Vanskabte Land

“Godland” is an audacious and visually stunning film with a unique point of view, but its artistic pretensions can make it difficult to connect with emotionally. The film’s strengths lie in the sneaky deadpan humor of the screenplay and Elliot Crossett Hove’s standout performance as Lucas, but the overreliance on allegory and underwritten characters can be a hindrance.

How did they possibly pull off that descending waterfall shot. Did they lower the camera on a string? I loved the montage imitating how people posed for 19th century group pictures. I was kind of expecting something more Aguirre/Fitzcarraldo-esque and given the runtime was left disappointed when this didn’t evolve (or devolve) into something more complex

I'm going to disagree with folks saying this was overlong. The footage was absolutely stunning, the sound design was thrilling. Maybe because I'm cooped up in this massive city, but it felt good to watch a film that effectively captured the sensuality of wild nature. Maybe this film was hampered a little bit by its wretchedly unlikeable protagonist, one of the more arrogant, hateful and broken characters put on film.

"I'm full of shit. Pray for me." pretty much sums up the whole movie. While I can't fault the gorgeous cinematography--every shot is a mid 19th century painting come to life, but the narrative (or lack thereof) is plodding and overly self-indulgent. In a way, it is all very Lutheran, repressed, emotionless, jarring, vacuous. Contrast to something like There Will Be Blood, a film of a similar tenor but wildly more compelling, more watchable. Godland was a series of pretty pictures.

This clearly wins my own personal Oscar for the year's Best Cinematography, as well as my Oscar for Best Location Scouting. Real stunning scenery, which helps when the environment is really integral to the kind of visual and earthy film this is. But it does suffer when focusing on the characters, who are engaging enough, but still go on an inadequate journey of conflict amongst them, despite a few great chilling moments.

Hlynur uses the Academy Ratio much like Reichardt does in Meek's Cutoff; an incredible vista of a landscape fenced in by how we see the world, an incompatible jumble of prejudices. Yet for all its cold and hopelessness, it drops glimpses of irreverent humour that seem like possible ways out, and you keep hoping the characters will see them. The seeming contradiction of the titles (Godland/Misshapen Land) may be part of the joke, with the punchline being that we get hung up on the one we see.

eerie and disquieting, malickian in it's appreciation for the subtle details of nature and the patience it's shows in capturing everything (those slow, creeping 360 shots are incredible) narratively it seemed to loose momentum in the second half but deserving of much praise

This is an absolutely beautiful film. Inspired by the photographic process Hove uses in the film, Hlynur Pálmason shoots the entire film in Academy Ratio, confining the vast, exquisitely shot landscape to cramped, claustrophobic frames. In many ways it's a familiar story ... a self-assured, civilized man in severely tested and driven mad by a wild, unforgiving landscape. It embraces this movie western heritage, and times feeling like a John Ford film

It'd be stupid to deny how ridiculously pretty Godland is. Palmason's directorial work is superb, perfectly capturing the scenery of Iceland. He doesn't just slap the camera down and do nothing, he frames stuff perfectly. The ending sequence is especially potent. I enjoyed the movie as it went on but it's really slow with little payoff, both intellectually and emotionally. You need profound dialogue. The ending when Ida talks about being with nature is the closest it comes to it.

Amazing look and atmosphere that goes closer to nowhere than somewhere.

Looks amazing but it's also way too long and sometimes boring. I like my Tarkovsky/Herzog as much as the next guy, but I prefer 'A White White Day' to 'Vanskabte land' anytime.

a near-Masterpiece, definitely

God. Horses. Photographs. Sometimes even holy men cannot be saved, and so to the fiery terra firma of Iceland they must descend below, for they will never rise to the heavens above. But that's okay, because as the earth taketh away it also giveth most generously.

Very pretty, but unnecessarily slow, and with the substance spread out so thin, whatever this wanted to do was just too diluted to affect me. The period-reconstructive aspects of the production seemed better devised than the script, which stutters in some of the key scenes.

Pretty photography and solid acting, especially from Hove. But it doesn't really amount to all that much.

This is a movie I should really like: masterful cinematography, a focus on the landscape and the way its reflected upon its people, and a slow, somewhat pretentious air to it. And while I truly did enjoy big parts of it, the movie felt like it was missing something that I’m not smart enough to figure out. Was it too slow? Sure. But at the end, it left me with a bit of a “so what”.

Fabulous cinematography, intriguing characters and lots to say about language barriers, nature and colonialism but it felt a lot too long for me.

Magnificent.

Thought provoking, excellently acted and absolutely brilliantly shot. Doesn't feel as long as it is.

Sıradışı 1 misyoner filmi. Hatta tüm misyoner filmlerinin antikahramanı diyelim. İzlanda'nın uzak 1 köyünde, yeni yapılacak olan kilisenin baş rahibi seçilir. Rahip, gittiği uçsuz bucaksız yerlerde kendisiyle hesaplaşmak zorunda kalır. Çok güzel görüntüleri var. Cennet ve cehennem tasvirleri çok iyi. Ama çok sıkıcı. Hele 2.yarı beni öldürdü. Filmin sonunda, Rahibin kemikleri sızladı. Uzaklarda arama çünkü sen içimdesin.

During its best scenes, this felt like a 70’s Herzog film taking place in Iceland. They managed to find fresh angles to capture the nature and landscapes; shooting on film probably helps. Sigurdsson & Hove were good in their roles and their rivalry gets pretty funny. As a whole, it’s just way too long and contains long scenes that could have been cut. Director Pálmason is good at building strong atmospheres, but he doesn't allow his audiences go easy which IMO diminishes his films.