This is a movie which can we watched and taken-in at ease, with little after-work or after-school etc mental-effort, it's few lessons easily enough set/contextualised,..
...although some of the at-least-early-on in planning and writing character-development , is inconsistently thrown away, at the end of the movie, when a near-political ( if not political) sub-plot , starts, but is thrown-away in a feel-good, weak, even disrespectful ? , ending.
When it had the potential for a good left-open-ended-question kind of ending, where both the two main characters' relative-innocence, could've been maintained, but also a wider SCOPE introduced,.. ... of their eventual desires, becoming more collectively or inescapably-interconnectedly daunted, swamped,.. over-written,.. then,.. 'letting-adults-decide'.
------------
Instead, they get their initial desires full-filled in yet more opportunism & exploitation, but everyone's simply,.. happy-happy.
*spit*
... and as one of those foreigners who eat potatoes everyday ... lucky enough to be of the same identity that used to ONLY, survive, on them, or similarly poor/desperate means, during more PROLONGED commitment, to strikes & unions and making factory-owners NEED, to care, about their employees...
... i have to say that this ending is quite disrespectful, not just of grandma's funeral,.. but also of both local, AND international consistencies, of WHEN ;
----------
that's too political for a kids movie?
yeah maybe, but in that case, you might as well leave the movie entirely kids-ey ... so why the scene with the older brother crushing the mailbox-advertising-scrap in his hand after his grandmother's funeral was less expensive than a pizza?
there is clearly meant to be introduction to the Q.s / reasons, there... but to have a happy-happy ending at the end of all that... mmm... like an emotional roller-coaster ... why have a tipped-in-sugar ending?
i would've wanted to see the elder brother to see his younger cramming his mouth, but then a close-up ... a memory-cut-back sequence, and then him deciding to turn the table over in the cameras, spitting on their 'hero' ... and then walking off with his brother and his mum,.. the news asking him WHY,.. he did.
It is a REALITY, that people are NOT, content, with placations / proffered-'results' / fantasied-about ... happy-happy endings, in reality.
In the same way that when one can accept that one's communities-based religious leader, unlike the more obviously hopeless political-'leader'-stooge of their slum ... are sometimes able to bring some wisdom/philosophical relativity or rationalisation or P.O.V ... but despite being able to, still cannot change INEVITABILITY, of conflict and RE-EMERGENCES, of discontent, and ... well ... MORE,.. than merely discontent, the longer a happy-face is put in front of exploitation.
It is not an imposition, to say that, and it is NOT, someone else's culture, let alone religion,.. to recognise what has been ADMISSIVELY recognised, BY, people like factory owners, or recruiters of conscripted soldiers, in the past ... when it comes to people's reactions, to their time/money/lives, being wasted, or asked-for, for someone else's interests.
yes, yes,.. too much for a kids movie...
but on the other hand... WHY have, that crushing the advertising-scrap ... if not wanting to introduce it in the movie at all?
Disney certainly doesn't make that mistake,.. IF,.. that was your ONLY intention... keeping the fantasies going for longer.
it's like the directors/producers for this one, could not make up their mind.
a good solid, consistent, direction, not changing it's mind half-way through, or especially not, right before the end... ...makes a movie like this, not just a 'OK' movie ... but a lot more, and maybe a great movie,.. by moving into the pre-adult / adult phase of the economic-politics,.. at least, in the elder-brother's likely rejection, even if he had to become the embittered-black-sheep, while everyone else, goes happy-happy.
That AT LEAST, would not leave a bitter taste in your mouth, after it having had some potential there, but then half the audience waving their hands at the screen and walking off before the movie's ended, or asking for their money back, etc.
----------------
it's cinematography, and story-boarding, acting, and other production values, are all right though. Quite realistic, and no doubt to some, shocking, so thumbs up for that.
I imagine there were a lot of dissapointed crew, left-hanging , left-wanting, after the end of the production, of this one.
---------------------
Perhaps betrayed in the editing suite, when TOLD, that it was going to remain political?
GAMBLE on that political interest... and you'll win, from many's interest in that,.. not lose, from other interests, being feathers-ruffled upset or other weaning terms... when fearing not getting donations/investment for the production, if you do.
Don't GET, or try, to get, donations/investments for the production, if it's going to be a movie that HAS, a political sub-plot in the first place - get it via crowd-funding, or somewhere else. A admissive superstar / businessman, rather than supposedly inevitable greed, in all rich.
Some are. Ask them. There's no point, in starting a sub-plot, and then betraying it. No-one likes the result, the popularity dwindles rapidly, instead of the film being consistent enough, that people can want to watch it again - they go... nooo, not good enough,.. not committed enough,.. to the sub-plot ... don't watch this one, watch some other one ... for a better portrayal of what causes conflict / when conflict ACTUALLY happens, from that kind of circumstance / opportunity.
Someone recognising the elder brother's OPPORTUNITY ... in production terms,.. is recognising something true, when saying... you've got potential there for a sequel. Please! not more happy-happy endings!
The poor, are a immense 'resource', for the filmmaker that 'gambles' on that interest.
------------
Russian films, are decades beyond even using the word, "gamble".
why.
...although some of the at-least-early-on in planning and writing character-development , is inconsistently thrown away, at the end of the movie, when a near-political ( if not political) sub-plot , starts, but is thrown-away in a feel-good, weak, even disrespectful ? , ending.
When it had the potential for a good left-open-ended-question kind of ending, where both the two main characters' relative-innocence, could've been maintained, but also a wider SCOPE introduced,.. ... of their eventual desires, becoming more collectively or inescapably-interconnectedly daunted, swamped,.. over-written,.. then,.. 'letting-adults-decide'.
------------
Instead, they get their initial desires full-filled in yet more opportunism & exploitation, but everyone's simply,.. happy-happy.
*spit*
... and as one of those foreigners who eat potatoes everyday ... lucky enough to be of the same identity that used to ONLY, survive, on them, or similarly poor/desperate means, during more PROLONGED commitment, to strikes & unions and making factory-owners NEED, to care, about their employees...
... i have to say that this ending is quite disrespectful, not just of grandma's funeral,.. but also of both local, AND international consistencies, of WHEN ;
- to maintain your demands,
- when to persist with the pursuit of punishment,
- when to not lose your nerve, when generosity / weaning's emotions, are mis-used by someone who is only interested in appearing to be something,.. temporarily, as long as they need-to, another mask, discarded.
----------
that's too political for a kids movie?
yeah maybe, but in that case, you might as well leave the movie entirely kids-ey ... so why the scene with the older brother crushing the mailbox-advertising-scrap in his hand after his grandmother's funeral was less expensive than a pizza?
there is clearly meant to be introduction to the Q.s / reasons, there... but to have a happy-happy ending at the end of all that... mmm... like an emotional roller-coaster ... why have a tipped-in-sugar ending?
i would've wanted to see the elder brother to see his younger cramming his mouth, but then a close-up ... a memory-cut-back sequence, and then him deciding to turn the table over in the cameras, spitting on their 'hero' ... and then walking off with his brother and his mum,.. the news asking him WHY,.. he did.
It is a REALITY, that people are NOT, content, with placations / proffered-'results' / fantasied-about ... happy-happy endings, in reality.
In the same way that when one can accept that one's communities-based religious leader, unlike the more obviously hopeless political-'leader'-stooge of their slum ... are sometimes able to bring some wisdom/philosophical relativity or rationalisation or P.O.V ... but despite being able to, still cannot change INEVITABILITY, of conflict and RE-EMERGENCES, of discontent, and ... well ... MORE,.. than merely discontent, the longer a happy-face is put in front of exploitation.
It is not an imposition, to say that, and it is NOT, someone else's culture, let alone religion,.. to recognise what has been ADMISSIVELY recognised, BY, people like factory owners, or recruiters of conscripted soldiers, in the past ... when it comes to people's reactions, to their time/money/lives, being wasted, or asked-for, for someone else's interests.
yes, yes,.. too much for a kids movie...
but on the other hand... WHY have, that crushing the advertising-scrap ... if not wanting to introduce it in the movie at all?
Disney certainly doesn't make that mistake,.. IF,.. that was your ONLY intention... keeping the fantasies going for longer.
it's like the directors/producers for this one, could not make up their mind.
a good solid, consistent, direction, not changing it's mind half-way through, or especially not, right before the end... ...makes a movie like this, not just a 'OK' movie ... but a lot more, and maybe a great movie,.. by moving into the pre-adult / adult phase of the economic-politics,.. at least, in the elder-brother's likely rejection, even if he had to become the embittered-black-sheep, while everyone else, goes happy-happy.
That AT LEAST, would not leave a bitter taste in your mouth, after it having had some potential there, but then half the audience waving their hands at the screen and walking off before the movie's ended, or asking for their money back, etc.
----------------
it's cinematography, and story-boarding, acting, and other production values, are all right though. Quite realistic, and no doubt to some, shocking, so thumbs up for that.
I imagine there were a lot of dissapointed crew, left-hanging , left-wanting, after the end of the production, of this one.
---------------------
Perhaps betrayed in the editing suite, when TOLD, that it was going to remain political?
GAMBLE on that political interest... and you'll win, from many's interest in that,.. not lose, from other interests, being feathers-ruffled upset or other weaning terms... when fearing not getting donations/investment for the production, if you do.
Don't GET, or try, to get, donations/investments for the production, if it's going to be a movie that HAS, a political sub-plot in the first place - get it via crowd-funding, or somewhere else. A admissive superstar / businessman, rather than supposedly inevitable greed, in all rich.
Some are. Ask them. There's no point, in starting a sub-plot, and then betraying it. No-one likes the result, the popularity dwindles rapidly, instead of the film being consistent enough, that people can want to watch it again - they go... nooo, not good enough,.. not committed enough,.. to the sub-plot ... don't watch this one, watch some other one ... for a better portrayal of what causes conflict / when conflict ACTUALLY happens, from that kind of circumstance / opportunity.
Someone recognising the elder brother's OPPORTUNITY ... in production terms,.. is recognising something true, when saying... you've got potential there for a sequel. Please! not more happy-happy endings!
The poor, are a immense 'resource', for the filmmaker that 'gambles' on that interest.
------------
Russian films, are decades beyond even using the word, "gamble".
why.