Vinyan (2008)

For this film to even have a chance of working, the audience has to have some kind of connection with our grieving couple. Unfortunately we are never allowed to really get to understand their plight as we are whisked off to the jungle very quickly. Yes, there is some flashback stuff, but by then I was just beyond caring. She was clearly nuts and he just wanted to go home. I can't even say I liked the performances; I guess they were good, but because I really couldn't engage with the characters, I found it all far too 'arty' for my taste. Definitely not one that will get any repeat viewings from me and sadly not one I can recommend.SteelMonster's verdict: NOT RECOMMENDEDMy score: 3.2/10You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

Determined Jeanne Bellmer (a fine and affecting performance by the ravishing Emmanuelle Beart) and her husband Paul (a sturdy portrayal by Rufus Sewell) encounter a dangerous tribe of feral children after they venture into the Burmese jungle in search of their missing son. Writer/director Fabrice Du Welz relates the intriguing story at a deliberate pace, does a bang-up job of creating and sustaining a powerfully dark, bleak, and hopeless tone that's dripping with dread and despair, offers a vivid evocation of the seamy Thailand locations, firmly grounds the premise in a credibly harsh and sordid reality, and takes the viewer on a gradual descent into hell that becomes more increasingly intense and unsettling as the narrative unfolds towards a devastating downbeat ending. Moreover, this picture acquires extra poignancy and resonance from the potent central theme about the tremendous precarious lengths one is willing to go to in order to be reunited with someone they love. Sewell and especially Beart do sterling work in the lead roles. Julie Dreyfus registers well in her regrettably small part as the spunky and enticing Kim. Petch Osathanugrah likewise impresses as treacherous local guide Thaksin Gao. Benoit Debie's sumptuous widescreen cinematography provides a wealth of stunning visuals. The brooding score by Francois Eudes hits the moody spot. A truly nightmarish movie.

Seems that many hated this mysterious chiller. Some thought it great, I quite liked it.The premise was a little different to the usual, with added credibility of the tsunami link and thus a genuine, human emotion for the couple to search for their missing child. Such emotion can be justifiably overblown in movies - making psychological issues out of almost anything.Yes, it looked good, very good. The attractive, sexy leads, (Emmanuelle Beart and Rufus Sewell, who still managed to remain mostly believable) the sultry landscapes and the monsoon weather, all adding to a great, eerie atmosphere. That it is compared, albeit only visually, to Apocalypse Now is to its credit, surely. Yes, it is ultimately mumbo- jumbo black magic nonsense but that hardly mattered, this is a moody chiller, not world class drama.The final scenes are not only well done, but pretty chilling, too. Not out and out horror, but ones that make you momentarily stare in numbed disbelief. The whole is greatly helped by a hauntingly atmospheric score by François-Eudes Chanfrault.No, I won't be searching for other films by director Fabrice du Welz but I've seen a lot worse movies in my time and for what it set out to do, was quite good.

Straight away I must say I agree with most comments in the "I hated this movie" category. However, I am writing this review to point out what I think might have been some redeeming features of it until they were totally spoiled by the fantasy elements and the ridiculous ending.Both my wife and myself were first attracted to it as it was classed as a drama on its TV showing (totally wrong, it should have been a fantasy/horror - there were certainly no thrills in it for us, we do sometimes quite like a good thriller - and then we wouldn't have bothered at all). We also thought the plot sounded plausible - a wealthy western couple losing their son in a tsunami, and then the seriously disturbed mother persuading dad to go with her look for him.On watching the film, we thought it went well along these lines, with the boy apparently being spotted on a video of children playing on a river bank, with one of them wearing a red shirt - possible the Manchester United shirt their son was wearing when he was washed away. This video was seen in a screening amongst wealthy patrons of charities organizing relief for the tsunami victims, also very plausible.So off they go, with some very good shots of the scenery and local means of transport, etc. Unfortunately much of it was at night-time, so we saw little of it. Why do film makers do this, or is it the reproduction on a TV screen? Anyway, that was the first put-off for us. Another put-off was the interminable length of many scenes, where nothing else happened (e.g. when the husband rescues his wife from the sea and they were splashing around in the water for far too long) and we were trying to be patient whilst waiting for the scene to change.As events unfolded, and I will not say more to avoid further possible spoilers, the only other redeeming quality for us was the chance that they might find their son, and we watched it through to the end with this hope in mind.I must add one major criticism of the use of the children in the film, on top of everything that has been said in other reviews. Were the film- makers trying to emulate "Lord of the Flies"? I can understand how boys of rich parents in an English prep school can turn into little savages, but the local children in such a disaster, having lost their parents, would not gang up in the forest like this. I think it was very degrading of the people who live in these areas to suggest they would.Googling child abandonment in Burma does not change my view of this film. This child abandonment is due entirely to the military, of which there is no mention. If there had been, and cut out the fantasy, then it would have been far more successful as a drama, albeit fictional.