Roah-Roah! is a weird, dusty trip back to 1927

So, I finally sat through Roah-Roah! Der Schrei der Sehnsucht. Honestly? Unless you are a total nerd for 1920s travel documentaries, you can probably skip this one. It is very... dry. 🏜️

It is mostly for people who like to see how things looked a hundred years ago. If you want a plot or characters you can actually care about, go watch something else. It's basically a glorified vacation video from an era where vacations involved a lot more khaki and mosquitoes.

The film follows Margit and Ludwig Kohl-Larsen. They were real explorers, not just actors. You can tell because they look genuinely tired in almost every shot. Ludwig has this way of pointing at things that feels very staged, like he’s trying to convince us he’s discovering something important.

The title translates to something about a 'cry of longing.' It sounds way more poetic than the actual movie is. Most of the time, the only thing I felt a longing for was a cold drink and maybe a scene where something actually happens. It’s a lot of shots of the horizon.

The camera work is pretty rough. It’s shaky and sometimes the focus just gives up. You can practically feel the heat shimmering off the ground through the lens. It makes the whole thing feel very heavy and slow.

There is this one shot of a lion that is actually kind of funny. The lion just looks bored. It’s laying in the grass and it looks at the camera like, 'Are you guys done yet?' I felt that lion on a spiritual level. 🦁

I kept thinking about The Last Egyptian while watching this. At least that one had some weird melodrama to keep you awake. Roah-Roah! just has more dirt. And then some more dirt after that.

Margit Kohl-Larsen is interesting to watch, though. She wears these massive hats and somehow keeps her cool while walking through what looks like a furnace. There’s a moment where she’s adjusting her gear and she gives the camera this look. It’s not a 'movie star' look. It’s a 'why are we doing this' look.

The pacing is non-existent. It just kind of wanders from one location to the next. One minute you’re looking at a group of people by a hut, and the next, it’s just five minutes of a very flat plain. There’s no real transition. It just cuts.

It reminded me of the empty feeling in Straight Shooting. But without the gunfights. Just the vast, empty space that makes you feel very small and insignificant. It's a bit overwhelming if you think about it too much.

The film stock is so grainy it’s almost like watching a moving pointillist painting. Sometimes the scratches on the film are more interesting than what’s being filmed. You see these white lines dancing across the screen and it’s kind of hypnotic.

There’s a scene with some local tribespeople that feels very awkward. It’s that typical 1920s 'look at these exotic people' vibe that hasn't aged well. They look at the camera with this mix of confusion and annoyance. I don't blame them.

I noticed a dog running in the background of one shot. It’s only there for a second. It was probably the most life I saw in that entire ten-minute stretch. I wonder what happened to that dog. 🐕

Some parts of the film feel like they were edited by someone who was falling asleep. A shot will linger on a tree for way too long. Then it will snap to a close-up of a rock. It’s very fragmented.

If you’ve seen The Big Hop, you know how these old adventure films can be. This one is even more stripped down. There’s no flash. No real excitement. Just the reality of being in the middle of nowhere in 1927.

I did appreciate the lack of fake drama. Usually, these movies try to invent a lion attack or a disaster. This one just shows you what it was like. It’s honest, I guess. Even if honesty is kind of boring sometimes.

The silence of the film—since it's a silent era piece—really adds to the isolation. You just sit there in your living room and feel the emptiness of the desert. It’s actually a bit spooky if you watch it late at night. 🌑

It's definitely better than Nude Woman by Waterfall if you want actual substance. But that’s not saying much. One is a gimmick, the other is a history lesson you didn't ask for.

I wouldn't call it a 'good' movie in the modern sense. It’s more like a document. It exists. It’s old. It’s dusty. It’s Roah-Roah!

If you're looking for something with a bit more punch, maybe try Kathleen Mavourneen. This one is strictly for the archive hunters. Or people who really like big hats and dirt.

Final thought: The lion was definitely the best part. I hope he got a good nap after the Kohl-Larsens left. He deserved it after dealing with that camera crew.