'Guldkysten' exposes the viewer to life at a Danish fort on West Africa's Gold Coast (now Ghana) in 1836, focusing on a young Danish officer who goes out to start a coffee plantation as an alternative to taking slaves. The slave trade had officially stopped but was covertly continuing, which he discovers during his stay. The film then focuses on his reaction to that, and how those around him respond in turn.The plot is vaguely based on the life of a real person, but was poorly received by some critics for mixing a historical character with a lot of fiction. This was apparently because the main female character became ill during filming, and so the plot had to be radically altered.I personally think the result is a sensual masterpiece in creating the powerful and conflicting emotions you would have had if you had been on the Gold Coast in 1836 – the elegance of the early 19th Century costumes contrasting with the utter depravity of many of those living on the fort; the beauty of West Africa's landscape and nature against the spectre of disease that killed so many who dared to visit; and of course the conflict between the ideals of Christianity and the Enlightenment against the base exploitation of slavery.One of the most visually spectacular and haunting films I have ever seen. I have only given 9 stars because I thought Wulff's descent into madness was over-exaggerated. He could have become very withdrawn instead, which I think would have been more realistic.All in all, a much needed film to bring home to today's audience an experience of one of the darker sides of Denmark's past.

I had the pleasure of seeing this movie at the Scandinavian Film Festival in Melbourne and was not disappointed.As other reviewers have noted, it is a beautiful production; the setting and cinematography are glorious. I won't waste time with plot (I was engrossed in it), as it has been covered, I would like to add my voice to balance out some negative points raised by others.The music, a deeply sombre, melancholic, electronic score is a striking juxtaposition to the colonial African setting. It is so out of place that is absolutely works. There is a particular scene at a tribal party. It is disorienting both for the characters and the viewer, however the (oft-times used in a disorienting fashion) authentic, rhythmic tribal music is replaced with the frenzied electronic score. It is fantastic film-making. The film is well, albeit slowly, paced. Some scenes do outstay their welcome, particularly the prison scenes on, but this film reaches an aching crescendo that is totally rewarding. It is, at times, gory, explicit, disgusting, and real, but that is true to form for the brutal time and place in which it is set.It offers a rich symbolism, and spiritual side as well, via the character's dream-like progression through the film. It is utterly fascinating. The acting is first rate.The direction, music and ethereal nature of the film reminds me somewhat of Nicolas Winding Refn's work, particularly Drive and Only God Forgives. Which a touch of Donnie Darko's existential spiritualism. But still it's own thing, completely.It is absolutely not for everyone, but I was completely taken with it.

Oftebro is a great actor. The setting (the Danish slave colonies) is interesting. They are willing to experiment with music. But sadly, the movie is quite bad.With heavy handed symbolism (flags, horned skulls, etc), good-or-evil characters, a messy storyline and ill fitting soundtrack, Guldkysten will sadly become another failed Scandinavian epic movie. A movie about a slaving colony with a protagonist ahead of his time (sharing the viewer's opinions on slavery) standing up against evil old fashioned slavers - we ought to be past these kind of stories by now. While I did enjoy the more experimental music, I had a hard time relating it to whatever was going on in the story. The movie is at its best when its characters borders on the insane, and the last quarter of the movie is by far the best one.Oh well. Onwards and upwards, Scandinavian movie makers!

Method acting? Check! Two actors actually urinating on a third. Actor starving himself half to death? Check! Jakob Oftebro lived on an almond a day. Provoking? Check. At least some Danish nationalists will raise eyebrows at characters singing royal hymns while group raping African slave women.I could go on with the bullet points that many critics will check off before arriving at a higher than average review. But these common features are far from enough to entice me.This movie was, however, close to capturing me. By its sometimes dreamlike filming; the naturalist main character's musings; the imminent conflict between the scientist and the religious fundamentalists pushed aside by their common basic decency opposing the brutality of slavery; the long overdue treatment of that historical period and place.But then there is the very special and in my opinion horrible techno music soundtrack which at the very least is completely alien to the time and setting. There is the slow, abrupt progress of the story. The lack of belief in most of the actors. The apparent difference between historical facts and this fiction; i.e. the main character being a pure hero while the historical person was actually a slave owner.And at the end of the day: How much do the descendants of the victims of slavery care for a movie about it, that portrays a white man as the sole hero and liberator of slaves?Didn't like it. Hated the music.