Duty to be a victim The graduate project of the aspiring Estonian director Tanel Toom, who by his 32 years had already managed to be nominated for an Oscar, quite justified his presence among the best films of the planet according to American film critics, despite the fact that the cherished statuette was eventually received by the philosophizing Luke Mazen and his “God of Love”. However, the award in the form of a student award of the same Oscar film earned.
It is worth admitting that Toom’s second major work turned out to be even more poignant than the ironically pacifist Second Coming. And, if it were not for the subtle ability of the Estonian to avoid direct discourses within the framework of the indicated problems, it would be a film with a claim to scandal. Toom enters into a direct polemic with the clerical order, which requires not only humility and faith from everyone, but also the unquestioning fulfillment of duties that from the philistine point of view look quite harmless. For example, a school confession, which requires only a clean teenage shirt and the desire to open the soul to an outsider for the first time in life. After all, it is clear that children, in the main, are sinless, which means that there is nothing to be afraid of.
In this sense, the example of nine-year-old Sam, in whose interpretation the need for repentance has acquired its purely formal meaning, is exceptional. It was his lack of sinful experience that signaled the need to correct this circumstance. Together with his classmate, who shares such views, Sam becomes on the path of war with his usual peaceful way of life. They develop a plan of evil joke, and then successfully implement it, finally and irrevocably changing their fates.
The famous expression of Leo Tolstoy about human duties will fit as a prologue to this picture. Even a cursory glance at the statistics of world history is sufficient to assess the role of religion as the main source of all kinds of crimes against humanity. Not to mention the harm, including domestic murders, which even educated people sometimes cause each other because of their differences in views on questions of faith. Religion itself, which needs more and more victims, is not loyal to sinless people. Under the dictatorship of the clergy, under the auspices of religious law, those who do not yet have even an exact definition of the meaning of the terms “right”, “duty”, “sin” are most easily fooled. That is, children with all the moral fragility of their views. The example of Sam and his friend, who became victims of their own beliefs and paid an unfair price for it, in this sense is indicative.
The director’s love for Christian symbols, which can be found in more than one of his works, is also striking. He also treats it quite carefully, at the same time more than successfully comparing it with the chosen form of narrative. It turns out that rare case among short films, when a half-hour screen action affects the viewer’s consciousness much more tangible than many full-length films on a similar topic.