Brownian Movement (2010)

I like artsy films for the simple reason that they make me think. And Brownian Movement's point to ponder is, I believe, what sort of mental illness creates such a closed personality as Sandra Huller's character. At least, that's what I think it is. Such a study requires character development and dialogue that leads to discover exactly what makes the lead character tick. Instead of dialogue we are treated to long silences between characters or without characters in empty bedrooms or bathrooms. Whatever dialogue exists is in such basic English or French that it made me wonder if the scriptwriter was fluent in either language.Any action that takes place between the sterile room or scenery shot is similarly sterile. The sex scenes are so devoid of feeling that they can only be classed as porn and not well made porn at that. The only compliment I can pay part 1, where most of the sex takes place, is that it answers a burning question that must be on every movie-goer's mind: Do German actresses have Brazilians? If Sandra Huller is a typical example, apparently not.Not recommended unless you need to experience terminal boredom.

Maybe the acting and cinematography is great but the story line is stupid. Here is another marriage where the wife is a wacko sex freak and the spineless husband just stands by in therapy sessions like a prime cuckold. Love might be a factor in some marriages, but not in this one.BTW, the therapy sessions we see, were for her evaluation to continue her job as a research doctor, which she ends up getting fired and losing her license to practice. We never see them continue the therapy for addressing her problems. Hence, another cuckold relationship.

Insufferable longueurs that test the patience to breaking point, posing as artiness. Complete failure to supply backstory so that we actually know nothing about the characters while pretending to think about them. Baffling behaviour by a medical doctor --- well, that's understandable enough, considering what they endure to achieve their licence. But that behaviour is never explained, and the character says smugly that to explain "would only make it worse". Since she had sexual intercourse with men selected from her hospital's patients, she loses her licence to practice and she and her man and their children head off to India, where nothing further happens at all. I could not understand why they spoke English, in rather sketchy accents, and why the French in the movie was not subtitled. The whole thing was so anti-audience and so extremely uningratiating that I felt totally uninvolved and not motivated to watch, which is a feeling evidently shared by the vast majority of humanity. How can someone do this to European cinema? How could the Dutch pay for it?

This is an exceedingly fine film. It explores issues that arise when a marriage is put under a "pressure test" – through its exploration of cause and effect it raises the challenging question of 'what is the nature of marriage?' The issue is "what is enough?' as one of the characters asks. As the wife and husband cope with events the camera focuses on their faces for very long durations of time; this is done in total silence so we, the viewer, is given the luxury of having time to explore our own thoughts about the progress of the film, and how each character does (or one thinks, should) react.This film flies its 'Art House' flag with pride, being slow and low key (but beautifully set and filmed). It is a film in which deep thought has gone into its making, and to do it justice it deserves the same respect from the viewer. Watch it, and see if it gives you cause to ponder the significant issues that it raises.