Month: November 2021

Rating :   ⭐️ ⭐️  ⭐️ ⭐️

Categorisation: Detective drama

Availability: Netflix, Danish with subtitles

Plot: The six-part series of The Chestnut Man begins with a 1980s flashback of a brutal murder – the killing of a family on an isolated Danish farm. Small chestnut figurines are found, adding a creepy sense of foreboding. Fast forward thirty years to present day Copenhagen where a women is viciously slain by a killer who leaves the same calling card – chestnut figurines. Then it happens again. Detective Naia Thulin takes on the case, along with her new partner, Europol agent, Mark Hess. At first, Thulin is unimpressed with Hess. He’s distracted, and in the well-worn Nordic Noir tradition, he looks like he might be on the spectrum. Concurrently, Rosa Hartung, Denmark’s Social Minister, returns to work after twelve-months leave following the abduction and murder of her daughter, Kristen. In their own ways, Rosa, her husband Steen, and their son Gustav all try to cope with the loss of a much loved daughter and sister, a loss that critically exposes the fragility of the family. When Kristen’s fingerprint is found on a chestnut man figurine next to each of the recently murdered women, the detectives begin a relentless pursuit of the killer as they try to connect the victims. 

Cast: The cast of The Chestnut Man is strong, and the uneasy pairing of the two detectives is a real strength of the series. Danica Curcic is terrific as Naia, a single mother and full-time detective who realises that her daughter is bearing the brunt of her obsessive work life. She applies to transfer to a desk job, but in the meantime the demanding Chestnut Man case takes up all her time, also exposing the fragility of her relationships. On top of that, as she gets to know and like Hess, she tries to look out for him. Hess, played well by Mikkel Boe Følsgaard, is talented, but also struggles to cope with his own tragic family history. As such, this places additional strain and responsibility on Naia. 

Filming and Setting: This is a very well filmed series. The aerial shots are stunning, and the film’s overall use of muted colours serve to reinforce the dark and menacing plot. It seems that Danish children make all kinds of animals from chestnuts during the autumn months, and the appropriation of a child’s chestnut man by the serial killer makes the drama even more sinister. This is chillingly captured in a scene where children are innocently singing a song to the chestnut man, inviting him in, while an ominous dark shadow loiters above them. It’s a clever juxtaposition of safety and threat, something that the series does well throughout. 

Personal Comments: The Chestnut Man  is a suspenseful drama that intelligently weaves together multiple themes relating to fragility in families as the characters cope with grief, loss, responsibility and sadness. At the same time, it is a classic whodunit that has you looking for clues and trying to solve the mystery of how the sinister chestnut figurines connect across different details of the story. Following familiar Nordic Noir territory, Søren Sveistrup’s screenplay, based on his own successful debut novel of the same name, results in a tightly knit and compelling series. Interestingly, Sveistrup also created The Killing, and both have the mark of a deliberate, slow burner plot. The Chestnut Man is, in fact, similar to the earlier series in a number of ways, and could be mistaken as being from the same decade. If you like Nordic Noir and enjoyed The Killing, this intense and satisfying series is well worth the watch.

Rating :   ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ 

Categorisation: Period Romance/Biopic

Availability: In cinemas

Plot: This film depicts a taboo relationship between two women in 1840s Lyme Regis, a town in West Dorset, England. It is a place that is renowned for fossil excavation. Mary Anning, in real life an early 19th century paleontological pioneer, famously had a workshop there, where she would also sell the fossils she’d found to provide income for herself and her widowed mother. In the first scenes, we are introduced to Mary, the harsh environment in which she undertakes her excavations, and the grim routines of her life as she makes shell-encrusted curios for tourists. One day a wealthy and enthusiastic hobbyist, Roderick Murchison, comes into her shop wanting to accompany Mary on her fossil hunting expeditions. Reluctantly she agrees as she needs the fee he will undoubtedly pay. His depressed and silent wife, Charlotte, is with him, and later as he prepares to leave Lyme Regis for Europe, Roderick worries that the trip would be too much for his wife, and so engages the reluctant Mary to keep an eye out for her during his absence. So the relationship between the two women begins, becoming increasingly intimate and opening an emotional space for both women.

Cast: Kate Winslet and Saoirse Ronan play the two women, big names in the film industry, and unsurprisingly they are both outstanding. Saying very little, Winslet in particular brings remarkable expressive emotion to the role of Mary. Alongside Winslet and Ronan, there is a great supporting cast,  James McArdle as Roderick, and Gemma Jones as Mary’s harrowed mother. 

Filming and setting: Ammonite is beautifully filmed. It’s slow and lingering, and we get some great shots of the rugged West Dorset coastline. Although much of the drama takes place in Mary’s cottage, a small oppressive place that reinforces the sense of confinement and constraint. The sexual scenes in the film are graphic yet sensitively done, although I think occurring with unlikely haste. I would have preferred to see more tender exploration as their intimacy developed. The move to full-on sex might nevertheless portray the depth of unmet need in both characters. 

Personal Comments: On the face of it, as a film about the relationship between two women, Ammonite tells the story pretty well…although I think it could have been shorter in the telling. It subtly uses the metaphor of the ammonite to explore the gradual opening of Mary’s tightly held emotional frame. But my main criticism of the film is the way in which it misrepresents both women professionally and personally. In reality, Mary and Charlotte both made important contributions to science. Completely obliterated in the film, Charlotte’s expertise in geology long predated her husband’s interest. Indeed, in recognition of her scientific contribution she had an ammonite that she had sketched named after her, Ammonites murchisonae. Over the years, Charlotte and Roderick were constant companions, travelling across Continental Europe, as they both undertook their important scientific work together. A thoughtful, intelligent and cultured woman, Charlotte influenced her husband greatly. As Roderick’s brother confirmed ‘To his wife he owed his fame, as he never failed gratefully to record…’ (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24136821?seq=1). It is true that Charlotte and Mary met each other and, despite coming from different social classes, became close friends. It is also true that during the 19th century (and following) women in science faced considerable disadvantage, their discoveries often usurped by ambitious men. But I do find it objectionable when filmmakers purposefully fail to acknowledge the achievements of real women, and misrepresent critical aspects of their personalities, something that is clearly done in Ammonite. The film maker, Francis Lee, has referenced his own experiences as being working class and queer. It seems this is also becoming something of a filmmaking signature for him, his debut, Gods Own Country, traversing similar territory. Shoehorning Mary Anning and Charlotte Murchison’s relationship into this frame as a means to an ideological end, is disrespectful to both women – and in fact is entirely unnecessary. Given the complete lack of evidence for Lee’s interpretation of the women’s relationship, and indeed evidence to the contrary, he might have better avoided the biopic genre altogether and instead told a beautiful, poignant story of two fictional women…for me, that would have had so much more integrity.