Badia and Imane work in Tangier peeling shrimps and at night they earn money robbing men. The determined Badia hates peeling shrimps and sees two new girlfriends, who are slightly better off, as a springboard. A dynamic film in which Badia’s energy explodes off the screen.
After making a documentary about immigrants who risk the crossing from Tangier to Europe, the breathtaking feature debut of Leïla Kilani is also about the bitter-sweet dream of globalisation. The 'plank' of the title is a springboard, diving board and pirate plank all at once; a springboard to a richer, more materialistic system - but one that is accompanied by great danger to life.
Badia and Imane are girlfriends who peel prawns during the day in the factory and at night rob men under false pretences. In the streets, they get to know Asma and Nadal, who have jobs in the Free Zone, the European- oriented part of the city. It is primarily Badia, spiritedly played by Soufia Issami, who sees that as an opportunity to gain more wealth. She will have to raise her criminal activities to a riskier level.
Kilani provides a raw and authentic glimpse of the attempts of poor workers/petty thieves to get a better life. As moody as dynamic film noir, in which the shots of Tangier by night contrast with the broad panoramas by daylight.
|
Als een sneltrein de film ervaren. En wat kunnen die jongeren snel praten. Kon de ondertiteling niet altijd bijhouden.
|
|
Webreview from
on 05 February 10:14
|
|
Mark as improper
|
|
Wat mij betreft één van de meer ondergewaardeerde films van het festival. Ten onrechte: een film met een spel en script zoals we dat nog niet eerder hebben mogen zien uit deze contreien. Als voormalig (Nederlands) gastarbeider in Marokko meen ik dat wel te kunnen stellen. Hier wordt een verhaal geopenbaard van een bestaande subcultuur die je als toerist normaalgesproken niet waarneemt, laat staan kunt doorgronden. Sterke en spitsvondige monologen, gebruikt als mantra’s, ondersteunen de ook visueel (garnalenfabriek) soms verbluffende film. IJzersterke hoofdrol voor een arbische Dolle Mina met een zichzelf opgelegd ADHD-syndroom in haar poging niet als een grijze vrouwelijke muis in de Marokkaanse armoede ten onder te gaan. Hopelijk krijgen we deze bijzondere en moedige film nog te zien in de filmhuizen!
|
|
Webreview from Yiddir (pl) on 03 February 22:13
|
|
Mark as improper
|
Best goede film waar ik overigens niet vrolijk van werd. De film is goed te volgen en als iemand delen van de film niet duidelijk vond dan heeft hij/zij blijkbaar niet zo goed begrepen waar deze meiden tegen vechten. Het heeft niets te maken met de overheersing van de man maar door het consequent voor zichzelf ontkennen dat ze garnalen moeten pellen in een fabriek denken ze nog een mogelijkheid te hebben om aan dat uitzichtloze leven te kunnen ontsnappen.
Verrassend slot.
8,5/9
|
|
Webreview from hans on 31 January 12:42
|
|
Mark as improper
|
According to the director, half of the viewers love this film, and the others hate it. I belong to the second category, mainly because of being left in the dark about so many essential things. For example, what was the reason that our main character said her mate to not mingle with the other factory workers. Was it religion, race, immigrants versus natives, or just "company policy" to keep their nightly activities secret?? Also, we had to read between the lines what those nightly activities were exactly. I could have expected some more effort by the film makers to make those things clear (that is what film makers do for a living).
I'm unsure whether the film intentionally wants to make a statement about self sufficient women, who can pull their weight, not needing men to survive in the real world. In this film we see men only appear in side roles, like a factory supervisor, or as targets for being robbed. All actors were non-professionals, according to the director, which surprised me a lot due to quality performances we witnessed.
The synopsis informed us that the story is about our main character wanting to move their nightly business to a higher, more profitable level. That was essential information, and could not be derived from the film itself. Again, a needless attempt to keep important things from us viewers.
I scored a 2 (out of 5) for the audience award when leaving the theater. The reason that I did not score a 1 was the acting, that seemed very natural and very able to compete with professional actors. The reason for the low overall score was a feeling of contempt for the audience that I got, leaving for us so many things to outguess. The story could have got much more flesh when paying more attention for people seeing the film unprepared.
|
|
Webreview from JvH48 on 30 January 08:14
|
|
Mark as improper
|