"Saint Omer" is a pretty new French film from 2022 and from this country, it was definitely one of the big players in the most recent awards season and scored big on a few occasions, even if was just nominations here and there. Those were also with prestigious bodies. The consequence was that this film got picked to represent France at the Oscars too. It managed to get on the list of nine potential nominees, but the actual nomination it did not achieve and I think this is the perfectly correct choice. You can probably already see from my rating that I was not a big fan of this film we have here. I also wish it could have been shorter, but runs for a few minutes over two hours even. Still baffling this got to represent France at the Oscars as it was not even a Best Picture nominee at the Césars if I see it correctly, but oh well. I guess they hoped that the film's political message and elaboration on race could attract Hollywood and to some extent it even did as there were American awards bodies (NBR) who really dug the outcome here. The director and one of the three writers is Alice Diop. Strange to see her receive some awards recognition too in categories that deal with first feature directors when she is not even that. She has worked on short films before yes, but also on full feature films. She is also not so young that you could guess she is new to the industry. Her two co-writers David and Galeron are also no rookies, but the success of this film here makes it their most known work so far. For one of the two you can say that she has mostly focused on another department of film production so far, namely editing, so it was a successful transition to writing. At least people are led to believe so, but was it really?
I would say no. I think many people are sadly led to believe this is a good film by others telling them so simply because it is a film that focuses on Black characters. Racism is not even really an issue in here, but apparently many think so automatically when seeing the protagonists and their colors and I find that really sad because as long actors will be perceived like this instead of fully focusing on their craft and judging their acting and films from a neutral unbiased perspective, real equality will never be reached. But you could write a long review or essay on this subject alone and this is not what we are here to do now. Before I move on, it must still be said that the film is not doing itself any favors (or Diop isn't doing her profession any favors) by including scenes of police/court officers taking the Black defendant in and out on handcuffs and they really depicted it in a way where we are supposed to suspect racism or that she is lead away like a dog on a chain when the truth is that this is just regular courtroom procedure and I doubt they would have shown it the say way if the defendant was a White woman here. Anyway, the two lead actresses are Kangame and Malanda and the longer the film goes, the more the focus switches to the latter. Kangame also becomes a supporting player almost. This is her first performance in a film (and this is actually true compared to the misjudgment linked to the director) while Malanda has acted on the screen before, but also is far from prolific really. I don't want to really elaborate on (the rest of) the cast in detail as I am not particularly familiar with the performers and I am sure there are French film buffs who can do a better job there like myself. I do see though that the cast includes another Diop in a small role, so this was a bit of a family affair.
I found it a bit sad how men are depicted and elaborated on in this film and this includes the defendant's father, prosecutor, the father of the dead child and also the man of the original protagonist because with him it is the problem that he is supposed to be seen as nice and kind and likable and looks a bit to me as if he has given up a bit on himself and only seems to exist in order to serve his woman. One moment when they are in bed together is just one example and he looks so strong and tough with his stature and beard, but oh well if this is the agenda and depiction of what is desirable for men to become (no matter if from a female or male perspective), then I have to say: Thanks, but no thanks. Of course, it is not just men who are depicted like this. But when a female is, then it also does not really feel authentic. Just take the one who comes to the stand as some kind of evaluator and elaborates on the defendant's philosophical interests. That was strange. I mean did she say anything else there or was this character only included to spit some potentially racist hatred? This is really an inclusion from a film script that could not be any simpler and less realistic. This alone almost makes me question the existence of awards attention for this film at all. The we also have the original protagonist's background that she is pregnant. This was maybe the only aspect they used to make a point why she is still in this film at all. She was basically just a silent observer in the courtroom there, but then they use this idea to have her burst out in tears in an uncontrolled fashion and yeah it did not feel too authentic to me. I would not even blame the actress' lack of experience, but the writing was just poor. Same applies to the scene when she leaves the courthouse and is all of a sudden surrounded by joyful (White, of course) people celebrating and it is all too much for her. How did she even get there among all these people? It was not shown. She was simply there all of a sudden. Made little or no sense at all.
I think with a better screenplay, they also could have done a lot more with the character who was the defendant's mother, but she was so utterly forgettable and the depth they were going with by how she wanted her daughter so adjusted to (White?) people did not make the story any better. I mean they were going for it and the film is ambitious here and there, but they just come so short. It is difficult for me to find anything positive here from the outcome. Maybe it was somewhat interesting to watch the proceedings early on how the jurors were determined then, but this also felt a bit off because there they again brought in potential racism from the prosecutor when he makes sure a potential juror with an Arab background is not permitted. On the other hand, we are supposed to support the defendant's lawyer's decision to keep an older most likely White woman out of the jury? Difficult to do. But this lawyer did very little for me anyway. I mean her speech in favor of the defendant was so random and had almost nothing to do with the subject at hand, it was pathetic. The more I think about this film, the weaker it feels. I know I was already hesitant if I should go see it at all, but yeah it did not surprise me one bit positively. Anyway, the aforementioned speech towards the end them from said female (of course) lawyer (actually, name-wise she could have been the person she refused to let into the jury, couldn't she?) felt as if it was something that Diop and her co-writers included to make a powerful statement on what it is to be a mother and a woman even and of course people in the crowd, the one in the movie, not the one in my screening luckily, were overwhelmed by the truth and power to said closing speech, but this was ridiculous. It was just a mess.
Also the film almost forgets towards the end then that it aspired to be a courtroom drama and does not show us the speech of the White male (probably racist) prosecutor. How is that for equality? Why didn't it? Why was the court decision also not shown? Because the jurors would find her guilty anyway? Well, if they did, then it is because she killed her own child and cited witchcraft, no matter if she did the latter for the court to say that her motivations were not as evil or not. So if she has to go to jail for the rest of their life, then it is definitely not because the jurors do not like Black people. But anyway, certain people will not understand these arguments anyway and I myself am closer to saying this was a horrible film than to saying it was a solid film. But right now, "weak" fits the bill. I cannot defend the film's many manipulative moments, even if they could be seen through easily from an unbiased perspective that many just cannot seem to find these days. This is not a good film, actually a mess at times. At least the Oscars understood finally, even if also a bit too late I suppose. It would have been one of the worst, if not the worst, foreign language nominee of the decade, maybe you can cut the specific category even and say it would have been the worst Oscar nominee of the 2020s. Or maybe I am being a bit too harsh there with some documentaries also being very much on the propaganda side and also some live action films, but one of the worst it definitely would have been. Almost everything felt a bit clumsy here, including how they depicted the protagonist early on as educated and apparently she is lecturing young people at the university or so and "Hiroshima Mon Amour" being used for this makes me feel almost a bit bad for the movie. It deserves better. That is all. Oh wait, just one more thing: The Nine Simone song was solid at the very end, but also rather the instrumental parts and melody and not her singing. Now this is really all. I certainly do not recommend the watch.
8 out of 17 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
