First and foremost: this movie powerfully reminisces the horrible years of siege of Sarajevo, and the role of artistic expression in human coping and survival. Through statements of actual participants in Sarajevo's wartime underground art&music, and via the story of U2's support - movie makes excellent points of transcendental values such as empathy, equality, importance of peace and it's protection, active resistance against all sorts of aggressiveness, etc.
However, the authors made three unnecessary extensions to the main story : first - tried to explain historical context through short clips about Milosevic. That was waaay too simplistic; adequate only for those that must have a bad guy / food guy dichotomy in every story. It goes to the absurd explanation of M.'s fate ... indictment in Hague-ICJ, although that indictment is not related to the war in Bosnia!
Second: choosing Christiane Amanpour to talk about tough times of people under siege - is adding insult to the fate of millions hurt by the wars she & CNN supported (since late 90s).
Third: at the very end, the authors clumped 30ish seconds of, from their perspective, "modern evils" (Putin, Berlusconi, Trump,...) . If they (authors) really think that such a "conclusion" is appropriate - then they are setting themselves as propagandists. Who needs that?
However, the authors made three unnecessary extensions to the main story : first - tried to explain historical context through short clips about Milosevic. That was waaay too simplistic; adequate only for those that must have a bad guy / food guy dichotomy in every story. It goes to the absurd explanation of M.'s fate ... indictment in Hague-ICJ, although that indictment is not related to the war in Bosnia!
Second: choosing Christiane Amanpour to talk about tough times of people under siege - is adding insult to the fate of millions hurt by the wars she & CNN supported (since late 90s).
Third: at the very end, the authors clumped 30ish seconds of, from their perspective, "modern evils" (Putin, Berlusconi, Trump,...) . If they (authors) really think that such a "conclusion" is appropriate - then they are setting themselves as propagandists. Who needs that?