Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Skin (2009)

Director: Anthony Fabian

Time Out rating

Average user rating

20 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

The true story of Sandra Laing – a dark-skinned ‘genetic throwback’ born to white parents in 1950s South Africa – deserves better than this bland, unmemorable biopic. Laing’s experiences served to highlight the absurdity of Apartheid-era racial profiling and segregation – she was rejected by both black and white communities – but director Anthony Fabian and his team of writers have lost sight of the conflicts inherent in her story, relying on TV-movie cliché and tired, unsuccessful attempts at emotional manipulation.

While Sam Neill and Alice Krige are solid as Sandra’s conflicted parents, the sight of the hangdog 38-year-old Sophie Okenedo as the rebellious adolescent Sandra is simply unconvincing. Though she grows into the role as Sandra ages, Okonedo’s performance lacks the requisite depth, but that’s the character as written: a battered symbol of human endurance rather than a rounded, empathetic figure.

Director Fabian allows his scenes to unfold in a series of drab, restrictive ranch houses, tin shacks and courtrooms. And considering the wealth of terrific music coming out of southern Africa in the ’60s and ’70s, his reliance on bland, syrupy strings punctuated with occasional bursts of jaunty, lightweight pop is disappointing. But this decision seems indicative of ‘Skin’ as a whole. The film feels totally unwilling to get its hands dirty, to tangle with anything approaching truth: mucky, messy, vibrant. In reducing its characters to archetypes, its politics to platitudes and its narrative to a glum historical lecture, ‘Skin’ does not do justice to a fascinating tale.

Author: Tom Huddleston

Time Out London issue 2031, July 23-29, 2009

Email Tweet Share

User reviews of this film

zenkosi said...

Posted on Nov 12 2009 19:59 Never been on this site before. Saw "Skin" and I agree with both Huddleston's piece and some of what the reviewers wrote. I was an African teen in the sixties in So.Africa and when we read about what the Laings were going through, we laughed. It saddens me today to recall all that realizing that not once did we think of what Sandra herself was going through. We just thought that the parents deserved what they were getting because they were "racist Afrikaners". Sad.
I totally agree that Sandra should have been played by 3 people. The supposedly teenage Sandra just did not look young enough. It absolutely angered me thinking...."they could have done better". They quickly wanted Sophie's acting skills but it just did not go with her thirty plus look. The music could have been better.
Still, I enjoyed the movie immensely.....maybe because I'm from So.Africa and it reminded me of "home" though I grew up in Durban with East Indians as neighbors and not a shack in sight.
Movie got me teary eyed a few times.
Good to hear that Sandra and her kids and their kids do well today.
Touching indeed.

Report as inappropriate
Katharine said...

Posted on Aug 25 2009 21:31 An excellent film. I nearly didn't see it as I took Tom Huddleston's review seriously. Thank goodness I decided to ignore it. The film beautifully tells the story of a family struggling through the era of Apartheid. The characters are complex, leaving no one without reproach, and skillfully demonstrates how the apartheid regime twisted the lives and minds of good people. It is true that Sandra Laing should have been played by 3 actresses instead of 2, but Sophie Okenedo's acting does a good job of making you forget that she is a too old for the middle role.
The film does a fantastic job of portraying the historical reality within a brilliant drama which grips until the end.
One of the best films I have seen in ages. I will be sure to ignore anything Tom Huddleston writes in the future. He clearly isn't a very good film critic! And as for Alexander's comment here about friends of the film-makers... Has he actually seen the film? I have very high standards - and often walk out of films which are poor. I don't know who made Skin - but I can tell you, I look forward to the next film they make!

Report as inappropriate
Helen Carmichael said...

Posted on Aug 19 2009 02:34 A "..bland, unmemorable biopic.." which has ".. lost sight of the conflicts inherent in her story .." and which relies "..on TV-movie cliche.." to tell the story? I couldn’t disagree more. Tony Fabian and his cast and crew have made a truly gripping and transformative drama out of a true story. They have also achieved something any storyteller knows is almost impossible - namely not altering the facts to suit the demands of drama. I saw the film with two South Africans, both of whom grew up in the South Africa of the 1950’s. Both were impressed by the truth of the storytelling and both were enormously affected on all levels, not the least emotionally. For me, who has lived my life in the film, TV and radio industries as a writer, editor, educator and co-producer, the film also achieved something few films have ever done: it completely absorbed me, so that at no time was there a part of me watching from a craft point of view. I can count on one hand the films that have achieved this over a life-time in the profession of storytelling. Rather than relying on TV or any other kind of cliche, the truth of this film is so powerful it totally suspended my critical judgement while I was watching it. The film touched me in a way drama is meant to touch: it moved me, and having moved me profoundly, it motivated me to think long and deeply on what it is to be human. It not only stimulated my mind, more importantly, it lifted my heart to see a protagonist survive the level of pain and injustice that Sandra Laing experienced. Finally, it gave me great pleasure to admire, post-viewing, the craft of the makers of this film. It is rare to see so many talents brought together into a cohesive whole - to span an entire lifetime with such economy, power and rhythm. It was a shock to read Tom Huddleston’s critique. One wonders whether the very power and truth of the film has caused such a response which amounts to virtually a total denial of the work. A pity when the film is not only worth seeing as a work of art, but also for the story it tells. Thankfully other critics did not see it as Tom Huddleston seems to have done.

Report as inappropriate
Mark Rites said...

Posted on Aug 17 2009 02:36 I found Skin's blandness almost unbearable, the quintessence of reducing complex issues to lowest common denominator cliches. Fabian manages to turn a potentially interesting storyline into an un-harmful TV movie. The sirupy, atrocious score peppered with dull as dishwater pop songs is just the cherry on a rather sickening cake. Unless you have a collection of individually named teddy bears or you happen to think that Bono is actually saving the world, avoid!

Report as inappropriate
will said...

Posted on Jul 30 2009 18:32 It is sad for a well known critic to have missed the point so badly. For the sake of full disclosure, I have become a friend of the film makers AFTER knowing the Sandra Laing story for many years. I grew up in Apartheid South Africa, and was heavily ivnolved in the anti-apartheid movement. This film was incredibly impressive in its ability to recreate the feel of those times - the bleakness of a Highveld winter, the sense of hopelessness and despair, and the undercurrent of real menace. Mr Huddleston - LIFE was a series of “… drab restrictive ranch houses, tin shacks and courtrooms” . Photographing said farmhouses in a different light is your prerogative, but the emotive impact of that very dullness was perfect. For the reviewers information - I took a number of Indian and black South African friends of mine now living in the US to to see this film, and every one of them was moved to tears - not only by the poignancy of the story, but for the joy they felt in seeing those very hard times so grittily and truthfully represented on screen. I respect your opinion Mr Huddleston but I hope you have not done too much damage by influencing people to stay away from a piece of work that desreves a wider audience

Report as inappropriate
Steve Cabrera said...

Posted on Jul 30 2009 11:39 I'm surprised by the review TimeOut gave this film! I found it moving, thought provoking and beautiful. It managed to combine the beauty of South Africa with the ugliness of aparthied.
One test for me is whether it stuck in my mind and prompted me to recommend it to friends - it has done both.
The reviewer's tone seems angry and hateful to me, especially in the comments - it's a shame!

Report as inappropriate
Tom Huddleston said...

Posted on Jul 30 2009 10:19 I may be a moron, but I have spent time in South Africa. Please see my earlier comment re: photographing said farmhouses.

Report as inappropriate
Mielie Paap said...

Posted on Jul 30 2009 01:08 As as an ex-South African, I would urge the reviewer to go to South Africa. His ignorance about South Africa during the apartheid era, as is evident in his criticism of the film... Criticizing the "drab farmouses" which feature in the film is a bit silly, no? It is SOUTH AFRICA -- there are shanty towns, townships, Afrikaans towns etc. which may not appeal to the reviewer, who clearly lives in a box. Anyway, he totally missed the point... I suggest he get an education, as this reviewer sounds like a moron who missed the point of the movie it seems.

Report as inappropriate
Basi Akpabio said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 20:02 Not sure that the reviewer and I saw the same film?! It's an amazing story well told and I found it intensely moving by the end. I'm not usually moved to comment on these boards but the injustice of the review has raised my shackles!

Report as inappropriate
ron said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 12:03 I've not seen the film, and I probably won't as it doesn't sound like a must see to me, but I do know one thing, and that's Tom Huddlestone is by miles the worst film reviewer around at the moment. I can forgive the idiots in the tabloids who are just plugging for their friends in PR, but TH seems to write his reviews on the way out of the cinema, never letting himself think over a film, always just a knee jerk reaction mixed in with a boring sense of Nathan Barley need for cool. He seems more in love with his job than he does with films. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe he does come out of the cinema and spend a day or so reflecting on what he's seen, trying to see what the filmmakers intended, but that certainly never comes across in his reviews. All I see is a dull need to be opinionated.

Report as inappropriate
Tom Huddleston said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 11:57 Hi Harriet. To suggest a reviewer is racist because they didn't enjoy a film which featured black characters is, you have to admit, pretty outrageous. Have you ever seen 'Soul Plane'?
And perhaps the word 'truth' was a poor choice on my part: what I meant was emotional reality. The film, to me, substituted hackneyed audience manipulation techniques for genuine character insight, using Sandra as a figurehead for a particular struggle rather than attempting to engage with her as a human being. The fact that she was involved in the making of the film doesn't mean that the filmmakers did a good job in connecting with her story, only that they stayed close to the 'facts'.
You have, however, misunderstood my use of the words 'messy': again, I meant emotionally truthful, and audience-grabbing. It had nothing whatsoever to do with sex and violence. And I have to say, substituting cinema for historical education seems slightly risky, Harriet. I'm glad your son enjoyed the film, but no film, however much it purports to tell the truth, should be treated as reality.
And finally, as for those shacks and courtrooms... a good cameraman can light and film a wooden shack to make it look interesting (see 'Tsotsi'), likewise a courtroom. Fabian and his crew didn't.
I hope this goes some way to clearing up my views on the film. I have nothing but respect for Sandra Laing, and her story is clearly an extraordinary one. A pity that, for me, the filmmakers opted to tell that story in such a bland, tedious fashion.

Report as inappropriate
Harriet Salisbury said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 11:29 Re: Skin review
What on earth is Tom Huddleston talking about? How can he claim a film refuses to tangle with the truth when it has been made with the involvement and full approval of the main protaganist? I have heard Sandra speak about the film and I did not get the impression she lied about her life or had been manipulated by the director. She said that the film told her story. But clearly your reviewer knows better.
Tom complains that the shacks and courtrooms in the film are drab and restrictive - what does he want - luxury appartments with views of the Eiffel Tower? I imagine that most shanty towns are a bit on the drab side.
But the comment that incensed me most was that he wanted the film to be more 'mucky' and 'messy' - I take this to be a euphemism for 'more sex and violence, please'. Great, so let's push it up to an 18 certificate. I took my 12 year old to see it and he was completely gripped, plus it taught him more about race and apartheid than seven years worth of Black History lessons at school.
I have been a subscriber to Time Out, but am seriously reconsidering. This was not a fair review - it did not even mention that audiences have voted to give this film awards at film festivals around the world. Is Tom just a wee bit racist? I think we should be told.

Report as inappropriate
vonney said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 09:44 Please do ignore the last couple of sentences in my review which i thought i had deleted!
TO please can you add a 'Preview' and 'Spellcheck' option for clutzes like me.

Report as inappropriate
Vonney said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 09:33 The headline grabbing hook of this film is the absurdity of apartheid in 1960's South Africa but its depth is in a much more universal story of identity and family breakdown. Bizarrely, some of the film's lighter moments come from depictions of the absurd apartheid laws (for exmple, placing a comb in Sandra's hair and asking her to shake her head as a test to see if she was white or black). The more harrowing scenes reflect the impossible choices which had to be made by Sandra and her parents, the ensuing separations, loss and, eventually, partial reconciliation and acceptance. Like TH I may well have preferred a happy ending showing us a 'rounded empathic figure' but I suspect the real ending of this true story is simply one of resignation. Heartbreaking.
I think it would have been a cliche to depict the happy ending sought bt TA in the rounjded...... The harsh reality is that this tale ends in esignation and acceptance. Heartbreaking.

Report as inappropriate
Liam Coman said...

Posted on Jul 28 2009 09:29 I rarely go see a film twice but this is a must for me.
The story draws you in, like a good book you don't want it to end. I wanted to get to know the characters better and spend more time with them to fully understand their plight, moreover since its a true story.
Having never been to South Africa and knowing many South African friends and work collegues I was interested to see an all too rare event as a film based in the country.
Sandra Laing's story must question the prejudices however small we all feel from time to time in our lives.
You will walk out from this film with a hightened perspective.
Go see and enjoy, I certainly will be again this week.

Report as inappropriate