Directed by: Joachim Rønning & Espen Sandberg.
Written by: Petter Skavlan.
Starring: Pål Sverre Hagen (Thor Heyerdahl), Anders Baasmo Christiansen (Herman Watzinger), Tobias Santelmann (Knut Haugland), Gustaf Skarsgård (Bengt Danielsson), Odd Magnus Williamson (Erik Hesselberg), Jakob Oftebro (Torstein Raaby), Agnes Kittelsen (Liv Heyerdahl), Peter Wight (Spinden).
While
I watched the Norwegian film Kon-Tiki I wasn’t surprised that the film was
nominated for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar this past year. That
category is usually filled with movies that feel American made in every way
except their language. The voters in that category always seem to embrace
traditional stories – like they do in every other category – instead of some of
the truly daring films being made around the world. There is nothing really
wrong with Kon-Tiki – it’s a fine nautical adventure film as far as it goes.
There’s just not all that much reason why it needed to be made – or why you
need to watch it.
Watching
Kon-Tiki, as it goes through the motions expected in this type of film, I
couldn’t help but wonder just how good the film could have been in the hands of
a director like Werner Herzog. For over 40 years now, Herzog has specialized in
making films – either features or documentaries – about people who are obsessed
with an idea, and more than that, willing to go to any lengths to prove they
are right. That is what connects films as seemingly diverse as Aguirre, the
Wrath of God (1972), Fitzcaraldo (1984) and Grizzly Man (2005) among many
others. Their main characters are driven – almost to the point of insanity (and
in some cases well beyond) in proving their ideas right. And the real Thor
Heyerdahl had to be somewhat insane to attempt the perilous journey he embarked
on in his primitive raft, no?
But
Kon-Tiki really isn’t that interested in what drives Heyerdahl – or really who
he was at all. As for his crew, forget about it – the all start blending together,
especially once they’ve been at sea for a while and all have crazy, NHL-playoff
type beards (one of them may well have been Brent Burns for all I know). Why
they accompany Heyerdahl is never explained, and who they are as people isn’t
either. You would think that as they drift for days, weeks, months on end, with
nothing but each other and the ocean around them, that they may have an
interesting conversation at some point. But no, they don’t. All their
conversations are either about their immediate needs – like not being eaten by
sharks – or Heyerdahl talking about his ideas. It gets tiring after awhile.
But
Kon-Tiki is a well-made film – and it has a few genuinely exciting moments. The
best is undeniably the scene with the sharks – at first one, but then the blood
in the water attracts many, many more. This is the one scene in the movie that
really gets the blood pumping, and gets you to the edge of your seat. The rest
of the movie is pretty much pretty pictures of them drifting in the water – and
yes, it is beautiful.
There
is a probably a good movie to be made out of this material. Herzog could have
made it. Or perhaps even these filmmakers could have, if they were interested
in something more complex than what they delivered. Heyerdahl’s theories and
methods remain controversial to this day, but you wouldn’t know it from this
movie, which portrays him as a straight ahead hero. I often complain that
Hollywood movies take the path of least resistance – that they take what could
be an interesting, complex story and dumb it down. If nothing else, Kon-Tiki is
an example that proves it’s not just Hollywood who does that.
No comments:
Post a Comment