Reviews

According to ALISSA SIMON of "Variety", this is a high-concept omnibus film developed from an idea by Serbian film critic/producer Nenad Dukic, that brings together five shorts by young lady directors from the republics of former Yugoslavia, all incorporating pregnancy in some way. Of variable interest and varying length.

Each segment is titled simply with the name of the country in which the action takes place, and separated from the next by a brief fade to black. The episodes reflect the economic, sociological, cultural and religious differences among the various countries. Strongest in terms of craft, performance and narrative is the suspenseful "Serbian Story." Tale of an expectant mother (Natasa Ninkovic) sharing an emergency room with a charming killer (Sergej Trifunovic) offers the piquant twist of an O. Henry yarn. While "Serbian Story" seems complete as a short work, ambitious drama "Bosnia & Herzegovina Story" feels more like an open-ended treatment, with nuanced acting that suggests complexities beyond the scope of the short running time. The narrative centers on a financially strapped Sarajevo family (Bosnian stars Emir Hadzihafizbegovic and Jasna Ornela Bery play the parents) forced to find a new place to live, while the pregnancy of Dutch U.N. official Hedder (Nina Violic) by the family's proud son (handsome Feda Stukan) is more tangential to the story. Uneven "Macedonia Story" unfolds in a private clinic where a junkie (soulful-looking Iva Zendelska) battles to keep her baby. Director Dzidzeva's hyper-real visuals and poetic framing make an impression despite the risible script. The longest but least engaging of the five, melodramatic "Croatian Story" follows a mentally unstable painter (Nera Stipcevic) who must decide if she should undergo a "selective reduction" because one of her twins will have Down syndrome. Still, notable production design supports the feeling of two worlds between the painter and her businessman hubby (Goran Bogdan). Arriving last, the attenuated "Slovenian Story," about a nun (Lucija Serbedzija) with her own version of immaculate conception, ends the omnibus on an awkwardly humorous note. Performed almost as silent comedy, the segment doesn't rep Slak's best work.

In conclusion, it could be stated that the film would not attract a very large audience, but that it was definitely worth seeing.

Before obtaining a copy of this film, and being very fond of Part 1, I read some of the reviews here. When reactions were so violent and outraged, most probably they were subjective and the product of defective education. Some even bordered on malignant stupidity. But this could be expected from the contemporary one-book, action-movie generations.

Although not the best of the Mikhalkov's movies, it is not bad at all. It could be vastly improved by re-cutting and shortening by one hour or so, but it nevertheless gives an accurate and touching picture of the horrors of the WW II in Soviet Union, of the enormous loss of young lives because of the monstrous Stalinist regime. Red Army was practically headless in 1941 because the majority of its leaders was either killed or in Gulags. It took some time and enormous loss of lives, equipment and territory, to push forward new and capable Red Army leaders and to train the ill prepared troops to fight Germans on equal footing. Mikhalkov's film accurately portrays the chaotic days of '41.

If you want to be "awake" go watch Steven Seagal or some such American crap, Mikhalkov is not for you. You are incapable of understanding the fight for survival on your own soil. So, shut up. If you don't like it, why watch it?

First of all, the number of voters is very low and I fear that those that rated the series badly are biased, even anti-Russian. Nevertheless, prevailing majority of the voters rated the film 7 and higher. Maybe IMDb should rethink the weighted averages method and revert to simple arithmetic means? One of the most significant faults of Russian films/TV serials is the lack of English subtitles. I understand Russian of the old soviet movies quite well, but have enormous problems understanding modern, quickly spoken language. The Russians will have to do something about it because many excellent creations go unnoticed. Very small number of people outside of Russia and ex-Soviet republics understand Russian. Due to this fact American distorted Goebelsian clichés about Russia still prevail: the Russians are either bad renegade generals, who want to attack poor unprotected America, or disgusting tycoons and prostitutes. This simply is not and was not so.

I am not Jewish, I do not have any Jews in the family, and only a handful of Jewish friends. I should be considered objective. "Insignificant number" of Jewish participants in WW1 was 100.000 (1/5 of the population). Killed in action around 12.000, 30 of them pilots. Why there should not be any reference to Jews in the Uebermansch movie? How low can you go in Guinea Bissau? As for the movie - it should not be compared to the "Flyboys" crap. Although I expected more of the film, it has brought us not enough and a little too late. There was definitely somewhat more of Lothar in Manfred, but otherwise the product is quite decent. Technically not bad with moderate amount of computer animation. It should be watched more then once to pass a definitive judgment. Not as good as "Aces High", definitely better than "Blue Max", and "Richthofen and Brown", and all the others on the same subject.

This is a very early (graduation) film of one of the best contemporary Serbian directors, Srdjan Karanovic. A village melodrama with tragic ending is presented with just the right dose of irony. The director's great talent is already visible. The entire cast is from the village, there are no professionals, and that gives the flavor of authenticity to this work. The additional spice to the movie is an old Gypsy violinist, who sings the old and passionate song (Pogledaj me, nevernice - Look at me, unfaithful) of love and death in a broken voice, and accompanying himself with a badly tuned violin. Nevertheless, the overall impression is great and somewhat revealing of the quality of the future, more mature works of this significant author.

I was only able to watch this beautiful movie recently, since the English subtitles appeared on the Internet. Pity it took someone so long to translate it. The film deals with the eternal dilemma of artists, torn apart between the urge to survive and to upheld some moral standards, in civil wars or during the enemy occupation. Under the skillful direction of Carlos Saura, all the actors performed superbly. The music is authentic and contemporary and sounds very convincing. After too many wars, the artist that entertained the enemy were often judged overly harshly. Not everybody is made to be a hero, and hunger is a very potent stimulant. The film is absolutely a must, but not for Fascist lovers, of course.

It really amazed me to see that someone would take so much time to assess such a bad movie. The beginning (of the film) had some truth in it. The Partisan "AF" was started in 1943 when two communist pilots from the Croat Ustashi AF deserted, together with their observers, in Breguet 19 and Potez 33, respectively. The aircraft saw some action in strafing and hand-bombing, but didn't last very long. One crew was killed and the other survived, the pilot being killed later while flying a Spitfire Vc. The real Partisan squadrons were established when RAF detached two of its (Yugoslav) squadrons of Spitfire Vc and, Hurricane IIc , respectively, manned by Ex Yugoslav Royal Airforce pilots, and allotted them to Tito's forces on the Island of Vis. Even those were never engaged in air-to-air activities, but strictly for ground support. So the film was one giant cow manure, to put it mildly, and the lowest point for its, otherwise not at all bad, director. By some quirk of fate I was present on the filming of the last sequence of the movie, when dozens of German aircraft were destroyed (Yugoslav 522 trainers, used also in the flying sequences) on the Mostar military airport. The pyrotechnics were impressive, and the Scotch served lavishly by the film crew was even better. Otherwise, the film was a shameless lie was and frequently joked about by the contemporary audience.

The film is unique musical parody of gangster movies, where all the roles are played by children. I first watched it shortly after its release, and was absolutely thrilled. Balanced director's work, smartly composed screenplay, great and very temporary musical score and, above all, the brilliant talent of young Jodie Foster. Not all the roles were played equally convincingly, but the kids were generally quite good. I enjoyed the film even more while writing subtitles (for home use) for it several months ago, being thus forced to listen carefully to every word spoken or sung. After 30 years, I really have nothing to add to my first impressions. "Bugsy Malone" is timeless, and should be listed among the movie classics, along with "The Wizzard of Oz" and "Oliver".