Showing posts with label Laeni Geiseler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Laeni Geiseler. Show all posts

Thursday, February 5, 2026

Sound of Falling (In die Sonne schauen)


 





















Director Mascha Schilinski

Jury Prize at Cannes

Behind the scenes














SOUND OF FALLING (In die Sonne schauen)                   A                                            Germany  (155 mi)  2025  d: Mascha Schilinski

I’d rather people feel a film before understanding it.                                                                  —Robert Bresson

I want the audience to feel the film before they understand it.                                                     —Director Mascha Schilinski

Horribly grim, but brilliantly complex, operating on so many different levels and time periods, expressing the beauty of metaphysical passages, yet it’s all juxtaposed together in multiple layers with a uniquely abstract, stream-of-conscious storyline that may as well be a ghost story reverberating from our distant past.  Haven’t seen a film this ferociously original since Lynne Ramsay’s 2025 Top Ten List #2 Die My Love, perhaps the only two working directors who could make a film like this, so, of course, both films were shut out of Academy Award nominations.  While it may not be for everyone, difficult, and at times alienating, as the subject matter delves into the grotesque aspects of misogyny, suicide, incest, dismemberment, forced sterilization, and sexual assault, yet seen through the eyes of children, all young adolescent girls, leaving images seared into our brains, documenting, more than anything, female subjectivity, where this feels so essential, like a necessary expression of who we are, as opposed to who we pretend to be, creating a haunting piece of cinema that hits you like a ton of bricks.  Films like this are a reminder of the power of movies.  Undeniably ambitious, yet extremely challenging, with no real lead character in a fragmented narrative, instead the main character is a place that captures the full weight of history, like a silent witness, instantly becoming one of the more powerful, yet devastating films you could ever hope to see, a physical experience that challenges the viewer, yet what’s so compelling is the abstract editing style and the intensive scrutiny behind the making of the film, three years in development under the working title The Doctor Says I’ll Be Alright, But I’m Feelin’ Blue, which comes from a Tom Waits song, where just the casting process alone lasted a full year, auditioning more than 1400 girls to find just the right faces for the four main characters the filmmaker was looking for.  Winner of the Jury Prize (3rd Place) at Cannes, never before in the festival’s long history has a female German director been recognized with one of the top prizes, though Marin Ade’s 2017 Top Ten List #2 Toni Erdmann was scandalously neglected, this is as unsettling a film as you will find in theaters today, a poignantly aesthetic and sensual work, yet the impressionist vision pulling it all together is remarkable, an intelligent mix of Michael Haneke’s The White Ribbon (Das Weiße Band – Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte) (2009) and Sarah Polley’s 2023 Top Ten List #1 Women Talking (2022), though some have compared it to Sofia Coppola’s THE VIRGIN SUICIDES (1999), or even Andrei Tarkovsky’s elusive narrative structure in MIRROR (1975), but it also recalls the complexity of Julie Dash’s multi-generational Daughters of the Dust (1991), particularly its inspiring use of an unborn child as a narrator.  Taking us on a labyrinthian journey, using a variety of innovative techniques, shooting each period exclusively in the summer, what stands out is the chilling atmosphere that literally haunts the film with a suffocating presence, breathing a sense of profound disquiet as the events that unfold are echoes of the violence happening all around them, coming from an era when women were viewed as expendable and expected to suffer in silence, in this case a deafening silence.  One character acknowledges, “It’s funny how something can hurt that’s no longer there,” which may as well be the overriding premise of the film, becoming a shockingly tender and moving reflection on resilience and the ripple effects of inherited trauma, a mirror to the nation’s brutal and tormented history, exposing a national trauma playing out in the personal lives of German families living in a land bursting with life and shadowed by death, yet despite an uncommon length, it’s hard not to be affected by the morally reprehensible nature of what we’re seeing. 

After spending a summer on the farm in the Altmark region in the deep countryside halfway between Berlin and Hamburg, Schilinski and her co-writer Louise Peter developed an understanding of the region where the film is set, historically defined by decades of turmoil, including two world wars and Germany’s East-West divide, bordered by the Elbe River, the dividing line between East and West Germany, which is how far the Russian Army advanced at the end of WWII, becoming part of the Soviet occupation zone that comprised East Germany.  The farmhouse where the film was shot remained empty for 50 years, yet everything was still in place, both struck by how little it had changed, allowing the filmmakers to view old photographs that told their own story, revealing a decided lack of female perspective, so the film became an urgent act of remembering, a reimagining of what might have happened there, telling stories that are largely absent from history.  This is one instance where the English title is actually preferable to the German translation “Looking Into the Sun,” which is more reminiscent of the mythical tale of Icarus.  One of the sources of inspiration was American photographer Francesca Woodman (Francesca Woodman | Alternate Stories), whose ghostly use of a blurred image simulated floating or flying, creating a sense of urgency and movement, while one of the central themes is psychological and physical violence, not exclusively directed toward women, but mostly.  Among the most harrowing is a son chased down by his own parents in an intentionally inflicted “work accident,” resulting in a loss of limb in order to prevent him from going off to war, elevating a prevailing sense of trauma that is an ordinary, everyday reality, not necessarily big, impactful moments, but more often than not smaller, quiet moments.  He shows up as a grown man in an introductory sequence that shows a young girl playfully exploring the hallways and rooms of the house, hopping around on one leg with crutches, emulating his tragic condition, but the only sound we hear is an insistent male voice outside screaming for her to help bring the pigs into the barn.  When she finally does make an appearance, she’s met by a hard, abusive slap in the face, which is a kind of a wakeup call for what we are about to see as the title quietly graces the screen.  The film is essentially four interconnecting stories in no chronological order about four different young women, always surrounded by an omnipresence of death, with each providing their own voiceover narration, as we see Alma (Hanna Heckt), the face we’re most likely to associate with this film, a young, observant blond girl in pigtails whose seriousness is overwhelming, mostly seen wearing a white apron and clogs, Erika (Lea Drinda), a teen living with a cruel father during World War II that we see in the opening, perhaps the most traumatic period of German history, whose life and death comes with a haunting reminder of the Mass suicide in Demmin, Angelika (Lena Urzendowsky), a coming-of-age girl whose mother is Erika’s sister, desperately wanting to escape the confines of the farm in the 1980’s and the dangerous attractions within her own family, specifically her uncle and cousin, becoming painfully aware of the power her pre-pubescent body holds over men, and Lenka (Laeni Geiseler from Frédéric Hambalek’s What Marielle Knows (Was Marielle weiß), released a few months earlier), a seemingly happier young woman in contemporary times, yet who is also touched by sadness, a curious modern day extension of the previous three.  Fiercely defiant, the unraveling mysteries remain unexplained, as the film revolves around connecting lives and conversations that are largely unspoken, often incomprehensible, but the astute inner narrations offer some semblance of internalized self-reflective poetry that transcend what we are seeing, literally taking us into elevated realms.   

Not really told in any particular order, meandering back and forth, using a fragmentary, collage-like mosaic that unites characters from different eras spanning an entire century, something akin to the remarkable, multi-generational Gabriel Garcia Márquez novel One Hundred Years of Solitude, starting in the early 1900’s before WWI, moving to the tragic circumstances of the Second World War (neither war is ever seen, only the consequences), the East German Republic during the 1980’s, and present-day Germany, the film shifts between four different time periods which all run together, with no discernable difference, seemingly in conversation with one another, as they’re all set on the same rural farm, with a courtyard and barn, yet it captures, with remarkable precision, the nonlinear nature of memory, where the echoes of the past reverberate into the present.  With a multitude of characters and a large ensemble cast, including many children, there is little dialogue in the film, with Schilinski indicating we usually don’t remember words and sentences, as it’s the feelings that remain.  With a restrained visual language that leans on her husband Fabian Gamper’s 4:3 format cinematography to create an immersive, intensely subjective, painterly world, where the camera glides through interior domestic spaces like the disembodied ghost of an earlier era, this gives the film a very distinct claustrophobic look, noted for its dark, immersive atmosphere and unique sound design, while the women in particular must endure the intrusiveness and patriarchal oppression of the men on the small farm.  Camera angles and at times unsettling editing amplify the emotions of the different characters, while visual effects like the use of daguerreotypes, candlelit interiors, Super 8, keyhole settings, cracked doors, extreme close-ups, color filters, underwater sequences, lens flares, and sweeping camera movements that overwhelm, while still contributing to the density of the film’s entangled narrative.  There is a jovial playfulness in playing pranks, but not everyone laughs, as some find it more humiliating than fun, so when we discover the brutal, sadistic ways that women are treated within this community, daughters barbarically sold to neighboring farmers, or maids sent away so they can be “prepared for the men,” victims of a cruel practice of forced sterilizing so that the men will have full access to them sexually, literally normalizing rape, as one of the younger maids is seen viciously chased down at night, with no one lifting a finger to come to her aid, your heart just sinks.  Using a pace that is ponderous, with the present and the distant past speaking to each other in unexpected ways, what this film gradually reveals are the collective ways in which women’s lives are shaped by seen and unseen socio-political forces, and in which inherited transgenerational trauma forges a kinship which can only be sensed, not grasped, like an invisible protagonist.  It’s not only Alma who is haunted by memories that she hasn’t actually experienced herself, but so have the other young women and girls who unconsciously repeat gestures, words, and actions, while discovering faces in images that resemble their own, with a recurring motif of faces being blurred in photographs, made all the more poignant by the innocent voices of child narrators.  Fantasy becomes a realm in which protagonists articulate their historical despair, as Angelika waves red flags to signal her father’s harvester combine toward her direction, then curls up next to a dead fawn in a wheat field directly into the path of its blades.  The scene is all within her head, a suicidal ideation that is fiercely intrusive and vivid, rhyming with another scene in which Lenka, abandoned after swimming with her family, imagines wrapping herself in a towel, then tumbling down the banks of the river Elbe to drown, mirroring the final sequence in Robert Bresson’s Mouchette (1967), Robert Bresson, Mouchette, final YouTube (3:26).  The line between real and fantasy is blurred, nearly indistinguishable, in this staggeringly provocative effort from which there is no escape, making this deeply engaging viewing experience all the more emotionally impactful.

As grandiose as it is radically staged, there is a droning sound that accompanies the leaps through time, reminiscent of the whoosh of wind rustling through tree branches, which becomes associated with the film’s title, the sound of people falling through time.  An existential threshold between life and death, capturing the psychic interiors, this powerful, genre-defying film highlights the demand for unconventional narrative techniques, but is also evidence of the global nature of feelings.  What unites these women across the generations are similar experiences and repetitive patterns of exploitation, adaptation, and oppression, about a lust for life and a longing for death, about the silent screams against oppression, as they live in a patriarchal-authoritarian system which is populated by the spirits of the past.  Schilinski makes the historical personal, as she reminds us the memories that truly shape us are not always those born out of great catastrophes, but rather the small, everyday moments whose significance we seldom grasp while living them.  We sense something unnamed in the young girl Alma, who bears the name of a deceased sister who died when she was Alma’s current age, yet we see something stirring from deep within as she gazes at an old photograph of her, with an apparition-like mother whose face is blurred, and then imitates her sister’s pose on the sofa, dressed in the same clothes, yet there are no words to describe this feeling, only the image of Alma, eyes closed, hands resting just as her sister’s once did.  Sensual and sensory, their shared desires and distress, their secrets and truths, all rise to the surface, as if dredged from the past, where their encounters with another’s gaze reveal a defiant gaze in return.  Though separated by time, far-reaching resonances emerge as echoes of experience linger in the air.  With remarkable fluidity, Schilinski creates invisible connections between eras that suggest how women constantly battle repression and misogyny, yet also find pockets of grace and beauty amidst those societal restraints, like watching a boy and a girl sprint down a dirt road at night, illuminated only by the moon.  Filled with dark humor and the restless anxieties of youth, perhaps the most extraordinary aspect of the film is the literally intoxicating, perfectly-in-sync song motif by contemporary Swedish singer-songwriter Anna von Hausswolff, known for her Gothic style, usually accompanied by the pipe organ, Anna Von Hausswolff - Stranger - 2015 YouTube (5:20), initially heard by Lenka accompanied by her neighbor Kaya (Ninel Geiger) listening through headphones, later internalizing thoughts in a drawn-out dream sequence, as if coming from the deep recesses of their subconscious, while also heard again over the closing credits.  This eerie, lovestruck ballad, reflecting the longing for tenderness, is used to mirror the film’s themes of out-of-body emotional conflict and memory, with lyrics noting, “There is something moving against me.”  Angelika contemplates seeing the world upside down, SOUND OF FALLING - EXCLUSIVE CLIP YouTube (1:50), while Lenka remembers the gaze of her parents’ male friend leering at her when she took off her T-shirt while splashing in the garden with the smaller children in the heat.  “Why is it that you blush on the head so that everyone sees your own shame when you are trying to hide it, and why are our bodies constituted to make this visible to everyone?”  In the end, two figures rise in succession during a huge storm, as they float above the ground in a moment of bizarre beauty in the midst of the chaos swirling all around them, above all the burdens and worries.  Profound and deeply thoughtful, with so much open to interpretation, Schilinski has crafted a somber, poetic, and skilled chronicle of immense power that reverberates beyond its volatile confines, possessing the elegance of a poem and the emotional complexity of a great novel.

Sunday, February 1, 2026

What Marielle Knows (Was Marielle weiß)





 


















Director Frédéric Hambalek





















actress Laeni Geiseler











WHAT MARIELLE KNOWS (Was Marielle weiß)             B-                                       Germany  (86 mi)  2025  d: Frédéric Hambalek

The premise behind the film is a good one, using the gift of telekinetic powers to expose just how much of our carefully calculated self-image depends upon a foundation of lies, questioning just what happens when that protective illusion suddenly collapses, balancing perception with self-deception, but the execution leaves something to be desired, never rising to a level of excitement, where you can’t help but think another filmmaker would have been more risqué and brought so much more out of this, with the ending feeling like something of a letdown.  Better films on telekinetic powers would be Brian De Palma’s The Fury (1978) or Joachim Trier’s 2017 Top Ten List #4 Thelma, yet this film relies upon the very ordinariness of it, becoming all too banal and downright disinteresting, falling short of its possibilities, which is very hard to do, as the subject itself is so fascinating.  Described by BFI Sight and Sound (Eight under-the-radar LFF films | Sight and Sound) as “The most uproarious German comedy since 2017 Top Ten List #2 Toni Erdmann (2016),” but nothing could be further from the truth.  Despite some absurdities, and an over-the-top chamber score from Beethoven and Schubert string quartets that only heighten the hysteria, the film is a flat-out exposé on middle class hypocrisy, from a family that on the surface of things has everything, where seemingly open-minded parents pretend to be educated and honest, but the reality is something altogether different, which is confusing enough for a 12-year old child just entering puberty, on the verge of forming her own identity, especially after she mysteriously develops telekinetic powers and is able to see and hear everything her parents do and say.  Initially refusing to believe her, suspecting she’s somehow spying on them, yet her recall is so accurate and precise that it’s hard not to believe, completely altering their behavior, forced into hiding all their hidden secrets, turning their lives upside down, pretending nothing is out of the ordinary as the parents feebly struggle to put on a fake front, knowing they are always under observation and every word is being listened to, but the result couldn’t be more inexcusably pathetic, as there’s little left of their bourgeois ideals, ineptly becoming exactly the kind of people they never wanted to be.  A family drama passing as a surveillance story, exposing deeply hidden insecurities and a marriage founded on lies and deception, but the real tragedy is the story is told almost entirely from the parents’ point of view, with a focus on how they deal with this new revelation, and the poor girl gets left behind to fend for herself, with no support system in place, as she is never actually taken seriously, instead believing she is playing some kind of sick joke.  The film is surprisingly inert, more of an existential dilemma, their lives suddenly on hold, as if waiting to figure out how to deal with this strange phenomena, but that time never comes, as they’re simply not equipped to tell the truth the whole time, as everyone has precious secrets that no one else sees, somehow delving into the uncomfortable realms of Ruben Östlund in Force Majeure (Turist) (2014). 

Premiering at the Berlin Film Festival, it sounds like an edgy subject matter, but the director never finds the key to unlocking the film’s precious secrets, failing to utilize a bolder aesthetic, feeling more like something conventionally made for television.  Described as a comedy, it’s not really, though there are a few comedic moments, mostly it’s a mammoth tragedy, as the girl is so completely isolated and left all alone, where even her parents doubt her and are not what you’d call helpful, as they double down on their own egotistic superiority, unable to really engage with their daughter, instead they view her with suspicion and distrust, quickly dragging her to a doctor, with no results, only fanning the flames of family dysfunction.  As the film is well acted, ultimately the problem is with the writing, as the lives of the parents are suddenly exposed and openly transparent, confused that their everyday lives are completely disrupted, always on watch, but little is known about the girl, who remains a mystery, mostly kept out of sight, and is never seen at school, knowing next to nothing about her life, playing a youthful heroine who never laughs, while avoiding the idea of becoming a coming-of-age film.  That’s a problem, as she’s clearly the most intriguing character, where your heart goes out to her, as her easily perplexed parents haven’t a clue how to help or support her, instead they’re all about covering their own tracks.  What this says about constructing our own sense of identity is revealing, suggesting our view of ourselves is lined with lies and inaccuracies, offering a buffer to the hard realities we often choose to ignore.  Marielle (Laeni Geiseler, reminiscent of the eerie children in the films of Michael Haneke) has an unexplained gift that comes out of nowhere, suddenly her everyday reality after a brief spat results in her best friend slapping her in the face, suddenly discovering she is telepathic, yet she never abuses this gift, which feels more like a curse to her, as the adult world of her parents is suddenly exposed, her mother Julia (Julia Jentsch, from Hermine Huntgeburth’s EFFI BRIEST, 2009) and her father Tobias (Felix Kramer), as their immediate reaction is to self-servingly protect themselves rather than help understand or lovingly comfort her.  That leaves her trying to fend for herself in an adult world that is beyond her comprehension, filled with cover ups and despicable behavior that she never knew existed, completely dumbfounded that her parents are less than forthcoming with her.  What happens when suddenly your privacy is removed?  When the most unpleasant secrets of Julia and Tobias are embarrassingly revealed, they embark on a manipulative game that increasingly leads to more absurd situations, evoking unexpected consequences, where their comfortable middle class lives are not what they appear to be, making you question their seemingly harmonious family life.  Unfortunately, Hambalek’s film doesn’t stand up to Fassbinder’s more savagely brutal yet elegantly stylish family exposé Chinese Roulette (Chinesisches Roulette) (1976), or Roman Polanski’s emotionally devastating chamber drama, Carnage (2011), but does recall the 60’s horror sci-fi classic VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED (1960), or those deceptively uncomfortable human conversations trying to outwit the technologically superior but malfunctioning computer Hal in Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).   

A satire of bourgeois family life with all its secrets and lies, it starts, appropriately enough, with Julia having a healthy flirtation, engaging in verbal sex fantasies during a smoking break before entering into a scandalous affair with one of her married coworkers, Max (Mehmet Ateşçi), while at the same time Tobias is humiliated at his job designing book covers for a publishing house, where his planned cover design for a new novel is ridiculed and scorned as pretentious by his colleagues, particularly his younger competitor Sören (Moritz Treuenfels), who completely undermines his authority, leaving him struggling to regain his composure, having difficulties being recognized as the group leader.  In both of their minds, they have done nothing wrong and simply embellished the truth, rationalizing every little aspect of their own behavior while advocating for a version of themselves that is significantly better than who they really are.  But for Marielle, she sees things a little differently, suddenly seeing through the built-in defense mechanisms of her parent’s private and protected lives, yet when she asks them about it, they quickly deny any wrongdoing, instead reiterating meaningless platitudes that conceals what actually happened, continually presenting themselves in the best possible light, causing confusion in her young life, knowing her parents are lying, but she doesn’t know what to make of it, only adding to the confusion of her young life.  By repeating to them what she actually hears, reciting conversations verbatim, they are immediately shocked into altering their behavior, as if they are continuously on camera, with someone always watching them and seeing them in real time.  This shift in parental behavior exposes their own hypocrisies, but their initial reaction is to protect themselves, suddenly speaking French to avoid detection, never giving a thought about how this is affecting their young and impressionable daughter, whose life is spinning out of control, as what she’s been led to believe is exposed as a sham, where her parents are not who and what she was led to believe, suddenly much more fallible.  Finding herself in the precarious position of being the adult in the room, the only one speaking openly and honestly, literally hiding nothing, while her parents seem to be leading double lives, the ones they are actually living, and a fabricated version they want her to believe.  The film ends up being somewhat middle-of-the-road and inoffensive, matching the conventional mindset of the father, where much of this feels like characters walking on eggshells, as if there are potentially explosive landmines everywhere they step, accentuating all the things we say that we would not want others to hear.  The choice to focus on the more unimaginative and far less interesting parents leaves Marielle out of sight for most of the picture, mirroring what the mostly befuddled parents are experiencing, but this decision lessens the dramatic impact, feeling overly predictable, where it’s less about the supernatural ability itself and more about its impact on the family, but this leaves out of the picture the one character who is far and away the most interesting person in the room.