In My Country (2005)

Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

An absolute waste of money

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

The movie about apartheid and forgiveness was intense. Unfortunately, I missed a very important plot twist at the end because I couldn't understand what was being said or what language was spoken. Dumi Mkhalipi, Anna's assistant apparently did something horrible to inspire someone else to shoot him in cold blood. I watched this section of the movie four times and still haven't a clue what he did.I caught the words "pointed out" "on the highway", but this was a shocking plot twist that made absolutely no sense. Why did he die? I realize Dumi's death was simply a device to demonstrate that not everyone was on board with the whole concept of Ubuntu (forgiveness), but I would like to know what he did.This supports the complaints of other reviewers about sound quality in the movie. Subtitles were an essential part of the movie that went ignored.

A black journalist of Washington Post, Langton Whitfield; is sent by provocation by his boss to South Africa in order to "cover" the auditions of proceedings named Truth and Reconciliation Commission, that must decide if murders and torture authors can be amnestied if they say truth on act that they have made and express regrets in face of their victims. Langston encounters a young Afrikaner woman who follows also for South African radio the same sessions. She discovers the horror of Apartheid politics and she is bowled over by these facts. In these circumstances, Langston and Anna bring closer together. It is the story of the deep of human cruelty and also of the power of love and forgetting. The movie is dramatic and well played by Samuel L. Jackson and Juliette Binoche, but seems to be a little too oriented and melodramatic.

Recap: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is about to start in South Africa in a try to start a healing process in the divided country. People are able to bring their stories, their questions and their grievances before the commission and the responsible perpetrators is granted amnesty, if they tell the entire truth and can prove that their action were politically motivated, i.e. they were following orders. Journalists from the entire world travel to cover the event and so Anna Malan, an Afrikaan poet working for a South African station meet with American reporter Langston Whitfield. Together with Anna's sound technician Dumi Mkhalipi (and a lot of other journalists) they follow the Commission that tours the country and listen to the appalling stories.Comments: A interesting and catching movie trying to heal some wounds that tore through South Africa. Most appalling stories are brought to the front, but also forgiveness and images of a beautiful country. Binoche and Jackson perform beautifully as the reporters but the best acting performances is done by Menzi Ngubane as the charming sound technician Dumi and Brendan Gleeson as the cold calculating apartheid colonel De Jager, whom Whitfield interviews. That interview is told parallel to the main story and those subplots interact in a very interesting fashion.It is a good pairing with Binoche and Jackson, and one could feel early on that there was something between their characters. But when it started to get a little warm I thought, "Luckily she is married (happily) and has three boys, and he is probably married too (we only know that he has one kid)". Ten seconds later they went at it. I think it was unfortunate and unnecessary to bring in a love/cheat story into this as it steals attention and focus from the main cause, the commission. I guess the team wanted some drama, added to the main story that almost is a dramatized documentary. But they are wrong, the main story is strong enough on its own, and it was a mistake to introduce the love story. They should have stuck to the main story alone, it would have been better.7/10

I am not a big fan of romances, but in this case I gave it a try because of director John Boorman ["Excalibur," "The Emerald Forest," "Hope & Glory, "Deliverance"] and actors Samuel L. Jackson ["Coach Carter," "Star Wars: Episodes 2 & 3," "The Red Violin"] and Juliette Binoche ["Chocolat," "The English Patient," and the 1992 remake of "Wuthering Heights"].This film was in the better half of Boorman's, while Jackson and Binoche gave top-notch performances. The supporting role of Dumi, played by Menzi Ngubane was excellent, as he acted both as foil and antagonist between the couple.I think the weakest elements of this film are in screenwriter Ann Peacock's dialogue and in the construction of the Anna Malan and brother Boetie characters. The first for taking on just a little too much burden of responsibility, especially in one somewhat uncharacteristic scene at one of the hearings with a particularly gory testimony, and the latter for being incomplete when a key development occurs that should have played more into the storyline and into Anna's reactions.From what I've heard about the book by Antje Krog, I can understand why anyone who had read it before seeing this movie might be disappointed, but it was certainly clear to me by the marketing that this was a romance and not a cinematic litany of the horrors of Apartheid.Given the turbulent background of Apartheid and the South African Truth & Reconciliation Commission proceedings, along with other clues, I was also expecting this to be an adversaries-fall-in-love story, which is the type of romance that I like the most. The collective incidents which drive Anna and Langston together are neither contrived or turgid, and fall comfortably in between, especially because they are juxtaposed with events based in reality. There is one most significant turn at one of the hearings, which, given it is true, would bring any two adversaries together, in peace if not in love.I don't want to give away anything about the extent of their romance, except to say that how it ended up was a pleasant surprise and quite satisfactory. I wish I could recommend two other good romances that end so similarly and satisfactorily, but I would give away the surprise.This film is certainly worth a rental or two, worth showing to friends, but I suppose the disturbing nature of the background events might keep some people from buying it for their home library, but if you bought a copy of "American History X," I think you might want to buy this one.