User Reviews

'Grain' (the Turkish title is 'Bugday'), the 2017 film by Turkish director Semih Kaplanoglu is a beautiful film and at the same time a dense and difficult one. We are dealing with an ecological parable that can be described as being somewhere at the intersection between science fiction and the theological-philosophical discourse, a film with a special aesthetic and numerous references in text, image and composition that often requires browsing through personal repository of cultural, literary and cinematic knowledge of the viewer. It is this permanent intellectual and aesthetic challenge that makes the film's message seem not to be at the top of the director's interest. 'Grain' risks becoming a film from which in a year or ten years from watching we be remembered more for visual quotes than for ideas.

The post-apocalyptic world in which the story takes place is familiar from many other films: a deserted planet with islands of relative stability protected by armed soldiers and deadly fences and arid areas where the rest of the survivors wander in rags. The cause of this apocalypse is an ecological catastrophe generated by genetically engineered crops, which have practically destroyed living species on the Earth's surface. The hero of the film, Erol (Jean-Marc Barr), a scientific researcher employed by the corporation that controls the artificial crops tries to determine the exact causes of the disaster and find a solution. The key to the enigma can be, perhaps, found in the theory developed by another former employee of the company, Cemil (Ermin Bravo), who has taken refuge in the deserted area. Erol will embark on a dangerous journey that will take him though the devastated areas of the planet, in search of his former colleague and of truth.

Most of the film describes the hero's pilgrimages on the destroyed planet where no form of life survives more than three generations at most. If the post-apocalyptic landscape resembles that of other films, cinematography is completely differently. The combined effect of using black and white and wide screen is spectacular and dramatic. 'Grain', an international production, was filmed on three continents, with urban scenes filmed in the United States while the natural ones, for the most part, use the landscapes of Asian Turkey. Erol's pilgrimages through the devastated areas, as well as his quests in which science combines with mysticism, are reminiscent of 'Stalker' and it is no coincidence that Semih Kaplanoglu is a great admirer of Tarkovsky. Quotes abound in this film, in which the Turkish director seems to have wanted to pay homage to many of the sources that inspired him, from the Qur'an and the Bible (the little girl discovered in the basket on the shore, the burning tree in the desert) to the name of the guide Alice (Cristina Flutur), the one who has the power to cross the forbidden borders between the worlds. Visual metaphors intertwine with those in the words spoken by the characters. The aesthetic effect cannot be disputed, but neither can the sensation of repetition and length. Unlike many other films that sound the alarm about the risks of genetic engineering, 'Grain' does not choose the more commercial means of expression such as horror or action films, but rather picks the most difficult ones of poetic and religious metaphors. When people try to play God by meddling in the mysteries of creation, solutions and salvation may also come from the direction of the sacred.

I'm sorry but this movie was a complete waste of time, why 2 stars and not 1 because the actors were still quite decent.

This movie goes from one fallacy to the next, irrational and uncohesive for the most part. Clearly had some propaganda in it for the Islam as it had a decent amount of quoted lines from the Qur'an and some clearly Islamic habits.

The only thinking it got me to do was what next stupid thing is the producer going to bring out next and what is his next flaw going to be.

It's clear the writer and producer where the same person and it was just a terrible move.

Let me do some guessing, I FEEL like that the producer was trying to produce a masterpiece like other great philosophers have done, such as Plato and his Plato's Cave, however he failed completely miserably. Probably due to not enough skills in being a philosopher, writer and/or director. It's a shame because the plot/synopsis looked very promising.

Edit/addition: People, animals and everything living thing does things with a reason. Sure people might hallucinate or dream. However why would anyone want to watch a random dream that's not cohesive at all.

Also gray-scale makes it look more apocalyptic, however if you need to use gray-scale to achieve such effects than you did a horrible elsewhere, such as in the scenery/decor or costumes. Talking is also kept to a minimum with dialogue that is either uninteresting or doesn't have much of a point (or both). It's basically watching an old movie with a bit of sound added. The difference, old movies did a good job conveying their plot and having a (interesting) plot. Again the movie does NOT at all show what is written in the synopsis. Again I suspect one (or a bit of both) of the following issues. Director/writer either thinks to highly of his work (or himself) and feels like he's spreading knowledge, like a Plato, Socrates, Aristoteles, etc. Or the director/writer/etc just took on too much work for 1 person.

Btw plot/synopsis, last time I read it doesn't describe the movie well.

To some extent, GRAIN is a messy film of two halves. The first takes place in a futuristic factory where everything is manufactured, even the air. The Professor (Jean-Marc Barr) discovers that the person who can enlighten him the most (Ermin Bravo) has gone AWOL into the wilderness, and cannot be contacted. The Professor goes after him, with the help of youngster Andrei (Grigory Dobrygin), and guide Alice /Cristina Fluter). This covers roughly the first hour of the film, making trenchant points about the ways in which humanity has conspired to ruin the soil and the atmosphere, to such an extent that most of its is now synthetic.

The second half of the time, set in the wilderness, has the Professor encountering his missing colleague, but discovering a more important lesson about the relationship between humanity and the soil. The colleague takes him on a tour of the wilderness, and into his private lair, where some soil unaffected by the prevailing acid rain is preserved. The colleague resolves to take it out and use it for growing new natural things. Meanwhile the Professor discovers things about himself through dreams such as witnessing a burning bush, and being taken to a small area of land where the soil yields fresh produce. The movie ends with a pretty explicit exhortation to everyone - including the professor - to avoid complacency and contribute towards restoring the relationship between humanity and the soil by digging deep and discovering new soil and new plants, especially the wheat plant, which contains within its seeds the entire relationship between the soil and humanity.

There are distinct echoes of Kaplanoğlu's earlier meditations on similar subjects in the familiar trilogy (MILK, HONEY, EGG) but here the message is more insistently expressed through dialogue between the Professor and his colleague, plus a final image of the Professor discovering wheat seeds in a fertile piece of land in the wilderness.

The film's style is characteristic Kaplanoğlu, a slowly burning narrative with long silent patches, where all we can hear are the birds or the rustle of the characters moving around. We are invited to focus on the land - or lack of it in the first half - and how humanity has destroyed it with buildings now in a state of disrepair. This strategy makes the ending all the more powerful, as the Professor moves out of his hidey-hole on to the land, draws a circular shape (containing the fertile area) and digs out some wheat seeds.

As usual, some filmgoers might be bored with the slow style and occasional clunky lines, but there's no doubting Kaplanoğlu's sense of ideological purpose, which comes fully to the fore as the narrative develops. Definitely a film to watch again for its subtleties, although perhaps viewers have to know something about the Qu'ran to appreciate it fully.

No excitement, no action, no sympathies and actually no storyline either. In short the most boring film, we have ever seen (and we like watching films). And the whole production is in Black and White, why we need a colorless film in the 21st century? That's all, we don't want waste more time on this film.

I am certainly very impressed and touched by every second of Grain. Tremendous attribution to all very good human examples from Prophet Moses to Porphet Muhammed (sav) also great thinkers like Yunus,and numerous others whom tried to understand and reminded us human journey's limitations & efficient use need. Andrei is obviously Andrei Tarkovsky in some point their road seperated because their search needs were different.

Breath or Grain you may read this as spirit or material. Both are not different as western world scholars thought us. There is no borders between them and they grow together.

Everything in the film is happening right now. We are all witnessing to Middle East, Latin America, some Asian countries divisions and how their resources stolen by some countries. They are not right but at the moment they have the power. But with this power also they are destroying themselves.

Semih Kaplanoglu gave an examle during one of his interviews; "While people are starving in Sudan, there are grains grown to sell to Europe in fertile soil covered with electric tails one or two steps away." The film goes out of the way of the world's question, how we can cure the present disorder. Disorders; desire for constant and continuous growth. We can compare the problem to cancer,which wants to grow up without stopping; Until it is impossible to grow constantly with limited resources, people break down the habitat they live on, and eventually environmental disasters and hunger that have not been seen throughout history have become prominent.

If you do not know much about this part of the world, its heritage and culture it will be difficult to understand but watch this film and then you can read about more to understand it. You will surely enjoy more in time by widening your harizon.

Tried to do a Sufi based movie but not able because i believe it looks ilke a good show for the eyes. The essence was not sensable. Looks ilke memorizing sentences from Sufi-Islamic literature with good camera.

The film takes its main topic from a famous story of Moses the prophet. All of the film is black-and-white. Locations are impressive, especially the old building in Anatolia. The best thing about the film is that film blends post-apocalypse and Islamic mysticism. The fictional world of film is also very good. The concept of breath used well in the film as a symbol of truth and soul. The main character, trying to make a choice between grain (all physical things) and breath. Thus, the director tells the audience about the choice process of people between the physical and metaphysical world. The film includes a perfect criticism of materialism in the background. The film bears the well stamp of the sci-fi genre. Like all other Semih Kaplanoglu movies, you can feel the taste of delicious drama in the film. Lastly, the performance of actors is excellent, they add a sincere mood to the film.

To define it as a remarkable film, many reasons can be used. The most important is the state of soul after its final credits. A film about life and fundamental options. A film about faith and about goodness. About questions and about the high price of answers. A film about the return and the way and the bag of grains , a burning tree reminding the meet between God and Moses, the voice of child in night and his invitation to dinner and, not the last, the powerful memories about "Stalker" by Andrei Tarkovski. Sure, I admit, the temptation , before see the movie, is the names of Semih Kapanoglu and Jean- Marc Bar . i do not know if it is a masterpiece. But , for me, it is not far by this definition. So, only "Bugday".

I love this film with all my heart. Much better than expected.. Good acting and good camera.. The only real question is how many awards will this win. See this film, it's utterly incredible. you'll see how much better it becomes. The technical side of the movie is practically flawless.It was a good movie!

The director Semih Kaplanoglu has a succesful cinema discography. His last film "Grain" is raising his cinematographic level to top!

Grain presents an excellent visual narration making feel the taste of Bela Tar, Andrei Tarkovsky, Pawel Pawlikowsky or Alfonso Cuaron movies. Also, by the context of dark storytelling and using mystic-religious references to tell a distopic story, the movie evokes Darren Aronofsky movies. However, these tastes signify only evoking materials; Kaplanoglu has achieved a genuine and peculiar cinema langue containing authentic, local and oriental images and narratives some of which refer to Kur'an.

Only disturbing content of movie, especially for me, Grain present an open-ended expression on the contradiction/combination of science and spiritual-religious beliefs within the story of an apocalyptic future where people strive against scarsity and poverty. Hence, some of possible interpretations can radically change main suggestions of the movie and many viewers (like me) could dislike some of these conclusions. The director's ideo-political position (close to actual political power in Turkey) may give some clues on what he has tried to express by his movie but, looking for the meaning out of this movie could lead us to false notions.

Despite this, I loved this movie very very much.

It is surprising how a modern era film can carry so much misogynism.

Overall the pacing of the film is torpid. That and the misogyny in several of the textual quotes proves an unpleasant cinematic experience.