Kam motýli nelétají

I had no idea this would turn into a two-hander, a film genre that I'm not particularly keen on. However this one was original enough and the circumstances were edgy enough to overcome any possible boredom.

We see the background to the two leads' lives, which is essential to understand their motivations and interactions later. After an accident that traps both teacher and pupil in a cave complex, these two young men become close during their efforts to get out.

I'm glad to have seen two things. Firstly that there turned out to have been no hanky-panky in the story between the two leads. Secondly that it's emphasised that the urge for a relationship, however fleeting, comes from the younger guy, something that pertains so often in real life.

I didn't know there was an epilogue after the closing titles. I'm going to have a look now. Pretty dumb way of doing it though, I have to say.

This is easily one of my favorite movies that centered around gay characters. Without going into the synopsis too much, I'd rather say about how I feel about this movie.

It's a masterpiece in itself. Even though this is a sequel of some sort to a short film but this movie could very well be a standalone film by itself. And the ending, which is after end credits had rolled deserved to have another follow-up.

As for the movie, I'd say it played on so many levels. But the main important things to take note are knowing about who you are and how you fit in this rather oppressed world where being gay is concerned. That is the major symbolism of the cave. How could you survive in such desperate scenarios in which the world throws at you. And another thing is about overcoming prejudices of others and making presumptions of others. In other words, do not judge a book by its cover.

In terms of the two leads being caiught in the cave, there were several intense moments. And I admit that despite the unusual relationship between the teacher and student I do want them to have some intimate moments; which there were yet those moments were given tasteful treatments. Their performance were excellent and their chemistry was organic. You vouch for them. At the same time, as the movie progressed while they were trapped in the cave it did feel as if all hopes were lost. And with every such moments presented itself I feel morbidly ok about it. They found hope and strength in each orher.

Ultimately, if the cave represents the oppressed world for whom we love then the titular butterfiles represent hope.

The realism can be defined as basic virtue of this precise definition of loneliness, a teen and his parents and their relation, a teacher and his secret love story , a meeting and cohabitation.

The cave remains the powerful symbol of a way to see the life in its basic traits and to try to shape it.

There are two important things you might like to know BEFORE you watched this film.

Firstly, as it has already been pointed out here, don't switch off when the closing credits start rolling: after them, there is an important scene that provides some closure (dots the "i"s and crosses the "t"s). Why the film has been edited this way is anyone's guess but it is rather unfortunate.

Secondly, not many people know that there is a prequel to this film (with the same leading actors), which provides a background story and some depth to this one. It is a short (30 min) film called O otci (About a Father), 2017. If you watch this, you'll know why the relationship between one of the leads and his partner's mother has been strained (the fact is briefly referred to in the opening sequel) and you are likely to have a more multidimentional take on the characters too.

If your expectations are right, you are likely to enjoy this film. You shouldn't expect a high-brow drama, it is a 'feel good' story, which should be very much familiar to the Western audience under the guise of 'Christmas films' while the Eastern Europeans of a certain age will immediately recognise the all-to-familiar 'social fairy tale' screen feature of the Soviet era. Basically, it is teen adventure fiction, and there is nothing wrong about it at all. You don't have to be 16 to enjoy it properly but, as it is with, say, Gulliver's Travels by R. L. Stevenson and Treasure Island by J. Swift, the younger you are, the more you'll enoy them. The closest analogy to Kam motýli nelétají will be J. Verne's Les Enfants du capitaine Grant, better known to the English-speaking audience under the title In Search of the Castaways, though. In fact, it feels like a lot of inspiration for the film comes from this particular Verne's classic oeuvre.

As the laws of this genre dictate, the quest and the adventures take priority. The characters are mostly one-dimentional and, as in any fairy tale, the baddies are just bad while their opponents are just good. You won't see much of a character developments in these stories either, unless the inner conflict between the good and the evern better in each of the 'good' characters is considered. So, by the end of the story, the only transformation you'll see is the already good ones becoming even better. The moral is simple and straightforward, the story-telling is untaxing and relaxed. It is a perfect family movie, which is both safe and highly enjoyable to watch with your kids who are 14+.

The latter posed a certain problem to the script: the coming of age angle of the story would have been more natural if the protagonists had been 14-16 but as they were 19 in the film, some aspects of the younger protagonist's inner drama seemed rather anachronistic. It also created some (very minor) difficulties, as far as the plot is concerned: at 19, the young protagonist is already a young adult, so having his parents summonned to the school because of his academic failures looked odd (would have been pretty normal, should he still be 16 or 17). These minor hickups won't spoil the entertainment though: after all, it is just a modern fairy tale, so don't expect too much plot rationality and realism (a chest of highly practical treasures fortuiously found just at the right time, perfectly drinkable water from the underground pool, an average-sized rucksack that still magically contains a full wardrobe and a pantry, etc). After all, you don't look for realism and rationality in, say, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone or any of the films for the young audience produced at Barrandov Studios in 1970s-1980s, do you?

The film has been shot well and the actors are doing a good job, mostly. Given the natural lack of depth in the characterisations, they don't have a particularly tasking job to do. Jiri Vojta, the older main lead, is doing the best with the material he has. Unfortunately, the other main lead, Daniel Krejcik, is a much weaker actor. It is not that, being 28, he had to play a 19 year old. It is his acting abilities that lack: displaying emotions doesn't come easy to him, nor the result is natural or pleasing. He is not completely disasterous though - he just could and should have been better at basic acting. As he isn't, his protagonist comes out rather unfavourably creating an unintended impression that the actual reason for the universal dislike to Daniel is his being artificial rather than different.

Overall, it is a very enjoyable film, perfect light watching for a family evening.

Thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Story, acting, music, directing, editing and visuals all top notch. This movie is not the stereotypical gay movie that we see these days. Just a good storyline with 2 good actors interpreting what they have been given. Also very easy on the eyes. FY: Do not leave when the credits start rolling as the movie is not finished and things get somewhat wrapped up.

Good 2 hours of entertainment. I highly recommend seeing it. It would also be a good movie for those struggling with belonging and trying to come out to themselves and others. I saw this at a gay film festival in Palm Springs and all those in attendance seem to enjoy it.