Our audience has so many prejudices about our cinema that we no longer believe in our native cinema. However, Russian screenwriters, actors and directors are not translated on earth!
The genre of “catastrophe film” for modern Russian cinema is new. But as you know, beginners are lucky. The Metro tape is a direct confirmation of this. The film was successful. I can be proud of our cinema. How's the classic? He's awake! Yes, that's right!
You watch this film, and you understand that everyone who had a hand in the creation of the film, conducted a titanic work. Everything was important here. Grand scale, complex scenery, pavilions ...
The cast was no less pleased. Magnificent Svetlana Khodchenkova, Sergei Puskepalis, Stanislav Duzhnikov, Elena Panova, Alexei Bardukov and many, many others. The audience had to believe them. And he believed them. Everything is played, I will not fear these words, with filigree precision. Frame by frame... The actor completely gets used to the role of his character. It feels good, and it can't help but rejoice.
The length of the tape is almost two hours. But you don't pay much attention to that. There's a couple of times when you think the credits are coming, the ending is tragic and that's it. But that's not gonna happen. The film keeps from beginning to end.
Traditionally, I want to focus on the work of composers and musicians. Yuri Poteenko was able to write the necessary melodies and musical themes. Bravo! Special thanks to the team Bi-2 for the final track Prayer, which very organically fit into the atmosphere of the film.
That's it, I have nothing to add. I am again delighted with our cinema, because only WE can make such a large-scale spectacle, only we have such inimitable actors who can convey such emotions that no American actor can convey, and only Our rescuers can so appreciate every life, without looking at their own!
Praise your loved ones!
It is impossible not to watch what is called the “breakthrough of domestic cinema”.
The main character is a nice and kind surgeon from Moscow. He can’t do anything about what his wife cheats on him, he can’t say a bad word to his daughter, and because when the first one did not come home from work again, and the second one snorted in the morning and went through the subway to school, he only had to grab a briefcase from the car and follow his child. But there was a terrible thing in the subway.
Nothing supernatural could be shown to shout "this is a masterpiece of cinema." They showed an angry ruthless crowd in panic, careless Russian employees working through their sleeves, the problem of fathers and children, the problem of reincarnation of the personality in a difficult situation, and the real character in the struggle for survival - nothing so new, in principle, but simply qualitatively and skillfully presented.
First, special effects. I did not understand why it was necessary for the driver to brake so, but otherwise the disaster would not have happened. The crash itself was painted / filmed qualitatively, realistically: I immediately remembered the “Destination Point”, only without an abundance of blood and torn legs / arms.
Second, actors and heroes. “Out” would send only Khodchenkova: pretentiously, terribly pretentious: the realism in her image is zero; no bitch, no loving wife – no one in fact, and this smile on her face in the end – horror. One of the worst roles of Hodchenkova in my memory. And soon she will see it in the Wolverine!? The confrontation between the heroes of Puskepalis and White liked. The bitterness of the situation of the first and his feelings when they met there, on the subway, feelings of hopelessness, resentment are conveyed classily. He's sorry. And I would give a bream to Hodchenkova's heroine at the end. The second is a solid businessman who accidentally got into the same subway, clings to and fights for his life, ruthlessly treating the bulk of people, but treats these two, especially the daughter of the mistress, with warmth. The girl herself played well. The young couple who formed there, during the disaster, are naively complete, but such heroes are in any American film, and we should also have! The heroine Panova liked, and her "tied up" at the end shows that big falls change people.
Third, the B-2 soundtrack. Great!
In general, it turned out to be a good, high-quality film. I wouldn’t say that a very stressful, but long time of 2 hours passed quickly and without annoying. Among other slags of the Russian film industry, of course, looks with a lot of optimism, but also, think about it, because our just rarely take on such genres. I’d like to see what kind of comedy this director made. But for now, we have the right to evaluate what is. And that "is" very much nothing.
One of the reviewers noted that “Metro” is an absolute breakthrough of Russian cinema, and it is difficult to disagree with this. Do you want my opinion?
Metro is a Russian cinema of a new level, a new mentality. Cinema, in which we moved away from the beaten, monotonous plots with cops' disassemblies, bandits and crime, soap series and other consumer goods with bureaucratic lawlessness.
Quite an interesting question asked the young man in his review, pointing to us, and what is the idea of this film?
Have you ever watched a foreign film that smells like an idea? I don't. People just make different films on different topics, trying to surprise their audience with some simple plot. The idea was in films of the past century. In today’s only effect and its extraordinary.
Let’s stop blaming the domestic manufacturer. The movie is really worth it. This is definitely a breakthrough...
I would like to note that this is an absolute breakthrough in Russian cinema. What America has been filming for years, Russia is just beginning to unsurely do. A disaster film of this magnitude for us is really a curiosity, so it was very justified to say so “fear” for the quality of shooting, the script and so on.
As soon as there was even a hint of making a movie "Metro", I immediately began to follow the developments. And, of course, the next step I took was to go to the movies to see for myself whether it was a fatal failure or a remarkable one. To my immense joy came the second: "Metro" and really good in almost everything.
In the center of the plot is a family on the verge of collapse. The main character cheats on her husband, but in the meantime can not decide on a final break. Her tossing and groaning between two men look more comical than believable and painful. Here to the heroine Svetlana Khodchenkova is my main claim. I’m not happy with her performance or the character. By the way, in one of the interviews Hodchenkova says that running in heels in Moscow was the most difficult test for her. Well, it is immediately obvious that all the forces were thrown at this, and the acting game was not found.
After the main characters fall into the epicenter of events, then with each frame to watch them more interesting and interesting. The plot keeps in suspense, the panic of people is plausible, the intensity of passions grows every second. Male roles were given to powerful and strong men: Sergei Puskepalis and Anatoly Bely play harmoniously, each has his own hero and his own story. One fights to save his daughter and tries to cope with the betrayal of his wife. Another struggles not only with the elements, but also with the realization that his beloved woman does not love him. They escape from the water, from fear and despair, while trying not to lose their humanity. And in the end, the craving for life, trust and love — all in combination — points them to salvation.
"Metro" is a worthy and respectable film. The creators did their best: they did a great job on the project, so watch, enjoy and draw conclusions on your own. I hope they will be positive.
I started to watch the movie from different opinions about him. I decided to find my opinion on this. Set aside time. I saw it.
At the beginning of the film, the position was negative. Like, ' here is not so' and ' here is not so'... but then captured, so that at dangerous moments with them all experienced.
Special effects
In general, the method of production reminded 'Night Watch', something closely related. Some 'chips' even very close. But still to Hollywood special effects we somehow far away, you can even praise, but not zealous!
6 out of 10
Acting game
Not bad in general. Especially for the average viewer, the game is quite natural. But still, the eyes did not always reflect the atmosphere prevailing in the film for many actors. I really liked the box! Of course, it is clear at once that Elena Panova, lives a completely different life, and the life of an alcoholic is alien to her, she worked it out as honestly as possible to the end, but she showed that the life of Galochka was not always reduced to a morning glass', there are even some aesthetic qualities in it.
6 out of 10
Setting
I think that the whole problem of Russian cinema is the omission of important things. I noticed a lot of jambs in the story. Disregard for the laws of physics, or the transmission of images of Russian officials, etc.
I also thought there were not enough parallel lives. Before stories. Same grandma with a dog or a metal worker. Because of this, I already knew who would live and who would not.
And more... There is good music at the end and everyone is fine. The fact that a huge number of people died is not important. The main characters survived. Because of this:
5 out of 10
Plot
The plot is very interesting, touching and exciting. But! Why is it that a changing woman is always taken as a basis, and in the end everything is fine with her? Naturally, it is clear that she suffered a lot. Yeah. But when she was standing between two men at the end, she was thinking!? Women in such situations immediately understand what they need, because of whom she had all her experiences, for whom her heart hurt.
I was also saddened by the conflict between men. In such situations, the most important thing is cohesion, not tug of the blanket. And their skirmishes were very difficult to feel the film.
8 out of 10
Output
You can watch the movie, I might recommend it to someone someday. But for me to change something after watching, this did not happen. Once to see, somewhere to cry, and nothing more.
Evaluation of the entire film:
Honestly, I don’t even know where to start. Probably positive. Still, from the film “Metro” did not have much to expect, because at present, any release of Russian cinema is subject to doubts: is it worth spending time on this? I gave this movie a 7 because I didn’t disappoint. Of course, there were moments worth criticizing, but about them later.
It is worth noting, perhaps, that “Metro” was shot completely not in the spirit of “Destination” or any other American thriller; on the contrary, the film is saturated with incomparable “Russianness”, and all the characters are quite harActor and cause real emotions. First of all, the film is based on the drama - no, not the flooding of the subway tunnel with the waters of the Moscow River, but on the drama of social, spiritual or, if you want, moral: the cuckold husband finds himself in a flooded space next to his wife's lover, young Alice and Denis, on the contrary, find love tested by heavy obstacles (certainly, a winning story!), and a kind of Russian "Gala", not discouraged even when there is nothing to breathe, at the end of the film concludes: quit with alcohol.
I would like to note the performance of actors, first of all Katherina Spitz and Alexei Bardukov. Of course, their story is inserted into the film to add a kind of romance, but the actors wonderfully and touchingly performed their roles, touched the living (honestly, most of all for them and worried). I also liked the heroine of Elena Panova, who has achieved nothing in life and is still a strong woman, with her simple wisdom.
But the torment Svetlana Khodchenkova to assess, unfortunately, can not. Half of the film she rushed headlong in heels, not knowing who and why. As a result, she "heroically" rejected the lover with whom she had spent the night so nicely before these events, and returned to her husband, who showed himself in this role only at the end of the film. I didn't like the trio, it was stupid and predictable. And in general, the film abounded in petty nonsense, when the characters wanted to kill for abnormal behavior.
Next. Special effects at the moment when the water broke through the walls of the tunnel inside, spoiled the whole scene, giving it a ridiculous, even comical look, as if not the thriller was filmed, and “Night Watch”. The splashing water looked unnatural, falling passengers - even more so.
Although the nerves “Metro” rubbed well, in which the unpredictable behavior of the elements played a role. The plot is well structured - moments of calm competently alternate with moments of strong tension, when you can expect any turn of events (foo-foo-foo, my favorite couple this turn did not hurt much!). Well, in the end, of course, pleased with the soundtrack from B-2, well in harmony with the finale of the film.
But even despite the undoubted advantages, the film “Metro” left me with a double impression that the creators worked hard and eventually overstepped the stick in some places, and in some places did not reach the proper level (take at least the same special effects), trying to cover the flaws with a dynamic plot. But what's the point? If you do not find fault with the little things, the film “Metro” is quite suitable for viewing. At least for one.
I was pleasantly surprised to see this new film of a completely new direction in Russian cinema. In my memory, this is the first disaster film shot in Russia with the participation of Russian actors, which we had the opportunity to watch at the general box office.
The film is very realistic. I couldn’t even write a review right away until I saw the movie. I could not believe that such a movie could be shot in the conditions of robots of the Moscow metro (!). And only after watching the filming, I sighed with relief: with the Moscow metro, it turned out that everything was fine, and our main characters “swimmed” in wetsuits in a specially built tunnel.
As for the actors, they were pleasantly surprised. For me personally, the opening in the film “Metro” was the actress Elena Panova, who played Galka. At first, I didn’t even realize it was Panov. A more radical transformation from her standard roles into a typical character of the capital’s railway stations under the name “Galya”.
In general, the film touches on different aspects of people’s lives: this is the attitude of workers to their duties, that is, negligence, and the problem of building a city without taking into account the interests of society, and typical conflicts within the capital’s family. Against the backdrop of all this, a family drama unfolds. But we see the main message of the director at the end of the film: whatever happens between people, a common tragedy unites and makes people stronger. After that, they appreciate each other even more. Irina makes a choice in favor of her family. The plot of the film holds the soul to the end and causes a real sense of empathy and concern for the fate of our heroes.
I really liked the graphics. Insanely interesting and beautiful look drops of water and fragments of broken glass windows of the subway car, and filmed all this in slow motion filming. I can’t imagine the effort it took to create these effects (!)
And, of course, special thanks for the final song “Prayer”, which was performed by the group B-2. As the band members themselves said, “The main motif of the song is the value of human relationships in any, even the most extreme situations; it is a prayer that everything will work out for us, our loved ones will always be with us, and that love will not go anywhere.”
Therefore, based on the above, I cannot put lower than
Most impressive was the “calculated time” of flooding: the ring line is three minutes, the entire central part is ten. Powerful. I wonder, really?
Traffic jams were not surprising, of course, but on the screen it still looked impressive. And in general, the city is filmed very beautifully, colorfully. I wouldn’t bother with complicated underground scenes either, except perhaps for a key episode. "Clash with the abyss," so to speak. Not inspiring. It's unnatural, no matter what.
But did not stint on the palette, painting the passenger contingent. You did the right thing. The variety of characters (including “random passers-by”) is the key to the realism of the screen action.
That I didn't like. I did not understand why the real metro stations were “diluted” (by the way, and in the literal sense of the word too) by fictional ones. Target? Or is it better to look for a reason?
The main characters. Wonder how good S. Puskepalis and A. White are. First! “Didn’t your mom teach you to chew, Gena?” is a great episode. And the “stress check in the network” through the small size of the creature, mistakenly called a dog, also remembered. But gradually, the real activity, energy, creativity, if you will, of both characters seems to dissolve in the mass of water that they have to overcome in the company of less remarkable personalities. Alas! In the end, the guys will come up with nothing better than to slide into a stupid banal muzzle "because of the woman" with whom one of them sleeps and the other allegedly loves. Boring ...
The moral qualities of the above-mentioned “baba”, in my opinion, are exhaustively characterized by the situation described, and her rare ingenuity is clearly demonstrated to us in the episode with a phone call. Needless to say, a prize. At the same time, I note that I have no questions about S. Khodchenkova as an actress.
Another thing is that the proposed version of the final in the light of the above seems completely unacceptable and frankly intermediate. One said what he should have said, though perhaps not in those words, and the other. The other just kept quiet again. That's it! My daughter is happy!
In fact, I was also pleased, although more technical side of the film than its semantic content. From here.
7 out of 10
After watching the movie, I had a double impression. On the one hand, it can be seen that among all the slag that Russian cinema throws at us, this is a very good movie. On the other hand, if we judge the quality of films on a global scale, then the film is clearly not up to a good rating. I will try to focus on the shortcomings. Let’s talk about everything in order.
1. The script is simple. We literally immediately immersed in the subway, not allowing to meet the heroes. We will learn about the heroes after the disaster. Now I will not go into the details of the plot interweaving, I can only say that it seems that everything is docked correctly, and some questions still exist. After watching the film, you will notice some of the stupidities that the characters do. Such plot twists almost do not cut eyes, but still there.
2. Actors. This is a separate conversation. The atmosphere of the film was ruined by the actors. The actors are famous. Some of them are seen in comedies, TV series, so they are not taken seriously. Even the death of one of the heroes did not make me feel sorry, even though from his mouth we heard a fiery speech about my family. This is supposed to hurt, but alas, did not catch. This is probably because we know very little about heroes. Perhaps the only heroes we really care about are our father (Sergei Puskepalis) with his daughter (Anfisa Vistingausen) and a couple of Denis (Alexei Bardukov) with Alice (Katherina Spitz). By the way, Katerina Spitz here played above all praise. Undoubtedly, this is her best role. I think she was one of the few who brought the film to a high level.
3. Editing and special effects.
I haven’t seen any amazing effects. Yes, it was done at the level, but it is not 2013. The scene of the crash of cars looks generally good, but the installation in this place is disgusting. The moment when all people fall is recorded in a low FPS, because of which the video slows down, a slide show is obtained. In my opinion, this is simply unacceptable. The editing and special effects of the rest of the film are on level. Cameras flying by the road with a traffic jam look great.
4. Atmosphere.
Like I said, the atmosphere was ruined. The film is not seen as a full-blown tragedy. It looks like it’s just a small problem in the subway. In theory, the victims showed us, wounded people, and severe trials. I think the problem is that we didn’t get every character. We are immediately shown the disaster, without going into the details of the personal lives of the heroes.
Nevertheless, it was possible to remove the disaster. Wounded and killed, the grief of loved ones, the indifference of other people, the desire to profit from the misfortunes of people. It's all well shown. Although it causes some misunderstanding the fact that some “bad” heroes the director does not punish.
Result.
In general, it turned out to be quite good, sometimes even too “good”, albeit with a rating of 16+, a film that gives a ray of hope for our cinema. Like any film, there are many controversial moments in Metro, but this picture is head over all that is shot in Russia.
This is certainly better than usual, but it does not reach the foreign standard.
6.5 out of 10
Is everything bad in Russian cinema? No, we still have brains and talent!
I wanted to leave my review of the film, which: 1. pleasantly surprised - there is still gunpowder in the gunpowder, 2. kept the whole session in suspense, 3. forced to admire the actors and empathize with the heroes, their humanity, 4. touched with excellent camera work, 5. admired excellent directing (I had never heard of this director before), 6. struck with special effects (pity that not in 3D filmed), 7. crushed realistic.
$9 million for a disaster movie is minuscule. The average lousy American movie is made for at least 20 million. Therefore, it is doubly disappointing that the film 'Metro' although it beat the budget, but almost did not earn anything. Although everything is obvious: thanks to incompetence, laundering money through cinema, Russian cinema is considered pathetic and miserable. Therefore, the people did not go to the cinemas, considering that this is another murmur in the style of the latest works of Mr. Bekmambetov.
Now the movie. With ' Crew' Mitts compare it incorrectly. Yes, in scale and scope, perhaps. But Mitta shot when there were no graphics, no special effects in sight. 'Metro' But perfectly keeps the viewer realistic, good (not beautiful!), well-coordinated work of actors, thought-out special effects, it was filmed qualitatively and competently (thanks to Astakhov!) and, very important (and sometimes you can not catch in American disasters), human cohesion played on the rupture of the aorta. People survive in the conditions of a disaster: the guy so cherishes the girl he saw only an hour ago - they even did not have time to meet, risks their lives for her - it is expensive and will not leave anyone indifferent. Two adult male rivals: one is a cheated husband, the other is his wife's lover. We were on the same train, trying to survive together. That hatred, and the desire to survive, is also worth a price. Where in America’s multimillion-dollar movie disasters are those feelings so beautifully conveyed that only Russians can understand? Nowhere!
Someone read about the courier Misha that, they say, implausible behavior in front of rolling on him wagon. Why do you measure them all by one measure? Each hero has his own character, which in a particular situation can be revealed completely unexpectedly. Well, the courier Misha could not grab the railings of the car, and bounce to the wall of the tunnel, clinging to the cables and waiting so for the passage of the sad car. Misha is a kind person, but a mummy and a smudge in life. In a state of shock, it is even more slow.
And it is not necessary, in principle, to shout with foam at the mouth that in real life such a disaster in the subway would instantly kill everyone. Yes, you don't have to wait until the contact rail touches the water. If such a volume of water actually hit the unenergized tunnel, the victims would be anyone who touched the metal parts of the composition. But it's a movie, gentlemen! And Mitta, and in ' The Day After Tomorrow' there are also details that would not really let anyone survive. But the movies are made and admired.
About the actors. Khodchenkova didn’t quite like it, but it’s subjective – I just don’t like this actress (but I’m not saying that she’s untalented). I did not see in her performance the mass of experiences that should have been. I don’t like White as a person or an actor, but that’s my taste. Frankly liked the work of Katerina Spits, Alexei Bardukov, Lena Panova, Stanislav Duzhnikov, Vladimir Sterzhakov (an eminent metro chief), Sergei Sosnovsky (' what kind of water is there? if it is wrong'). But the appearance of Makarevich’s son in the role of a digger, in my opinion, is a dubious step. I'm not impressed, in a word.
So, ' Metro' I advise everyone to watch, even those who do not believe in Russian cinema. Perhaps, after watching, you will begin to treat individual works and directors a little differently.
With each new film, I feel worse and worse about Russian cinema in general, although there are, as they say, rare and pleasant moments. But, pleasant moments in the film "Metro" I did not find. Let's go in order:
1. Scenario mediocrity . I hope everyone noticed the actions of the main characters of the tape. The director decided to rush to extremes - the actions of the characters are either paradoxical or so primitive that any sane person begins to doubt their adequacy. (For example, a young man parked in a car in the middle of the road, in the presence of empty parking spaces, and rushed to run with water for his relative, who dies without water, which is unclear for what reasons was turned off, but the genius of our director managed to tie it all together in one thundering with its nonsense chain.)
2. Actors play. Few of the actors really played well, especially struck a healthy man with the character of a 14-year-old girl. Where did you see the prototype of such a man?
3. Physics in the tape. Example: a man rolls a wagon that carries a stream of water. The speed of the car is so small that it can turn around and jump on the railing of the car. But no! He does not do this, and the car slowly and confidently, as in the movie Saw, catches up with our well-fed martyr, and he lies under the wheels of his death on his own.
A little bonus movie in good special effects. But, sorry, that’s not the main thing in a good movie. Rating 4 with a stretch for special effects.