport of extreme attrition while also being a highly tactical game; something you don't just get by watching a single stage in a Grand Tour or a Spring Classic.
So, the creators of this series had their work cut out for them. They had to educate while also managing to entertain. I suppose they found that task too great a challenge as they failed miserably at educating. Does it then absolve them that they know how to entertain?
For me, it might have had they been honest in the way they'd chosen to construct their narrative threads. They were not. As an example I can't forgive is the way they set up the team EF Education, rightly, as an underdog in need of UCI points, but then chose to completely ignore reality in favor of a good story. You see, stage 12 ended on the legendary Alpe d´Huez - a mountain so occupied by people during the stage it could be claimed to be more populated than certain European capitals, so of course such a stage has to be front and center. And so, to set the scene we're told EF Education has had a bad Tour up to that point; that this is the chance to turn it around. The young and talented Neilson Powless, who has proven to be anything but powerless, is set up as the man to save EF. Now, while that's all very entertaining and sets up a battle between Powless and later winner of the Stage, Tom Pidcock, it's nonetheless utter nonsense as two stages earlier Magnus Cort, an unsung hero also of EF Education, had won stage 10. We see one clip of Cort... in the bus, in the background. And Jonathan Vaughters, general manager of EF Education, even mentions that it's been a good Tour as Cort won and in the process he contradicts himself and this documentary.
There are multiple examples like that and of editorial choices to steal shots from a mountain stage where fatigue is obvious and then splice it into another, earlier stage to construct a conflict and thusly drama.
So, my overall point is that the Tour does not need this kind of dishonesty - it's abundant with drama. It's one of the most suspenseful events on the sports calendar and it's widely believed that 2022 was a new high point. Had the 2022 edition been a wine it would be invaluable. So why cheat? Why rob sporting heroes of their achievements by editing them out? I'll let others answer that and just conclude that if you're already a bit of connoisseur, then this is most likely not for you. And if you're considering watching this series and haven't any real knowledge of pro cycling and the Tour de France, then by all means enjoy it but be aware that reality is much wilder and more dramatic than this soap-operatic endeavor.