Out of Africa
A CINEMATIC VIEW
Out of Africa is a mixed bag. Its good points are so good that I wish they were present in a better film, but its weaknesses finally outweigh the pluses.
Filming author Isak Dinesen’s literary composition, Out of Africa, has long proven an obstacle to screenwriters. (Not having read Dinesen’s book, I have to take the film on its own terms.) Using Dinesen’s work and also two works about Dinesen, screenwriter Kurt Luedtke has put together a winding tale of Karen Blixen, who in 1913-1914 exchanged her family money for a title when she married Baron Blor Blixen. The two left Europe and went to Kenya to start a farm. Luedtke explores the relationship between Karen and her husband, whom she eventually comes to love or at least like, and the relationship between Karen and the one true love of her life, Denys Finch Hatton, an aristocrat, war hero, white hunter, and aviator. It was from her 17-year experience in Africa that Blixen, under the pen name of Isak Dinesen, wrote her highly acclaimed stories of Africa.
The talent assembled for the film would seem to make Out of Africa a sure commercial and artistic success. Meryl Streep is certainly one of the finest contemporary film actresses, director Sydney Pollack is a gifted director, Robert Redford is a good screen actor, and Klaus Maria Brandauer (at least from his work on this film) seems to be a master at underplaying. With these four, could one ask for anything more? I think so. I would have enjoyed seeing a film with some dramatic impact, a work that had some power and force to it. But Out of Africa is flat and dull.
You May Also Enjoy
Contemporary film is quite advanced; the tools are available for making significant films. What is obviously lacking is insight.
Tolkien knew very well that God allowed him to understand the reason for the bloodletting of modernity: Man had fallen away from the Creator.
In the homogenized world of contemporary political and religious thought, a film like this strikes some as dangerously paleo-Christian.