Customer Reviews

Whispering Moon (Sub)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Getting my nomination for "Most Bizarre [....] Film" is "Das flüstern des mondes (Whispering Moon)" (2005), an Austrian film that is part homoerotic love story, part sci-fi, part political conspiracy thriller, part tech-nerd's wet dream, part student project, and lots of "Huh??" moments.

Jannis and Patrick are two attractive young men who are working on a film expose' of a circus that is rumored to be a front to breed poisonous frogs to be used to kill politicians (Still with me? Hold on, it's a bumpy ride!) Patrick, the seemingly younger and less experienced of the two, is the son of a noted television journalist, and seems to be on a personal vendetta to complete their project. Patrick doesn't speak (He was supposedly struck mute after watching his father commit suicide), but you still hear his voice (with no lips moving!) as he communicates silently with Jannis. The boys start a sexual relationship, and there are many very homoerotic moments, with full frontal nudity, simulated sex acts and a creative use of a container of yogurt. But Patrick meets Mo, a young woman with the circus who has a rare condition that forces her to avoid the sun or most artificial light, and it becomes apparent that Patrick is somewhat bisexual. Patrick also gets a job with the circus, first as a laborer and eventually as a fill-in for a performer, hoping to get some leads about the poisonous frogs. Oh yeah ... and all of this is told in flashbacks, by Jannis, as he is being tortured by someone for some reason to force him to remember the details. The film, which is set "in the not too distant future", also pauses periodically to give you a "quiz" on what other film they are paying tribute to with various scenes. All together now: "Huh??"

Shot directly on video, the film is visually stunning, but especially confusing when you add English subtitles (the dialogue is in German) to the mix. The acting and direction is overdone, but that seems to fit in the context of such a strange film. DVD has several commentary tracks. If released theatrically in the US, it would likely have drawn an NC-17 rating for overt sexual content and full male nudity. I give it three stars out of five.

This is a strange little movie. It takes place in some near-future world where apparently NASA faked the Moon landings (they didn't), AIDS was made up by scientists (it wasn't), and a computer virus has apparently destroyed the internet, which is rather odd, considering the plot of this film centers around two boys making a video that is explicitly supposed to be put up onto a website. This is just the start of the sloppy writing.

Jannis and Patrick are the two boys in question. They have this insane notion that a series of assassinations in what I assume to be Austria were carried out by circus people using poisonous South American frogs as weapons. Ok, I can think of about fifteen different, more certain, less convoluted ways to kill people, but alright. The plan they have is to infiltrate the circus, make a documentary about what's happening there and post it up on the aforementioned website.

The entire story is told in flashbacks, none of the plot points make any sense, and there's a great deal in the movie that's simply weird for the sake of weird. That can work, given the right material, but this isn't it.

So why three stars instead of two or one? Well, first off the main characters have some nice chemistry and, frankly, both are very easy on the eyes, especially once nude. ;) Also, I was amused and impressed by the way they used video effects through the story, and laughed heartily at several of them, particularity the Film Quizzes that pop up now and then.

I did find it odd, though, that they used all this video tech and no one thought it might be a good idea to process the video footage so that it looked like film. One would think that would be pretty basic, and the video-tape look simply makes the whole thing look like an old "Doctor Who" episode ("Greatest Show in the Galaxy", perhaps).

Had the people behind the film spent a little more time writing the plot and having it make sense, and a little less time seeing how cute and twee they could be with their computers, it might've ended up being a better movie. As it was, it wasn't bad, but it could've been great.

Using a variety of cinematic techneques this movie takes the view on a journey through the complexity of young love and devotion. It is a movie that I will watch again and again and expect to discover more about at each viewing. It is certainly not a movie for those who want a narrative that starts, builds and finishes but it does challenge the viewer and at times even disturb. The two young men at the heart of the movie are complex charaters not two dimensional cut outs.

This film, unbelievable concept and execution, and all, are as if a group of highschoolers decided to "put on a show." And instead of a script, they went in front of the audience and said, "Look, we've got some computers, so we can do graphics, so shout out some ideas." And what follows are "poisonous frogs" "circus" "sun disease" "mother revenge" "father disappearance" "astronomy" "political assassination" and "plastic surgery." A professional improv group could have come up with better results than what we see here, and at least the laughs would be intentional. But even an improv group wouldn't work with so many disparate ideas in one plot. I don't think this video film is meant to be a comedy, just some "let's prove I'm a real director by use of deceptively clever camera closeup shots," combined with fullscreen computer graphics, and perhaps some over-earnestness on the part of the two main actors (both of whom average looking, openly gay in RL, but one in particular has several scenes of FF nudity). The plot is absurd, and hard to follow, if you've really a mind too. And the presumed eroticism or sexiness, is totally absent to this viewer. The best thing about this film is the front cover!

I actually returned this DVD for a couple of reasons... First, the subtitles were almost unreadable, the production of the film wasn't that great either. Wasn't my taste in movies at all. SORRY!