Psyhi vathia (2009) Poster

(2009)

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
A nice anti-war film, though with a leftist bias.
douc18 December 2010
There were some brilliant scenes in the movie, especially some of the scenes when the two brothers meet and the scene in the snow and the tent. Really captured the pain of a civil war.

As Guns and Roses say: what's so civil about war anyway?

My biggest gripe about the film was that it seemed to paint the communist guerrillas in much more favorable light than they deserved. Americans come across as the nasty guys. Very stereotype. Anyone wonder what Greece would have been like if the Soviets did come to the guerrilla's rescue (as some of the characters long)?

A film worth watching.
12 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A war movie that focuses on both sides.
giorts15 March 2018
The movie tries to portray all the suffering and pain that a civil war brings. At times the emotions are high, especially in after-battle scenes. The director tries to focus on both parties (maybe with a a little left-party bias).. Overall the movie succeeds in creating an engaging atmosphere although some scenes seem a bit rushed and unclear (towards the end).

Definitely worth watching,
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Greek civil war
lymbo126 September 2012
The issue is sovereignty.

When you visit the military museum in Athens you will find that Greek history is blacked out between 1944 and 1949 jumping from the Nazi retreat in 1944 to The Korean war.

This Movie tells some of that missing story and is a good start for the healing process of the Hellenic Nation. It is impossible to understand what is being undone now by means of reforms under brutal austerity which will bring back old conflict and strive and direct the nation on course of a new civil war. The meddling of exterior parties in Greek affairs has never been greater since the civil war of 1944-49. The war on Greeks is waged financially economically, with information as primary weapon. In 2012 people die, not by napalm but because of lack of Medication and increased suicide rate. And again, they die on both sides.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A true Masterpiece
misel98200126 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This is the story of two brothers, Anestis and Vlasis who fight in two different camps during the Greek civil war. The story takes place in 1949, the last year of the war and probably the year that the most ferocious battles took place between the guerrillas and the Greek Army. In this story the two brothers(who are not even adults) have to face their worst fear:Losing each other. While the story evolves, the audience can see the most realistic to date, images of this brutal war who cost the lives of 70.000 soldiers on both sides and resulted in the immigration of over 500.000 non combatants.

In this movie, almost everything seem realistic: Directing is great and the actors have been selected with great caution in order their appearance, voice and acting style fits almost perfectly with their roles. The director uses technics that make the audience feel that it is near the battlefield.The music that is used creates a realistic and depressing atmosphere that represents this period of great misery and pain. Another important feature of this film is that the story is being told from a neutral side: Since in this war there was no true winner and both armies were Greek, the director gives us each side's view. We will have an insight of what the Greek Army soldiers say and feel along with their rival guerrilla soldiers.

Concluding, by all means this is probably one of the best Greek movies of all time and most likely the best of the last decade. Besides subjective objections that everyone of us has when watching a movie, as a whole this war drama surpasses even the equivalent movies of the 1960s and 1970s era and proves that Greek cinema has still things to give.
23 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Maintaining an equal distance is not the way...
gg-taxo8 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
While not bad an effort, by Greek cinema standards, I would expect a more deep approach from Voulgaris, who has a great legacy. Keeping an equal distance from both the Democratic Army of Greece (former EAM members who had shed their blood en masse fighting against the Nazis and their local collaborators) and the National Army (guided by British and American imperialists) is a distortion of history. Equating the victim with the perpetrator (the partisans had been persecuted, murdered and imprisoned by the thousands for two years before the start of the Civil War) is an insult to those people. At least, it is the only Greek movie, so far, that demonstrates some of the atrocities the Americans committed (napalm bombs etc) to support the monarchofascists.
12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
contrived and unconvincing
d-apergis15 December 2009
Given the seriousness of the subject-matter about a period that has left an indelible mark in Greek history and bearing Pantelis Voulgaris's strong directorial credentials in mind, it's astonishing to come across a movie as shallow as this. The main plot about two brothers fighting in opposite sides in Greek Civil War is contrived and unconvincing, and when the movie loses its footing it simply resorts to lyricism flatly deploring the effects of civil war. Psyhi Vathia, in its inability to decide what it wants to be or how it should say what it wants to say, loses any real interest in politics as well and it is finally reduced to a rather naive statement of patriotism depriving the audience of a thorough and credible insight at the machinations that brought this war. A few good battle scenes and beautiful woods cinematography do not save the day.
16 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Voulgaris this time does not score
Ishkandar_B15 February 2010
One being familiar with the –in many aspects- minute Greek cinema can't possibly ignore a new film by Pantelis Voulgaris, a predominant figure in the Modern Greek Cinematography. "Psihi Vathia" i.e. "Deep (Courageous) Soul", is a film about two brothers finding themselves in opposite sides during the Greek civil war which, by the way, left ineradicable marks in the modern Greek history as well as in the modern Greek mythology, a civil war that followed the end of WWII. Voulgaris has been accused by some critics that in his honest effort to propose his own version of reconciliation (good guys and bad guys are in both sides) he finds himself trapped in a swamp of melodrama… Personally, I agree that the accusation is fair. Remember the young soldier dying with his mind and last thought in his 40 drachmas' debt (!!!). The battle scenes are perhaps more that what Voulgaris' budget could afford but there is some beautiful woods cinematography which, indeed, does not save the day. Some tried to compare "Psihi Vathia" with "El laberinto del fauno" by Guillermo del Toro . An unfortunate comparison, because, sadly,Voulgaris this time does not manage –as he did with his wonderful but underrated "Nyfes" (Brides)- to score
9 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Voulgaris took a shot and missed.
PalVa5 April 2020
This film is visually a masterpiece. The same thing can also be told for its haunting music. Sadly, these two elements are hardly enough to make this war drama a memorable film.

Politically speaking, Voulgaris tries his best to overcome his leftist biases and take an objective outlook of the civil war that devastated Greece from 1946 to 1949. His effort, however, falls rather short and the reason for that is not so much his implicit sympathy towards the Left as his exaggerated enthusiasm to maintain an equal distance between the two camps. There are times that Voulgaris becomes so keen on being objective that he actually neglects some other basic elements of the film, such as plot, character development and dramatic conflict (not to speak of historical accuracy or authenticity). Of course, when you make a film of this nature, the last thing you want is to be accused of trying to manipulate the audience. However, telling the viewer at every step of the way "I'm not taking sides, I'm not manipulating you" is also a sort of manipulation and it ultimately kills the dramatic tension on which this picture hugely depends.

History and politics, however, are not the main flaws of the film. In my humble opinion, the reason why this picture fails to make an impression is rather an artistic one. First of all, the characters come across really shallow. No real depth to make us empathize with their cruel destiny. Wooden and non-realistic dialogues play also an essential part in creating a huge distance between us, the viewers, and the dramatic action that takes place in the film. Furthermore, there are problems with the script and the contrived storytelling. The story is mainly based on the "brother against brother" cliche. This is not necessarily a flaw. In fact, it starts as one of the film's strongest points. It's a pity that, as the story progresses, the film doesn't seem to know how to handle it, in order to explore its full dramatic potential. This is also the case with most of the film's themes. They are executed in such a rushed and heavy-handed manner that the viewer ultimately loses all interest in the story. As for the sound and the visuals, they are both of the highest quality. Nevertheless, good photography and music cannot always make up for weak storytelling, especially when we are talking about a war drama.

With these in mind, is no real wonder why the film was reproached by many with being melodramatic. With no solid characters, uninteresting sequences (with a few exceptions) and a rather weak script, a melodrama is all you get in the end.

However, one should not forget that the Greek Civil War is something that still stirs up painful memories in Greek society and trying to make a film about it, takes undoubtedly a certain degree of courage. Voulgaris took a risk where others wouldn't and that does him credit. But, for better or for worse, not all risks pay off.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

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


Recently Viewed