The wolf's revenge

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Movie
German title The wolf's revenge
Original title Clearcut
Country of production Canada
original language English
Publishing year 1991
length 92 minutes
Age rating FSK 16
Rod
Director Ryszard Bugajski
script Robert Forsyth based
on a novel by M. T. Kelly
production Ian McDougall
Stephen J. Roth
music Shane Harvey
camera François Protat
cut Michael Rea
occupation

The Revenge of the Wolf (Original title: Clearcut ) is a Canadian film from 1991. The film adaptation is based on the novel A Dream Like Mine by the Canadian writer M. T. Kelly from 1987. Director Ryszard Bugajski poses the problem of industrial deforestation (" Kahlschlag ", English Clearcutting ) in Canada and shows the associated destruction of the natural habitat of Indian forest dwellers. The film premiered in the US on August 21, 1991, and in Germany on July 9, 1992.

action

In the wooded areas of northern Canada, the forest has been ruthlessly cleared for years. The responsible large paper companies are thus destroying the habitat of the Indians who now want to defend themselves. Peter Maguire, an inexperienced lawyer, is said to represent the indigenous people in a court case. In order to get a proper picture, Maguire has a charter plane take him to his clients' wooded area. After he almost lost his way, he ends up between the fronts of the loggers and the Indians, who are supported by environmental activists. The media also have their representatives on site and so the reporter takes Louise Maguire with her to the paper mill, where most of the felled wood is processed. Here he meets the opposing lawyer and his uncompromising client Bud Rickets, who makes it clear to him that he has no chance against him. Maguire is intimidated by the influential entrepreneur and has little faith in a victory, which he passes on to the Indian chief Wilf. But this cheers him up and brings him closer to the life of his tribe. In today's relatively modern reservation life, in which the Indians also live in houses and drive cars, their traditional rites play a major role. Maguire is invited to take part in a cleaning ceremony. Wilf encourages him to go into himself to feel what his soul really wants. On the other hand, the tribal member Arthur, the negotiations and trials are not sufficient means to enforce the rights of the Indians. However, before the court date comes, Maguire and Bud Rickets are kidnapped by Arthur. Maguire is horrified that Arthur treats him, who wants to help the Indians, just like Rickets. He tries in vain to convince the Indian that this is not the right way to get justice for his tribe. But he undeterred moves with the two far into the country and into the wilderness. Here he wants to show the “whites” what they have done to nature and that the civilization they want to bring to the Indians is worthless.

Maguire begins to doubt the Indians and their way of self-righteousness, because Arthur goes so far in his anger against the cutting down of the trees that he mutilates Ricket's leg and in cold blood shoots the police who have come to rescue them. Arthur brings his hostages to a sacred Indian mountain where he prepares another cleansing ritual for them. Maguire seriously thinks killing Arthur to end this "nightmare", but can't manage it. The further tortures that he and Rickets have to endure lead the once so peaceful lawyer to face Arthur and fight with him. After Arthur loses, he withdraws without a word and leaves his hostages alone. Maguire brings the injured Rickets back to "civilization" where the police are waiting for them.

Reviews

The "uncompromising ecothriller" was largely reserved by the critics. On the one hand, Graham Greene was criticized as the actor in Arthur, z. B. by Chris Hicks of Deseret News : "Greene's powerful screen presence elevates the whole film to a realistic, nature-related level that makes the film uncomfortable at times."

Hal Hinson of the Washington Post went a step further and described Greene's performance as "grossly sarcastic", he was "most terrifying where he is funny".

On the other hand, Michael Hogan was praised in the role of Bud Ricket, whose “charming demeanor hides a very cold heart”.

On the other hand, the coarseness of the film was criticized. He was "well meant, but ultimately disappointing". The film makes its point of view clear, but only "roughly" "articulates" it.

On the other hand, the film's unwillingness to compromise politically earned positive assessments: “Despite its superficial courtesy and although it […] fluctuates on the verge of simplification, [the film] is as radical in its message as an image that is in front of one's eyes has. ”For the lexicon of international film , this“ 'modern Western' questions the thesis of nonviolent resistance ”and“ makes the oppression of a people painfully tangible through its uncompromising harshness ”. François Protat's camera work was also praised .

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Short description of the film , Cinema , accessed on March 5, 2008
  2. ↑ a b c Movie review by Chris Hicks , Deseret News , December 18, 1992, accessed March 10, 2018
  3. ↑ a b c Movie review by Hal Hinson , Washington Post , August 14, 1992, accessed March 5, 2008
  4. ↑ a b The revenge of the wolf. In: Lexicon of International Films . Film service , accessed April 1, 2017 .Template: LdiF / Maintenance / Access used