Watch Under the Tree For Free

To me, this movie is perfection.

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Great Film overall

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Thrown out of the marital home when his wife catches him watching a sex tape featuring him with a woman who is not her, the foolishly-tatooed Atli (Steinþór Hróar Steinþórsson) slinks back to the home of his parents, Inga and Baldvin (Edda Björgvinsdóttir and Sigurður Sigurjónsson). But they are distracted not only with mourning for Atli's brother, who disappeared many years ago, but also by a feud with their next-door neighbours (one of whom, I was delighted to realise, is played by Selma Björnsdóttir, runner-up of the 1999 Eurovision Song Contest!) The feud concerns a tree in Inga and Baldvin's garden which casts a shadow over the neighbours' lawn. As Atli goes about trying to win access to his daughter, the neighbourly feud spirals out of control.It seems that most films from Iceland are given the 'black comedy' tag, but this one is darker, and has less comedy, than most: although the feud's ultimate resolution would be unlikely to happen in real life, it is all too easy to imagine real life getting at least close to the film. As for Atli's storyline, after the initial 'ho ho ho, his wife caught him looking at a sex tape' moment, there are no laughs there. In fact, Atli's storyline is one of the main flaws of the film: it is interesting in a soap opera sort of way, but it is not obvious why so much time is spent on it when the focus of the film is supposed to be, presumably, the feud over the tree. It is almost as if the writers, Huldar Breiðfjörð and Hafsteinn Gunnar Sigurðsson (the latter also directed) could not spin out the feud to fill the entire film so thought they would use Atli's situation as padding. Another flaw of the film is poor lighting: interior scenes, especially, often look bleak and washed-out. While that may be intended to set the tone of the film, the viewer can not help wondering why these people in their nice houses do not switch on a few lights...Acting honours go to Björgvinsdóttir, who does a very nice turn as a parent whose grief over her other son's disappearance finds relief only in her antipathy to her neighbours. Sigurjónsson's portrayal of her husband, unsure how to cope with her, is also good, although he loses his admirable subtleness in the final few minutes and descends into acting-by-numbers, which is a shame. Steinþórsson is competent in his soap opera role. As the neighbours, I particularly enjoyed Þorsteinn Bachmann and the afore-mentioned Björnsdóttir's realistic portrayal of joyful relief when their missing dog turns up on the doorstep - all the more poignant for the viewer, who knows the dog is not as healthy as he at first seems...

Have a lot of love for foreign language films, of all decades and all genres. That and that it was another film seen as part of my quest to see as many 2018 films as possible were my main reasons in seeing 'Under the Tree' from Icelandic director Hafsteinn Gunnar Sigurdsson. 'Under the Tree' is a truly fine film and manages to take a relevant subject (feuding neighbours) and explore it in a way that was hilarious, shocking and moving. It won't be one of my favourite films any time soon, but in no way should it be overlooked and should be seen as an example of how to execute a film with a subject like this well. Sadly, 'Under the Tree' has been released here alongside more expensive in budget films that have been quite big box office successes and films that people are more likely to go and see. While having enjoyed many of the films in question (in no way is it intended to be knock), 'Under the Tree' is better than most of them and deserves better.Sure 'Under the Tree' is occasionally a touch overcooked and some may find some of the behaviours extreme. However, Sigurdsson directs with a perfect balance of hilarious mayhem and melancholic pathos. This is also reflected in the thought-provoking script he scripted with Huldar Breidfjord. Many parts are hilarious in a dark way, others genuinely shock and there are emotional parts too, all in a way that is kept plausible throughout. Neighbour feuding sounds insignificant on paper to some, but 'Under the Tree' makes it darkly funny, disturbing and melancholic, a not easy feat but beautifully done here.The storytelling is always compelling, with the tensions having a bleakness and ferocity while still entertaining and emotionally resonating. There is a good deal happening, but not in a way that it feels cluttered with too many characters and subplots, instead there is enough breathing space and depth while having an alertness to the drama. A good cast would be needed to bring all this life. Luckily, 'Under the Tree's' cast is excellent. Particularly note-worthy of a cast where everybody is good and nobody bad is Edda Bjorgvinsdottir on fiercely intense form, her character near-unhinged. It is a very well made film visually, beautifully shot in particular. The music is inspired, appropriate and cleverly used.Overall, great and shouldn't be forgotten. 9/10 Bethany Cox

The story reminds me old Icelandic sagas, the conflict between neighbors and the sad end but i don't find anything depressing in this movie, just shows how fool and stubborn some people are.

In the description of "Under the Tree" in the film festival guide, it was a bit difficult to see whether or not the movie was a comedy. And, in watching it, this difficulty was NOT alleviated. Some folks saw the film as an ultra-dark comedy (perhaps like "War of the Roses") others saw it as a drama or cautionary tale. As for me, I just felt it was too dark to be laughed at and overall I found that it was well made but miserable to watch.The film is about a husband-wife who split up as well as the parents of this husband and their arguments with their neighbors about unimportant things. In both cases, the people become so embroiled in winning that they lose sight of what is right and what is reasonable and it all occurs in stages.At times, the film just went too far with these arguments. For example, one neighbor couldn't find their cat so they assumed the neighbor killed it. So, they had the neighbor's dog euthanized, stuffed and left it on their doorstep. Some might laugh at this...I was just horrified. The acting was good and the film watchable but incredibly nasty and unpleasant.By the way, something extraordinary happened during this viewing at the Philadelphia Film Festival. One man in the audience was laughing uproariously throughout the film. His response was extreme and unusual to say the least. Well, it apparently really offended another guy in the theater and through the course of the film they began screaming at each other. At the finale, it got uglier and I rushed to get Film Society staff because it looked as if they'd come to blows!! So, obviously one guy thought this was a great dark comedy and one thought it was a drama and it was offensive for anyone to laugh at the hellish story. Amazing that neither apparently saw that they were acting out the picture!!