Tangerines

Ethnic and/or religious armed conflicts are always particularly painful, "realpolitik" vs. history, perceptions vs. actual circumstances, victims vs. profiteers, etc. The War in Abkhazia (1992–93) was one of the first post-Soviet gory confrontations, with tens of thousands dead, ethnic cleansing, and included the biggest successful rescue operation so far by the Estonian government to save compatriots, not even citizens, as their forebears settled there in 19th century... Many smaller nations, like Estonians, did not choose sides, they just tried to survive and carry on, splendidly expressed through tangerines in the film, but remote weaponry reaches everywhere and does not ask questions (Estonians were not considered hostile by both sides).

All this is nicely presented in this Estonian-Georgian film, where Estonian actors used are all famous film actors (the Georgian ones were unfamiliar to me, but they were convincing), and characters seem very realistic. As far as I know, the topic of honour and keeping word are holy among the Caucasus nations, enabling to depict scenes and events odd and even improbable among the Western, "civilized" nations. The venue is limited to the remains of a village, but as everything is so properly constructed and performed, you do not feel embattled, and can follow and emphasize with all characters, significantly widening the audience and letting ponder on and over the essence of warfare.

PS The film is totally "male", only actors were present, no actresses, but the less than 1,5 hours pass tautly.

This film is flawless and one of the highlights of the Montreal World Film Festival 2014. It also was recognized with many international prizes in Europe, North America and even Israel. It captures the incoherence and inhumanity of war from the point of view of innocent civilians and of dehumanized soldiers. The pace and plot are crisp, compact and conscious-elevating with a spectacular, yet simple screenplay. The cinematography and music match and enhance the emotional and philosophical human drama. The acting from the all-male cast is poignant and powerful in its restraint. Zaza Urushadze's text comes to life like a play in this sometimes claustrophobic confine which only heightens the inherent tension between the protagonists. The directing does however balance this with the sad beauty of rural Abkhazia conflict zone. The simple sets set the mood and this movie is shooting for the moon.

Alexander Kuranov returns as the editor after teaming up with Zaza Urushadze for the excellent multiple story Three Houses (2008) and gets every cut and emotion right. The dialogue, like the film, is raw, unpredictable, mysterious and profound. It brings you the very core of humanity's hopes and fears. The theme of pointless war has rarely been portrayed so perfectly. It surpasses even seminal South Korean The Front Line (2011) and does so in a intellectual and emotionally effective way. Beyond that it is a human drama about people stuck in a conflict and how they decide to deal with it and each other. Is there a glimpse of hope or some guidelines we can learn from?

Be sure that I will be looking for Zaza's previous and next work. This is cinema at it's best.

That's what a nomination from the Oscars can do to a foreign-language film. it can build hype, put them on the spotlight, let so many others see films that might have not otherwise been seen by people who usually don't go out of their way to see foreign films. It's a rather lovely film, despite having subject matter that would be seen as glum or dry. Surely, it's not a "happy" film, but it's lovely in its themes that it reinforces by the end and what it's ultimately trying to tell us. In that way, it succeeds greatly and it offers as a reminder of our own problems and our own flaws, and that humanity, despite so many reasons to not care about others, can prevail in the end and make you really care for someone.

Zaza Urushadze gives the highest priority to his story. It's a very powerful story carrying a strong antiwar massage. And Urushadze tells it as if he's not there. As if we're watching the actual events taking place before us. This isn't a result of inaptness, this is a deliberate decision to let the story stand in the limelights on its own and avoid anything that could divert the viewers attention from it. You won't find any elaborate shots, any amazing breathtaking sights, no fireworks showing the director's technical mastery. Urushadze tells us about the follies of war and he makes sure that's what we'll get when we see his film. He's aided by superb actors, mainly Lembit Ulfsak playing the strong minded Ivo, a man of few words that makes every word of his count. Reserved, strong willed and determined, a role calling for acting of the highest quality and Lembit Ulfsek is up to the task. In fact there's nothing else to speak about regarding this movie, only the actors, and the director's lean approach to cinematic story telling. Thing is, even when that's all there is if it's done at such level of perfection it's a must see movie.

more than a war film, it is a peace manifesto. so, important is not the story itself - one from many - but the science to give delicacy and force to its levels. a film about solitude, hate and reconciliation with yourself. about survive in harsh time. powerful and poetic, cold and precise,human virtues in a special angle. a basic story and a lot of pieces who presents the best way to be more than part of a crisis. Ivo is a remarkable character for the virtue to remind old known truths. it is the merit not only by actor or scriptwriter, director or image. it is a merit of viewer who see the wise man who drives , always, the tensions from a space of conflicts to the necessary end.a film of silence and words as signs of it. a film who impress. for the smart manner to not be a lesson or only a good movie. but a necessary parable. about the deep essence of life.