Awarded best director at 8th International Shanghai Festival in June 2005, ‘Young Andersen’ was screened as part of the supporting programme for the Hans Christian Andersen 200th Anniversary Exhibition at The British Library in London.

Completely reversing the clownish persona of the 1952 Danny Kaye musical, this bleak biopic adopts a ’ nature vs. nurture’ approach more appropriate to a portrayal of Denmark’s foremost literary genius. Recalling Bergman’s dark Scandinavian mindsets and mores, and Fellini’s use of the grotesque to capture Andersen’s darkness of vision, the film chimes with recent eastern European landscapes in films such as ‘Koktebel’.

The ‘deathbed recall’ framework charts Andersen’s development from inept, semi-literate bumpkin to master storyteller with a complexity that almost literally bleeds from the two hour running time. Starting in a late nineteenth century Copenhagen recalling Dickensian London at its grimiest, the scene quickly shifts to the countryside and follows Andersen through a year in a Dotheboys Hall establishment presided over by corrupt and sadistic schoolmaster Meisterling, determined to bring the dreamy, overgrown pupil into line. Subject to taunts and bullying from boys and master alike, the possibly autistic Andersen’s greatest suffering occurs when Meisterling makes a whipping boy of his only friend, the cherubic but consumptive Tuk, a character invented for the film.

Intercutting scenes of the boy’s enraptured attention to Andersen’s tale-telling with unshrinking portrayals of atavistic local practices and the rigours of the schoolroom, an unshrinking camera records horrific detail whilst the script crowds in numerous foot-notes, including the visit to Anderson’s woodcarving grandfather confined to a madhouse, and Smike-like Tuk’s midnight poring over pilfered tomes from Meisterling’s private library.

Andersen himself was a great embellisher of his own story, and the film employs a welter of detail to suggest the origins of Andersen’s much-debated sexuality as well as the development of his gifts. Ultimately, the film reminds us of the inexplicability of genius and the fascination of tracing its elusive sources.








<Added>

Sorry, I didn't mean to use 'unshrinking' twice. The second instance should read: 'the camera records oftern horrific detail...'

<Added>

Sorry, I didn't mean to use 'unshrinking' twice. The second instance should read: 'the camera records often horrific detail...'

Cornelia

Only just got round to this.

If I may say so, a very professionally crafted and structured review that would stand up well in any publication. Tells me everything I need to know to help decide if this is one for me.

Really satisfying piece.

Regards

Zettel

Thanks. Zettel, for the encouragement. I think it must be very difficult to get film-reviewing jobs, although it is the kind of writing I find most enjoyable, probably because it's done immediately after the event, it's short, and I'm enthusiastic about film, as you are. I'll make an effort to find some outlets to find a few outlets.

Sheila

Sheila

Good luck. You might try BBC Collective as a halfway house. Waxlyrical and Cornelia + me have had reviews selected and this is worthwhile feedback + a prize though pretty random it must be said.

Regards

Z

Yes, I'm Cornelia, so I know, and in fact was very pleased to learn about this outlet, as it's always good to see one's work 'out there' and have feedback, if not actual money.

Sheila

Sheila

Sheila

Doh - how stupid did I get? My mind just went walkies for a moment - I found out about BBC Collective from you. For which again thanks.

Regards

Z