secondtake Wah-Wah (2005)It may seem like this story of a dysfunctional family is familiar, and just setting it in a new location (Swaziland, 1969) will perk it up. And that's partly true, both halves. It really is a television soap opera, and it really is interesting for its setting and subtle political backdrop.But it's so decently made, with sterling performances across the line, you can't help but give it a chance. Even when you think, oh no, not this, you will also think, ah, nicely done. Very moving. And funny. And beautiful.And that, oddly, is everything, which says something. The cast is easily read elsewhere (Gabriel Byrne and Emily Watson stand out for me). The director is a completely new name to me, Richard E. Grant, and it turns out he only has 84 movies to his credit--as an actor (including Henry and June and Dracula). This is his only role as director, and it should have encouraged him. With a more original script (which it must be confessed he also wrote), this would have made the sterling performances and great overall production rise to another level.As it is, a completely absorbing movie, being what it is, and for those who appreciate this kind of sometimes funny, sometimes moving melodrama.

bobgeorge1 Richard E Grant's film about his formative years being brought up in Swaziland is fascinating for both what it shows and what it conceals. It is a stunning portrayal of an only child brought up by feuding parents. It shows his parents turmoil in dealing with their required Upper Class Victorian behaviour - even though this is the 1960s - and their frustration at being unable to act their true feelings. It made sense to me of how people in authority who have to behave in such formalised ways to give their roles gravitas end up sacrificing their true desires. But desires come through. His mother turns to having affairs and his Father to alcoholism and the only child stuck in the middle of this is also dis-empowered. He is shuttled off to boarding school and the country of Swaziland and he each find their independence. But there's a real twist in this tale. My wife tells me that Richard E Grant has a brother. Can this be true? If so it means the film makes no sense. The whole basis of the film is the tugging Oedipul triad that destroys them all before each is reborn as is the country with a new identity. You'd better go see it too and see if you can work out why he left the 4th leg off the table?

Gordon-11 This is an autobiographical film about a child's turbulent childhood in a small African country.The good thing about this film is that the characters are amazing. Acting by the various lead characters are superb. There are drunk fathers, charming seductress, unhappy children and pretentious upper class figures. They all do an excellent job at portraying their respective character. The scene that struck me the most deeply is that the young child prays for his mother to come back. It is the most touching! However, the main weakness of the movie is that it is at some point rather confusing, and can be boring to watch due to the very nature of the film.I can imagine the process of making this movie must be very painful to the director. Thank you for bringing your story to the screen!

lyndachidell Such a pity this film is not being shown on general release but apparently only at "art" cinemas. It is one of the most moving films I have ever seen and will stay with me for many years to come. The entire audience in the theatre where I saw this film sat in stunned silence at the end. Seeing the movie was of particular interest to me because I lived for some years in the country in which the film was shot. Seeing the movie brought back so many memories for me - some of the 'extras' were people I knew during my time there. The story, based on Richard E Grant's childhood experiences in a tiny African Kingdom is brilliantly portrayed by a mixed cast of well known and unknown actors. Well done, REG, for telling your story so well!