Let's Sin

Country: Turkey

Original title: Itirazim Var (lit. I have an objection)

Director: Onur Ünlü

Year: 2014

A man is shot in the mosque during morning prayer. Unhappy with how the Police is handling the investigation, feeling some obligation towards his community and being very curious by nature, the mosque's imam starts looking for the culprit on his own. Of course, the case turns out to be more complex than it seemed at the beginning, the protagonist keeps meeting dead end after dead end (read: he solves several unrelated cases because his leads are misleading) and in the meantime he becomes a target of some unidentified people as well as one of the suspects. Not to mention his family problems haven't exactly gone for holidays either.

Let's Sin feels like a pretty formulaic detective black comedy, but somehow - I still haven't figured out why - it isn't one. The reason I came to this conclusion is because it had an ending typical for this genre and it felt completely out of place. Something about the movie made me anticipate that the formula will be broken and when I read online reviews I see I wasn't the only one. But regardless what it was that gave me such idea, the movie has the mood of detective black comedy and it's great because it's a genre that is horribly underexploited in recent popular cinema. Maybe it was my hunger for movies of that sort and such humor that made me enjoy it very much and remember it fondly despite several very obvious and major flaws.

The film biggest strength is the main protagonist, Selman Bulut. He is a very interesting - or even intriguing - and immediately likable character. He's a middle-aged man who tried many things in his life before he finally became an imam: we learn he used to serve in the army, he was an artist, he's good at boxing (which we get to see) and well versed in world literature. He's a firm believer, no doubt, but at the same time he's very practical and flexible, sardonic and witty. He's very unusual and at the same time he's a perfectly common man and this is just one example of contradicting traits he combines in a believable way. It's difficult not to love his comments and remarks and his struggle to unearth the truth is what keeps You engaged all the time. He doesn't mind running the streets or using somewhat controversial methods to achieve his goal and it's all fun to see.

The general outline of the story is significantly above average too. It's filled with many good and fresh ideas, however, it can get a bit messy when it comes to details. Light and heavy mood are balanced well, humor is dosed generously and usually in the right places and the pacing is fine too. It's a quite dynamic movie in which more than enough happens to keep You entertained. Background score is really nice too and it highlights the mood the way I feel it should be done.

Unfortunately, Let's Sin has a drawback I already mentioned and it's very difficult to overlook - it has a rather poor ending. When everything was finally revealed it was somehow anti-climatic and I felt cheated. It turned out that the main protagonist has solved the case off-screen and just summarized it in the final scene when he faced the culprit. I understand that it's normal and to a certain degree even desirable for such movies to mislead the audience a bit. But the trick is to show the real clues in such a way that the viewer won't realize their significance, to hide them between some red herrings. Not to leave them out completely and then pretend they have been laying under viewer's nose all the time.

And as I've already written, it didn't match the movie at all. It confused me so much I was even wondering if it wasn't some sort of a spoof. Something like the final part of Murder by Death, only much more subtle and downplayed. But the culprit's motives and backstory were dead serious and hardly a suitable subject for jokes of any sort. So I assume it was simply badly written.

To sum it up Let's Sin would be a near perfect film if only somebody worked on the script a bit more. Everything else is really great but of course I can't guarantee that everyone will find it charming enough to outweigh flows in storytelling as I did.

The Guide

Country: Ukraine
Original title: Povodyr
Director: Oles Sanin
Year: 2014

In early 1930's ten-year-old American boy, Peter Shamrock, moves to the Soviet Union with his father, an engineer wholeheartedly believing in the superiority of communism and wishing to devote his work to the good of the people. They plan to settle there for good, but soon naïve and idealistic American gets caught between political schemes and selfish abuse of power and Peter is left on his own in an unknown and not so friendly country. He survives with a help of a blind minstrel with whom he sets on a journey through hell on Earth – Ukraine hit by the Great Hunger and Stalinist repressions.

I find it very difficult to decide how I really feel about this movie. It touches many important issues and I appreciate it for that. But somehow it failed to have a proper impact on me. Something about it is too bland and too off-colour and I'm not sure what it is. It's really hard to explain why this well-made film with an interesting and important story feels so average and dull. But I'll try.

First possible reason is the fact that I was simply expecting something else. Knowing what Ukrainian Holodomor was and how painfully realistic Eastern European cinema can be, I prepared myself for an emotionally devastating film. Actually I was hesitant whether to see it or not, not sure if I can deal with it. However, to my surprise, The Guide wasn't even partly as heavy as I anticipated it to be. Great Hunger isn't the centre of the story, only a distant background. In fact, people who don't know about it themselves may not realise what's going on in that background and how significant it is. Instead, the film focuses on the blind minstrels, who are pictured as not only the keepers but also (and most importantly) incarnation of Ukrainian folklore, culture and national identity.

For some reasons, it wasn't a bad decision. I'm sure it was easier to weave a proper story around a minstrel, who is a quite strong and interesting character than it would have been if the makers decided to picture some starving common folk. Also, it's a fact that Stalin and his government put a lot of conscious effort into destroying ethnic identity and cultural heritage of all peoples they had any power over and it's certainly a story worth telling. But the way it was done in The Guide somehow feels wrong. I'm a person who's ready to put destroying someone's identity and physically killing somebody in one category. I'm a person who given the choice between saving human life and saving a piece of art or a historical document probably wouldn't be able to decide without hesitation. But I cannot easily accept a film that makes a fuss over a relatively small bunch of blind singers when the entire nation is literally starving to death. Some estimate that close to ten million people died in one year and cannibalism was commonplace. In a famine that was man-made, not a natural disaster. I felt those people and events deserved some more attention.

In other words, The Guide's makers' choice what to highlight and what to just sketch wasn't the best. It feels improper from a moral standpoint but more importantly it hinders watching experience as well. The film is set in a time and place where one of the most gruesome events in recent history was taking place and yet it feels like an average drama - it keeps You in a serious mood but fails to actually touch You or make You care.

Second possible reason I didn't like this film that much is because it too consciously wants to make a certain point and promote a certain case. I strongly suspect that The Guide was made primarily to promote Ukraine in the world and show how much it suffered from Russia. Sure, it's nothing bad for a film to have a clear message and filmmakers are free to share whatever ideas and thoughts are on their minds but I prefer it less obvious and more subtle. I find it annoying when a message is shouted loudly at me, even the one I wholeheartedly agree with. I find it even more annoying when I can see too clearly through filmmaker's strategy and I can't help thinking that placing young American boy at the centre of the story was nothing but a coldly calculated move meant to emotionally engage target audience.

But of course, The Guide has several good points as well. Since it's made for an international audience, it's easy to watch. It's not that different from average Hollywood drama, at least compared to average European film. It doesn't bother me either way because I'm used to many cinematic styles, but I know there are people who have problems watching foreign movies which differ too much from what they are used too. Action flows quite smoothly and it can be really engaging. I certainly wasn't bored when I was watching the movie (I just had mixed feelings afterwards). It is good technically and visually. There is one scene with a bit awkward special effects but other than that The Guide looks really well. Outdoors in particular are pretty stunning.

Overall it's a decent film. It's worth giving it a try, but I can't really say I recommend it.

Aldnoah.Zero

Country: Japan

Director: Ei Aoki

Year: 2014 (first cour) / 2015 (secon cour)

In an alternative universe part of humanity colonized Mars in the 1970s and turned against their home planet shortly after. In 2014 young Martian princess visits Earth as a goodwill ambassador, but right after her arrival she becomes a target of a terrorist attack. Outraged Martians immediately break a 15-year old ceasefire and attack Earth with all they've got. Which is a lot, since they're in possession of superior technology far surpassing anything forces of Earth can send against them.

I'd say it's a decent premise (though technically any premise is decent if one can handle it) and after watching the first episode I thought that maybe Aldnoah.Zero actually deserved all the attention it was getting. It didn't seem like it will be really mature and serious, but there was a big chance it will be quite intense and entertaining. Plus I haven't seen anything putting good old Mars to use in a while, so I liked the idea. 

After two or three more episodes, most of the main cast was introduced and I found it really promising. Well, maybe the characters weren't really interesting on their own, but they had a potential and there was plenty of room for development. And most importantly they were interesting as a set – bunch of people with various backgrounds, involved in the outburst of war in different ways, with different goals and priorities. They were gathered by chance and had to cooperate, at least temporarily, in order to survive. From the start, there were some hidden tensions and promise of interesting relationships and interactions.

But then the show creators decided that it would be really cool if Aldnoah.Zero was actually all about two arch enemies and their inevitable clash and started pushing the action in that direction, against its natural flow. This is what made this otherwise promising anime end up as quite average and hardly exciting – forcing upon it a formula it had no resources to realize. 

Kaizuka Inaho is an introvert but a very reliable Earthian boy in a final year of his military training. Slain Troyard is also an Earthian, but he has been serving the Martian princess for the last few years. His father was someone important and was doing important stuff and had important friends and something important happened, so Slain had his life saved by the princess, but nobody cared to properly explain what was all that about. Anyway when those two were just parts of a bigger story, it was really fine. Slain, in particular, was quite intriguing with his potentially conflicting loyalties and every time he made an appearance I got excited, anticipating how his presence will influence the situation. But none of them had what it takes to be the main protagonist in this kind of show. Placing almost entire weight of the story on them was a huge mistake.

There's nothing that makes pitching them against each other particularly appealing. They aren't natural enemies. They don't really have any conflicting interests or radically different ideals. The only reason they didn't end up in the same team was because Inaho didn't feel like making friends with Slain when they first met. Well, okay, he actually acted like a total asshole and Slain had all the right to be seriously pissed about that time. But they didn't even used that. They were put in opposing camps by 'tragic' circumstances. But since they weren't allies or friends to begin with, parting of their paths wasn't very thrilling either. To put it simply, there wasn't even an ounce of the chemistry great rivals are supposed to share. It was just dull and totally unnecessary.

Basically, everything about this show goes wrong after Inaho and Slain meet which is frustrating because it was quite an anticipated moment. The shift isn't immediately evident, and the first cour is really decent till the end, but it eventually takes its toll. The second cour is just weak and while I certainly wasn't forcing myself to watch it, I didn't really care what will happen to anybody either. Everything that was really interesting about other characters was resolved in the first cour and after that they were all degraded to plot devices and comic relieves. There is some talk about what really brought the enmity between Mars and Earth and why the war started, but it's just for the sake of appearances. It's supposed to make You believe that this show actually addresses some serious matters, when, in fact, entire conflict, political and social issues behind it remain a background as flat and unconvincing as a landscape painted awkwardly on a sheet in amateur theatre. We never even get to see Mars.

Overall Aldnoah.Zero is a show above average, but only because average isn't actually good. I'm sure a lot of people will enjoy it, but I neither had particularly great fun watching it (especially the second cour) nor will I remember it for too long.

And now a closing quiz:

Why Mizusaki cannot get a date?

a) because she's a freaking soldier and an officer and she doesn't have time

b) because she has a bitch of a superior who never misses a chance to lower her self-esteem

c) because she's a closeted lesbian masochist and has a crush on her superior

Post the correct answer in comments to win Martian invasion.

Miasto 44

Country: Poland

Title translation: City 44 (literally) / Warsaw 44

Director: Jan Komasa

Year: 2014

Movies about WW2 are plenty in the world and they are plenty in Poland. At least one is released every year and in the last five we were treated to about twenty new Polish films dealing with the war or its direct aftermath. So while You may suspect that I am prejudiced in favour of this movie – I'm a Pole and Warsaw is my city after all – keep it in mind that plenty others constantly try to emotionally blackmail me into liking them and fail. If I had to recommend just one Polish movie about WW2 from everything ever made, Miasto 44 would definitely get short-listed. And the reasons are as follows:

It's a solid war drama that's engaging to watch. It's very tragic and devastating, but paradoxically it's not really heavy or dark. It's not one of those movies that You appreciate and praise but shift uncomfortably in Your chair during screening, force Yourself to endure at some parts and probably will never watch again. Miasto 44 is entertaining. It feels weird to write something like this about a movie depicting agony of the entire city, but it's difficult to find another word. It's not fun in any way and contents is rather gruesome and yet it's surprisingly easy to watch and re-watch.

It's very appealing visually. Miasto 44 is a high-budget production and it shows in every minute of it. There are plenty of spectacular sequences, huge outdoor sets and lots of special effects. But probably because the director and the producer had to work very hard to get all those money – it took them eight years to gather necessary funds – they've never allowed themselves to waste them on pointless flashiness and certainly not on historically inaccurate flashiness. Costumes are just superb and extra care was given to all military equipment (You would be surprised how rare it is in films about WW2). Camera work is also good, truly worthy of Polish cinematographic school.

Even though it's entertaining and spectacular, Miasto 44 is not the kind of movie that tries to sell You any bullshit about war. It's painfully honest about how it looks and what it does to people and it shows many things most commercial films conveniently ignore. Most prominently shell shock and other war-related traumas, which I rarely see depicted realistically in high budget war movies. Here You can see people experiencing them all the time, from civilians just standing in the streets after big explosion, trying to comprehend what happened, to one of the heroines suffering from heavy panic attack while travelling through the sewers (one of the strongest scenes in my opinion, shot as if it was a part of a horror movie) and finally to main protagonist reduced to an empty shell after he narrowly escapes ambush in which his troop is massacred only to witness his family executed with other civilians. For a long time, he doesn't speak or react to anything and is just pulled by his girlfriend from place to place.

Miasto 44 has very human protagonists. In fact, so human, that it caused quite a controversy, as many people felt offended by the fact that main heroes did not conform to the idealistic image of spotless patriots. They've been called selfish, irresponsible and most of all immature and some felt they weren't heroic enough. But I really liked that approach. I liked it that the movie dared to show people who really didn't understand what they are getting themselves into and who got easily crushed under the weight of what was happening around them. Normal teenagers, many of whom joined the conspiracy simply because their friends were already in and who just went with the flow on many occasions. Some took the notion of Polish honor very seriously and were ready to sacrifice everything, and some prioritized their own and their loved ones' survival and didn't hesitate to desert or lie. It's extremely credible and easy to sympathize with.

Miasto 44 balances realistic depiction of events with subjective, emotional perspective very well. Before shooting Jan Komasa (the director) studied the subject really deeply. He read many survivor's diaries and memoirs and other literature and forced all leading cast to do the same (I heard he also told them to read books from the period that he felt their characters would be reading). He also had help from many institutions like Warsaw Uprising Museum, combatants organizations, historical recreation groups and others, that were involved in making the film. So while the main protagonists' story is original as a whole, many incidents really happened to someone and some conversations really took place. Several scenes recreate archive pictures from that time. But Miasto 44 is by no means a dry historical chronicle. It is in fact, all about emotions of main heroes, so don't be surprised, if a scene of first kiss that takes place in the middle of fighting looks as if it was part of a musical, with bullets literally dancing around kissing couple and during already mentioned scene in the sewers the walls are really closing on the terrified heroine, threatening to crush her. Komasa took not only the facts out of those diaries but also narrative dynamics. It's visible in the use of slow motion and editing. There is one scene that has a lot of build-up and then ends before anything actually happens, exactly the way war survivors tend to tell their stories - suddenly stopping when they reach difficult and painful part.

Miasto 44 is a very modern film. It accurately depicts 1944, but it doesn't try to pretend to come from that year itself. It was made by a very young director (24 when he started working on the movie, 32 when it got released) and mainly for a young audience, so it uses language of modern cinema and is not in the slightest discreet about it. That subjective, emotive perspective and mixing many styles is part of it and it's particularly evident in the soundtrack – a mixture of typical instrumental music (original score), classical pieces (including XVI German madrigal), plenty of songs popular in 1930. and 1940. but also some hits from 1960. and even a dubstep piece. Basically, Komasa used anything he felt matched and highlighted the mood. Actually many people were shocked by it and didn't appreciate it, but I think it was a good choice.

And lastly, I'm sure You could have guess it already from what I've written so far, but let me stress it anyway: Miasto 44 is spectacular, but it doesn't try to be epic or epic-didactic. There are no moving lengthy speeches, no cinematic acts of heroism that people point out and tell You “look, this is how You're suppose to defend Your country!”. Everyone is already fed up with this. Miasto 44 doesn't make a saints or even particularly noble people out of its protagonists. It doesn't judge things for You. It doesn't try to teach You history and certainly doesn't force any specific interpretation of events on You. It just shows You a story.

I would like to write more, but I think it might be boring for You, so lets end here, with one of my favourite scenes, that illustrates most of the points mentioned above. Polish DVD has English subtitles (most new movies have), but I failed to catch them and added my own instead. Just switch  on subtitles in YouTube.