Deep in the Woods (2010)

"Deep in the Woods" is presented entirely through short, fleeting scenes, giving the initial impression that you are watching a trailer of the movie, rather than the movie itself. Once you overcome this feeling, you settle in to watch a movie that you know isn't going to be generous in its exposition, so you'd better pay attention to these short scenes.The movie is about a mysterious tramp who enters the house of a 19th century French doctor and his beautiful daughter, played by Isild le Besco. He does magic tricks with the cutlery, and soon reveals a psychic hold over the daughter, Josephine, seemingly able to make her sick and well at his command. He also takes a strong sexual interest in her.Eventually they escape, her apparently under his spell, and submitting, perhaps not willingly, to frequent bouts of unerotic sex. After a while, she seems to change her mind in regards to this ugly, monobrow'd vagabond, and in a late sex scene where Josephine is on top, it feels like a vital turning point in their relationship.Nevertheless, the vagabond is captured and Josephine returned to her life at home. She has a baby. Is it Tomothee, the vagabond's? We don't get to find out.The aforenamed short scenes, combined with typically opaque performances from the leads, and obscure dialogue, keep us at a pretty safe distance from this one. When a police officer says, late in the movie, that a court case is no place for poems, but for the straight truth, we know how he feels. The movie is, ultimately, too lightweight to be engaging, and too distancing to make us much bother with puzzling over its mysteries.

Just saw this as part of a French Film Festival in Manila which as somewhat uncomfortable not knowing what audiences here find acceptable, though I think I only saw a couple of older audience members leave, everyone else enjoyed the show, many applauded at the end.The story was well written an and directed, the cinematography well done except for a few odd zoom-in close ups. This is not a movie for those easily offended by adult themes as there are more than a few. The leading actress and actor both gave very good performances and though the story is a little predictable, it still leads you in directions you might not expect.

Saw this one at the British Film Festival last night (22nd October). It seemed to me to be a film without redeeming features. The plot-line was exiguous and (such as it was) moved forward at a snail-like pace. There were no attractive characters (either physically or morally) other than perhaps the father. No explanation was proffered either for why the girl fell under the spell of the feral boy or (if she did fall under his spell), why she spent so much time screaming?That being said, if you like films where a not-very-attractive woman with a wobbly bottom and an inadequate personality gets raped by a crafty peasant with slimy grey teeth and a moustache that looks like a furry centipede, then this is the film for you.We just about stomached the rape, but when the crafty peasant started slurpy cunnilingus as if he was eating soup without a spoon, we walked out. I suspect the leading lady wished she could have walked out too . . .Bad film. Avoid.

this might pretty much be a big spoiler below.Story revolves around 19th century setting, a doctor's daughter being abducted and/or not by a dumb peasant/drifer. A lot of ambiguity in the film, is he that or not? Is she that or not? Did s/he "intended" to do that or not ? Supposedly the seed of the film is based on some fictional story found in an archive that might or might not have based on true story. True or not, that might not be the point ...The setting is interesting. Perhaps true to the source and the attitudes of the time. The story revolves around whether an beggar/outcast magnetize and capture a doctor's daughter against her will. Somehow the whole thing reminds me of the Italian Devil in the Flesh. Music wise even. I saw on other film by the same director a few years back, that was more of a go-as-you-please, day in the life episode. Not sure if that is typical. This is more structured, has a purpose, it wants to tell you something ,or let you be the judge.Maybe the point of this movie is this : Who you are is a combined definition of a) How you see yourself, b) How others see you and c) Who you really are inside. And well, that all depends on how well you know yourself also ?