Reviews

Gareth Edward seems to be the guy for high sci-fi war films as he delivers another gritty war sci-fi war film after surprisingly dark and well made Star Wars spin-off Rogue One (which was actually better than the new trilogy that came out around the same time). This film however is set in an original setting where humans are waging a war against AI controlled androids after a brief nuclear war. It's an interesting combination of Vietnam war films, as the film is mainly set somewhere in East Asia and a lot of filming was also made there and the film deals a lot with justification of wars, Blade Runner with it's cyberpunk elements and futuristic Japanese inspired cities and technology and Avatar with it's depiction of technology with nature and the heavy use of CGI. In my opinion this film actually looks better than the mentioned Avatar and is visually more varied and intersting, though it also shares a lot of its faults. The film is structured more like a video game than a film with action being the main focus of the film with some slower world building "cutscenes" in between. Characters are not as annoying as in Avatar, but share their blank nature unfortunately. Dealing with the interesting themes the film presents is not given enough exposure due to prioritization of action and glitter over substance and despite the moving opening scene theres no emotional connection to any of the characthers. Visually it has some stunning scenes and especially the interaction between nature human culture and technology is beautifully illustrated here. I think this had the potential to be more memorable but as it is, it's a sci-fi action film that looks great but is a bit too long.

The film tells as much about its production as it is about the subject it portrays. The first full length film by the director Toni Kurkimäki is clearly a passion project to him and the crew who are mainly composed of culture workers and artists from Lapua and wider Östrabothnia. Hugely ambitious project about a major ammunition factory disaster from a young inexperienced director did not get its trust from the Finnish film foundation, but did manage to receive enough enthusiasm and funding from the local community to get it done. The director and producer committed to take a huge loan in order to get the film finished and to the big screen, which tells you all about the passion behind this film. The story is quite generic (one could say it's Titanic set in Lapua during the 1976 disaster) but what makes the film work is the chemistry and performance of its cast as well as the sense of community and passion behind the film, aas well as the attention to detail. From the sets, to the music and to makeup. The film could have used more scenes shots in Lapua as most of the film happens either in the factory halls or inside apartments which can get get a bit repetitive at times. The main cast of characters are all a bit generic but also interesting, maybe aside from Matti whose only weakness seems to be that he has none of them (which funnilly enough is how most men in the region tend to see themselves). Despite the best efforts the explosion scene is not as impressive as the opening scene of the film, though it does have a disturbingly well made audio production.

The film tells as much about the subject as it tells about its makers and this one has a lot of emotion behind it!

The film is a combination of societal documentaries done in the past decade. It presents a critical outlook on the global economic system (Inside Job from 2010 and the forcaster from 2014), discusses it's effects on people (Push from 2017), critiques the ultra rich and their effect on the society (generation wealth from 2018), interviews young activists who are aiming for a regime change (The Square from 2012, How to Change the World from 2016 and Joshua from 2017), and also has an overarching somewhat bleak narrative with a call to action as it's core message with some footage of nature as well as an environmental perspective (David Attenborough a life on our planet from 2020). Overall this film is ambitious in it's scope in attempting to weave all the stories and the whole picture together, maybe at times to the point that it can loose its coherency. It has a normative undertone in that it asks relevant and important questions while also attempting to push people to be more active, though it does not give very clear answers towards where. In a way it's a mashup of "best of" documentaries with social commentary from the past decade both in it's form and also how it looks, but does not provide anything particularly new or revolutionizing as a documentary film or as a story.

Composed of home footage shot by marusya syroechkovskaya throughout her adolescence and early adulthood, the film is a personal story of her and Kimi, a history student who loves both Alexander the Great and Kurt Cobain in a equal manner. It's both a subjective, intimate and personal narrative told by syroechkovskaya about growing up in post-soviet Russia, her relationship with Kimi and the doomed generation of people from broken families, who have no sights of a better future. While the film is pessimistic, sad and gloomy in it's overall tone, it also has a lot of humor as well as sweet and intimate moments, while syroechkovskaya seems to have a sense of self irony when looking at her young teenage self.

Technically and it's tone and subject matter there are a lot of similarities to Joonas Neuvonens Reindeerspotting and Lost Boys in that the film is composed of footage shot by digital hand held cameras and it focuses on one specific charather, while also including the film maker as a clear subject and a charather as well. There are also overlaps in the subject matter as well in that there is a lot drug use and film centers around experience of youth. How to save a dead friend however has a stronger societal narrative and ties the lives of it's main charathers strongly to the surrounding society, giving a picture of repression and negletence of the state towards it's people, that has produced the generation of young people who drive themselves towards oblivion. In addition to footage of hand held cameras there are animations that represent the early 2000's internet asthetics and the film ends in a beautiful 3d animation seuqence. The music of the film represents the youth culture it portrays and its a combination of "Russian grunge" and synth waves, that work well to immerse the viewer to the context.

A tragic, yet funny and intimate film that has a strong societal narrative.

The main part of the film are the intense and at times intimate interviews of captive ISIS members held by the SDF forces in Northern Syria. The interviews are made with a close up with the interviewees who tell their experiences, views, regrets, dreams and nightmares to the viewer. These are coupled with some scenes of everyday life of the SDF forces near to the prison camps. The interviews are almost like a therapy sessions, where the ISIS members reflect on the decision they have made and their consequences, with differing conclusions. Some of them take the viewer very close to the interviewees, making them an intimate experience. The shots and scenes outside the interviews are technically interesting and offer a glimpse to the everyday realities of the conflict. They resemble very much the scenes in Notturno, another documentary about Syrian war that was also showed in the DocPoint film festival two years ago.

While well made and thoutfully filmed, in 2 hours it repeats a lot of similar footage and the interviews also start to get a bit repetitive at some point. However, it offers a unique glimpse into the minds of former ISIS members and post war trauma, which is worth a watch for those interested in the subject.

James Cameron's technical spectical got me going to the theater for a second time since 2009 and it was a mistake. Even though the film looks impressive at times, at some point I started to realize that I would rather watch a proper nature documentary. The action scenes are well made in a way where the veteran director seems to take all of his greatest hits compilation. 3 hours of video game footage however does not apparently make for a good or even a decent film.

The technical spectical is not enough to save this film from awful writing a script that it has. I wasn't expecting Shakespearean drama, but the story and the characters were even more bland and/or non-existent than in the first film. All of the characters have one single motive and none of them are relatable or even likable. The story itself is an excuse for the mass violent spectacle happening on the screen. Even though the Na'vi are fighting the American imperialists, they seem to have adopted all of their core values: patriarchy, nuclear family, violence as a virtue, chastity of body and having a gun fetish. Their supposed connectness with nature seems more like one what middle class people from the western world experience while on a holiday in a tropical island, than what actual indigenous people have.

James Cameron, you can trick me twice but I will not make the same mistake three times and will happily skip the rest of Avatar films.

The film seems like a long travel commercial targeted towards elderly Finns and Chinese audiences. The story is both predictable and forgettable and re-produces stereotypes about the "perfect migrants" who apparently work happily without pay. The use of "bad English" as the main language that is spoken throughout the film brings with itself a whole new level of cringness and that would otherwise be already quite high with embarrassing dialogue, bad jokes and thin and dry characters. While the music and scenery of rural Lapland and nice, they are not enough to save this film from the overall bad writing and boring story.

Stop Filming Us is a meta-documentary about representation of aid receiving subjects. While dealing with heavy themes, it has a lighter side to it through the banter of some of the characters of the film. The film raises questions about the ethicacy of western funded development aid and how it is implemented. Questions rise about inclusion, accountability and the economic system behind aid. Recommended for all those who have worked in this "industry". The film is made in an interesting way, mixing different styles of filmmaking together and including bits from other directors work as well there.

Though the fim begins with an introductory text on the modern history of the Middle-East, it focuses on specific scenes and people at the seeming end to the current phase of the conflicts. Some scenes depict the mundane day to day existence of the wars, while in others people are trying to reconcile what they have experienced through art. There is also an element of the environment in how the wars effect nature itself. Though sad in essence, the visuals of the film are stunning and immersive.

The film is tightly structured and narrated over archive footage of king, with some other contemporary footage mixed in. In terms of visual material, the film does not bring any new unforseen archive films to the table and a lot of the images used in the film are used several times. With the original sound bites however, the film does a great job in opening the context to the audiences. What the film lacks in new visual material, it gains in its content as it is based on new research of the FBI archives. Great learning material for history or social studies classes.

The third adaptation of Väinö Linnas Uknown Soldier Epic, is technically good achievement without much artistic ambitions or new perspectives to the classic. The film flows well with well studied, though also, well seen cinematography, from one battle scene to another, showing the brutal realities of war. The scenery of arctic nature is gorgeous, but feels a bit unnatural due to strange lighting effects that dont work well with the overall realistic style of the film. The script restrains from taking any risks and fails to build any real depth to most of its characters, despite attempts to build romantic stories with minor characters in the film. Made mainly for domestic audiences, it does not open well for viewers who are not familiar with the source material or the previous adaptations.

A documentary on struggles of Uzbek refugees and their efforts to have their family member who is held in the infamous prison for political prisoners in Uzbekistan. The film gets emotional momentum after the introductory first half, where the context of human rights violations in Uzbekistan is described. The story of the Uzbek community in flight is a gruesome depiction of how refugees are connected to their country of origins not only through their personal history and relations, but also very real aspects. It also leaves a lot of thought to the viewer on how human rights violations across the globe are transnationalized in our time and not only local grievances. Though the film has parts where it advertises specific human rights organizations blatantly, it is still a powerful and though provoking story about a country where not a lot of stories get told in the west.

Set in gorgeous green highlands of Ethiopia, the drama tells a story about loss, childhood, social isolation and family. A realistic in its depiction, but emotional in the delivery of its story, Lamb goes deep into its main character's position and psychology. The film is rich both in its visual setting and music and beautiful to look at.

Lauren Greenfield continues her study of capitalism's effect on culture, this time attempting to focus on its generational impact. The film follows the formula found in the previous films where the phenomena is described through the most extreme stories and people with interviews and anthropological lense. While the subject is interesting and the directors self reflection brings another level of dept to the film, the film uses a lot of material from the previous films and ties into the directors work in photography, which means that the film relies on that the spectator is familiar with the director and her work elsewhere. While the stories told here are certainly interesting and somewhat eye-opening, there is so much packed content in the film that it seems to loose its focus and emotial impact at times.

A film with interesting and original themes, suberb acting, beautiful and creative filmography is unfortunately flawed due to its incomplete and not well implemented script. Have not seen many films which have the protagonist as a disabled person and that can express such things as sexuality and oppression from that point of view in a way that really raise awareness on this issue while also being mature and emotional.

The first two thirds of the film were some of the best drama in the last few years with good pacing and creative screenplay and really good acting, but the story completely loses its focus at the end.

The social drama takes the viewer to the factories where their clothes are made. The storytelling and cinemography reminded me of older European films from the 40's and 50's that dealt with the same issues: workers rights, women's role in a patriarchal society and a corrupt system. Though much of these ills have been improved in the privileged west, they are not gone from the world, far from it. The story is engaging and setting is interesting and colorful. Though the film feels at times it has been made for social studies class, it is nevertheless emotional and capturing story that does great work in bringing awareness on the issues that it portrays.

Important reporting on the post-modern global capitalist economics where housing, one of the basic human rights, has become a commodity and a tool of exploitation by large financial firms and companies. The film describes the same situation in different locations around the world and does a great job in explaining the phenomena in a generally understandable manner.

And no, the film is not against private ownership of housing, many of the people who have lost their homes in the film owned their apartments or homes. It's about the growing inequality of wealth and a system that fails to protect those most vunerable.

Shot during the peace talks between Turkey, the document offers a unique look on the militants operating in the Taurus mountains near to Disrbakir. Rather than giving a firm narrative, it gives the people who have decided to join the querilla an opportunity to tell their stories and why they have decided to make such a dramatic life choice. It humanizes people who in the mainstream Turkish media are labelled as terrorists. It raises questions on the necessity of the armed conflict. The document takes the audience on a tour to the Taurus mountains and to the training camps and caves of the querilla fighters, showing the unique and beautiful scenery of the region. Recommended to people interested in the conflict.

The documentary takes the audience literally to child's perspective and observes the surrounding world from there. With beautiful cinematography and music it's a memorable experience. Though the film lacks a strong script or thematic focus as it deals with broad issues such as religion, friendship, culture and terrorism, it succeeds in looking at these difficult topics from its 6-year old protagonist's perspective.

The documentary about globalization of Norwegian Black metal that tells a story of four musicians playing the obscure and extreme sub-genre of metal originating from the cold and dark Norway. While all the stories are interesting and tell their own sides of modern black metal, the film does not really go deeper into delving into the subject matter and leaves it to the viewer. Technically the film is not very interesting as it follows a basic TV/journalistic documentary formula. The length is not really justified, though there are some really interesting scenes in the film among some dull and repetitive moments. There are more entertaining looks into the music genre in the film world but if you are interested in the globalization aspect, this could be of interest.

Uzak is a poetic film about the sense of distance. Distance between people, distance between a man and a woman, distance between the city and the countryside, distance between the seasons, distance between the land and the sea. It is told through relationship of its two main characters Mahmut and Yusuf who'se distant relationship works as the main focus of the film. The film is also about modern experience of alienation that is part of both of Mahmut's and Yusuf's life. One could also see this distance between the characters as a reflection of divisions in the modern Turkish society as a whole which the films story also describes.

The film's cinematography is stunning and memorable with long shots including the wintery Galata Bridge depicting Yusuf's loneliness in the city, as well as shots in the Anatolian country side which creates a sense of contrasting realities. The lighting and the colors carry the viewer through the feelings and experiences that the films characters are going through.

A classic of Turkish cinema.

Intruiging visual description of losing ones identity. Emotional story of identity and fragility of life. The script that follows closely its source material does it by sacrificing some of the depth of its charathers. Julianne Moore does a remarkable role as the film follows Alice's journey in losing herself with a screenplay and filmiography that reflects her confusion and change.

Bone Tomahawk is an interesting mixture of western and horror that bows its head in respect to the legacy of both genres without residing too much into banal humour. An entertaining piece despite its slowish pace that goes well with the earie desert landscapes. Though the story is simple, and the charathers somewhat cartoonish, the screenplay is superb. The director does a great job on instilling a sense of horror and suspence.