mchenrykrm
As is typical of so many Russian made war films the acting and cinematography is outstanding and the depiction of Russian village life during the war is realistic,I tend to find the quality of these movies superior to what Hollywood puts out but then films of this nature might not click with the American public. The actors look like real people and the plots lack the melodrama and symbolism of too many American made films in general. Implying sex doesn't seem to be enough in the good old USA either but I think in this film it is handled quite well. We know what they are going to do and have done but rather than the overacted graphic stuff that appears to be required in US films, the act itself is left to the imagination. The plot centers on a group of three prisoners who escape the Germans during the first year of the German invasion. They hide out in a Russian village and struggle to survive in an area where the Germans are in control and friend or foe among peers is difficult to discern. From the Germans to the Russian village girls all of the actor's depictions are spot on. That's one of the things I love about these films.Extremely well done and to all involved in the film I say bravo!
.
Armand
a Russian war film. or, only, a Russian film. impressive script, admirable acting. and profound role of landscapes images. a movie like a rope. nuances of duty and love, communism and life under occupation, about chance, fear, cruelty and sacrifice, about profound image of reality in a village and splendid eulogy to basic values. so, a film about wars. each detail, each side of violence, the construction of dialogs and the waters of faces are important because , more than a story it is a picture about sense of small gestures,moral force in dark times. as many others movies of genre from Russia, using a noble tradition, it is a Christian movie and, in same measure, reconquest of past events in a new and clear light.
Lee Eisenberg
Dmitri Meskhiev's "Svoi" (which means "one's own") focuses on the moral dilemma of some Soviet soldiers during WWII. After they escape a POW camp, they end up on a farm. But this farm, while Russian, turns out to be not much different from anything operated by the Nazis. The character Nikolai, due to his manipulative actions, has more control over things than the Nazis do. To Starosta, the Chekist represents the 1930s repression in the USSR. As for why Starosta doesn't kill the man at the end...it's because the man is still one of his OWN (not a German).I certainly recommend this movie. Full comprehension of the plot does require some understanding of Soviet policy during WWII, namely that Stalin vowed to punish the family of any soldier who surrendered to the German army. But anyway, it's a really good movie.
jherr
This is a WWII movie that deals more with the dilemma many people dealt with who lived in areas like Finland, the Baltics, Poland, the Ukraine, etc. Basically, they found themselves sandwiched between two totalitarian regimes. While some obviously saw the Nazis for what they were, to others, the Nazis where seen as liberators from Stalin's repressions. For instance, if your whole family had either been sent off to the gulags or starved to death due to Stalin's collectivization of agriculture, anybody who would free you from the people who perpetrated that sort of evil had to seem like saviors.Best I could tell, the movie takes place either in present day Finland or the Karelia region of Russia. One of the characters in the movie is referred to as a Chekist. To those who may not be polished on their early soviet history, the Cheka was the predecessor of the NKVD. Actually by the 40's, the Cheka had already been incorporated into the NKVD. Anyway, this is an important fact to know to understand the relationship between two of the characters in the movie and why they distrust each other.If you have seen the Finnish film Kukushka and liked it, you will likely also enjoy this film.
AD
