Due to the fact that stories are told to the viewer through the prism of their heroes, for many to see 007 agent Daniel Craig in the image of a Belarusian partisan of Jewish roots became at least an interesting film experience. At the same time, in contrast to the rather superficial criticism, we got a story that is capable of captivating, not least thanks to the main actors. And the accent of the pronunciation of the characters goes into the distant background, as we grow into the atmosphere of a hidden settlement in the forests, fighting for the very right to exist.
We know almost nothing about the Bielski family before the events began, receiving only verbal fragments of retrospective. The storyline begins in the summer of 1941 with an event that will forever change the lives of the three brothers. With all the obvious abundance of military dramas, "Defiance" manages, surprisingly, to bring new tones to the genre and in their own way to present their heroes. Having lost their homes and loved ones, the three brothers embark on a long, dangerous road of both revenge for their relatives and an act of survival. They were not terrified farmers, but soldiers hardened to fight as well. Conditions and events directly affected them. Even a seemingly minor scene with an insult from a comrade-in-arms has far-reaching consequences.
The film, in its full of events, was at the intersection of military drama in the usual combination of battles and losses and simply drama, which is sometimes based on difficult human relations. On the one hand, we have a history of the Holocaust and collaborationism, racial prejudice at home, and prerogatives in guerrilla warfare. Heroes not only escape in forest groves, but also enter into open battles with enemies, both external and internal. Shootings and hand-to-hand combat contribute to our audience interest in what is happening. After watching the film, there is a sincere desire to get acquainted with the literary original, which is the basis of the plot.
Between military themes, and this is evident already in the first half of the film, the artistic seeds of social drama begin to grow. The horrors of war directly affect the heroes, but the complex relationship in the forest camp is not due to them alone. And the rivalry or disagreement between the two brothers is not the leitmotif. No less interesting, albeit superficially described, is the life of people, informal love relationships, the participation of religion, the distribution of social duties. For those who expect to see the brave Daniel Craig with a machine gun, about four-fifths of the film will not be about it. Separately, I want to note just the beautiful acting of Lev Schreiber.
The Jew of the Second World War was used to depict a modest man hiding in a hat and a bag, or, if we talk about women, an inconspicuous dress and a long coat. It's different here.
In brief: the three Belsky brothers, after the invasion of German troops in Belarus and the massacre of Jews, flee to the forest, where they organize a Jewish partisan detachment. At the beginning, there were 17. And the goal was a little different.
The film is based on the real life of the brothers. The story of his older brother, Tuvia Belsky (Daniel Craig), can be considered the second story about Schindler. They lived in the woods for years. They organized a school and an infirmary there, and they were popularly called “Jerusalem of the Forest.” Under the leadership of the brothers, 1,200 Jews were saved, whose descendants still live. But unlike Schindler, none of the brothers was even posthumously awarded any order. Tuvu was only reburied in Jerusalem.
The Jews of this picture are zealous fighters for their lives and freedom. They fight in every sense of the word, they attack the Germans, kill, at some points they rob, but always remembering to protect their own.
Craig may not be the best Bond (and that’s my opinion), but here the role fully reveals his masculinity. He and Liv Schreiber, who played his brother Zusi Belsky, 40% of the film speak Russian. And for the most part, it turns out almost without an accent: Craig once toured Russia a lot with the theater, and Schreiber is half Ukrainian. It’s a great idea... domestically.
Beautiful music, beautiful love and courage that many people would learn. Here it is, in Hollywood Russian cinema with a low bow.
Watch the movie correctly.
I will speak positively about the film, despite the main audience of critics who rely on emotions, perceiving the film - another pro-American agitation, because this is absolutely not the case. Of course, the film was made by a foreign director, who gathered, mainly, famous faces of Hollywood, which in part was a good move, which served as a good collection, without using, at the same time, the actors of the country whose actions on the fields developed during the Second World War, which I do not quite approve of, but nevertheless, a decent training of actors, in an effort to screen not biased the real events that occurred at that time - justify the approach.
The film is like an interpretation, where the swamp is the ocean.
It is very unusual, if I may say, to take real events as a long-standing legend about the Prince of Egypt – Moses, who dispersed the ocean and led his people to a new land, away from the tyranny of the Egyptian Pharaoh. The film clearly shows the noble character of Tuvia, who in such difficult times showed a note of altruism to save other people, and a number of subsequent events will confirm the reference to the former myth, especially in controversial moments when the main character did not put his life above the alien by right of strength, out of the motive: We are responsible for those who were tamed.
Craig and vodka.
In the west there is a monster with a mustache, in the east there is a monster with a mustache.
Still, the note of “anti-Sovietism” is impossible not to notice, but in view of its weak pressure, I dare to assume in the absence of selfish motives from the filmmakers, because the question is in our general narrow awareness of historical events, we can not confirm the true motives of those times and the mood of society, when even the surviving witnesses can not adequately convey to us the level of awareness of information.
The last word.
The film worthy viewing, as one of the few adaptations, because it has an important role - to remind us of the heroes who have already become nameless, who have not broken and provided us with a decent bright future.
7 out of 10
Whenever possible, I try to follow Edward Zwick. A talented and interesting director. As I have noticed, he chooses projects of historical importance, polythetic hardening and life. Zwick’s films are rich in drama, emotion, and the parallel between negative and positive characters.
“The Challenge” is a pretty good military drama, based on a real story. By the way, another favorite moment of the director is the real events at the heart of the paintings. In the center of the story are three Jewish brothers. During the Great Patriotic War, they are forced to hide in the forest and lead a guerrilla life. Gradually, new representatives of the Jewish nation join them. Here, already, there is a kind of colony of nomads - partisans. They continue to live in the forest, but, at the same time, lead their lives, build homes and settle down in the wild. Against the background of the above events, there is a “split” of the two older brothers. Alone, stays in the settlement. Another joins the Soviet partisan detachment to beat the fascists. In principle, the storyline runs very smoothly. So, you should not wait for constant shooters. A large amount of screen time, occupies the theme of fortitude, human endurance, courage and justice. Although, the few battle scenes, it should be noted, put qualitatively. And, in general, the movie is tense, atmospheric, touching the viewer. You can't call "Challenge," the director's best work. However, it's a good job. Within the framework of budget funds, the topic and production, it is good. Very good. In addition, on the hand of the tape, plays a strong and convincing work of the actors. In particular, Daniel Craig and Liv Schreiber, who managed to confidently play two brothers. Well, I'll mention Jamie Bell. He tried, too. The music from Howard, as always, sounds right.
In general, paying attention to the film is worth it. To some extent, this topic concerns everyone. Something, of course, can cause complaints. For example, how our partisans are depicted. But it was a war. And war is a test of resilience, endurance, and, of course, humanity. This is a scary case. The price was very high. God forbid. I'm done.
7 out of 10
It seems to me that any film based on real events (well, except for documentary films, of course) should be evaluated, first of all, as a work of art, and only then think about the plausibility of certain facts. In this case, we can see with our own eyes the history of the Bielski brothers (based on Nehama Tech’s book The Challenge: Bielski Partisans), who during the Second World War tried to resist the forces of Nazi Germany. In addition to their own, they are entrusted with the lives of many other Jews who fled the ghetto in search of hope for freedom. This scenario is somewhat similar to the story of the great Robin Hood, the prince of all thieves, who lived in the forest and robbed wealth for the poor, but this time it is not gold and jewelry, but weapons and means of subsistence, the most important for these people.
Despite the numerous armed clashes of the parties, the war in this picture seemed to pass by. There was no excessive cruelty that the Second World War brought with it, and we saw the Germans on big holidays, rather, even the Soviet partisans were more like enemies, their director showed not from the best side. Attention is completely focused on the main characters who often try to jump above their heads, and sometimes they succeed, yes, at the cost of the lives of many of their compatriots, but in such a case there are no victims. Well, as in many American films, there was a place for high feelings.
What I saw was not particularly striking, and the only thing that can be noted is a fairly prosperous cast. Daniel Craig and Lev Schreiber, who played antipodes in character, pretty much, but with a sensitive accent, spoke Russian, it was nice to see, and among the other minor characters you could see familiar faces, for example, Thomas Arana, whose name may not know everyone, but it is simply impossible not to know in person.
Here are some modest results and...
In my lifetime, I've seen both jingo-patriotic war movies and heartbreaking Holocaust movies. This film differs favorably from those and others, in that it tells the story and not about the soldiers and not about the victims.
But first of all, this film attracted my attention for another reason, because of which I can be considered not quite objective. The fact is that I am a relative of these same brothers Belsky, they were uncles to my grandfather. I can judge this story not only from books, but also from the stories of the person who was there, who saw it. I can honestly say that everything described here is true. Of course, the historian cannot but note the abundance of inaccuracies, small details that are inevitable in such films. Of course, Jews, local Belarusians, Soviet partisans, and Germans are shown very caricatured, but at the same time accurate. Many reviewers are outraged at how stupid the Germans are (which they must agree with) and the Soviet partisans are evil anti-Semites, many wrote that there were no anti-Semitic sentiments in Belarus at all, unlike Poland. We were. And many Soviet partisans gave the local population more problems than the Germans, which we do not like to talk about. And the way it is portrayed in the film is almost entirely consistent with what my grandfather told me.
I was very pleased with the actors, they are exactly as I imagined them. The film was very emotional, at the end I could not hold back tears. And although the film stretched the events of one year and information it turned out not very rich, in general, the creators managed to tell this story.
2 points for historical errors