By Alex McPherson

Bleak, unflinching, and deeply sensory, director Dea Kulumbegashvili’s “April” captures nightmarish realities flecked with vividly-rendered beauty and perseverance of the human spirit.

Set in a rural community within the country of present-day Georgia, we follow Nina (Ia Sukhitashvili), an OB/GYN who has devoted her life to the profession to the point of refusing to have personal ties outside of work in order to focus on providing for her patients. Her hardened empathy has clearly taken its toll on her psychologically, but Nina fully embraces her calling within a patriarchal environment that is seemingly always watching her.

We first meet Nina at the local hospital where she’s helping deliver a baby. Arseni Khachaturan’s camera films a (real-life) birth scene as the struggling mother and hospital staff do all they can to safely extract the child, but to no avail — the newborn dies soon afterwards. 

Nina is blamed for the death by the mother’s resentful husband (Sandro Kalandadze), and Nina’s supervisor (Merab Ninidze) launches an investigation into what transpired. Nina convinces her fellow doctor and ex-lover, David (Kakha Kintsurashvili), to lead it. But despite supporting her, David is concerned by Nina’s actions outside of the hospital, where hushed threats against her are spreading among rageful, conservative men and the population at large.

The risks of the investigation go beyond Nina losing her job at the hospital. They extend to the home abortions she provides for impoverished residents of a nearby village, and her helping married women (some extremely young) access contraceptives, which are both taboo and hard to obtain.

While termination of pregnancies in Georgia is technically allowed up to 12 weeks, prevailing Orthodox Christian views bring intense shame to the procedure.Without transportation to larger cities like Tbilisi where the services are more readily available, Nina is the women’s only hope. Regardless of how the community depends on her, though, Nina’s safety and livelihood remain at the mercy of those wanting to punish her for “sinning” in the name of free will.

Going about her day-to-day life, with the weight of the investigation hanging over her, Nina is slowly being consumed by existential dread — partly visualized through frequent sightings of an alien-like, dried-out humanoid embodying the ultimate futility and depleted sense of self she’s developed over time in her profession. The combined weight of her responsibilities and the empathy she holds onto eats away at her mentally. 

“April” forces us to confront injustice in a manner both agonizing and transfixing, marrying the horror of its narrative with lush lyricism that casts a stunning, albeit elliptical, spell. Kulumbeshgavili’s film is an experience that’s relentless in its brutality yet punctuated by moments of stark beauty and quiet bravery, immersing us in Nina’s point-of-view on both grounded and spiritual levels.

Indeed, “April” is a demanding watch. It can be excruciating in its unblinking depiction of birth and abortion, featuring taut sequences — captured in tense, volatile long-takes — that shiver with the potential for physical and emotional violence. Kulumbesgavili paints the film’s remote setting as an alternately gloomy and vivid landscape reflecting a symbolic tug-of-war between futility and hope.

Brilliant, sunkissed poppy fields one moment become rapidly battered by the elements the next, never being able to escape the forces beyond their control. Neither can Nina’s patients protect themselves from the paralyzing stigma and eye of government. Neither can Nina protect herself from her own self-destructive pull to provide for those who could otherwise perish within futures not written by them.

Kulumbegashvili offers little comfort or reprieve from the film’s relentless sadness and uneasiness. Khachaturan’s cinematography manipulates perspective to a fascinating degree. It often puts us directly in Nina’s POV, whether during clinical operations in the hospital, nighttime drives looking for random, empty sex, or confrontational scenes in which we focus entirely on Nina’s face (hauntedly portrayed by Sukhitashvili) staring directly at the camera. In these scenes, it’s almost as if Nina looks into an abyss that, time and again, reverts to archaic, dangerous expectations of the kind of woman she should be. 

Other shots flip the camera around with Nina offscreen — putting us in her shoes as we evaluate the judgments and barely-concealed threats levied against her by people, mostly men, who fail to understand her and what she believes in. At other times we seem to levitate above the ground, floating through nature. The film’s 4:3 aspect ratio furthers a sense of confinement and claustrophobia, as does the film’s incredible sound design — otherwise quiet scenes are often accompanied by Nina’s deep, heavy breaths that help fill out a memorably unsettling soundscape intimately connected with her mental state.

The film’s bravura sequence — an abortion filmed in one, extremely long take — takes a different approach. The camera positioned at the side, we see the patient’s midsection in the middle of the frame, her sister’s hand holding hers on the left side, and Nina’s hands working on the right. The scene is silent barring the occasional whimper from the patient, and Kulumbegashvili doesn’t sensationalize the ordeal. Rather, the eye is drawn to the left: one person comforting the other in a time of intense uncertainty and fear. A small but important gesture that means the world and, even though the situation down the road cannot end well, shows the necessity of compassion.

Some might fault “April” for its pacing and ambiguity, especially surrounding Nina’s backstory (implying vague trauma), and supernatural interludes that, daring though they are, momentarily break the film’s mesmerizing rhythms. So many elements combine so seamlessly here that we get a comprehensive picture without needing the creature to fill in thematic gaps. But it remains impactful as a distillation of Nina’s sense of self, of also enduring, as new days dawn after darkness, and as the seasons change.

“April” is a beautiful, uncompromising film singular in vision and firmly among the best-directed I’ve seen in recent memory.

“April” is a 2024 drama directed by Dea Kulumbegashvili and starring Ia Sukhitashvili, Merab Ninidze, Kakha Kintsurashvili, and Ana Nikolava. Its runtime is 2 hours, 14 minutes, and it’s currently unrated. In Georgian with English subtitles. It screens at the Webster University Film Series May 30 – June 1. Alex’s Grade: A

By Alex McPherson

A sincere and impressively well-acted reminder of the power of community to persevere through adversity, director Josephine Stewart-Te Whiu’s debut feature, “We Were Dangerous,” shines a warm, hopeful light through the darkness.

The film is set in 1954 and begins at New Zealand’s School for Incorrigible and Delinquent Girls, where the free-spirited and courageous Nellie (Erana James) plots an escape from the institution with her best friend, the younger but no less resilient Daisy (Manaia Hall), and her other Māori classmates.

Their class instructor, The Matron (an alternately satiric and terrifying Rima Te Wiata), aims to “correct” these girls through her three education principles: “Christianize, civilize, and assimilate.” The program attempts to restrict the girls’ free will and independence each step of the way. 

When Nellie’s escape attempt fails, just a few inches from clearing the gate, The Matron is instructed by her superiors to relocate her class to a small island previously used as a leper colony. This renders their chance of escape and risk of pregnancy moot, given that the only man there is the island’s bumbling caretaker, Barry (Stephen Tamarapa).

Nellie and Daisy’s group are accompanied by some new arrivals to the program, including the mysterious and confident Lou (Nathalie Morris), who Nellie and Daisy strike up a fast friendship with. The three of them room together in a ramshackle hut with a leaky ceiling. As the girls spend their days doing manual labor and enduring mind-numbing lessons about religion and female etiquette under The Matron’s eye, their vibrant spirits endure, and their bond strengthens, despite their bleak circumstances. 

But when the institution begins running sterilization experiments on the girls, Nellie, Daisy, and Lou must fight back against The Matron and her superiors before it’s too late.

“We Were Dangerous,” executive produced by Taika Waititi, isn’t a downbeat film,  despite the tough subject matter. Stewart-Te Whiu positions the lead characters as heroes resisting the systems trying to shape their identities, complete with a surprisingly light touch that works as its own sort of defiance against their grim reality and the morose nature of many period dramas. 

It’s definitely a choice that risks sugarcoating the timely issues on display if used in the wrong hands. Luckily, the performances and rich visuals give “We Were Dangerous” a soulful weight that elevates the sometimes archetypal nature of a screenplay that, for all its wry and rousing sensibilities, can’t quite do justice to the characters at its center.

Stewart-Te Whiu doesn’t wallow in the sadness and horror, but doesn’t underplay it either, striking a seriocomic tone that brings to mind Waititi’s work in its balancing of the harrowing and humorous. “We Were Dangerous” almost plays like a comedy at certain points, with the girls’ wit and playfulness contrasting with The Matron’s ghastly actions and the antiquated ideas of womanhood being forced upon them.  

Cam Ballantyne’s score, too, is lively and energetic, reflecting the continued hope and moments of happiness found scattered amid the abuse and drudgery they endure under The Matron’s watch. María Inés Manchego’s cinematography captures a vivid beauty alongside chilling isolation in the island’s untouched landscapes.

James brings rousing confidence and heartbreaking vulnerability to Nellie, who was forced to attend the school after being caught shoplifting in Christchurch. She had  been sent there by her family to live with a relative, but ultimately left to survive on her own.

Nellie is a surrogate big sister for Daisy, brought to life by Hall with a playful innocence belying Daisy’s trauma and determination to not have her “wild” spirit be tamed. Morris brings a mischievous energy to her performance as Lou, rejected by her well-off family and sent away to the school due to her sexuality.

James, Hall, and Morris have terrific chemistry, and their dynamic is tangible and grounded. It’s easy to buy them as a surrogate family unit, even though Stewart-Te Whiu and Maddie Dai’s screenplay rushes through their initial bonding without giving enough space for it to develop organically. 

Their connection feels a bit schematic as a result, especially during late-game plot beats that half-heartedly explore the risks and benefits of rebellion with the foot firmly on the gas pedal, building towards a near-fantastical conclusion. Indeed, the film’s 82-minute runtime is both efficient and limiting.

Stewart-Te Whiu is clearly intentional with what she focuses on — foregrounding the defiant joy and strong, distinct personalities of the girls above all else — but the film’s insistence on being inspirational also robs more traditionally dramatic character moments of the weight and consideration they deserve.

Narration by The Matron is woven throughout the plot — she explains Nellie, Daisy, and Lou’s backstories through her own point of view, flashbacks included — and while this decision successfully illustrates the contrast between The Matron’s warped worldview and reality, it also condenses these women’s stories to a semi-frustrating degree.

Still, the performances truly elevate the proceedings, revealing complexity not always afforded by the screenplay. 

Te Wiata, for example, chews scenery to a nasty, memorable pulp as The Matron, but we can see for ourselves, through subtle mannerisms, the self-hatred that percolates as a result of embodying the misogyny she was herself indoctrinated into as a young Māori teenager once searching for purpose — perhaps recognizing that it’s easier to conform than to embrace her own individuality.

Suffice to say, “We Were Dangerous” is an imperfect film, but one that features shades of greatness and that tells a worthy story while (in some respects) bucking convention. It’s disappointing that Stewart-Te Whiu opts for speed rather than necessary patience, but this remains both a serious-minded and life-affirming film that, especially in today’s troubled times, we can all take something from right now.

“We Were Dangerous” is a 2024 drama directed by Josephine Stewart-Te Whiu and starring Erana James, Manaia Hall, Rima Te Wiata, Nathalie Morris, and Stephen Tamarapa. Its runtime is 1 hour, 22 minutes, and it’s currently unrated. It opens at the Hi-Pointe Theatre May 9. Alex’s Grade: B