3096 Days (2013)

I had tracked the progress of this film from its initial stages after the release of the book to the ridiculous speculative casting; Kate Winslet and Scarlett Johansson, two actresses known for being voluptuous playing an emaciated young woman from about preadolescence to young adulthood? Yeah, right! No wonder the film took ages to get going. Unfortunately, it was also delayed because the initial director (Bernd Eichinger) passed away. Hoffman later took over the realms with Eichinger still listed as writer. This type of story was not suitable for maudlin Hollywood Oscar bait treatment and fortunately it didn't go there. It's probably a good thing it was an independent film with obscure indie actors which would help detract the potential glamorization of such a sad sad story.

If you have read the book this film is based on, I would be surprised if you found the film equally insightful. It isn't. The film in spite of its natural limitations of time does not do enough to absorb Natascha's harrowing story. You're pretty much getting a clear-cut version of her ordeal but that's not surprising with most adaptations of real life stories, especially ones that have an important chronology as hers did. This monster robbed her of her youth, and you can't really translate that when you have a grown woman of 30 playing the young teenage version of her.

Having said that, the acting was okay - nothing special. Hughes, to me at age 29-30 does look convincing as a younger person, not sure enough to pass for a young teenager but you will just have to suspend any disbelief. The set and locations I think are relatively well done. There are some scenes that were as I imagined them to be reading the book. The story does stretch the truth more than what Natascha herself was willing to reveal in her book but has implied outside of the book later on. The relationship between kidnapper and captive is very complex - probably not understandable to most people, thankfully. This movie does a predictably mediocre, yet mildly engaging way of portraying this type of relationship.

To be honest, if I just watched the film without actual knowledge of the real-life events that occurred, I would have given it a lower score, but because of my personal interest in Natascha's story, I can't help but say I was interested in the film - to see a visual albeit fictitious representation of what "happened".

Fmovies: I came to this film without any assumptions, nothing more than the hope to be told (more like summarized) the incredible story of what this lady had to go through.

Characters were well developed by the the writing staff as well as the actors. The actors with English as a second language had some trouble with their characterizations, they looked a bit stiff/expositive at some times.

The real problem with this film was the editing. Lack of expertise was palpable in the way this film was cut. It lacked both cohesion and continuity. It looked like a photo reel at times. The notable exceptions were: the fantastic transition marking 4 years of captivity, and the transition to freedom. They were really well done, very professional. Then how come the rest of the editing is so amateurish?

The first minutes of film were rushed: Lady calls for help. Cut to little girl with her father in a bar. Cut to sleeping girl. Cut to angry mom, cut to walk to school, ... All in a few moments. It absolutely looked as a collection of takes of different girls in different situations.

There are several continuity errors distracting the viewer. The producers, director, and editors should have reviewed the edition with more detail. There were also some pointless decisions in the editing room, such as the first slow-motion scene, which had no purpose in being slow, and the focus on some window while dancing. No context, no purpose.

Although the writing was good, there are situations and lines of dialogue going sideways and getting lost. Vegetarianism, media bias, a drunk father, a joke, an establishing shot of a house with dimming lights which absolutely confuses and/or enrages.

The victim writing a secret list of received abuses, while calling them out, presumably for the viewer to hear, but at the same knowing that her captor is probably listening, is something which should have been written with more thought.

Original music for this film was rather scarce. I think it was well composed but original music should also have been put in important scenes of the film. These scenes were hurt because of that silence.

The rest of reviews for this film address other problems I agree with.

I think a director's cut is in order. After addressing these problems the film would be awesome. Also, this film's staff is in debt to this lady and her family; they should have been more careful with the editing and music, out of respect and sensibility, just as they were careful at writing, acting, producing. By the way, the sets were terrific, claustrophobic, overwhelming.

"Obey me! Obey me! Obey me!"

3096 Days is based on the autobiographical book written by Natascha Kampusch, a young Austrian girl who was kidnapped when she was 10 and kept in a cell for over 8 years. The shocking event took place during the late 90's and the title of the film refers to the amount of days Natascha was held captive, so there is no spoiler here. The film was directed by Sherry Hormann (Desert Flower) and the screenplay adapted by Ruth Toma. The premise may sound interesting since this is an extraordinary story, but the truth of the matter is that the film failed to engage me. The film focuses on Natascha and how she struggled to break away from her chains, forgetting about the outside world (there are a few scenes with the mother, but we never get to see her desperation) and the police procedural to try to find her. Because of this the film focused entirely on Natascha's captivity which after a few minutes kind of felt repetitive because there wasn't much they could do with the story. We see the abuse she experiences and clearly her captor is a troubled and sick young man, but there isn't much more that the film has to say about this. Thirty minutes into the film you realize that it doesn't have anything more to offer and the story begins to drag so much you actually feel like you are held captive for years.

The film opens with a scene at a local bar in Austria where a 10 year old girl named Natascha (Amelia Pidgeon) is falling asleep while her father (Roeland Wiesnekker) is having a few drinks. The next morning Natascha's mother (Trine Dyrholm) is trying to wake her up for school, but of course she has trouble doing so due to the late night her father put her through. Her mother realizes that her father has taken her to the bar again, but Natascha defends him and is slapped for doing so. Upset, Natascha walks out of her home and heads to school, but on her way there, she is kidnapped by a young man (Thure Lindhart) who hides her in a white van and takes her to a hidden cell under his home. For the next 8 years this will be Natascha's home. The film focuses on those early days and then it jumps forward in time to her teen years (played here by Antonia Campbell-Hughes) where she is abused. She is convinced that only one of them will survive, but she never loses hope that one day she will break free.

The most positive note about this film is the impressive transformation that Antonia Campbell- Hughes went through to play Natascha. It was shocking to see her so thin and it allowed us to understand the true impact of the abuse she was receiving. It's just too bad she went through this physical transformation in such a bad film. She delivers a strong performance as well as Thure Lindhart, but the rest of the cast is forgotten. It's a shame that such a talented actress like Trine Dyrholm (In a Better World) is so underused. I believe that if the film gave us a better glimpse of the outside world and the struggle Natascha's parents were going through, it would have engaged the audience more. But since everything takes place almost entirely in captivity the film does get repetitive and dull at times. The story is devastating, but the film never made me feel that way really. Stick with the book and stay away from this movie.

3096 Days fmovies. This true story that many have heard of in the news is realistically brought to the screen in this well made and shocking movie.

A 10 year old Austrian girl is kidnapped for 8 years and kept imprisoned in a small basement room for much of the time.

The actress Antonia Campbell Hughes looks frighteningly thin. The real person was kept on an almost starvation diet for years. The Danish actor who plays the kidnapper is good too - he doesn't act too obviously crazy.

It's unimaginable that she survived but the thing that makes watching the painful story bearable is to know she escaped.

Some of the reviews for this film reveal the "blame the victim" mentality held by society towards victims of sex crimes. The hints of blaming the victims echo the usual excuses, that these victims in some way got what they "deserve" for not apparently fighting back, for "letting it happen", and on and on. These rationalizations are some of the worst blows to the victims and conversely one of the greatest supports of the perpetrators.

It is necessary for films like this to be made so the myths and lies of sex slavery are viewed for what the reality is: torture, plain and simple. In one of her newspaper interviews after the film was made, Ms. Kampusch stated that the reality was far worse than the film depicted, so this glimpse into the world of sex slavery was watered down considerably.

I also was glad that there were hints of mysterious behavior from other characters involved in the story who may or may not have been involved in what the Austrian police later publicly claimed may have been the machinations of a pedophile ring, which may have helped this perpetrator abduct and psychologically torture the victim. Too bad this statement from the Austrian police was not included in the film.

I wanted to watch this film because I was curious about the details of Ms. Kampusch's kidnapping and her life before and after. And partly also, to be perfectly honest, because of the horror of it all. I don't want to label us all as emotional and violence porn freaks for watching this, but there's a certain part of that in it, too. After all, if we all just wanted the facts, then why watch a dramatization? Why not read about it or watch a documentary?

The problem with this film is that is satisfies neither desire. I don't feel significantly more enlightened about the facts and the story, and I didn't get much drama.

So what's wrong here?

Well, with regards to Natascha's life as to before and after her captivity, this film seems uninterested in it. We are offered but a good handful of minutes dealing with her life before her abduction, and the film ends within minutes of her escape. What is focused on is her life as a hostage, and the time spent on this subject is used to play out the intended drama.

Which is the second problem of this film. As a drama, it just doesn't work. And a low budget doesn't justify the reasons for that.

One of the problems I have with it comes from the decision on shooting it in English. It seems odd, given that it is a European production set in Austria. In more capable hands such a decision is often a non-issue, but here it becomes a real problem accentuated by decisions on casting non-English speaking actors. As a Dane, I should probably be proud to see two Danes in this film, one of them in a leading role. Truth be told, I think they should have stayed at home.

It really makes me wonder what reasons are behind casting Thure Lindhart as Mr. Přiklopil when he looks nothing like Mr. Přiklopil, is not a very good actor, and has always looked like a teenage boy.

And while Amelia Pidgeon is actually excellently casted as the 10-year-old Natascha, with her striking physical resemblance to her, Antonia Campbell-Hughes is just such an astoundingly bad choice for teenage Natascha, it makes you wonder just how many people were casted as favors between friends rather than on their merits.

Antonia Campbell-Hughes, playing 14-year-old Natascha was 31 while filming. I don't know what else to say but, "why?". And why the need to cast an anorectic? We know that Ms. Kampusch was a chubby kid when abducted, and we know that Přiklopil refused her food to make her lose weight. But, the facts are that when Ms. Kampusch escaped, she was 159.7 cm tall and weighed 48 kg. That's a BMI of 18.8, just within the normal range. So why cast an anorectic 31-year-old for this part if not for shock value?

And then the real question arises: Why would you need such a walking-and-talking visual (counterfactual) dramatic shock effect when you're telling a story that is already laden with such horrendous facts?

The answer in this case is: Because you don't know how to tell a story.

Let's forget the semi-amateurish cinematography and directing that all to often manage to undo those rare occasions where the actors actually succeed in performing convincingly, in spite of having been tasked with portraying flat, single- dimensional characters. The real problem is not that 3096 Days is presented like an episode of The Bold and the Beautiful, the real problem is that unlike that soap opera, it fails to portray complex and interesting characters who interact in meaningful ways in a sto