controversy

Play Film Difficulty Ranking: 3

In the late 2000s a group of black boys aged 12-14 robbed other children’s phones on around 70 occasions in Gothenberg. This film tracks one of their robbery scams to see how they did it whilst cleverly making the victims (and the audience) look (and feel) helpless. Watch it here (Amazon).

Why Watch Play?

• It’s controversial but clever
• It will make you feel uneasy and helpless
• If you’ve seen Force Majeure (Amazon) or Cannes winner The Square and want to see more from director Ruben Ostlund
• To experience mall culture in Sweden

The Breakdown

Play starts with a still shot of the centre of a shopping mall. Two 10 year old white boys enter the middle of the frame talking about what they need to buy next. Then, the camera slowly pans to the left, settling on a group of 5 black kids. They’ve spotted the two white kids and play rock, paper, scissors to decide who is going to go rob them.

Turns out, their trick is a lot longer than you might expect. One of the black boys asks one of the white boys for the time. Then when the white kid pulls out his phone, the black kid tells him that his phone looks just like the one that was robbed from his little brother. Cue a tour around town to find his ‘little brother’ to verify if the phone is the one that was robbed from him.

The race and class separation between the two groups is obvious. One group, with two white kids and one Asian kid, is obviously more well off than the group of black kids that rob them. They are in the mall shopping for new clothes and video games. In contrast, the black kids are just messing around. They’re not there to spend money, they’re there because they have nothing else to do. Robbing the richer kids is their entertainment. It gives them something to do and gets them enough funds to afford dinner.

For more on the identity dynamics, I recommend reading IndieWire’s review of Play here.

How the Director uses static images to convey helplessness

First of all, the bystanders in this film are pretty useless. Every time they see the group of kids in trouble, they refuse to help and just carry on with their own lives instead. The static frames make the bystanders look even more useless. Instead of cutting between close-up shots of the victims and antagonists, the static frame shows us their surroundings. You can see bystanders sitting or standing at the edge of the screen, pretending to be oblivious to the action. Their cowardice makes us question ourselves: would we be like them and just ignore kids being bullied near us?

The static frames also convey the victims helplessness. Once the victims enter the frame they’re stuck. They can leave the screen, but they will always return to it. Similarly, the audience is forced to watch the victims being bullied and robbed. There are short breaks from the main narrative, such as a group of Native Americans singing in the street, but our focus will always be diverted back to the kids being bullied. It’s as if the director wants us to feel helpless whilst trying to show us enough bullying to encourage us to help the helpless.

Conclusion and What to Watch Next

Play is brilliantly daring. It’s controversial and clever – it highlights cowardice and staunch social boundaries (class and race) and provokes debate. However, one word of advice, just like a lot of other controversial art (gangsta rap) you’ve got to look deeper than the surface.

For a funnier but even more awkward film from Ruben Ostlund, I strongly recommend Academy Award Nominee, Force Majeure (Amazon).

I’d also strongly recommend watching both Girlhood and La Haine. They’re two more films that focus on underprivileged kids looking for their way in life in societies where they’re marginalised.

Or, if you’re looking for more Swedish film, you must check out anything by Ingmar Bergman. Start with Wild Stawberries or The Seventh Seal (Amazon).