"Ins Blaue", which of course means "Into the Blue" is not the Jessica Alba movie, but a German theatrical release from 2012, so this film fill have its tenth anniversary next year and maybe it happened already depending on when you show up here to read this review of mine. This film was just on ARD pretty much in the middle of the night, but you can also see that this was no television release back then from the fact that the running time is 105 minutes and not the usual minimally under 90 minutes. I wouldn't really say that the people who made this film make it obvious that this one was for the big screen because pretty much (almost) all of them have worked on television projects too over the years. The director here is Rudolf Thome. he was in his early 70s when he made this and is now over the age of 80. Actually, this was his very last film and probably it's gonna stay that way as he seems retired now. It was a bit of an ode to film for him apparently with the subject, but I will get to that later. Thome began making movies in the mid1960s when he started with short films, so you can see with this one here that he worked in the industry for almost half a century. And not only did he direct most of his works, but he almost always also worked as the writer and producer. This also applies to this movie we got here. On rare occasions, he also acted and edited, but these really just exceptions. Nonetheless an incredibly long and prolific career with some pretty solid inclusions. His name may be the one who is attached the most to quality from this film here. As for the title, it is basically a metaphor for "into the unknown" as well, but the color blue fits in nicely because the film takes place in its entirety in Italy, at the seaside to be precise, even if the sea really only had a really minor impact on the film as a whole, even if the nice warm weather was constantly around.
As for the cast, the first name in the credit is Vadim Glowna. His first credits was the role of a baby during the times of World War II, but his real career began in the 1960s, so a crucial parallel with the director here. Another parallel is that for Glowna this was also his final work, but that is not because he retired, but because he died not too long after the shooting here and way before the release sadly. Normally I would say that Glowna really shouldn't be first credit here because his screen time compared to the actual protagonist is considerably limited, but in the face of his death back then, we can let him get away with it as some indirect tribute, even if I am not sure if he was a good actor. I have by far not seen most of his stuff, but what I did see did not impress me too much to be honest. Also, for a relatively old man, he got naked a lot in his final films and this includes the one we have here. The actually biggest lead here is of course Alice Dwyer. She is also the only one who received awards recognition, also for another film, and that is okay. Not undeserving I guess. She was one of the best aspects from this film here. Many times, her role forced her into some kind of quiet observer position, but when she got the chance and the material, she did all she could and it worked. Or at least she was not to blame when it didn't work. It's good to see her in films like this. There is a risk to them and it was always clear this would not become a crowd magnet, but working with Thome in this rather artistic project was definitely worth the risk, 100% times better than going for uninspired ARD Degeto releases, even if those maybe mean a higher salary. It could have turned out a lot better for sure. There is not a lot I can say about the rest of the cast to be honest. Mostly new and fresh faces that nonetheless have more experience to them than you would guess maybe. Check out their bodies of work if you care. I don't think any of them has enjoyed a breakthrough in the almost nince years since the release of this film.
As for the story, I was kinda hesitant for a long time if I could give this film a positive or negative recommendation, but at the end it just got a bit too showy for my taste and the overly happy ending seemed also a bit too positive honestly and not as realistic as I would have liked it. Thex exaggeratedly showy stuff includes for example the escalation scene between the old man and the woman who plays his sexual partner in the movie. Or how said actress tells the protagonist/director that she had sex with the old man to get the role. This was reason enough for a loud escalation between the daughter and father here and the idea that he simply should not be there because he was getting in the way of her daughter on several occasions was one I liked, but the way they led us there not so much. I mean there were situations before that during which we see that she will never be fully in control of the film as long as her father is around, a (former) filmmaker himself. Take the one when he says they should shoot a scene once more. Or take it how he takes care of the unpleasant job to let an important crew member go and in that scene his daughter is sitting on his lap as if she was a little girl again. Very telling show about who's in charge. The guy who needs to go by the way was slowly turning into a potential love interest for Dwyer's character and that I did not like that much, but what was even worse is how they got him back. As if he was only waiting for her/their call. This was one example how men once more basically only have to follow and another reason why I did not like the outcome too much. the anti-male component is there. Be it the father sleeping with this supporting actress, be it him getting rejected on a later occasion, be it the religious fella and how he is treated by those three women at the campfire, when he lies to his superior etc. (even if it was in the movie), be it the guy having sex in the cave etc. Men are really reduced to characters here that have no purpose other than being willing to please their woman and this film is a prime example of extremely poor writing when it comes to male characters.
If we move away from that, the film has definitely other and more interesting aspects to offer. This includes for example how Thome is toying with the audience and how we never really can be sure that what we see happens there in the movie and not in reality. This is the case because with these scenes shot for the film inside the film he almost always waits a pretty long time to show us Dwyer's character in her directing position and sometimes he does not and we still assume, it's not reality. Besides, I personally found it kinda funny especially during one scene how we basically watch a director direct his cast and still we do not really see the real director and all we see is in fact cast 100%. So we basically see what Dwyer's character is seeing. it#s tough to put it into words really what it felt like to experience this, but I liked it. It was certainly one of the better inclusions and from that perspective it was a successful take interms of film on film. Nonetheless, with some weaker inclusions, it did not feel good enough as a whole. For example, I as somebody who originates from Berlin and has lived almost his entire life here, I struggled with the Zoopalast inclusion. I mean this is a truly prestigious cinema here in Berlin, one of the biggest and honestly nothing about the movie (they were making in this movie) would make me think this could be such an important film that everybody would be looking forward to. on the contrary, I expected a film maybe even more indie than the actual film here. So this Zoopalast scene I really could have done without, but it was one of several bad choices from the last 15 or 20 minutes here. Maybe it should have been shorter and had they cut the right (i.e. wrong) stuff, I perhaps would have given this a thumbs-up even. Oh, but back to the positive, the moment we see the movie in the theater at the very end was still pretty nice because the film has the exact same name like this movie I was watching. More toying from Thome and a really nice idea for the final shot of his career as a filmmaker there. You can feel his creativity, even if it was not omnipresent this time in other areas.
Okay, this is pretty much it then. There were moments that I liked and others that I did not like. I already stated that it would be a close call, but the final verdict here is a negative recommendation for me, even if, also in its weaker moments, it is never inside failure territory. Maybe you understood that already from the little color reference I made in the title of my review. And I am glad Dwyer got cast here for the lead because she managed to elevate the material here and there, something i would not really say about her husband. Anyway, if you want to see a better (German) film dealing with production issues during the making of a movie, lack of money, complaining actors and basically all this stuff, then I suggest you go for the Michael Kohlhaas film (much longer title) that stars Robert Gwisdek, an actor I usually like as well, and that film was made around the same time like this one here. I saw it in the theater back then and would actually love to give it another watch, but it's not too easy to find. In contrast to the Kohlhaas film starring Mads Mikkelsen. Anyway, I am drifting a bit back from this one here now, but i think all has been said pretty much. My suggestion is to skip it and I think it is in crucial moments not as artistic as it wants to be and occasionally also feels too much for the sake of it. Like for example the great deal of nudity and sex even at times felt as if it was supposed to make a much bigger impact, turn this film into something more sensual than it actually turned out as a whole. But of a pity the script was so much over the place here and there. I still think given the cast and Thome's talent, this had potential for more.
As for the cast, the first name in the credit is Vadim Glowna. His first credits was the role of a baby during the times of World War II, but his real career began in the 1960s, so a crucial parallel with the director here. Another parallel is that for Glowna this was also his final work, but that is not because he retired, but because he died not too long after the shooting here and way before the release sadly. Normally I would say that Glowna really shouldn't be first credit here because his screen time compared to the actual protagonist is considerably limited, but in the face of his death back then, we can let him get away with it as some indirect tribute, even if I am not sure if he was a good actor. I have by far not seen most of his stuff, but what I did see did not impress me too much to be honest. Also, for a relatively old man, he got naked a lot in his final films and this includes the one we have here. The actually biggest lead here is of course Alice Dwyer. She is also the only one who received awards recognition, also for another film, and that is okay. Not undeserving I guess. She was one of the best aspects from this film here. Many times, her role forced her into some kind of quiet observer position, but when she got the chance and the material, she did all she could and it worked. Or at least she was not to blame when it didn't work. It's good to see her in films like this. There is a risk to them and it was always clear this would not become a crowd magnet, but working with Thome in this rather artistic project was definitely worth the risk, 100% times better than going for uninspired ARD Degeto releases, even if those maybe mean a higher salary. It could have turned out a lot better for sure. There is not a lot I can say about the rest of the cast to be honest. Mostly new and fresh faces that nonetheless have more experience to them than you would guess maybe. Check out their bodies of work if you care. I don't think any of them has enjoyed a breakthrough in the almost nince years since the release of this film.
As for the story, I was kinda hesitant for a long time if I could give this film a positive or negative recommendation, but at the end it just got a bit too showy for my taste and the overly happy ending seemed also a bit too positive honestly and not as realistic as I would have liked it. Thex exaggeratedly showy stuff includes for example the escalation scene between the old man and the woman who plays his sexual partner in the movie. Or how said actress tells the protagonist/director that she had sex with the old man to get the role. This was reason enough for a loud escalation between the daughter and father here and the idea that he simply should not be there because he was getting in the way of her daughter on several occasions was one I liked, but the way they led us there not so much. I mean there were situations before that during which we see that she will never be fully in control of the film as long as her father is around, a (former) filmmaker himself. Take the one when he says they should shoot a scene once more. Or take it how he takes care of the unpleasant job to let an important crew member go and in that scene his daughter is sitting on his lap as if she was a little girl again. Very telling show about who's in charge. The guy who needs to go by the way was slowly turning into a potential love interest for Dwyer's character and that I did not like that much, but what was even worse is how they got him back. As if he was only waiting for her/their call. This was one example how men once more basically only have to follow and another reason why I did not like the outcome too much. the anti-male component is there. Be it the father sleeping with this supporting actress, be it him getting rejected on a later occasion, be it the religious fella and how he is treated by those three women at the campfire, when he lies to his superior etc. (even if it was in the movie), be it the guy having sex in the cave etc. Men are really reduced to characters here that have no purpose other than being willing to please their woman and this film is a prime example of extremely poor writing when it comes to male characters.
If we move away from that, the film has definitely other and more interesting aspects to offer. This includes for example how Thome is toying with the audience and how we never really can be sure that what we see happens there in the movie and not in reality. This is the case because with these scenes shot for the film inside the film he almost always waits a pretty long time to show us Dwyer's character in her directing position and sometimes he does not and we still assume, it's not reality. Besides, I personally found it kinda funny especially during one scene how we basically watch a director direct his cast and still we do not really see the real director and all we see is in fact cast 100%. So we basically see what Dwyer's character is seeing. it#s tough to put it into words really what it felt like to experience this, but I liked it. It was certainly one of the better inclusions and from that perspective it was a successful take interms of film on film. Nonetheless, with some weaker inclusions, it did not feel good enough as a whole. For example, I as somebody who originates from Berlin and has lived almost his entire life here, I struggled with the Zoopalast inclusion. I mean this is a truly prestigious cinema here in Berlin, one of the biggest and honestly nothing about the movie (they were making in this movie) would make me think this could be such an important film that everybody would be looking forward to. on the contrary, I expected a film maybe even more indie than the actual film here. So this Zoopalast scene I really could have done without, but it was one of several bad choices from the last 15 or 20 minutes here. Maybe it should have been shorter and had they cut the right (i.e. wrong) stuff, I perhaps would have given this a thumbs-up even. Oh, but back to the positive, the moment we see the movie in the theater at the very end was still pretty nice because the film has the exact same name like this movie I was watching. More toying from Thome and a really nice idea for the final shot of his career as a filmmaker there. You can feel his creativity, even if it was not omnipresent this time in other areas.
Okay, this is pretty much it then. There were moments that I liked and others that I did not like. I already stated that it would be a close call, but the final verdict here is a negative recommendation for me, even if, also in its weaker moments, it is never inside failure territory. Maybe you understood that already from the little color reference I made in the title of my review. And I am glad Dwyer got cast here for the lead because she managed to elevate the material here and there, something i would not really say about her husband. Anyway, if you want to see a better (German) film dealing with production issues during the making of a movie, lack of money, complaining actors and basically all this stuff, then I suggest you go for the Michael Kohlhaas film (much longer title) that stars Robert Gwisdek, an actor I usually like as well, and that film was made around the same time like this one here. I saw it in the theater back then and would actually love to give it another watch, but it's not too easy to find. In contrast to the Kohlhaas film starring Mads Mikkelsen. Anyway, I am drifting a bit back from this one here now, but i think all has been said pretty much. My suggestion is to skip it and I think it is in crucial moments not as artistic as it wants to be and occasionally also feels too much for the sake of it. Like for example the great deal of nudity and sex even at times felt as if it was supposed to make a much bigger impact, turn this film into something more sensual than it actually turned out as a whole. But of a pity the script was so much over the place here and there. I still think given the cast and Thome's talent, this had potential for more.
