User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
good idea but poorly executed
auto38528814 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
A TV journalist and his cameraman are covering a story in a conflict zone, they encounter some soldiers who promise them a scoop. Instead they have taken hostages and ask the TV crew which one should be executed in front of the camera.

A compelling moral fable marred by poor execution. The acting is poor but what carries it through is the controlling central idea within the script. I only learned from this website that the writer removed his/her name from the production due to a re-interpretation of the script behind his/her back. I can only hope that he/she carries on writing and put this film behind them. It has only slowed you down, it will not stop you as long as you keep on writing.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Absolutely harrowing, Schindler's List meets CNN
sophiesss4 June 2005
Rebel soldiers lead two foreign journalists deep into a war-torn forest to a place where they have taken civilian hostages. I saw this when it was screened in Liverpool and a couple of the images have stayed with me, probably because it seemed very based in "reality". The director has managed to convey a sense of voyeurism, as if the viewer is witnessing events that they are are not really meant to see. Paul Usher (Brookside, The Bill) is excellent, as are the hostages. He gives a very filmic performance with a characterisation that's a million miles away from his TV work. That some of the dialogue is in Russian (subtitled) only adds to the documentary/fly on the wall style atmosphere, which leads the viewer down a very uncomfortable path.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed