An interesting Coming of Age film taking place in Swaziland in the late 1960s and early 70s, round about the time of the country gaining independence from England. In this outpost very British traditions are upheld and the ex pats try to keep it up by playing cricket, having tea parties and living in comfort while served by their large numbers of servants, all in true colonial style.A young boy, Ralph Compton, sees his mother having intercourse with another man; this would affect him much. Eventually his parents get divorced, his old man marries again - and starts drinking. Ralph lives in his own world and enacts scenes he witnessed as his parents' marriage breaks apart, using his puppets. The boy seems to cope somehow and eventually finds his own voice.The film has some good acting, particularly by old man Compton (Gabriel Byrne) and Ralph (Nicholas Hoult). The cinematography is good and effectively brings dusty Swaziland into your home. I would have loved some appropriate background sounds too, perhaps local bush-veld birds calling for instance. Halfway through the film becomes a bit too sentimental to my taste, but fortunately not for long. All in all it was a delightful film. I score it an above average 8/10.

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.

Wah-Wah (Richard E. Grant, 2005) is a delightful film about writer-director Grant's childhood during the final throes of colonial Swaziland. Balancing fraughtness - as his alter-ego's mother (Miranda Richardon) leaves and his father (Gabriel Byrne) descends into alcoholism - with superbly judged comic passages, it transports the viewer into the head of the young protagonist, perfectly articulating his feelings without the need for speechifying or voice-over. Such a feat is testament to the economy and precision of the script, Grant's subtle but expressive direction and Nicholas Hoult's excellent performance as the 14-year-old Ralph Compton. That Hoult can hold his own against Emily Watson, the most gifted dramatic performer of her generation, is as high praise as I can think of. Watson is ideal, as ever, playing the boy's ballsy American step-mum, who's threatening to turn high society on its ear if she can stand the scotch-swilling company long enough. The film does suffer from a dearth of geographic context in the mid-section and has some structural problems in the second half that seem to saddle it with several false endings, but it's clever, subtle and formidably unsentimental, with superb acting across the board. Its more painful exchanges have the unmistakable ring of truth and grim memory, and there's a great set of scenes in which Hoult sees A Clockwork Orange and starts idly apeing McDowell's eyeliner-wearing sociopath. I really liked it.

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?