Inaccuracy in the synopsis is not a battery, but a rifle company, and it is not about surrender, but about a convulsive attempt to delay its own end, causing confusion in the enemy camp. In my opinion, this is the only way to characterize the actions of the Hitlerites who released Klimchenko after making a statement on his behalf. Well, or a fair share of Jesuitism in relation to the prisoner - after all, after the accusation of betrayal, the character of Yuri Kuzmenkov had to destroy their own punitive organs. This prospect may well have pleased the collaborator and his Nazi masters. But this remained behind the scenes, we can only guess about it, because we do not really know anything about the character of Chernov, and especially about his "Aryan" superiors. Unlike the character Kuzmenkov, whose emotional component of the role was represented by the artist in all the beauty of fullness, in his traditional less talkative manner. And here, at last, the work of the filmmakers intersected, with the artisticity of the literary source. The authors managed to betray the likely idea of Vasil Bykov taking for creativity episodes of the extreme existential state of man in the war, which in other screen versions (Alpine ballad, Live to Dawn) or failed, or discarded in the interests of the nostalgia of the plot. However, the short duration of the picture and the transparency of the situation described by the film contributed to this success of the film adaptation.
6 out of 10