In the past, our planet has known many universal catastrophes that almost destroyed our civilization. Yet people have always found a way out and continued to build their societies with the prospects they need to survive and thrive. However, if we look back on history, we kind of need to experience a big shake-up every few thousand years to remember what is most important in life. This is because society tends to forget the right guidelines and begins to destroy itself. So one of the options for such a cleansing disaster is a long rainfall that floods everything around. This is exactly what we see in Mahalia Belo’s film The World Flood.
The events of this story take us to England, or rather London and its surroundings, and introduce us to the Woman performed by Jodie Comer. I wrote the word with a capital letter because in this film only one character has a name, while all the others have only a symbol. So the woman is in the house, outside the window it rains and her contractions begin. It is necessary to get to the hospital as soon as possible, which is not easy to do - the roads are blurring, the ambulance will not come so easily. However, the woman goes to the hospital and gives birth to a son named Zed (the only person with a name in this story). But this is far from over.
It is no longer possible to return home, the rain turns the whole area into a very dangerous maze, to which not every car will reach. A woman wants to get at least to the parents of her husband, but the way there is also not close. So the heroine has to pinpoint her way from one safe place to another and visit specially equipped camps where survivors live. But there are fewer and fewer places in such camps, and there are more places to get there, respectively, and this becomes a big problem for the Woman and her child.
The original title of the Flood is “The End We Begin.” The film is based on the novel of the same name by writer Megan Hunter and it was quite popular in England, in connection with which producers, including Benedict Cumberbetch, bought the rights to the film adaptation and now we see the finished result. I will not say that the story turned out to be extremely spectacular and large-scale, but we can definitely say that it is tense. Unhappy Woman performed by the convincing Jodie Comer will have to face a dying civilization on her way and people here show a variety of sides of their character, including weakness and hatred. But it is the weakness that a woman cannot show, since she must save her child in spite of everything.
In this film, the most important is not the special effects, but the people. Some of them are trustworthy, while others behave openly inappropriately and want to see them on the screen as little as possible. And here it is very important how a woman will behave in a particular situation, because the wrong words or actions, and she will have a lot of problems, which can lead to trouble for Zeda. Watching was really interesting and stressful. And it’s a bit of a shame that the film has a place for Benedict Cumberbatch and Mark Strong, but their roles are quite small and rather episodic. But these are not critical moments, if we talk about the film as a whole.
“World Flood” turned out to be a worthy film that tells a very tense story. Spectacularity and suspense are sometimes lacking here, but in general it was interesting to follow the Woman and her son, who make their way to salvation in a drowning world.
Rainstorms hit England - houses and cities go under water. The heroine who has just given birth is trying to escape. . .
While watching, I was covered with a sense of deja vu: Europe, a natural disaster, the family is trying to escape, there is chaos and confusion around, there are no resources, where to run? All this was on the screen recently in the French "Acid" (in our box office "Catastrophe"). This is almost the same thing, only in England. However, the French film easily drowns the British - there and the cataclysm is more dangerous (torrential rain and floods - it's unpleasant, but it's not acid from the sky!), and the drama is sharper (if the characters in the "World Flood" and die, then behind the scenes), and the feeling of hopelessness is hopeless.
“World Flood” as if deliberately cooks events on a slow fire – first, the heroine is more or less under control (bath, TV, phone – everything works), then the electricity is cut off, but the moisture becomes too much – and the water goes away. Step by step, the heroine comes (almost swims) out of her comfort zone, but almost never finds herself in a life-and-death situation. Moreover, in some situations, the heroine (and her lax husband) begin to “seek for good” – so, we will not go to the hostel, there are many people, the commune is too boring, we need to look for something else, etc. The heroine herself is quite passive - she now sits and waits for salvation, then follows her friend. About the men in the film without tears you can not look - the husband of the heroine is clearly neurotic and afraid of the crowd (his wife has to go for groceries on her own), the heroine's father looks strong, but quickly "breaks". The hero of Benedict Cumberbetch appears for five minutes and dissolves, not really helping the heroine.
Throughout the film, the authors use the same note to create tension and empathy for the heroine - the cry of a baby. It is he who drives the heroine forward (or back), does not give up. At the same time, the characters look so weak that they simply do not believe in their survival in a new cruel world - an indicative shot where they leave the hospital with a child in a carrier under an umbrella and go as if nothing is happening around at all. They are too dependent on parents, on volunteers, on hostel staff, on smarter fellow travelers, and everywhere they demand help, saying like a mantra: "We have a child." As if in the apocalypse it would still mean something. In fact, during the entire film, the heroine commits only two independent acts - one stupid, the second cruel. And if cruelty for the sake of her son can be forgiven, then stupidity is not.
And yet there is the movie "World Flood" plus. It's hope. If heroes so weak and illogical can survive, then we have a chance. We haven’t dug up our own bunker with supplies in the yard yet, and there’s not much we can do except pray ‘We have a baby’. Then we'll live!
Cataclysms happen. Some of them are predicted, some are unexpected, and some are seasonal in nature, and repeat year after year. Some quirks of nature can be overcome relatively easily, the consequences of others are eliminated for years, and others never pass. Everyone has one thing in common – nature, rebelled for only a known reason, shows its power, making you feel the insignificance of your strength before it. “World Flood”, now released in Russian hire – another work on the theme “man and the elements”, not devoid of interest and even a certain originality, but hardly bringing something really new to the genre of catastrophe and derivatives from it.
The basic question that the Flood is trying to answer is quite universal and applies to any extreme situation that divides life into “before” and “after”, and is not necessarily radical: should we forget to live on, or should we remember, because memories are part of ourselves. The theme of the “new page” in the film is associated with the birth of a child in its first scenes, and with the flow of water, which can be interpreted as an update, and with the search for a community that organizes its existence taking into account the changed circumstances without looking back. People met by the main character also find themselves face to face with the indicated dilemma, having something unpleasant in the past, or even tragic, that was easier to leave there for the sake of their own survival. However, the main character herself is an unfortunate example for searching for an answer to the question posed, since she, in fact, does not face it: there is nothing in her past that is worth forgetting. No one betrayed her, even if her man seems weaker than herself, even if she has to make an unwanted decision, but a more reasonable one. There is no tragedy in her life that directly affects her. In short, for the heroine, the past is not a weight tied to her legs, but, if so, her choice is obvious, and the question is only in time.
The filmmakers’ decision to strip their characters of their names is not entirely obvious. Perhaps it is relatively reasonable in relation to the main character - just Women, and nothing else. In her image, the inseparability from the child is important, and, to summarize, the woman in the “World Flood” is always the mother, this is her only function. This theory is confirmed by the fact that all the key heroines of a woman are mothers: both her mother-in-law and an unexpected friend. As for men, they seem not interesting for the authors of this film, because they are not independent figures, but only an appendix to women, no more independent than the newborn son of the main character. Of course, this view of things seems very narrow and in no way objective. Perhaps the rejection of names carries the idea of equality before the elements, but in this “World Flood” is even less convincing than the standard zombie apocalypse, since the difference between people here is obvious: with and without a car, the inhabitants of the city and village, distributing food and receiving – all these statuses are due not to the flood, but to what happened before. In other words, people remained the same, albeit under new circumstances. We can assume the motive of confusion, inevitable in a great tragedy. However, it also does not look plausible, since the main character clearly knows what he wants (to save the child), even if it is a minimum. In short, the technique used, rather, does not work than vice versa, and this is not an advantage for this movie, but its disadvantage.
Finally, the circumstances of the large flooding, in general, do not seem convincing. We can assume that this kind of element is not chosen by chance, because after, say, a fire will not remain anything – ashes – the final final, and the water will go, allowing you to start all over again, as the original title of the film says. However, a natural question arises: why? The absence of any preface suggests that it is just so, and in this case, on the screen is just a tragedy for the sake of tragedy, devoid of any philosophical subtext. If the flood is not used as a metaphor, then it should be realistic, but the film fails and this: only rains lead to tragedy, and, far from constant, Britain is flooded selectively - on the basis of the size of the population center, and the main problem suspiciously quickly becomes food, not drinking water and infections. Perhaps the authors of the Flood wanted to show the true nature of people taken to extremes, but did not pay serious attention to this and did not say anything new on the topic.
“World Flood” is another attempt to dig into man in extreme circumstances, but not too successful. Perhaps the choice of a woman who has just given birth as the main character is a mistake, it seems good only at first glance, but her motivation revolves around protecting her young son explains everything and leaves the heroine no room for any depth or reflection. Its survival here is pure instinct of natural origin, there is nothing civilizational in its way. Maybe this is the point: that survival is tied to the instinct, and it matters which one will prevail? I don’t know, it seems to me that reducing all the answers to the value of motherhood is too simple and banal, to express this thesis, a flood is not necessary at all. The subject of love for a man is concomitant, not defining, not obligatory. In general, another movie that tries to seem more complicated than it really is.
The picture for its viewer: viscous, emancipated, airy, skimping on details, focused on one idea. It is difficult to call the picture “a discussion about humanity in the construction of an ecological catastrophe”, rather, it is a collision with the elements, but for me it is a lyrical mono-performance of a mother and child. The film, the directorial debut of Mahalia Belo based on the novel by Megan Hunter, with a female lead role.
The female role is central - spiritual, emotional, reflects all the power and beauty of a woman. The picture is female in everything: from handwriting to a melancholy tone. Male characters are allusions, flashing against the background of abstract theater, washed by rain and the life force of a mother saving a child. The main character swims in a stream of circumstances, guided by instinct, in search of refuge. Her image wanders in a small drowning world, touching fear and despair, she finds and loses under the pressure of severe trials, preserving hope and determination, embodying Mother Nature on the remains of mankind.
Despite all the efforts of the director, despair remains incomprehensible, and nervous tension does not attract attention. The restless journey is centered on caring for the infant—the little and the greatest that motivates the contemplative student; the small but the great that inspires the rare spectator.
To my great regret, I could not watch this movie until the finale, apparently, my inner world is not ready for such an aesthetic treasure.
The original British film is called The End We Start From, meaning The End We Start From, and it captures the story much more correctly than The Flood. Since the global flood as a global earth catastrophe in this tape, we are not really talking.
The Flood begins with a pregnant young woman. She is in the house alone, outside the window does not subside, the water begins to pour into the premises of the house. The heroine begins contractions, and calling an ambulance is not an easy task. But in the end, a woman gives birth to a child in the hospital. She is joined by her loving husband and they are faced with a problem - the house is flooded and they with a newborn child need to go to another city to the parents of the man.
The whole ensuing narrative is a story about how ordinary Englishmen will exist if their island is flooded. Movement between cities will be limited. Then there will be food problems. People without shelter and food will be concentrated in government-organized camps. But these camps will soon be unable to accommodate new people. There will be robbery and crime. And someone will hide in remote communes. . .
In general, the Flood unfolds exactly as the story of an environmental disaster should unfold. However, in fact, this film is not a drama about people living in conditions of natural disaster, but an overt feminist fantasy.
Allusions between mother nature and woman as the basis of life are more than obvious. But the plus of this glorification of weak and at the same time strong women is thinking about men.
Men in the Flood are practically useless and weaker than weak women. One committed suicide, the other said that he was so mentally traumatized that he would soon lie down and die, so he could not save the woman and the child. And the rest are just gangsters and minting creatures on the background.
And the whole film eventually slides into the argument that men in general are not needed. But the main character gave birth to a boy and she loves him. And she loves and misses her husband - no matter how insignificant he is, she still needs him. . .
There is an episode in the film where the heroine enters an isolated commune of women. It's very safe and well, but she's leaving and trying to get home. I don’t know how this can be interpreted except as a metaphor for abandoning total feminism and lesbian love in favor of family life. . .
In short, instead of a story about the social consequences of possible natural disasters of the future, “The Flood” turned out to be a sluggish story of a woman who realizes that she and in general women are more important and stronger than men. That men are rags, not rescuers. But at the same time, she accepts the fact that without men it is bad and I want them to be.
The main roles are played by Jodie Comer, Joel Fry, Catherine Waterston, Benedict Cumberbatch, Mark Strong and Gina McKee.
But if you miss this novelty, you will lose absolutely nothing.
The international LGBT movement is included in the list of extremist organizations of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
The survival drama “World Flood” is based on the 2017 novel of the same name by the English writer and poet Megan Hunter.
The drama was directed by Mahalia Belo, and this is her first full-length project, since she previously shot TV series (Long Song, 2018, and Requiem, 2018), a short film and one film for television (Ellen, 2016).
Screenwriter and playwright Alice Birch adapted Hunter's novel for the screen. In her portfolio there are such noticeable adapted scripts as “Normal People” (2020) and “Conversations with Friends” (2022) based on the novels of Irish Sally Rooney.
Benedict Cumberbatch co-produced the film along with his production company SunnyMarch, founded in 2013 in collaboration with friend and colleague Adam Ekland. Also among the producers were Jodie Comer (who played the main role in the drama) and Mark Strong (who played the role of the father-in-law of the main character).
SunnyMarch is passionate about motherhood, or what affects humanity, or what is environmental. It is logical that Cumberbatch and Eckland bought the rights to the film adaptation of Megan Hunter’s novel The End We Start From (literal translation of the original title The End We Start From), in the center of the story is a Mother and her newborn son, surviving after the whole of London and the surrounding area flooded.
In this film, the name is only the baby, the newborn son of the main character - he was called Zeb, in the credits all the other characters are indicated by letters, and the main character - by the word Woman. Most likely, this is the idea that the very fact of what is happening is important - the element does not choose from documents who to fall on, it covers anyone. The man then begins to fight, survive, get out, build anew, along the way reflecting on himself and his life, which in the film comes to the fore.
The film begins with a woman (Jodie Comer) serenely talking on the phone with her husband and at the same time going to take a bath. Her conversation is slightly drowned out by the sound of water pouring (to immediately give a hint of something disturbing - allegedly right now something will happen to her or while she can enjoy a calm evening). But while the Woman really calmly takes a bath, rain pours outside the window, pots with flowers stand on the balcony, and in the yard tomato bushes bow branches and fruits to the ground, which already ceases to absorb rainwater. Again, it’s just beautiful and atmospheric. The woman's home. She likes their house, which she arranged with her husband in anticipation of replenishment.
But as it happens, everything changes in an instant. The house turns off the electricity, and the woman begins contractions, premature, as she notes, but this can not be stopped. As well as the fact that the water begins to pour into the house. The contractions are getting stronger and the water is pouring faster. You cannot reach your husband or the clinic. Element is always stronger than man.
Translation of the English name The End We Start From into the phrase “world flood” in this case is even appropriate, because it does not need to be interpreted literally. That is, literally in the film, London and the surrounding area went under water (this disaster affected only England), and metaphorically, this biblical catastrophe has the meaning of chaos and confusion. It was the chaos that swept over the British because of what happened, it destroyed their lives. Literally washed away the old life, making you think about how to be next, where you belong and whether you want to be what you were before, that is, before. There is also a biblical motif in the name of the baby. The name Zeb, which the boy was named, means “gift of God.” I read about it as “a short name that flies off your tongue.” In the film, the woman repeated the name several times, trying on what it was like to say it. And she obviously liked it. The letter Z in the English alphabet is the last. Here you get a game of meanings - the baby is the beginning of life, and the name begins with the last letter of the alphabet, which hides almost playing the name of the film.
The idea of who I am and where I am goes through the whole story. The personality of a person is strongly connected with the material that surrounds him. Although this is taken for granted over time – home, furnishings, work, the usual route – but the flood, which destroyed the usual way of life, reveals that without these elements a person “lost” in space. He may not think about it, floating with the flow, however ironic it sounds, but this metaphorical current changes direction thanks to a very real element and makes you ask questions and not postpone the answer to tomorrow.
And the child in this case, especially with such a meaningful name and in a plot with biblical overtones, also serves as a symbol of the important and valuable. The child is a new life, an incentive to continue.
In the end, it’s not a massive drama-catastrophe, it’s more of an aesthetic movie to think about the unpredictability of life, how things change – if not collapse – in an instant, how, when you let go of a burden, you don’t lose it at all, it lies in a different way, giving rise to another responsibility, also this film is about the fear of death and how it transforms depending on the situation in which a person exists.
About the next “luxury” adaptation of the name for the Russian rental even do not want to talk. As for the film, after the trailer, there were no special hopes, but the cast (Comer, Waterston, Cumberbatch, Strong) was very impressive, and therefore decided to get acquainted. Actually, the main problem here is in the direction and script, and the second is surprising even because the book is based on it. Scenario here creates the feeling that the concept of the short film stretched for a full meter (thanks to the film is only 95 minutes, not 2 hours, and it looks long). There are not so many events in the film, and the bulk of the dense mass occurs in the first 40-50 minutes (just the most interesting), and then there is stagnation, repetitions of flashbacks, which only delay the timing and do not really reveal the character and do not carry a special semantic load except for banal memories of familiarity with banal phrases. Everything is quite simple, but the eye is pleasant, including good shooting in nature.
Director-debutant Mahalia Belo diligently tries to diversify the action - there are really strong individual scenes, excellent work with sound, an attempt to create a certain aura and tension. But for the whole film creative passion and skill director was clearly not enough. There are no complaints to the actors – everyone, including Jodie, plays great and it is a pleasure to admire the golden Britons. It is a pity that Benedict and Mark have only small episodes, but Waterston has a bigger role and the character is lively and charming. In general, it turned out to be a boring and rather mundane survival drama with elements of a thriller. But the film has some successful moments and excellent cast, and, in general, from idleness or because of the presence of a favorite artist (artist), you can watch it, but it is absolutely not necessary.
6.5 out of 10