Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

PaulLondon When the film began the flat DV photography and poor subtitling made me wonder if this was going to be worth the effort. With its anachronisms and stylised start it would be too easy to write this off as sub-Jarman. But, it is worth sticking with this 'historical' inter-racial love story set in South African as its themes of intolerance are still relevant today.Although the low budget is very obvious, so is director Greyson's imagination and belief in this project. An interesting film which almost scuppers itself with its bad start but which redeems itself as it progresses.

movietrail So as not to repeat what other thoughtful reviewers have already stated, let me agree first that in many ways it is a very powerful film (though I would definitely not call it cinema), thanks almost totally to the remarkable acting skill and pathos of the two leading men, charged with the sin of loving each other and being quite physical about it.However, especially during the first quarter, one gets the impression that you are watching a reject from educational TV due to overall filming quality (or lack thereof), which of course I'm sure is due to lack of funds, rather than lack of skill in directorship. The glaring anachronisms look like goofs at first, but then again not even the worst Hong Kong director would send a jeep to look for thieves in 1730 (though he might make prisoners gather eggs with plastic bags and sound sirens in the background every now and then). You start to get the hint.As other reviewers have pointed out, the modern costumes and props supposedly serve to tell us (wink-wink) that things haven't changed so much (or at least between 1730 and 1965, which is the period of most of the out-of-place costumes) and it still pretty much sucks to be homosexual. In 1965, at least.While I realize the directors are trying to make a point, the presence of 1990s props and 1965 beehive hairdos with polyester suits just make the movie look cheaper, even satirical, especially in light of the fact that the photography basically resembles a home video on a tripod. To me, the intended anachronisms were just a distraction; and I don't need to be reminded that things are still very much the same, thank you very much. In any case, it just seems to underline lack of budget more than anything else. And lack of imagination.Anyway, back to the film (not movie). Despite all the critical comments I have reserved for the directing and filming, the story of the happy-go-lucky "Hottentot" and sullen Dutch sailors' relationship was extremely well told and acted out, to the point where the hand-cam and plastic bottles and barb-wire fences didn't matter so much any more. It's a bit of a mystery why Shaun Smyth (the chatterbox botanist) got billing over Neil Sandilands (the sailor), whose few terse-but- loaded lines and facial expression spoke volumes more than one might imagine. In fact the whole film could have been made with just the two leading lovers and the rest as extras (the acting ability of most of the others left something to be desired).As for the erotic part of the film, it could very well border on porn (again, due to the video look) except that it is much more human and realistic, and yes, touching. Anybody whose tastes run to lean-and-muscular men will definitely get their nickel's worth.If this film was intended to get certain people thinking about humanity and justice more than they have been, it will probably not attain that goal, as it is so gay as it will probably fly over the heads of even some of the most understanding heterosexuals.But it's great if you like to see proteas blooming fast-forward.

mpb2009 Post-apartheid cinema is characterized by the emergence of new voices and a diversification of themes. For the first time South African audiences are exposed to certain marginalized communities, including gay and lesbian subcultures. An important milestone in South African feature film-making is Jack Lewis's Proteus, the beginning of a visible gay/lesbian cinema in South Africa. Under apartheid gay and lesbian voices in film and television were also silenced. In a seven year study of the depiction of gays and lesbians in African, Asian and Latin American cinema I have noted that homosexual experience is unique in South Africa, precisely because of our history of racial division and subsequent resistance. Based on a true story, PROTEUS is a period film that raises issues still of enormous relevance today. Historian and filmmaker Jack Lewis was fascinated by a court record in the Cape Archives, dated 18 August 1735, giving judgment in the case of two Robben Island prisoners. Dutch sailor Rijkhaart Jacobsz and Khoe convict Class Blank received extreme sentences for what the court called 'the abominable and unnatural crime of Sodomy'. It is an extremely moving experience and forms part of a very small number of South African productions on homosexuality. Despite a new constitution which prohibits discrimination against gays and lesbians, our images of gay men and women are limited and still on the margin of the film industry. One ends up with less than fifteen short films, a few documentaries, less than five features with openly gay and lesbian characters and virtually no television programmes during the past hundred years of South African cinema!

Havan_IronOak This film, based on a true story tells of Rijkhaart Jacobsz and Claas Blank two men who were imprisoned and met on Robben Island 1718 and 1735. These two men met and fell in love on the island that would, many years later become the site of Nelson Mandela's life sentence.Rijkhaart Jacobsz was a Dutch sailor that had been sentenced there for homosexuality. It is there that he met Claas Blank, a aboriginal (Hottentot) who had run afoul of the law and was acquitted of any crime because there was insufficient evidence of his committing any crime but was sentenced to 10 years hard labor because he had been accused.The story also tells us of Virgil Niven a Dutch plant biologist who had come to South Africa to classify the plant life there but was afraid to return home after the Dutch in Amsterdam began a pogrom of homosexuals. While this story is NOT well known in South Africa today one hopes that with this film it will become more widely known. South Africa has one of the most enlightened constitutions in the world with an equal protection clause for sexual preference in their Bill of Rights.The film uses a creative approach to anachronism to help tell its story, mixing modern day elements with what is essentially a historical costume drama. Many of these elements were reported by the director to have special historical significance to those that know the full history of Robben Island, for the rest of us it just makes for an interesting device that adds a bit of spice to what some may think is a too-drawn out story.