African Mannerheim

[Juha Tompuri]

The Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle has unveiled its controversy movie about national hero Marshall C.G.E. Mannerheim, to be released in September. The title role will be played by an African

http://yle.fi/uutiset/yles_new_take_on_ ... origin=rss



Regards, Juha

[J. Duncan]

I did not know that Finland was in Africa. I thought it was in Scandinavia. Obviously, I didn't learn my geography too well. I hope it wins an oscar for best foreign film. We need more of this kind of honesty worldwide.

[phylo_roadking]

The title role will be played by an African

So are most of the rest of the others, by the look of the trailer!

[Ken S.]

Poll made by finnish magazine (Iltalehti) tells that 90% of finnish people will not watch this movie. Director of the movie has also received lots of hatefull feedback.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=781_1345112170

[Kingfish]

Just film a documentary on Shaka Zulu using local talent and call it even.
I'm sure watching pasty white Finns dressed in loin cloth and armed with spears is convincing enough.

[Mikko H.]

Obviously the filmmakers were not trying to make a historically accurate presentation of Mannerheim's life. They want cast fresh light on Mannerheim's character from a novel point of view, and it remains to be seen how successful they will be. This is a piece of art and should be treated as such. (I'm a great fan of art for art's sake and science for science's sake.)

There has been a very lively brouhaha in Finland about this film during the last week or so, mostly whipped up by evening tabloids with no real news to sell the papers. I'm hugely disappointed how idiotic the public reaction has been in some parts! Making threats to the makers of this film??? Grow the **** up people! This goes to show how irrational we Finns can still be when the wars and Mannerheim are brought up.

[Juha Tompuri]

This is a piece of art and should be treated as such.

Have you seen it?

There has been a very lively brouhaha in Finland about this film during the last week or so, mostly whipped up by evening tabloids with no real news to sell the papers. I'm hugely disappointed how idiotic the public reaction has been in some parts! Making threats to the makers of this film??? Grow the **** up people! This goes to show how irrational we Finns can still be when the wars and Mannerheim are brought up.

AFAIK the "movie" budged was ca. 20 000€, of which the main character (all were locals) got 800€.
The movie was shot in five days.

Regards, Juha

[Mikko H.]

Have I seen it? Of course not! And neither has any of those who have been so quick to condemn it. That's the point! The time to form opinions is when the film comes out. Who knows, it might be very entertaining in its own way.

[Seppo Jyrkinen]

Publicity helps business. No matter if you are for or against it. Well known fact from Hollywood, 100 years ago.

As anonymus it is so easy to make marketing with big feelings. And if you join with it, you are marketing the product (Enkeli-Elina, Luovutetut, Salaiset aseveljet...).

YOU are the toy!

[Juha Tompuri]

Have I seen it? Of course not!

So, how can you then claim it being piece of art?

Regards, Juha

[Mikko H.]

Juha, I say 'art' because this piece is (obviously) not meant as history, but as an artistic interpretation of Mannerheim's life. Therefore it's a piece of art; it remains for the great public to form their opinion on how good a piece of art it is.

[Juha Tompuri]

Juha, I say 'art' because this piece is (obviously) not meant as history, but as an artistic interpretation of Mannerheim's life. Therefore it's a piece of art; it remains for the great public to form their opinion on how good a piece of art it is.

Not everything that is not based on history, is automatically art.

Regards, Juha

[Marcus Wendel]

Juha, I say 'art' because this piece is (obviously) not meant as history, but as an artistic interpretation of Mannerheim's life. Therefore it's a piece of art; it remains for the great public to form their opinion on how good a piece of art it is.

Not everything that is not based on history, is automatically art.

Actually movie making is per definition one of the visual arts, the word "art" does not automatically mean that it is good or for that matter bad.

/Marcus

[Juha Tompuri]

Art:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/630806/art

Regards, Juha

[Marcus Wendel]

Art:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/630806/art

As your link says: "a visual object or experience consciously created through an expression of skill or imagination" and "The various visual arts exist within a continuum that ranges from purely aesthetic purposes at one end to purely utilitarian purposes at the other". The quality aspect is not part of the definition and that is only correct as it is in the eye of the beholder anyway.

/Marcus