User reviews

"The Student" – "(M)uchenik" directed by Kirill Serebrennikov is an attempt to reconsider religious fanaticism in the modern world. The picture is based on the play "Martyr" by German author Marius von Mayenburg and it was adapted to the reality of modern Russia.

In a way the problems touched upon in the film are universal and not connected to one particular religion. An interesting aspect of the film is the constant quoting of the Bible which shows that any religion can become an instrument of aggression. The picture is a sharp and humorous satire. The teachers in the film are very well depicted, they whose heads are full of self contradictory ideas combining Stalinism, Putinism, Communism, Liberalism and religion. The school administration cannot confront a religious fanatic because they themselves do not have any ideas or principles.

When the biology teacher tries to confront Veniamin, she also looks into the Bible, which she interprets in a vulgar and primitive way. The relations between Veniamin and Grigori are interesting; he becomes very close to Veniamin but we see later that Grigori is gay which is the real reason why he becomes his disciple.

The film is shot in a minimalistic way in this low-budget production, but the actors play well and the dialogues are very funny. The ideas of the picture are important, the film has an open end just as our society has an uncertain future with growing extremism and radicalism.

Venya is a teenager with attitude, he is cared for by a single mother who works three jobs to keep body and soul together. Then one day she gets a call from his school saying he is refusing to take part in mixed swimming lessons. She imagines all the reasons why a teenage boy may not want to do such an activity but never thought that it would be against his political convictions. However, he insists that he is religiously motivated and his stance finds traction in the school principle.

As he realises that religion is power so he sets out to control those around him by becoming a sort of walking, talking Bible. The passages he quotes are very subjective and selective but when delivered with absolute conviction seem to carry more weight and their implicit truth appears loaded with spiritual and moral currency. His Nemesis in this is a forward thinking science and biology teacher but he knows he has God on his side.

Now this is taken from the play by Marius von Mayenburg who is German and the original Russian title was '(M)uchenik' which is a play on Russian words in that muchenik is 'martyr' and 'uchenik' is student – and as such is a brilliant title, but would not work in English – hence 'The Student'. The issues of religious control and the like are hot and controversial topics with parallels to way more than Christianity and as such the film has had its critics.

The acting, directing and cinematography are all excellent and the plot is both compelling and urgent for a film that runs just shy of two hours it really does not waste any time – in Russian with good sub titles this is a film that will divide opinion and I think that is no bad thing – so recommended to those who like to have to think about their cinema.

A world-wide vision on the religious fanaticism, since it is not a Russian history, is a history that must be located in some part of the world and in this case it was Russia. From the outset, I have no doubt that Russian cinema is very intense; I am not an expert in the filmography of that country but the last Russian films that I have seen are truly visceral, anchored crudely in reality. This film is 80% masterfully directed in the intensity of its plot. Added to that brilliant baton, the interpretations of the protagonists are superb and the soundtrack is truly exquisite. However, there are two things that I did not like: the photograph could have been sublime due to the subject that was treated and it was not, and the end, after so many minutes of filmic intensity, is diluted with the scene of the school board meeting. Without a doubt, it is a recommendable film, it is a beautiful sample of the contemporary Russian cinematography.

like many Russian contemporary films, it seems be portrait of near reality from East. in fact, it is a puzzle of questions. about school and about teenager crisis, about the use of religion and the answer of Church, about friendship and fear and teachers, about situation of a student as personal struggle for a woman looking defining his life direction. it could be perceived as attack against Chistianity, as satire or as precise reflection of the state of school. but, more important, it has two virtues - the performances - especially the performance of the lead actor and the status of support for reflection about near every day reality. because it gives nothing new. well known facts, the crisis of a teenager, empty head teachers, a revolutionary Biology teacher, her boy friend, a young student looking for love. each as part of a lucid and admirable interrogation. so, an admirable work.

Nowadays Russian cinema is more political than ever. And its political word is not shy, it frankly declares war against either bureaucratic or societal corruption (or both), as we can see in Leviathan, Durak, and this film. But the most dangerous enemy in this war, is the scope of the enemy. If you define the whole corrupt society as something to destroy, who will be your allies in this war? No one, for sure. You're as lonely as Don Quixote in his delusions.

Actually, the idea of "the Holy Bible in a human's body" as a character is striking, strengthened by the undeniable references. The viewers are forced to observe how religious fundamentalism can threaten the society, especially when the people around cannot see the big picture, cannot imagine what will come next and feed the beast naively as if donating to the church.

But as I mentioned above, despite the power of its criticism this movie too is unfortunately flawed with the problem of being incapable of providing solution, like similar others. The film rightfully asks: "This religious fundamentalism is poisoning us! What is the antidote to it?" But the answer is perfectly oxymoronical: "We need idealist individuals, but hopeless at the same time due to their loneliness..."

So, according to me it's clear that these "pessimist-idealist" characters represent the directors themselves. They can foresee what's coming, they want to do something, but when they look around they realize that they don't have anyone to cooperate with. So, disappointed with this loneliness, they get critical of the society much more than the problems the society is experiencing. So, contradictorily, what we as the viewers have in the end is not a motivation for action, but a reflection of the pessimism of the director dictating us to sit and smile cynically at the inevitable self-destruction of the society.

The plot revolves around religious interpretation validity, but just out the shell.However, religion issues are a mere devise to show the detrimental progress of the mind of a boy traumatized for the absence of a father. That father longing, becomes the Father, and the Son religious metaphor that is at the same time took literally by the main character. The boy that is treated as a devote religious man, is never taken seriously as the boy that needs urgently a shrink to disclose the only reason for being ill minded. The pain of Growing without a father and the mother as the remaining culprit, no matter how she cares. The Bible as a textbook. And the Bible as the metaphor of the lacking lessons that a father could had given to his son. Divorce is the apple eaten by the new Adams and Eves of the 21th century.

It is hard to describe this film. A challenging film to make as well. Not like an expensive film with huge cast and graphics. It's a simple drama, a drama that draws a line between two different theories the humans have adapted and followed in the present world. So when a film drags religious as its prime topic, most of those kind of films never received well in the past, says the history. I don't know this film met with any kind of controversy, but all I know is it brought in a wrong religion to tell the story.

I'm not against such kind of concept. But this film was one of those annoying one. It's neither preaching religious nor against. That does not mean a well balanced narration. No, it's not. If you are a believer, you might think it is making some false claims. If you are a nonbeliever, that's a test for your temper. There are many scenes where it could have taken a turn like a normal clichéd film does, but it did not go those ways. Just headed randomly, dragged the runtime of the film to nearly two hours.

The story follows the high school boy Venya, who recently have started to read the Bible. Living with his mother, they have never into the religious stuff. Now he thinks he found his belief, but that does not it, he begins to impact everyone, everything around him. Because of him the school loses its privileges in many sectors. Suddenly he becomes a villain to many eyes, but there's one big backing for him all the way. Then the rivalry between him and the biology teacher heats up. How far it goes and how it all ends told in the remaining parts.

❝I wish he collected stamps or jerked off all the time.❞

Venya's belief in the 2000 year old book reminded me a real person in my life. He almost trusts everything he reads from the books, which were printed decades ago. The science is updated every day. When a book got printed and in the meantime to reach the people, a new theories have already been proved. That's what I argue with him all the time that he's late and learnt old ones. Two millenniums ago, there was no democracy. This religious book made people to follow uniform rules around the world. Now the time is different, where these old texts do not make logic, excluding the moral values it teaches us. So, like saying, don't believe in everything you read is perfectly aplpies here.

The film was adapted from a German play. The entire film shot in a month of time. Most of the cast were first time in front of the camera. There's no complaint about the filmmaking. From cinematography to acting, dialogues, direction, music, all were top class. But you know, the story had not compromised in any one particular path among the two topics it dealt with. Like it keeps poking in the viewer's eyes by not giving what they want. That makes it a one time watchable film. Because, for such storyline and its such ending, who would go back for a second view.

I have waited till the final for some real twist in the tale! It did come, but totally disappointed the way it went on to conclude. But there were a few sub-topics like gay, (school) politics et cetera. Remember, it is a Russian film where the filmmakers have so many restrictions to use the contents. So I understand the way the film had been made. Even though, just an above average film in my opinion. Definitely it is not a bad film. You could like it better than me, but I'm not sure of that. At least it was unique, and what most of the modern Russian films dared to expose the social issues the nation is facing. I won't favour it, but you should not ignore it too. Do some research on it and decide yourself to try it.

6/10

The first DVD I've seen in which there is no menu (e.g. chapters; audio; special features, etc.) at the start. It just started, I was initially worried that subtitling would not be present, but turns out subtitling was actually well done & accurately translated. Script is centered about a high school student (possibly in Moscow, Russia), and his isolation from his schoolmates because his newly developed obsession (or is it devotion) to a literal interpretation of The Bible (literalists don't see it as an interpretation, but as the only direct & unquestioned revelation from God) sets him at odds with everyone including his mom. His actions turn most students/school personnel against him (but not all) disrupting the school. He causes his biology teacher to be confrontational to the point she loses it. He believes a true devotee must be willing to die (martyr) for their place in Heaven. Most Christians (including conservative Russian Orthodox Church members) & everyone else will have Hell (i.e. think William Blake's burning Hell) as their destination. He believes prayer is only honest when done in secrecy/privately; temples/churches & anything equivalent to gold (wealth) are a ticket to Hell. Lots of remarkably unbiased intelligent discourse presenting his pov while he tries to defend himself & change others, including the science/biology teacher who is his main counterpoint. To showcase human debauchery there's full nudity (no sex); excessive consumption; vainness. Not a dry talking heads story, but an engaging, at times amusing (in biology a sex-ed demo with a carrot & condom turns hilarious), dramatic story w/a surprising ending.

There are several issues touched upon in this film; some of them very complex, and others, rather simple. First of all, there are no protagonists in this film. All the characters are flawed to some degree; some are extremely flawed. Also, there is no clear delineation between what is right or what is wrong. If you are religious, you will believe in one set of outcomes; if you are agnostic or atheistic, you will believe in other outcomes. Does God exist? Thomas Tafero wrote about this issue in his book (Amazon.com) called The Defense, where he had to defend his atheistic beliefs against six religious leaders of different faiths to receive his PHD (very good reading I might add). Aside from the religious aspect, there are the sexual overtones of the film, and finally the persecution of innocent teachers by school administrators who constantly take the word of students over the teachers (I had this experience at Jimei University in China, when one of the administrators believed six students who lived in the same dorm who cheated on their final paper. I had to eventually pass them after giving them all an F). I never thought I would see the day when Soviet schools would be so permissive. The film is interesting to see the current state of Russian education.

This is the cinema we should be watching right now to rest a little bit of the same old famous faces from Hollywood and the same narratives.

The storyline adapts itself to the times we are living where the ultra Orthodox thinking is starting to rise again. Maybe it's not the end we were expecting to happen but it's the one a Russian direct can afford in their own political context.

Making a movie pro or against anything as "The Student" does it, is not hard. Following the examples of the despised propaganda that biased media provide us, the movie depicts just the right circumstances that prove the needed points. I guess the film is in some way intellectually provoking but it's a 2016 film.

Let me elaborate: 1 century ago film-makers and media creators started to put to work the brainwashing power of mass-communication. Today even commercials don't take themselves too seriously; otherwise you don't take the product seriously - we all know ads are just a way to sell something.

Serebrennikov and von Mayenburg instead take themselves very seriously as if they are contributing to mankind's progress (for sale) or unveiling some great mystery (while they are just giving another shape to ideas and concerns way older than them). They take themselves too seriously for someone who chose not to become a prime minister, an academic or a prophet. They are supposedly entertainers but they don't seem to care about the boring and lengthy script.

Therefore, for the potential audience of the movie (which is very limited and likely made up of people that already agree on most of the points the authors stress), warning! This is mostly an annoying waste of time with very few redeeming moments.

While respecting the fact that someone may still learn something or ask himself some new questions as a "response" to the movie, there is nearly no entertainment; it's just a prosaic, uninspired lesson. Watch Agora (2009) instead.

"The Student" is a scandalous drama by Kirill Serebrennikov, one of the most interesting Russian directors of the twentieth century based on the famous play of the German playwright Marius von Mayenburg. The life of the main character of the film balances on the thin and blurry facets of morality, faith, religion, humility and permissiveness. Fact: it was after this film that the persecution of the director Serebrennikov's authorities began.

Yet another bleak, cynical Russian take on the modern world and its moral conditions (Leviathan, etc). Here, Russian director Kirill Serebrennikov and German playwright Marius Von Mayenburg re-tread the age old argument that pits Christianity against the modern worlds view on human morality. Made in a somewhat trendy, dismal style, with too many shaky hand held shots and some overbearing music - these movie makers, as with so many others over the decades, seem to think they have reached an informed conclusion so, able to convince us all of their superior intellectual standpoint. They have both chosen to overlook the fact that vast numbers who went before them, have concluded that it's an unwinnable topic that leaves more questions than answers – in fact, many who set out to fight against and disprove the wisdom of Christ's word, converted over to it.

They use many of the Bibles strongest passages to substantiate their subservient arguments but the language presented on both sides of their viewpoint tends to suggest that perhaps: The Wisdom of Man is Less than the Foolishness of God. Their protagonist is portrayed as a psychotic who quotes almost verbatim Bible scriptures but, he is ultimately shown to be as crippled as the cripple he tries to heal, then harms. This character offers no real basis to mount a genuine argument. As another reviewer has already stated: Laughable.

Set in a current (surprisingly undisciplined) Russian school, many of the usual hooks are put-out to appeal to our basic instincts: Sexual freedoms (with lashings of nudity and sexual situations) ~ Anti Semitism (with the biology-sex-ed teacher being both anti-Christian and Jewish, in fact - her character simply allows for situations of associated Christian based hatred, to be easily introduced within the ideals of the modern world) ~ Next, there's the headmistress and the teacher of religious studies - both shown to be perhaps out of touch (as one might expect). These movie makers have perfectly armed themselves with so many manipulative character devises to support their biased point of view. It's too easy to mount an argument by designing characters to serve an already formed view.

If the topic leans your way it could appeal - otherwise, stay away.

Kirill Serebrennikov gifts a masterful satire to the audience. The student presents a charming artistic experience by meaning of both cinematographic content, awesome and original visual narration; and a striking story of a face off among relations, beliefs and modern life.

This movie, within an uninviting way and demanding no permission, throws the audience into a harsh face off whirlpool. Serebrennikov fearlessly shows humanity's evils all of which we are certainly aware but connive for some holly reasons.

An annoying tension is created in the movie leading the audience into ideotional traps. Finally, thanks to those traps, "the student" makes us question how a world we live in and those we have been conniving are able to cause what.

A film with no positive goals. Extremely onesided and plane. Loss of time. If a person is not familiar with christianity, he/she may believe christianity is this. Which is horrifying. Why the other side is not demonsrated? OK, there are such fanatic teens in every religion. So what? Where is the point? Why didn't I see the controversy between the diabolic fanaticism and the real faith? The Love, the Humility, te Forgiveness, the essence of Christianity? I repeat myself - a very plane and deprived of meaning film.

While showcasing naked males the director tells us what is right and what is wrong. Based on Bible quotes, of course.