Kindil el bahr -Damien Ounouri

By Marie-Christine Tayah
Editor In Chief


Taking us on a fairy tale, facing the heat of a dull life, escaping by the sea, Kindil drags us into an imaginary world, where women know no boundaries. Half-woman, half-mermaid, she invites us on a poetic journey, a game with the waves, a challenge to the horizon, an escape from the sun, the society, the golden cage of marriage, the absent husband, the kids’ burden… She plunges into the sea and with her, an ode to love, a hymn of freedom, and a sense of belonging to Mother Nature calls on us. We feel human and humane. We feel connected, we feel one. But then again, the greed and criminality of men strikes back. They hit her, violate her rights, intimidate her, and make her wish she was never born out of Adam’s rib… They kill her and victimize her. Her only sin? The taste of freedom. Still, Eve hasn’t said her last words. She turns into a Kindil, breathes in all her suffering and inner injuries and lets everything out in an untamable strength, a violent power that violates each and every rule. She returns back as an inhuman sea creature and throws her revenge at the human kind. She kills. She destroys. She shuts the world away, off, and far. Eve is back. Beware… And then comes the so predictable mankind reactions. They accuse the husband of indirect complicity, they make him feel guilty, responsible, traitor. Until they convince him to go back at the beach calling for her, if she really loved him, she would appear again, and with a bit of luck get out of the waters to meet him. There, that would be it. They would catch her and imprison her… And so the world would keep turning, and so injustice would still prevail… and so reality would strike back again… and legends would remain legends…


Is there an adaptation from some kind of creature or a creation when it comes to the transformation of this woman in a medusa?
I would say there is a realistic vision of the woman in the film but then again, it develops into a dreamy version that comes back to the antic times before it goes back to reality at the end of the movie.


Was it she who kills people or the opposite, despite what one could see on screens?
I agree that each film has its own interpretation and once it is on screens, it is no longer the director’s or the actor’s belonging. It is owned by the audience. Still, to me, yes, it’s the woman herself who kills people.


How would you explain it more obviously?
When this woman is killed, she comes back to life and tries to find her family back. This is when this kind of power is built up and the consequence is that she kills people.


How would you interpret this movie?
This film is shot disregarding religions and ideology. It reflects the metamorphosis of life. In the movie, the victim turns into a guilty person. Still, the film ends with a realistic touch and feel at the end. The society’s eyes move the victim to the public place, where the whole context of the film changes and we see what we usually face nowadays with the media scandals on TV.