Mikaela

I found Mikaela to be a well-crafted thriller with intense pacing and solid performances. However, I was disappointed by the choice to depict the antagonists as "slavic criminals" - a detail that felt unnecessary for the plot and added nothing to the narrative depth.

Ethnic identifiers, especially when linked to villainy, can easily reinforce harmful stereotypes. In recent years, Slavic and particularly Russian characters have frequently been cast as the default "bad guys" in Western media. While this film doesn't explicitly name Russians, the use of "Slavic" as shorthand for violent criminals still contributes to that trend.

Stereotyping entire groups - even subtly - can shape audience perception over time, especially when repeated across genres. It would have been just as effective, and more thoughtful, to portray the criminals without linking them to any nationality or ethnicity.

Art influences culture. I believe filmmakers have a responsibility to consider the implications of the choices they make - even in genre films like this one. I hope future projects will aim to break away from these patterns and offer more balanced representation.

I usually enjoy Spanish thrillers, so I decided to give this one a try - and I liked it more than I expected. A policeman is returning home, promising to spend time with his daughter, when he's suddenly called for a mission. Now he can't go back home and has to save the day.

The film is not only entertaining for its action, but also meaningful, as it brings up some deeper lessons. All the actors are excellent in my opinion, and the director did a great job keeping the tension high throughout.

At the moment I'm writing this review, the film has a score of five, but I think it definitely deserves at least an 8. My impression is that some reviewers tend to give lower scores to European and non-American productions in general. If the same story and execution had come from a film made in the USA, I'm sure it would have scored at least a 6.0.

I'm not saying American productions aren't great - in fact, they're usually the best in the world (and I'm not American). However, I can't understand why European films often receive lower scores, even when they are as solid and enjoyable as this one.

If a movie about a snowstorm could be made without snow, this would be it. Seriously, I don't think the director has ever seen real snow in their life. The landscapes depicting the blizzard look like cheap sets from some old film, and the "snowstorm" is more of a failed special effect than an actual natural phenomenon.

Snow, as a central element of the film, was completely unconvincing: either it was poorly rendered or just entirely unrealistic in its behavior. I don't understand how the director could overlook such important details like the texture of snow or how it actually behaves during a heavy snowstorm. In a real blizzard, everything looks different - the wind knocks everything over, snow piles up in heavy layers - but here, it's all fake.

It's not just a minor detail; it's the core of the film. If you're making a movie about a storm, you should at least pay attention to the snow element instead of abstractly approaching it. I kept watching and wondering how anyone could detach from reality this much.

Overall, the film was a letdown. For some, a snowstorm might just be a bunch of white patches on screen, but for me, it's not like that. Even if the whole plot were perfect, the artificial snow would still ruin it.