Director: Lukas Metjes
Writers: Hervine De Boodt & Marion H von Loewenstern
Cast: Hervine De Boodt, Michele Brousse, Achille Gwem, and Marion H von Loewenstern
Running time: 27mins
I admit to having been somewhat baffled after watching the German made, English language short narrative Doctor Harriet’s Four. I could not get a handle on the movie – it appeared to be an absurdist take on modernity and late capitalism, yet appeared to be aiming for something else that I could not quite fathom. Then I read the submission notes which told me: The film displays the drama and seriousness of life through its flip side – comedy.
I got it – a comedy. I watched the film again. Sadly, I have to report that as with the first viewing I did not laugh once – not even a wry smile or chuckle. Two conclusions offer themselves – either humour sometimes does not travel well across cultures, or your reviewer is a desiccated husk of a human being with no sense of fun. Or, alternatively, the filmmakers might have been aiming to establish a new genre: mirthless comedy.
I will use the word filmmakers in this review as this appears to have been a collaborative project. The director, Lukas Metjes is a young Australian/Zimbabwean, with one film to their name. The script is credited to the lead actor Hervine De Boodt, in collaboration with Marion H von Loewenstern. Von Loewenstern is an award-winning indy director and somewhat unusually takes the movie’s opening credit: Produced and Story By. Von Loewenstern also plays a key support cast role.
The Doctor Harriet of the title, authoritatively played by De Boodt, is a representative of the dread contemporary phenomenon – the TV medic. The filmmakers efficiently sketch out the plot line. The Doctor has a long-running TV programme and is being hassled by their rude and abusive producer to come up with an idea for the next episode. In a eureka moment, De Boodt hits upon the idea of finding four contestants and empowering them by tasking them to sell the Eiffel Tower. Woven into the narrative is the story within the story that De Boodt will appropriate the proceeds from the sale in revenge for being jilted by an ex-lover.
An absurdist conceit. Yet, mainly due to Metjes’ excellent direction and Geoffrey Kenner’s fine cinematography – the filmmakers convince us to immerse ourselves in the delirium. The minimalist opulence of De Boodt’s high-status office where a lot of the action takes place is well observed – especially the backdrop of the haunting megapolis cityscape. There is an excellent soundtrack – not too obtrusive but adding momentum and atmosphere at key moments. De Boodt is totally convincing in the way they portray the twin personas of smiley medic and Machiavellian schemer.
The opening scene is a stunning piece of cinema. De Boodt, power dressed in elegant haute couture, is alone in the office at night seated at a desk. The camera lingers on a brown paper package on the desk. As De Boodt thoughtfully examines the parcel, the filmmakers play with our expectations as to the contents. Spoiler alert – as De Boodt opens the parcel, we see what is inside – a giant cheeseburger. We then have a cut to the perennially unflattering shot from below looking up to De Boodt’s mouth and nostrils as she devours the reconstituted meat products and processed cheese -atavistic – the savage carnivore. The scene is beautifully achieved but somewhat less happily the filmmakers use the fast-food theme at further points in the movie with diminishing effectiveness.
We are introduced to the eponymous Four – the contestants. The saps, the fall guys, the butts of some joke on the part of the universe. De Boodt’s PA, played by von Loewenstern, recruits a middle-aged male accountant with an alcohol problem, an unemployed male artist of demonstrably little talent, a laconic hotel doorman, and a female vagrant of advanced years with apparent mental health issues who von Loewenstern meets at a bus stop on the way to the office.
There is a strange tension at the heart of the production. Two of the lead actors appear to be unable to act. Michele Brousse as the woman at the bus stop is woefully over the top in their attempt to portray someone suffering from psychological trauma whilst von Loewenstern as the PA is as wooden as an oak table. Yet Brousse is an experienced actor with many film credits and von Loewenstern knows their way around filmmaking, so the thought occurs that the ham approach to their roles when they are riffing off the formidable performance by De Boodt was a deliberate production device – to accentuate the movie’s inherent absurdity. If my surmise if correct, the device works wonderfully in its development of the ensuing frenzy.
The contestants – another spoiler alert but as the movie is not exactly a whodunnit a revelation by your reviewer of occasional plot turns should not detract from your enjoyment of the work in the round. Three of the contestants see their fantasies realised but the fourth is rewarded with nothing but a t-shirt – the issue here is that the latter is played by the only black member of the cast.
We meet Toby, the hotel doorman played by the Cameroonian actor Achille Gwem. Toby is in hotel livery opening the door of a limousine. The hotel doorway is ridiculous – it is framed by two huge concrete representations of a pair of elephant tusks whilst beside them are two plastic sculptures of baby elephants fashioned in a Jeff Koons Super Realist style. A woman emerges from the limousine sweeps past Toby and remarks – “Africa – I had a farm there.” Well, bully for her.
The next scene we are shown a hive of industry – a room full of needleworkers (all women – it is gendered somewhat predicably) stitching garments. The camera homes in and we see that they have produced as a prize for Toby – a rather awkward embroidered elephant on a t-shirt. We are forced to conclude the elephant should be taken as a synecdoche for the African continent – the part as a representation of the whole.
I found the elephant imagery ill-judged and offensive. I assume the filmmakers’ intention was to use the symbolism ironically and critique the European perception of Africa as reducible to one species of animal while the marginalisation of the sole black contestant was intended to portray racial discrimination. However, what made me queasy was the fact that Metjes, the director, is a white Australian Zimbabwean. By historical logic, this arguably means a representative of the colonial project to plant ‘Little Europes’ across the globe is, essentially, asking us to laugh at the experience of black African people making their way in Europe. (An alternative approach might have been to cast Gwem as the alcoholic accountant and shaken the kaleidoscope.)
Whatever the aim, your reviewer found this side of the film’s execution to be repugnant. This sense of distaste also unfortunately carries into one of the best realised scenes in the film – a pastiche of that staple of the contemporary gangster/espionage drama – the showdown at the airport. The private helicopter. The opposing ranks of limousine. The holdall of cash thrown down as a marker between the two. The bodyguard packing heat. (I know under neo-Liberalism the rich can get away with most things, but in the European Union can their entourage carry guns?) The scene is tremendous, but even here for your reviewer there was a discordant note. When we realise the rich man emerging from the helicopter is of Arab ethnicity and is addressed with the honorific ‘Sheikh’ – the otherwise excellent soundtrack changes to an electronic mimic of the sound of an oud strumming an Arabian ditty. The late unlamented Benny Hill might have been proud.
In spite of the above criticisms, though, there are ways Doctor Harriet’s Four still manages to be a triumph of indy filmmaking. The filmmakers have achieved a rare feat of creating a pandemonium – letting loose the chaos of Pan on screen; but still being able to present a coherent piece of art. That is no small thing.
Do try and catch this movie. If you do and it raises a smile or even better if you find yourself laughing away throughout – please leave a comment to explain what your reviewer has been missing. And watch out for the Hitchcockian cameo from Metjes right at the end of movie – it is so well judged, and shows astounding self-confidence from a young filmmaker.
