In my country is the type of movie one might see no reason in reviewing. The seriousness of the topic combined with the predictability and banality of some of the characters, the sloppy writing and the cheesy nature of some of the scenes makes me just want to get through my review as soon as possible and never return to this movie again. Yet at the same time I realize this is a rather selfish perspective and a dangerous one. Despite its limitations, In my Country deserves the credit for being one of the few Hollywood movies dealing with one of the most important events in post-apartheid South Africa.

Let’s start with the facts. In 1995, President Nelson Mandela established the Truth and Reconciliation Commision, a court-like system meant to witness, record and, in some cases, pardon some of the most atrocious acts of violence, torture and, generally speaking, human rights violations that happened during the Apartheid. Its mission, the way I see it, was twofold. First, it was meant to actually achieve reconciliation between the black and white communities of South Africa (a mission whose degree of success is highly debatable). Second, the Court’s hearings were used as a mechanism of documenting these atrocities so that all South Africans could have a more nuanced perspective and resource materials on their history. The Court’s mission is, in itself, a controversy. To its architects, it was a device to uncover the truth by using amnesty for perpetrators as a mediating force. It wasn’t, in itself, a judicial body meant to punish those who have harmed others.  Based on the ethical African concept of “ubuntu” – which can be broadly defined as the ways in which people relate to each other – the TRC seemed more as an instrument of healing than one of revenge. But as the horrifying stories presented in the township hearings were being broadcast all over South Africa at the time, it was only natural that the entire process caused very mixed feelings among the general public.

John Boorman’s In my country, set at the time of the commission hearings, tries to capture the complexity of life in those tumultuous times while creating an enticing story that would be appealing to a Western audience. He is only partly successful in doing any of the two. Samuel Jackson plays Langston Whitfield, a Washington Post reporter covering the hearings. Whitfield is highly skeptical of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and his aversion towards the whole process becomes apparent both in his writing and his radical views of what happened in the country and what the role of “all the White people in South Africa” was. He thinks the perpetrators are easily getting away with murder and that justice is not served. As it happens, he meets Anna Malan, a white Afrikaaner poet who was commissioned to do daily broadcasts for the South African Broadcasting Company. The two start on the wrong foot, as they have very different views on the commission, but they end up sleeping together. In the process, we think, Whitfield changes his mind and eventually sees the value of the hearings but the script doesn’t specifically reveals it.

Now, the movie received mixed reviews from critics. After doing a little bit of research I realized that Western critics criticized the movie heavily for its unnecessary sub-plots, love stories, and predictability, while South African critics praised them for covering such a critical episode in post-Apartheid history.

As far as I am concerned, if there was one topic where sexual intercourse should have been left out of the equation, perhaps the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was one of them. The white Afrikaner journalist falls in love with the black American journalist and they eventually end up in bed.  Even if the director wanted to use this sub-plot as a metaphor for the reconciliation, the idea was rather simplistic at best. After all, Whitfield is American so his background does not really qualify his for the metaphor.

Otherwise, I think this is a good movie in that it actually introduces the Western audience to an episode in South Africa’s post-apartheid history which is not actually known by a lot of people.

I rate this movie 6/10