Motion, shooting, blood. But most importantly, there is meaning. And a very good point. More movies like that. A lot of scary stuff, but it's all about business. Be sure to look!
It's a very heavy movie, you bastard marauders, they should be put on a stake like Ivan the Terrible. I've never seen this before. No word. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The film “Sun” 2021 is quite propagandistic. Although we, the audience, most of us, were not there, on the scene, in the Luhansk region of 2014. We cannot fully judge what criminals and nationalist battalions did there. And yet, the Sun is not for weak nervous systems. It's not for impressionable people. For they are so impressed, it is yes, that "Mother does not grieve," but, with a minus sign. They may not be able to sleep normally for a while. But I can also not say that the painting “Sun” is pure for images and people with a stone heart. That's not true.
In the center of the narrative of the film directed by Maxim Brius and Mikhail Wasserbaum, the events of 2014, just after the Maidan. Alexander Bukharov plays a character named Vlad, the father of the family with whom he is fleeing the impending civil war in eastern Ukraine.
The film is built on a certain starting point that happens in the life of almost everyone. It is when one stop, one step, one action becomes a decisive milestone in all life. I must say that the film “Sun” was shot in 2021, that is, before all the events, the starting point of which is considered to be February 24, 2022. Unexpectedly, "Sun" a year ago was quite relevant for today, October 2022.
If we talk about genre purity, then “Solntsepec” is a drama, an action movie, and, in part, a historical film, as it affects events that occurred in the recent past.
The main character performed by Alexander Bukharov turned out to be very expressive in the role of the father of the family, who takes the family out of the flaming Lugansk. His eyes and those of his family suddenly saw the horrors of the civil war. Vlad is a former military man who attended combat school in the mountains of Afghanistan. He remained fighting comrades who were on opposite sides of the barricades because of the events in Ukraine in late 2013 and the subsequent Maidan.
Actor Alexander Bukharov well conveyed on the screen the feeling of a restless soul. His pensive gaze, sometimes stubborn on the floor, as if assessing the situation, is very eloquent. The expression of the actor’s face in this role is often “wandering”, slightly confused, in part, it demonstrates clumsy gestures. All this is evidence of a great inner struggle, of hesitation, between the duty of a father, a husband, a caretaker of the family, and something greater than this limited circle of people. On the other side of the scales is the weight of the soldier’s heart. Even if he is retired, he is still a soldier.
I must say that Bukharaov does not look like a superman. Although it would be good for a fighter. But "Solntsepec" is far from pure action, although scenes of hostilities are present here, and quite often. In the film under consideration, his character Vlad is an ordinary Russian peasant, whose life has again turned upside down from events beyond his control, and radically turned over. What does a Russian man do? Accept? Run? Stay? Lots of questions that haven't been answered yet. And Alexander Bukharov perfectly conveyed this inner struggle, this heat in the restless soul.
Again, returning to the idea that the film was shot a year before the events of February 24, 2022, there is a topical phrase in “Solncepek”: “The war did not start in time?” War... It's always a bad time!
And this terrible wave, called civil war, is taking over new territories and new human resources. The film "Solntsepec" tries to show the viewer that in extreme conditions, in conflagration conditions, in the conditions of internecine war, everyone chooses his side. And everyone has arguments in one way or another.
Anyone can be useful. Even not young and obese teacher Gurevich (Vladimir Ilyin) is also useful. And not the folding, eleventh-grader yesterday, who barely turned 18, could be helpful, too. Although the war and grinds its millstone everyone, regardless of age, profession and social status.
I must admit that the film “Sun”, of course, tendentious. One side is painted black, the other is painted white. We can assume that these are clear signs of a social, and perhaps political, order. But done, this order was executed quite well. There's nothing wrong with that. All countries use cinema as an instrument of their policies. Even V. Lenin, the number 1 revolutionary in the world, declared that "of all the arts for us the most important is cinema!"
As you watch the film “Sun” 2021, and I must give him credit, the viewer is inflated by a sense of despair. Desperation of people who found themselves in this terrible mess. You're involuntarily cringing when you try to imagine something like this could start anywhere. And we, in Russia, including.
If Russia were now a powerful economic, geopolitical, cultural, and democratic power, and not a country with blatant social inequality and a raw material orientation of the economy, perhaps none of this would have happened. And the countries and peoples that are around the orbit of the concept of “Russia” would be drawn to such an attractive center of influence themselves.
Unfortunately, none of this was achieved. Therefore, the "tear" territory has to live. And the film "Solntsepec" is part of this propaganda machine.
7 out of 10
After watching Donbass: Around the edges, the interest of filmmakers in the consecration of past events is beginning to grow. War cinema in Russia has long been busy with films about the Second World War and the war in Syria, the quality of which jumps from year to year, and their ideas and thoughts were known already at the stage of watching the trailer.
The trailer for this movie looked fresh and interesting. It is a pity that, as in the case of films about the Second World War, the thought is not far from the trailer. The film itself evokes very contradictory aesthetic feelings, and the thought in the film was already visible in the beginning.
Arrangement of forces:
The forces are divided into two and a half parts. On the LPR and APU, well, half are taken by looters. With people who kill other people just for profit, everything is clear, but with the other two sides need to deal with more details.
Let's start with blue and yellow. In a nutshell, they're enemies, and they've taken them as a show. It’s all cattle, convicts, crooks, shouting “Glory to Ukraine” every second or two, whose commanders pee at the prisoners and drive the “green soldiers” to fight.
They also have a sudden plot-forming (??) assistant - artillery. Works like clockwork, hits schools, Glavhero houses and... roads? Only in the end will they finally hit the enemy.
LPR fighters, on the contrary, are shown as heroes, noble and generous martyrs, proudly standing for their people, although no action is taken for this. Once they storm an unnamed outpost and shoot down the plane and that's it. And prisoners from the outpost are not killed, but let go.
They are such heroes that even the color scheme of the film is on their side, bright and joyful. And if someone attacks them, they will not do anything, only they run back and forth with automatics, and they try to squeeze a tear out of the viewer.
And at the end of the film, the idea of their uselessness as a military unit arises. A column of Ukrainian troops attacking the LPR is being destroyed not by volunteers, but by Wagnerites. Well, in general, the image of the LPR turned out to be infallible and innocent.
Emotions, emotions and emotions again:
As you know, to achieve the desired effect, you need to use strong emotional images. There's no problem with that in this movie. Blood, intestines, disfigured corpses are accompanied by exhausting screams and howling crying, which looks very impressive until the middle of the film.
But there’s only one problem: it’s too much.
The screams and screams towards the end of the film are extremely irritating. Cranberry Morse and sausages from the nearest five begin to amaze with their artificiality.
Yes, and killed mostly civilians in Luhansk, and the military seems to be no. If the soldiers of the APU die, it is at the hands of marauders or mercenaries.
Characters
The story is based on two characters: a former Afghan man with his family and his former Brother in Arms.
The Afghan is quite well exposed. His motivation is clear. He wants to save his family from the war and does not take sides. His companion is the opposite of his. A man without a family living in war.
The other characters are so flat, static and caricature that there are no words. Starting from a patriot from the village and a resident of Moscow, who strangely ended up here, ending with a general of the LPR. They do not cause any empathy. Against the background of the main characters, they remain unnoticed.
Result:
Of course, in this case, the film was not shot for artistic purposes, but to protrude inside out propaganda clichés straight from the television broadcasts of federal channels of Russia. There is no point in watching this. It is a pity that with our experience of war films, we are able to produce only ridiculous political agitation for terribly emotional people like the film “Crimea”.
It is not recommended to view and safely pass by.
NTV film with great propaganda "Ours are good, not ours are evil"
Recently, I watched the 2021 film “Suntseopek”, which shows the horrors of life in the DPR and LPR in 2014 for the Russian audience. The film left mixed impressions. I would like to highlight some of them.
1) Primitive.
In my opinion, the imagination of the director is rather scanty. He seems to have nothing to draw attention to. He does not think of anything better than to lure the dismemberment, and in huge quantities. All this is done mainly in order to instill in the viewer the negative role of the “bad”. This is especially noticeable during scenes with a lot of blood (for some reason, it is only in the victims). When, for example, “our” are killed, this is not shown for some reason, apparently, our other ammunition, from which blood does not come.
2) Lack of information.
The average viewer does not understand what 56 DSB is, but, unfortunately, no one thought to decipher this acronym. And the viewers at the TV screen and do not know that we are talking about the Airborne!
(3) Paphos.
The image of paratroopers is too superhero and pathetic. It's like the Batmans of the Domestic Spill. They do not burn in fire or drown in water.
Always right. Appear at the right time in the right place and do nothing but exploits in the name of the Motherland.
They even speak in the voice of Superman! And just the case. They don't talk.
(4) Predictability.
When viewing, a lot becomes obvious and understandable. It's no surprise that this guy knew this guy. And these people died because of this. It's all in the palm.
Because of this, I want to draw a conclusion: in my opinion, the “sun chain” is a film shot in the spirit of typical gangster NTV and REN-TV series with a clear division into good and bad, as well as with a lot of unnecessary blood and dismemberment. There is no doubt that terrible things are happening in the DPR and LPR, but for some reason they remove every torn and bloody hand or leg for 10 seconds.
And the main question for the director: for whom and for what was this film made? It's hard to call it a movie. This is undisguised and very harsh propaganda!
4 out of 10
About the first film of these authors learned by accident - to one of the videos in the recommendations got out a tourist trailer. I watched, liked, a great action movie, without unnecessary snot, love lines, bed scenes and stupid pathos. I learned about the next films in fact, also by accident - in one of the comments I learned about the upcoming continuation of the Tourist and about the already filmed film about Donbass. I waited for the appearance on the Kinopoisk and watched for two visits. And yes, I will say in advance that the evaluation of this film will certainly be contradictory for you - this film is too much not about "propaganda", but about the conflict in which there will always be "one look" and "second look". It is probably impossible to come to a compromise here. At least not very soon.
It is difficult to talk about realism – I read a few diaries of the militia, but they mostly described their personal participation in the fighting on the “front”, but similar shootings on civilians, of which there are a lot in the film – were described not because they did not exist, but because they did not personally catch them. However, the abundance of wounded in hospitals (which they could see) was.
And in short:
Pros: good fighting scenes, shows all the horror of war, which should be in films about, suddenly, war, and not "lubof" - the murder of civilians, rape, everything is quite harsh and realistic. War is not toys, it is not heroism, it is fear, it is not fear that you will be killed, but fear that people around you are dying and you cannot help them. In fact, I personally do not see anything wrong with showing a conflict situation on our part, which is a full Internet of stupid sayings that there is only a conventionally “Western” view, and everything else is not true. This film is about our view of the situation.
Cons: as for me, he is exactly the same here – it’s still one thing to show “our” and “enemies”, but still in this film they overwisted with the demonization of enemies and the reverse situation with the militia. Because somehow it is a little stressful when you show everything (certainly, perhaps really taking place in reality) - captives, severe torture, the murder of civilians, and from the militias - a "white and fluffy" commander who even his enemies, killing his own soldiers, lets go, because "Well, what about shooting them?" All the same, it is clear that their own, but they are also people, and not angels in the flesh.
Well, it was nice to see the characters from the Tourist - albeit fleetingly, but interesting to see, you can say, their baptism of battle. And the reference with the book Wagner, to his accompaniment, looked good.
If you have 2 free hours and you like action movies, definitely watch.
I really liked it. Due to the mass of low-quality modern cinema, I always expected some banality, stamps, but the director surprised. The plot is unique. Definitely worth watching.
I can't appreciate the movie because after the kid was killed, I turned the movie off. . After 2 years, I decided to watch the film, rewinding the first 5 minutes because I remember what was there. .
I have always had a special awe for war movies. Every film lover has a favorite genre. That’s just over the years of watching movies create a kind of cliche, and when watching the next “new” the viewer does not experience the emotions that were available to him before. The movie, so to speak, is boring.
The drama "Sun" became a breath of fresh air for me. Something I missed so much. First, it is a war film, but it is not about the events of the Great Patriotic War, Afghanistan, or even Chechnya. That's good enough. Secondly, the creators of the film decided to move away from the approach of romanticizing war. We are all used to scenes of heroism, which supposedly promotes to give your life without any doubt for the common good. And now it seems to the audience that the war is an event where you can demonstrate your patriotism, throwing yourself on the enemy embrasure under the inspiring soundtrack.
But!
It's different in the Sun. Here without embellishment conveyed all the drama of events. The film tells about the Donbas and the military conflict that began in 2014. And the enemies here are not strange people who speak foreign languages and adhere to unfamiliar views and traditions. No, here they go to kill their own. Yesterday’s neighbors, countrymen, today really hate you.
The plot of the film is built around the Novozhilov family. Its head, the father, at one time passed Afghanistan. And this operation of the USSR, as you know, lasted 10 years and claimed the lives of almost 14,000 Soviet soldiers. He saw with his own eyes what war was doing to people.
Novozhilov wants to take the family abroad, but it is closed. Then he decides to stand up for what is called "Homeland". Movie
The Sun is not an advertising campaign for war. On the contrary, it is a tough film that clearly demonstrates why such events should no longer occur.
9 out of 10
Hollywood horror movies don’t seem so scary anymore.
Movies are mostly made to entertain. So that a person can stock up on popcorn, sit in the chair of the cinema or at home on a cozy sofa and have a pleasant time. However, with "Solncepek" it will not work, because the creators of the picture pursued a completely different goal, namely to show the tragic events of 2014 in Luhansk. It was very convincing.
From the beginning, the film is full of scenes of violence. Moreover, the concentration of cruelty is so high that when watching some moments, I personally became uneasy and involuntarily took my eyes off the screen. Therefore, it is not surprising that many critics of the directors, claiming that it was not necessary to shoot everything in such detail and bloody colors.
On the one hand, they can be understood, because in this regard, the Sun can give a head start to any horror film, which also shows pools of blood and mountains of corpses. But you know, as the writer of the film noted, “we are still sorry.” And I completely agree with him, because in fact, seven years ago it was much worse in Luhansk, and eyewitnesses of those events confirm this. So directors Brius and Wasserbaum can only be praised for not romanticizing the war, but showing everything as it was.
By the way, when I found out the names of the creators of “Solncepek”, at first I did not want to watch it, because I thought that Brius and Wasserbaum are not capable of anything but to shoot series about the wars of cops and bandits. But I was wrong.
I want to praise the actors. Playing in such a bloodthirsty movie is not easy, but they were able and did it very convincingly. If I were in their place, I would probably give up filming to protect my already shaken psyche.
I would especially like to mention Vladimir Ilyin, who played a music teacher. The character is far from the most important, but at the same time conveys the emotions that civilians in Luhansk experienced better than many. What was the point when he asked Gritsai: “Do you really think that it is right to decide who has the right to defend their homeland?” In that war, his students died, so the meaning of his life, and all residents of the LPR, was one thing - to stop this genocide.
Of course, the film is not without minuses, still it was shot in a rather short time. In particular, I would note the nondescript soundtrack and sometimes not the best performed special effects. But it's all small things. The task was to convey to people that war is evil, and the creators of the picture coped with it.
A film about how people who did not want war were forced to take up arms
All people want to live in peace, quietly do their own business, work, raise children. The film “Solntsepec” is about this – it is about those who lived their ordinary life in the Luhansk region, and when chaos came to their native land in 2014, people had to make a difficult choice for themselves.
The main character of “Sun” Vlad Novozhilov at the beginning of the film decided to leave the country with his family. He chose peace for himself and his family and did not want to take part in hostilities, despite having once served in Afghanistan.
The hero, played by Alexander Bukharov, soon had to make a choice again: the border was closed, he and his family had to stay for a while in Lugansk. He went to work as an ambulance driver. He abstained from joining the militia - after all, his unwillingness to participate in battles with his people overpowered the impressions of the horror. The ambulance went to the scene of shelling every day - the driver saw wounded, bleeding people. But he still hoped to get away from the nightmare. At the end of the film, he makes a third choice after a severe emotional shock.
Vlad Novozhilov is a typical resident of the Luhansk region, where many people experienced similar internal changes in 2014. The human psyche could not always adapt immediately to the shelling and horror of what was happening. Then, over time, people got used to the fact that the shelling and death of civilians is a reality, and then decided for themselves what to do.
Teacher Gurevich (played by Vladimir Ilyin) takes a similar inner path – at the beginning of the film he teaches a lesson, not wanting to leave or fight. After the tragedy, an elderly man makes the only possible choice for himself - goes to the militia.
However, there were people in Donbas who immediately adapted to the situation and realized that the only way out was to take up arms and fight back the enemy. So does Gritsai (played by Alexey Kravchenko), who has experience in Afghanistan. The image is very true – in the Donbass really in 2014 there were people who created a militia, and immediately stood as a wall in the way of the enemies.
The film shows not only the defenders of their land. It also tells about what happened on the other side of the front, in the good fights. One of them gets Goncharenko (his role was played by Maxim Dakhnenko). A former Afghan has to teach Ukrainian Nazis, who have a lot of pay but little intelligence. The scumbags mock the prisoner, do not want to comply with the rules, brawl. They went to war on courage, not really understanding what they were doing. By the end of the film, Gonacharenko rethinks the situation and makes the only possible choice for himself.
The film is interesting, it bribes with its truth. Heroes are real living people, whose inner world is clear, and the motives of behavior are explainable. “Solntsepec” is a film about people who are caught off guard by military actions in their own country. Someone immediately knew what to do and made a choice once. Someone needed time to adapt and reflect on what was happening - they made a choice several times.
It's a very realistic war drama that has psychologicalism, not just battle scenes. It allows you to better understand what is happening in Ukraine, so it is worth seeing everyone without exception.
There are a lot of violent scenes in Suntsevek, so advice to parents: first watch the film yourself, and then decide whether or not to watch it for your children.
9 out of 10
The success of any feature film includes the idea of the film, a good script, a talented director, the cast. In my opinion, all this is present in the picture “Sun”. Therefore, it is not surprising that the film turned out to be extremely successful.
Formally, the film can be called a militant. However, the creators of the militants are aimed at entertaining the audience. And the authors of “Solncepek” had a completely different task – to tell about the events that took place in 2014 in the Donbass, as truthfully as possible. This explains a large number of scenes of murder, rape, abuse of prisoners.
For some viewers, this may seem too much. I think that's the right approach. You cannot show the terrible essence of war by smoothing corners, much less romanticizing it. People need to see firsthand how it was to come to the conclusion that the war is a horror and that the events that took place in Luhansk seven years ago cannot be allowed to repeat themselves. Not in the Donbass, or anywhere else.
The implementation of the author’s idea was facilitated by a successful selection of actors. All of them, even the youngest, did a great job. And how well Vladimir Ilyin, Alexander Bukharov, Alexey Kravchenko, Maxim Dakhnenko, Marina Denisova performed their roles is unnecessary even to say.
Sometimes the scenes of the film resemble documentary footage. However, this does not detract from its dignity as an art film. Mainly because the film is very psychological. The character of each character is drawn skillfully, and tears sometimes come to your eyes from dialogue.
I have to admit that something in the movie didn’t seem very good, which is the soundtrack. But this, of course, does not negate the importance of the picture.
In short, the appearance of the “Sun” was a pleasant surprise for me. And I think the same can be said by those who are just going to see the movie.
I was initially warned that “Solntsepec” is a rather tough movie, in which there are many bloody and shocking moments. However, I watched a lot of horror movies like “Turn the wrong way”, so I did not attach much importance to it and, having bought popcorn, went to the movies. After the first few minutes, my appetite was gone.
In terms of cruelty, the picture can give a head start to any foreign horror, because when watching some moments, even I, a grown man, became uncomfortable. I wanted to close my eyes or even get up and leave, so as not to injure my already shaken psyche.
However, as the screenwriter of the film Vladimir Izmailov said, we are still sorry. Still, because in real life everything was much worse, which is confirmed by the stories of eyewitnesses and those who personally had to survive the events of 2014 in Luhansk. So, it seems to me, all the claims to the directors of “Solncepek”, that, they say, it was possible not to make such a gesture, are completely groundless.
It is worth noting that puddles of blood, mountains of corpses and the excessive cruelty that Ukrainian punishers showed to civilians, this is not all that this film can offer a tandem of directors Brius – Wasserbaum. The picture turned out to be very emotional and due to the excellent play of the actors and competently staged scenes. What is the dialogue of the main character Vlad Novozhilov, who was brilliantly played by Alexander Bukharov, with his son, in which he told the young man about all the horrors of the war.
Yes, of course, as in any movie, there were no minuses. In particular, in my opinion, some bloody scenes look a little unnatural. Although it should be noted that the film was shot in a rather short time, so that this kind of trifles can be closed eyes. The purpose of the film was to convey the horror that happened seven years ago. And, in my opinion, the film crew coped with it 100%.
10 out of 10
The main character is a loving husband and father who must save his family from an acquaintance, from the terrible from which he fled in the past in Afghanistan. He does not hesitate, too familiar scenery unfolds before his eyes, too familiar smell of blood and the cries of the dying. And he's coming out of the country with his family, from a wave of blood already stalking them - but the borders are closed and all that remains is to hold hands, close your eyes, feel the iron taste in your mouth and start fighting. The main thing is not to forget that it is necessary to “be” and “love”, and not to think that later it will turn into a punishment.
Like all tragedies based on real events, it is perceived more difficult than others. You know that all this was, and you want to turn it off - because it was not the director's fantasy that played out, but the nauseating reality in the film was captured. And the scenes you don't have time to look away will be imprinted deeply. But you will watch the movie and someday forget, and someone carries this nightmare all his life in himself, because he saw all these scenes not through the screen. The film is difficult to perceive in isolation from the context and as an independent work, but this is normal, after all, he was not shot for this.
Nevertheless, it is worth paying tribute to the writer and director, because you still live what is happening through the prism of the characters and react to their stories and cry not because of the general tragedy, but because of personal. And no matter how hard I tried to emotionally isolate myself from the characters, it does not work, again, thanks to the director, screenwriter and actors. The film catches in every sense and on all levels, this is the case when after watching you will go through the dialogues of the characters in your head for several days and remember the scenes.
10 out of 10
"Beautiful Far Away" is a future that doesn't exist
The events of the film "Sun" unfold in 2014 in Luhansk. At the time when the civil conflict began, which resulted in fear, horror, violence, cruelty and complete misunderstanding. Although the film is based on monstrous real events, it is more artistic and saturated with symbolism.
A children's choir that sings "Beautiful Far Away" about a future... about a future that doesn't exist. Neither these children nor the residents of Donbass. Because Ukrainian shells bring death. This scene and awareness of what is happening cause terrible anxiety and fear.
The most realistic scenes of violence and sadistic acts, for example, with a woman at the beginning of the film, are not exaggerations, but facts. The atrocities of good-bats and the torture of “separs” are also a fact. The authors, it may seem to many, have added too many scenes of violence so naturalistic that the blood in the veins gets cold. But these are bare facts that have been kept silent all this time. And most likely, the creators even to some extent spared us, because in reality even more terrible things were happening.
From this point of view, "Solntsepec" is relevant, since it is the artistic embodiment of those events in 2014. The film is heavy from an emotional point of view, and the faint of heart is generally contraindicated. But such films exist to feel, to realize, to tell - the same "Schindler's List", although terribly heavy, but is considered a classic. Before the “Sun” to talk about the terrible time no one risked.
And if the emotional background of the film is all right, then some storylines are worked out, perhaps not completely. But there is an explanation for this: the film is not historical or documentary, and therefore flaws in the narrative can and should be. The film shows the main thing - reality. The horror that the residents of Donbass had to face. An atmosphere of complete misunderstanding, confusion and fear. Like people, literally, you-wa-li. “Sun” perfectly conveys the problem and atmosphere of that terrible time.
8 out of 10
Cinema, like any art form, must make a mark on the human soul. This movie almost broke my soul. He grabbed it with his cold and nimble hands and crumpled like a sheet of written paper.
Land plowed with shells, scattered bodies of former neighbors, cries of pain and suffering around. Who says war is just a gunfight? In fact, war is shrapnel torn in the heart, not letting you sleep, not letting you forget.
The authors of the film “Suncat” were able to push away from the mothball standards of the genre and do something really worthwhile. I remember being impressed by a scene from Pearl Harbor. After the Japanese attack, a warship sank. He was slowly sinking to the bottom. From a small hole protruded the hands of people reaching for the light, but they could not be saved. I remember this scene as a great metaphor for war.
There are a lot of scenes. Especially remember the moment when children in the house of culture sang the song "Beautiful far away." Alas, it was not so far away, and not so beautiful. This is a crazy mixture of tragedy, bursting in at the time of the performance of such a bright song. All this tells us what war is.
The main character wants everything to end well. The viewer wants this, however, the latter understands from the first minutes that there is no good end to wait. Inflating atmosphere. Skin cold. Human destiny. Broken nerves.
It is hard to believe that the film took place in the relatively recent past. Just seven years ago, misfortune struck the Donbass. Grief burst into the apartments. The air was filled with a taste of iron, which is characteristic of blood. The atmosphere was filled with screams and groans, which is characteristic of war.
9 out of 10
On the destruction of the world and the chances of survival
Before the premiere of the film, there were two trailers on the networks. The one deemed "censored" did not contain tragic scenes of traumatic footage. It was almost a teaser. And on YouTube and on its own website of the film there was a full video (uncensored).
The screenwriter of the film “Sunset” explained in an interview that a true film about the events of 2014 in Luhansk and the region was shot, trying to spare the feelings of the audience. For this reason, there are two trailers in the open access - detailed and gentle.
The film "Sunset" is already estimated as a tough and traumatic film about the beginning of the civil war, but it is about events that cannot be explored by means of cinema without reconstructing creepy episodes.
For example, at the first shelling in the city in singing classes, children sing: “Beautiful far away, do not be cruel to me...” Like much in the film, this episode was recreated from the accounts of eyewitnesses and participants - while the choir was rehearsing, shells flew into the city, part punched through the wall of the school and killed the children's choir. . .
Screenwriter Vladimir Izmailov emphasized that there were many documents with terrible facts, eyewitnesses and participants described monstrous events, but the story of one family was prepared for the viewer against the background of painful tragic events.
Consequently, it was important for the filmmakers to make an honest film about the military tragedy – about how yesterday’s peaceful life disappears before the eyes of shocked people, and a chilling horror comes to replace it and some of yesterday’s fellow citizens turn into soulless punishers. They look human, but only in appearance. From this horror runs to Voronezh through the Luhansk region family. ..
It is necessary to assess the complexity of the task set for the directors (Maxim Brius, Mikhail Wasserbaum). It was necessary to convey the state of people for whom the whole world disappeared in a matter of days, and for survival in the new world of extreme injustice, there are not yet forces and some special qualities - they were not blithely stored and trained in peaceful life.
Father and husband, an Afghan veteran, is played by Alexander Bukharov. It seems that this level of complexity has not yet played a role in his career. With the role of the wife of the main character fell to cope with Marina Denisova. Of the major figures should be noted the role of the teacher of singing (Vladimir Ilyin) and the leader of the Luhansk militia (Alexey Kravchenko).
The difficult task of showing a veteran who could not remove the war from himself, forever enslaved by a military psychotrauma, went to Maxim Dakhnenko. Many notable supporting roles are performed by faces unfamiliar to the viewer. The film was shot in Crimea, and the streets of the Crimean city from the streets of Luhansk will be distinguished only by the well-rounded eye. Single-family houses with small garden plots in the Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk regions are very similar.
Up to the latest footage, the viewer decides whether a detailed reconstruction of the Luhansk walls and streets was necessary, if it was to show how the world around us changed and people changed in 2014. It seemed much more important to show who and how turned a difficult but peaceful life into a military hell. And what to do if the war takes everything from you, but for some reason leaves you still alive.
10 out of 10
May-June 2014, Ukraine. The beginning of the civil war in the Donbas.
Directors Brius and Wasserbaum, without ceremony with the viewer on a grand scale plunge into the horrors that begin in the country, when the state collapses and chaos and powerlessness reign. Murders, violence, looting created by gangs of armed scum, released & #39; by the new government' in Kiev. And it does not matter whether they are dressed in the uniform ' Dobrobatov' or go to ' citizen'.
The head of an ordinary Ukrainian family, Vlad, an Afghan veteran, takes his wife and son to Russia, away from the military conflict that has begun to gain strength. He doesn't want to fight, take sides. But the chaos has changed their plans. Stuck without documents in Luhansk, he goes to work as an ambulance driver, and the family finds shelter in the house of a local militia activist.
In parallel, we show several inhabitants of post-Maidan Kiev. There is a local boy who dreams of European life, and his friend from Moscow, who hates his country, and wants to join ' free Ukrainians' and escaped from boring family life on the Maidan Lviv selyuk, but ' the revolution of hydration' over, and return to family and work do not want. Goncharenko, another veteran Afghan, dilutes the company slightly, but the war beckons him. All this motley company joins the ranks of the nationalist ' Dobrobat' and goes to nightmare ' Russian occupiers' in the Donbass.
Separately, we can distinguish the line of characters of local residents of Luhansk, who stood up to protect their homes and families. From me personally thank the screenwriters and Alexei Kravchenko for his hero – Gritsai, in the image of whom I easily recognized a well-known in Ukraine, public figure, historian, teacher, Afghan veteran, head of the search movement of Luhansk region since the 90s, Alexander Alexandrovich Gizai.
In general, the film has a lot of references to specific events and real characters of that time. The most famous of which is the airstrike of the Ukrainian aircraft 02.06.2014 on the Luhansk administration, where 8 were killed and 28 civilians were disabled, and the military transport of the Armed Forces of Ukraine shot down over the Luhansk airport. So I would call this film a historical drama, although the story is not over yet.
The film itself is made without excessive pathos, but quite realistic. The lyrics of the characters may not be 'Fountain' but quite consistent with the conversations of real people of those places and those times. Except that ' Conversation' and Surzhik could be added to all, except 'Moskal-Rightsek'. Costumes and props, camera work and script, all at a good level. Very reminiscent of the recent 'Tourist', because the backbone of the crew came from there.
The film leaves a heavy impression. Otherwise, if you correctly show the essence of the civil war. The senseless violence of bandits, the sadism of the Nazis. In an instant, the brightest things on earth, childhood dreams, first love are destroyed. Death comes at the most unexpected moment, not distinguishing between children and old people, men and women, soldiers and doctors.
Anyone who, after watching this film, think that this is a rampage of Russian propaganda, I responsibly declare that the film does not fully show the real events of the summer of 2014 in Donbas, but only the beginning and only on a small piece of the map of these events, which have been going on for seven years.
The obsession of human suffering, powerlessness and cruelty
The story in the retelling is quite simple - riots begin in the country, up to violence and murders, and the father of one family quickly realizes that in order to save his family, he must urgently take everyone abroad, leave his native land. The decision is difficult, but even more difficult decisions the head of the family has to make after the borders are closed and escape will not work. To face all the horrors face to face and survive, protecting his wife and son – now the main task of the hero.
Immediately I want to highlight the first scenes that competently prepare the viewer for what will be and immediately sift out too impressionable. The film begins with murder and violence, already in the first minutes it becomes obvious all the powerlessness and hopelessness that will accompany the viewer throughout the film. Fortunately, the first victims are the so-called “strangers”, over the violence of which the viewer is rather surprised and does not have time to penetrate to worry too deeply. But already ready for what will happen next. Or, on the contrary, turn off the film.
And despite the seemingly “promised” cruelties, the film is still discouraging, because it breaks expectations from the development of events, scenes, the behavior of the characters. He confronts reality again and again and reminds us that there are many surprises and unwritten events in life. Someone plans to relax after work in the evening and drink tea while watching the series, but holds a bloodied child.
This movie is a bloodied child, because you play it with the certainty that it will not touch you or hurt you, but only tell a story. But this story is unbearable. A father who tries to save his family to the last, a young man who rushes in feelings and aspirations, a girl who believes that her mother will come for her. Human destinies and inhuman conditions - all this rolls into a single bloody and barely pulsating lump and remains in us after watching the film.
The worst thing is that the events in the film are based on a real tragedy, which makes it even harder to watch this vicious circle of suffering, powerlessness and cruelty. From the very beginning of the film, it is clear that nothing good will happen, but out of habit you hope for a happy ending, although just the same “end” has long been known. But you expect at least some glimpse, a lumen that someone in these events managed to escape, lucky. Some in this story really manage to save themselves, but not the former, but only scraps of the human soul, which is doomed to survival.
The picture is very strong, causes a storm of emotions and feelings, albeit not the most pleasant. But such ambiguous, cruel and tragic films, for a short time knocking out your life, is the art. What confuses you is forcing you to sigh, close your eyes and mouth in a silent cry, because you are having experiences you hope you will never have in your life.
A worthy attempt to tell an uncomfortable truth out loud
I am glad that the tape raises the question of why the Ukrainians came to fight with their countrymen. This is a really important question. I'd even say the boss. “Sun” is one continuous question “why is it all.”
It is important that the viewer understands: “Sun” is not an artistic fiction of the screenwriter, but a film based on real events. What you will see in the film is the quintessence of testimony and eyewitness accounts of those terrible events. Awareness of this fact adds to emotions well when viewing.
The performance of the actors in the film is impressive. A lot of the scenes are done perfectly. Yes, there were some places that could be stronger, especially in emotional scenes. Apparently, they decided to protect the viewer. The bombing scenes could also have been tougher. But here, it seems, the concern for the feelings of the viewer affected, although, in my opinion, such scenes should be worked out especially. Here you get a kind of “fork”: and I want to realistically show the suffering of people who fell under the “Grads” and mortar shelling, and you understand that someone after watching such footage can be taken out of the cinema by doctors. As a result, they limited themselves to a “static picture” of bodies lying in paint. This somewhat deprives the scene of a degree of emotion. But you can't call it a minus of the picture either.
On the technical side, there are also some comments, but overall it turned out well. Yes, there are few special effects, but this is a drama, not an action movie. As a person who works with sound, it seemed to me that the microphones on the set were not quite professional, but I did not experience any special inconvenience when watching. Maybe I'm wrong. And the film, judging by the time from the announcement to the premiere, was shot in some hurry, so that some small flaws can be forgiven.
The main character of "Solncepek" Vlad Novozhilov tried to escape from the tragic events, saving his family, but the borders were closed, and he was forced to stay in Luhansk. He had already gone through Afghanistan in his lifetime, and he no longer wanted to take up arms. But fate had an opinion on this. And what exactly - will tell the film itself.
“Am I a trembling creature or do I have a right?” . .
Who are you, gentlemen?
I don’t watch Russian cinema very often, so I want to note that Russian cinema has risen significantly over the past ten years. And I’m not talking about the plot component, because it was always on top in our films, but about the technical part, which at one time was very lame.
In a good movie, there is no such problem anymore. "Mentov series" does not count, they still do not feel good. So, "Sun" was shot very well. A special admiration deserves a perfectly selected nature. It is clear that everything was filmed not in the Donbass, but it looks so much that goosebumps are already on the skin.
Films based on real events, in principle, look much more interesting, although more difficult. You can’t say, ‘It’s just a movie,’ because these characters or events really happened. "The Sun" from such paintings. From this movie goosebumps, because this is our reality – Donbass 2014, after the Maidan in Kiev.
Vlad Novozhilov (Alexander Bukharov) tries to leave with his wife and son, but the paths are cut off. By the will of fate, they get to Lugansk, where Vlad meets the head of the local militia Pavel Gritsai (Alexey Kravchenko).
Dialogue Novozhilov and Gritsai, forgive the pathos, a separate art form. They're as realistic as possible. These are conversations of two strong men who have seen a lot - not a single unnecessary line, all in short, on the case. Anyone who has a military in their family will understand.
Vlad and Paul are strangers to each other, but Gritsai helped this family, and the Novozhilovs themselves helped the girl they met in one of the villages. In fact, this is the essence of the film - in terrible times you can destroy, or you can help. People make their own choices.
But the story is not only about Novozhilov and Gritsai - there are a lot of heroes in the film. Everyone has their own vision of what is happening. Some do not change their minds to the last, others begin to rethink the situation they are in. Very clearly conveyed human emotions, throwing, feelings. Fortunately, none of us know what we will be like in this situation. We can only assume and let it be.
Brius and Wasserbaum made a film on a very topical topic. The Donbass story is not over yet, and there are not so many films about it, and there are no good ones at all. At least not until the Sun came out. The most realistic picture.
Watching such a movie is very difficult, so I do not advise the faint of heart. Well, the 18+ marker is not just worth it.
“Brotherly Heart”: an impression of the movie “Sun”
The phrase that says the hero of actor Alexei Kravchenko ingrained in my soul. After all, in fact, it should become a slogan to unite and stop those terrible events that are shown in the film and to this day have not received a logical conclusion.
Crossing destinies, displaying what is happening through the eyes of the participants is a strong move by the authors of “Solncepek”. Looking at it in a global sense, it's a very good idea, because what do we know about the truth? As one movie hero once said, everyone has their own. And then I'm sorry, everyone's a big deal. Remember, “we will never be brothers,” which was actively rushed at the time. Well, a stupid example of propaganda, which not only divided peoples, but also exposed people who say so in a bad light. Well, you want a new way, come on, why don't you care about your story? Especially for people you share a table with. It's very stupid and clumsy. About our TV, too, you can not say that we are white and fluffy, enough of our circus.
So that's what I'm about, in this whole picture of general rejection, the struggle of their own in essence with their own, to hear from the main character "brotherly heart", it resonates so much that it knocks out and breaks the skepticism about this film as about another one-sided gum.
Yes, we can argue for a long time whether or not there were atrocities depicted in the film. I watched a stream of militias, they say they have heard of such precedents, but have not personally seen. So let's abstract from that, especially since all of these terrible things in the film were laid on looters and ex-cons. Scoundrels should not have a nation.
In addition, the film showed a lot of other dirt, because the war was never famous for white collar and gentlemanly gestures. War is always about dirt, the line between humanity and atrocities. But this is a harsh truth of life, it would be a crime not to tell about it, because there is so much evidence to support crimes against civilians.
And in all this dirt, to see the hesitation of people, the insight that they are fighting against their friends, relatives, comrades, for example, the storyline of the Afghans. A strong moment, a silent scene of three heroes who fought on one side in Afghanistan, and now their fate is scattered on different barricades.
Personally, I tried to see in this film the human experience of people. Thanks to the filmmakers, this is possible. To look at the tragedy not from the position of one of the sides, but in general, to look at people’s experiences, because not only the character played by Maxim Dakhnenko was horrified by the cruelty and composure shown by the so-called “good-batters”. A man who had seen a lot in Afghanistan simply regretted that unfired stupid “romantics” were thrown like cannon fodder at the very epicenter of the developing conflict.
For me, this is primarily a drama, a drama of human souls and a tragedy, a tragedy of an entire people.
Everything else can be questioned and disputed, but tens of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands of crippled fates – this is the result of the events in the South-East of Ukraine. This, in my opinion, and the film The Sun.
As you know, the best way to reflect on emotionally difficult events is creativity. How many masterpieces were created in this way.
One of the most significant works of the Spanish artist Pablo Picasso is the famous “Guernica”. The picture was created under the impression of the bombardment by the Francoists of the Spanish city of Guernica during the Civil War. In a matter of hours, the city was destroyed, several hundred people died. On the canvas, the creator depicted all the horrors of war with scenes of violence, atrocities and destruction. According to some reports, during the war, Picasso was summoned for questioning by the Nazis, showed him a picture and asked: “Did you do this?” To which the artist calmly replied: “No, you did it.”
And it was this story that I remembered after watching the film "Sunlock". Inspired by eyewitness accounts and archival data, the filmmakers managed to show all the horrors of human tragedy. Let me remind you that the plot of the film revolves around the tragic events of 2014 in Luhansk. The degree of cruelty in the picture is really extreme. However, only in this way could the authors unvarnishedly convey the message of the film.
Despite the fact that here I would like to write: “people with a strong mind must watch”, I still can’t ignore the other aspects of the film. The cast was very pleased. I would especially like to mention the game of Kravchenko and Bukharov. The plot itself is quite uncomplicated, but in this case, the story carries a purely nominal role and with its task to show the entire tragedy of what is happening copes with “hurrah”.
As for the visual, there are flaws that can be called a production defect, but not significant. These marks do not affect the message, are not fatal. Therefore, the inhabitants may not even notice them. And yet, we can say that in general, a bold attempt to reveal several storylines was successful in terms of narrative, but not all the characters were revealed to the end. Or rather not, some of the intersections of these destinies turned out to be crumpled.
The truth you want to forget, but you need to remember
Yesterday I went to the cinema in one of the local cinemas. With the work of director Sergey Shcheglov, I was familiar and earlier in the films 'Tourist' and the series 'Leningrad 46', so I was very glad that he took on such an important and responsible role - to convey the tragedy of the events of 2014 to those who are familiar with them only by the headlines.
The frankness with which the authors of the film approached his presentation is both frightening and pleasing at the same time. It's scary because it's true. I am glad, because this time the truth was shown as it is, without unnecessary propaganda. Not every viewer, going to the cinema, wants such a deep dive, as even the most daring this film can bring to tears or cold sweats, even taking into account the fact that the film is not shown very much. The main focus is on the selection and demonstration of some key events. In the center of the picture are the stories of people who were on both sides of the conflict. The authors tried to convey to the viewer through dialogue the thoughts and beliefs of people who went to fight from each side, and, in my opinion, they succeeded. As a direct participant in those events, it was difficult for me to watch, because memories of those years constantly surfaced during the viewing. From the very first minutes, the film began to refer to real events of the time, which I had to hear or participate in myself. In 2014, I lived in Donetsk. And my first personal impression of the announcement 'ATO'. Turchynov completely coincided with the quote of one of the characters of the film: ' Will we be bombed?'. At the time, I could not imagine and believe that the army would fire heavy weapons on a city of more than 1 million people. But the truth was worse than expected. And as one of the main characters said: ': In war, it is terrible not to be wounded or killed. It will hurt, but it will pass. They kill you before you know it. It’s really scary when you kill others and you can’t do anything about it.39
There is a lot to blame for the film: first of all, it is not enough attention to detail. Barricades like near the Luhansk Regional State Administration are recreated quite primitively. In fact, the barricades were built much more competently. Some real details I in this film was not enough for the completeness of the created picture, but it is not clear, and would miss such censorship. The cynical and vile lies about the exploded air conditioner, which was immediately picked up by the Ukrainian media after the shelling of the Regional State Administration by combat aircraft, are not shown. It is not entirely plausible to look at the scene with the third plane in turn, which was landing. He could try to get it from the anti-aircraft gun, but did not even try. Not shown playgrounds near the OGA, where children played. Yes, and the battered Russian flag is an artistic fiction.
This is a film that is designed primarily for an adult male audience that is not afraid of scenes of cruelty. If you are not from the timid ten, then, as Dmitry Yurievich says: 'Take reliable crews, go to the cinema!'.
This is a complex author’s work that definitely deserves the highest marks. This is one of the best Russian films of recent times.
At night we run from our farm to the steppe. Then Makhno will run, then Marusya, burn it with a clear fire, will jump, then Father Us, and now Father Angel has appeared.
- We have the same. Who are they fighting with?
- The devil knows them. Ride around the field, shoot each other, and give them bread, give them a horse, give them fat. Half a chute into the steppe. And then they'll take that lard? You can't make lard with a gun. . .
- The red ones.
- Maybe for the reds... Bandits, they must be behind the Reds. Maybe white people. . .
' Adjutant of His Excellency', 1969, dir. E. Tashkov
One hundred years have passed since dashing & #39; civil & #39; times. Well, or a little more, and again ' nightmare' District bandits, arbitrariness, powerlessness, fear. The same places rested, wounds healed. Here again, they can kill at any moment. A man with a gun in his hands is as common as a man with a loaf of bread in our country. Previously, the South of Russia was shaken by hordes of opponents rolling back and forth. They were red and white and green and different. Now two forces are confronting each other. ' Center' trying ' edge' to reason. Twisting his arms as best he can. You are us. No other way! It can't be otherwise! Obey, accept. Otherwise, a bomb, a mine, a shell, when you do not expect it, we will treat you. A volley through peaceful neighborhoods like nothing to do, like 'hello'... And don't care about the victims. And the conscience is clear, not tormented by remorse. We're on the front line.
Seven years ago, in 2014, the audience is transferred thanks to the director. Luhansk for our view. The war, its beginning, between brothers, is brought to our attention. About Russians in humiliation they say - Moskal. And hiss like snakes ready to spit poison. So you got it. So we're tired. Why is that? Why? With such anger at your neighbor? Who's to blame? To blame? Politics? Politicians?
It is these thoughts that you drop into yourself looking at the bloody footage of the massacre. Both camps are presented to us. And there are people, and here they are. The only difference is that the sword is embodied by some and like a shield of defense, others. To classify these heroes as the camp of good and the camp of evil, drawing a dividing line between them? You can. But is this always the case on the field of sechi? Someone is in a frenzy, someone just raging in the ecstasy of the elements, again - revenge is obsessed for... this, for that. Someone wants to cut down money, and make fun of it, and cheat, and are there few good people who want to limit themselves? Motivation is different. Lots of publicans. Robbers, looters have been around for centuries. Everyone has their own role, their own mission, their own interest. Everything would be fine, but most vultures are. Women are raped, death is stained as they please. Meat grinder. Whirlpool. This is where the author leaves us. This is a thought-provoking thing. Simple faces of characters in opposition. How long? Oh, to know. . .
Whether it is possible to escape war is the main idea of this work. In Voronezh, to friends, trying to move an ordinary family. Away from the turmoil. But circumstances are stronger than human impulse. And other twists are laid by fate. It's unpredictable. Everything is relative now. Every day can be your last. What awaits? What happens? Will there be any?
What do you take out of this picture for yourself? Understand? A deal? But how? And also - exactly at the beginning of the century & #39; collapse & #39; happens in these parts. Why is that? What's the reason? Are these places?
6 out of 10
Fighting for the film adaptation of the events of modern history is a difficult matter. It only seems that with the development of modern technologies, there will be no shortage of information about any phenomenon, but a good half of the available data completely contradicts the current course of things. That is why for a director who has taken on such a time-consuming project, it is extremely important to separate the grain from the chaff and show the viewer the real story, without losing the art and drama. Was Mikhail Wasserbaum able to cope with this task in his new film “Sunchain”?
It is difficult to describe exactly what happens in the film, because then spoilers can not be avoided. So I'll get to the bottom of it.
So, we were presented with a story about the real events of the civil conflict in the southeast of Ukraine. I, like many people, know about him from news reports, but as we understand from the film, not all the horrors of that spring 2014 were told to us by journalists. Not many people survived those events.
In “Solnzepyok” shows the most terrible phase of the Ukrainian conflict – when the point of no return was left behind, and the world suddenly collapsed with the first drop of peaceful blood, which absorbed the earth. And Wasserbaum is no stranger to creating the entourage of armed conflicts. At one time, he took part in the filming of the cult series “Special Forces”, so he has an idea of how to create tension in the frame with minimal special effects.
Admittedly, the 18+ plaque is completely justified. It was immediately clear that this was not another vanilla war drama, but almost a film adaptation of what we could see in the news or the Internet. It is only perceived in a special way. Probably because there were direct eyewitnesses to those events as consultants. People's stories cause much more emotions than news reports. And then the creators did not deceive, saying that the film will be on real events.
However, in terms of the picture was not without minuses. For example, I was surprised by the lack of imagination of the directors, who could not find several points for shooting the shelling of peaceful cities. The exposition's obviously blown up. It feels like the military is firing from one bush. The same can be said about the shooting of the chase, and in general about the shots where something is driving along the road. On the same road. Back there. Perhaps there is some symbolism in this, but no one is destined to catch it. It's upsetting.
Like many paintings designed to transfer the viewer to the atmosphere of terrible realities of the past, the basis of the “Sun” was the story of one simple family. This technique almost never misfires, because it is easier for a person to first feel the tragedy of a small world, and then transfer it to more global things. However, Mikhail Wasserbaum and screenwriter Vladimir Izmailov decided to go further and created a series of characters, whose fate is extremely interesting to watch.
Actually, the script is one of the main advantages of the film. All the characters are different, all with their own beliefs and thoughts. But they were united by one thing – the inevitability of meeting this “wind of change”. Their fate, like everything in this life, does not follow a pattern.
A good script was complemented by acting. With the caste, the creators of “Solncepek” did not lose, because on the screen their talents show a whole galaxy of honored artists of Russia. The same Alexey Kravchenko, Maxim Dakhnenko and Vladimir Ilyin breathed life into their characters, gave them emotions and, despite the short screen time, made me, a callous kalach, move. But there was not without a spoonful of tar. I'll bet an A for trying to portray an American accent. It's just right past you.
However, the central place in the picture is still occupied by the fate of a simple family Novozhilov. The father of the Vlad family, played by Alexander Bukharov, in the late 80s learned what death and torn bodies are. What he did not expect was that the horrors of Afghanistan, where he served, would be repeated at home. It was on Novozhilov’s shoulders that Mikhail Wasserbaum placed a heavy burden – making decisions on which the fate of others depends. I have the impression that the rest of the characters in the film are floating on the river of despair, but Vlad can make a difference, at least in the life of his family. Can you do that?
"Sunchain" is the movie you need to tune in to. With a good mood, it is definitely better not to watch, but with a desire to learn about these events a little more and feel them - will go to "hurrah".
8 out of 10