The film "Ispytanie" is one of those movies that go very light, but in the end, they hit you in full force, making you think. The movie itself is not really new – it was released in 2014, but it still captures the mind and the imagination. The award-winning film is certainly worth watching, not only to enjoy it, but also to think about what happens in the country of nuclear tests – Kazakhstan.
Filmed by Alexander Kott, the movie has won "The Best Music" nomination by Nika Awards in 2015, as well as 3 nominations: "Grand- Prix", "The Best Cameraman Work" and "Cinephiles and cinema critics' guild award" by Kinotavr (2014). The list alone is a testimony to the quality of the movie, but also a hint to what is the foundation of it – it is music and scenery that make it so beautiful, and deliver a message at the same time. Montage also deserves a lot of recognition, as it is an important part of any movie – smooth movement of the camera, coupled with at times, sudden appearances of the characters, puts emphasis on the parts that need stressing; it is due to it that we see what kinds of relationships bind the people.
One of the most interesting contrasts is, perhaps, the sharp contrast between the other works of the producer: "Elki 2" and "Elki 1914" are hardly the most serious movies, while "Test" is a diametrically different style – silent, perhaps a bit grave and most serious, the "Test" is a test of waters in a new direction, which yielded its fruits. Long shots of nature are coupled with close-ups on people, contributing to the contrasting nature of the movie, while allowing actors to better express their emotions (the inside of the house for the main characters is quite dark).
Probably, it owes its captivity to the fact that it is silent – there is not a word said during the course of the film. On one hand, this might look like a big handicap – the arsenal of available tools shrinks quite significantly, down to only visuals and music, and the other one – camera work. The last point was worth a separate mention just because, as written before, it was given an award over all the other films. Indeed, the camera never fails to impress us and to express the thoughts through what we see on the screen; even the intro scene already captures the imagination, making us think "What am I seeing? What does this mean? How could this happen in a modern world?", as we set out to explore the story of 4 people in a grand steppe of Kazakhstan – polluted by radiation.
What we have is a family of two who lives in the middle of nowhere, with only nature surrounding them. It is the 1950s, and the region is Semipalatinsk – nuclear testing site in Kazakhstan. Every morning, father leaves for work on his old truck. Every day, the daughter manages the household – cooking and cleaning and enduring the challenges of life. And while the father is away, a young Kazakh man is trying to capture the heart of the girl – unaware of the fact that she loves another, a Russian. The plot continues to unfold as we follow their lives, and the days pass one after another.
But perhaps, the piece that has created the most controversy and sparked the fiercest debate is the conclusion of the movie. People argue whether or not the good movie was ruined by the ending, or the ending is just a very strong statement, a statement of vision on the problem. However, this is ultimately the choice of each person – but casting the doubt aside, every single minute of the movie is worth watching.
Filmed by Alexander Kott, the movie has won "The Best Music" nomination by Nika Awards in 2015, as well as 3 nominations: "Grand- Prix", "The Best Cameraman Work" and "Cinephiles and cinema critics' guild award" by Kinotavr (2014). The list alone is a testimony to the quality of the movie, but also a hint to what is the foundation of it – it is music and scenery that make it so beautiful, and deliver a message at the same time. Montage also deserves a lot of recognition, as it is an important part of any movie – smooth movement of the camera, coupled with at times, sudden appearances of the characters, puts emphasis on the parts that need stressing; it is due to it that we see what kinds of relationships bind the people.
One of the most interesting contrasts is, perhaps, the sharp contrast between the other works of the producer: "Elki 2" and "Elki 1914" are hardly the most serious movies, while "Test" is a diametrically different style – silent, perhaps a bit grave and most serious, the "Test" is a test of waters in a new direction, which yielded its fruits. Long shots of nature are coupled with close-ups on people, contributing to the contrasting nature of the movie, while allowing actors to better express their emotions (the inside of the house for the main characters is quite dark).
Probably, it owes its captivity to the fact that it is silent – there is not a word said during the course of the film. On one hand, this might look like a big handicap – the arsenal of available tools shrinks quite significantly, down to only visuals and music, and the other one – camera work. The last point was worth a separate mention just because, as written before, it was given an award over all the other films. Indeed, the camera never fails to impress us and to express the thoughts through what we see on the screen; even the intro scene already captures the imagination, making us think "What am I seeing? What does this mean? How could this happen in a modern world?", as we set out to explore the story of 4 people in a grand steppe of Kazakhstan – polluted by radiation.
What we have is a family of two who lives in the middle of nowhere, with only nature surrounding them. It is the 1950s, and the region is Semipalatinsk – nuclear testing site in Kazakhstan. Every morning, father leaves for work on his old truck. Every day, the daughter manages the household – cooking and cleaning and enduring the challenges of life. And while the father is away, a young Kazakh man is trying to capture the heart of the girl – unaware of the fact that she loves another, a Russian. The plot continues to unfold as we follow their lives, and the days pass one after another.
But perhaps, the piece that has created the most controversy and sparked the fiercest debate is the conclusion of the movie. People argue whether or not the good movie was ruined by the ending, or the ending is just a very strong statement, a statement of vision on the problem. However, this is ultimately the choice of each person – but casting the doubt aside, every single minute of the movie is worth watching.
