Promised Land (2004)

hyped garbage

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

I liked 'Promised Land' and I am wondering why it got so many bad reviews from critics and why it did not have a fair chance to meet with the public. Other people comments have too much focused on what they perceive as flaws in the logic of the story. These may actually be real, as Amos Gitai is not the best story teller on screen, but this is not where the essence of a film like this needs to be looked for. The subject of the film is human trafficking and none of the several documentary or pseudo-documentary films I have seen lately did a better job in raising the issue in a strong and emotional manner, shouting about the brutality and evil that is happening in the lives of the victims. It is exactly the lack of logic, the absence of any romanticism or fictional elements that brings the issue in a stronger manner towards the viewers. The series of brutal and realistic scenes becomes surrealistic because the reality is exceeding the ugliness of nightmare. The contrast between the ideal Holy Land and the ideal Israel that Amos Gitai may dream for his country and reality is the very contrast that almost all Israelis have to deal with. This film raises a painful issue in the painful manner that it deserves.

It is deeply saddening to realise how misinterpreted this film is by several users. This is one of the greatest works by Gitai thus far. It is obviously about human trafficking and prostitution in Israel; however, there is much more to this film. It tells a story of several Russian women from Estonia that are being trafficked into Egypt and from there, through Gaza strip, into Israel. The style is semi-documentary, which speaks to the reality of the events.Yet, it seems to me, the message Gitai is sending is not only about the horrors of prostitution in Israel. The subject of female body as a sexual object is in the center of this film. The treatment of women is portrayed in a very bestial and inhumane way. They are traded like cattle, where the highest bidder gets the best animal at an auction. Women are washed with ice-cold water in a group, and then "corrected for" through hasty make-up. The driver that transports women from one "work" spot to another recklessly picks a girl of his choice and rapes her on the road. The scenes are disturbing and made me nauseous on few occasions.Those who are disappointed about the lack of script or bad acting should look into some documentaries and literature on human trafficking. These are real events that are happening as we speak; to make them more plausible to the viewer or to assign a Hollywood-style script would do no justice to women being trafficked. This film only complements my knowledge of the subject. Congratulations Amos, it takes a lot of courage and determination to create such a piece.

This film is a major disappointment by Amos Gitai.One should even call it a blot on his career.Promised land is neither a feature film nor a documentary nor anything which can lie in between.It features two popular stars Anne Parillaud and Hanna Schygulla but even their presence is not helpful enough to sustain viewers' interest.The film is about the plight of some Russian girls which are sold in Israel but its presentation is really bad. It does not make any sense as in order to heighten the importance of the topic Amos Gitai has decided to shoot the most part of the film in darkness. However darkness cannot hide the film's defects.The film maker has surely not done his homework well due to which viewers are forced to watch a crude succession of abominably cruel scenes in which women are traded like cattle.Most of the actors too suffer in this film as their roles have not been defined properly.Recommendation:better watch this film and be bitter about it rather than being sullen without having seen it.

The subject matter of this film is disturbing, and that alone may have contributed to some members of the audience walking out.But I think most left because it was just dull. The characters are hard to distinguish (and some of their roles are confusing), the plot moved slowly and some of the scenes of nudity just felt gratuitous (and no, not in a way that made them a turn on). In particular, there's a shower scene evocative of the treatment of Shoah victims. While the message is understood, the scene just doesn't fit into the film.<spoiler> The film starts strongly with a Sinai camp scene feature two parallel conversations between a group of Eastern European girls (apparently on holiday) and their local guides. Then the brutality starts; one of the girls is raped, and all are auctioned off (I've no idea if they go for 12,000 dollars, shekels or Egyptian pounds - are we talking lots or little money?). The rest of the film loosely follows their abuse as they are dragged from town to town ... but most of the 'action' is inside brothel/clubs ... but without any focus on the clients.The final scene, their release due to a (terrorist?) explosion, has a busy soundtrack, but nothing much visible on screen. <end>If the film was meant to be about highlighting the 21st century slave trade, I learned very little.