chimie-340-361128
Joined Apr 2012
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews6
chimie-340-361128's rating
In Hungary, an estimated 10% of the population has some degree of alcoholism, yet the subject is somewhat taboo. Nothing demonstrates this better than the fact that this movie claims to be the first to deal with the topic... but it would still be highly recommended to watch, even if that weren't the case.
First of all, we see some world-class acting, notably from the main character, Sanyi (Szabolcs Thúróczy). His transformation from a happy drunkard to a life-threatening monster is one of the strongest performances I've seen lately. I was totally surprised when I learned that Sanyi's repairman friend wasn't even an actor-his character was incredibly believable. Also, Hungarian viewers will surely enjoy the brief appearance of stars like György Cserhalmi.
Secondly, the characters are well-written. Even though alcoholism might seem like a "simple affair," Sanyi's dependence is explained from multiple angles.
Finally, the movie authentically presents the current mood of Hungary and Budapest, with places like that shabby CBA on the corner or the iconic Széll Kálmán tér.
Sometimes, the urge to cover "everything" about alcoholism makes the story feel a bit forced, but for the most part, it's a movie that immerses the viewer and hopefully makes them see the subject in a different light.
And yes, on top of all that, it's an important one as well. Even if you only walk away understanding that you shouldn't get offended the next time someone refuses to drink with you, that would be a big achievement.
First of all, we see some world-class acting, notably from the main character, Sanyi (Szabolcs Thúróczy). His transformation from a happy drunkard to a life-threatening monster is one of the strongest performances I've seen lately. I was totally surprised when I learned that Sanyi's repairman friend wasn't even an actor-his character was incredibly believable. Also, Hungarian viewers will surely enjoy the brief appearance of stars like György Cserhalmi.
Secondly, the characters are well-written. Even though alcoholism might seem like a "simple affair," Sanyi's dependence is explained from multiple angles.
Finally, the movie authentically presents the current mood of Hungary and Budapest, with places like that shabby CBA on the corner or the iconic Széll Kálmán tér.
Sometimes, the urge to cover "everything" about alcoholism makes the story feel a bit forced, but for the most part, it's a movie that immerses the viewer and hopefully makes them see the subject in a different light.
And yes, on top of all that, it's an important one as well. Even if you only walk away understanding that you shouldn't get offended the next time someone refuses to drink with you, that would be a big achievement.
If you are interested in what everyday life is (or was two years ago) like in Putin's Russia, this movie is a goldmine. It's also a must-see for those who care about trans rights or enjoy absurd fashion art. The film features memorable scenes of the protagonist facing conflicts in Moscow and Magadan, a town in the remote, far-eastern part of the country. It provides an intimate portrait of Jenna/Gena Marvin during a turbulent period in their life (and in Russia's history): early 2022, at the start of the Ukrainian war.
However, it feels like the rapid pace of events caught even the creators off guard, forcing them to complete the movie without delving deeper into the story. Gena is portrayed as a loner, mostly seen arguing with their parents (who insist that Gena abandon their lifestyle). Yet, the footage clearly hints at a network of activists and supporters around them, about whom we learn nothing. Additionally, the film doesn't explore the artist's working methods, artistic philosophy, or personal journey in any meaningful detail. Nor does it reveal how they reached their current position or whether they have any plans or visions for the future of Russia.
These shortcomings are especially disappointing because Gena/Jenna is such an awe-inspiring figure. Staying true to oneself is never easy, but when who you are is practically outlawed in your country, it takes extraordinary courage to share it with the world.
However, it feels like the rapid pace of events caught even the creators off guard, forcing them to complete the movie without delving deeper into the story. Gena is portrayed as a loner, mostly seen arguing with their parents (who insist that Gena abandon their lifestyle). Yet, the footage clearly hints at a network of activists and supporters around them, about whom we learn nothing. Additionally, the film doesn't explore the artist's working methods, artistic philosophy, or personal journey in any meaningful detail. Nor does it reveal how they reached their current position or whether they have any plans or visions for the future of Russia.
These shortcomings are especially disappointing because Gena/Jenna is such an awe-inspiring figure. Staying true to oneself is never easy, but when who you are is practically outlawed in your country, it takes extraordinary courage to share it with the world.
Very rarely feels this hard to rate a movie.
Yes, it has scenes you will remember for weeks, maybe for ever.
Yes, it gives the viewer a strong impression about how war actually feels for a civilian (or a journalist).
On the other hand, it is very hard to rate the production as a movie / documentary. You don't get too much context, you see and hear mostly things that you'd expect to see browsing a collection of footages.
The main feature of the production is some kind of recklessness: the makers spent 20 days risking their lives for getting any coverage out from the city, and also, were not shy to show us shocking images about people who, it seems, were never asked (couldn't be asked) wheteher they find it OK to be on film (some even protest, but end up on the screen anyway).
So, at the end, it is a philosophical question.
If you believe the perfect documentary is something that makes you feel you were part of the experience it is about, 20 Days in Mariupol is perfect. If you seek some kind of cinematic production, you yill be one of those people, who will feel it almost unwatchable (and not just for ethical reasons).
Yes, it has scenes you will remember for weeks, maybe for ever.
Yes, it gives the viewer a strong impression about how war actually feels for a civilian (or a journalist).
On the other hand, it is very hard to rate the production as a movie / documentary. You don't get too much context, you see and hear mostly things that you'd expect to see browsing a collection of footages.
The main feature of the production is some kind of recklessness: the makers spent 20 days risking their lives for getting any coverage out from the city, and also, were not shy to show us shocking images about people who, it seems, were never asked (couldn't be asked) wheteher they find it OK to be on film (some even protest, but end up on the screen anyway).
So, at the end, it is a philosophical question.
If you believe the perfect documentary is something that makes you feel you were part of the experience it is about, 20 Days in Mariupol is perfect. If you seek some kind of cinematic production, you yill be one of those people, who will feel it almost unwatchable (and not just for ethical reasons).