borislav_dimitrov Reviews

The Exam (2021)

In or out of the community?

[9/10 · 3 December 2023]

This is an interesting movie making the spectators think and posing probably the right questions for the close but also distant - to the Western world - Kurdish community in the Middle East as well as for universal human values.

Is it fine to fight the family, parent, community traditions and rules? How far can we reach in our rebel against these traditions and rules? Is it possible to build up love instead of hate? Can we invest so much in hatred so we can ruin our and others' lives? Is the education an obstacle to a marriage? In other words - will a marriage not need educated people? How much it is easier to learn to hate instead of learning to love (even in an arranged marriage)?

How much personal freedoms may contradict to the community and family traditions? Which is better - to indulge in individual or community rights and obligations?

And more... How to develop a society full of injustice and, respectively, full of corruption? Can the control and supervision ensure justice? Can the education make a real difference in the social standing of the people?

...At the end, was it a university entry "exam" or it was a judgemental exam in front of ourselves?...

Congratulations for the casting and also for at least some of the frames in the cinematography.

A movie which worths a recommendation!

A Hero (I) (2021)

Smiling to Hollywood

[9/10 · 6 March 2023]

I have just recently watched the movie for a second time.

And it was more than worth it. This movie for me is simply a spiritual gratification.

Let me start from the actors casting - Amir Jadidi and Sahar Goldust are a couple with a chemistry on the screen. I would not like to miss to mention Fereshteh Sadre Orafaiy for her noticeable appearance in an important supporting role. No need to speak for Mohsen Tanabandeh.

The framing quality and the colours in the cinematography are above the top world level. In some of the frames (cadres) I stay with my jaw dropped from the impact these frames have. Warm congratulations for the camera men and the film editor.

The whole story and the overall directing are a world top cinema at its best. ...In some of the scenes the main heroes are smiling with their white teeth flashing probably in a slightly exaggerated Bollywood manner but, honestly, I see this as a smile or even a laugh towards Hollywood.

Yes, I do think Asghar Farhadi and this particular movie teach a lesson in contemporary film-making, a making actually of a piece of art that is dramatic but also human, close to the real people, emotional and realistic, clear in the questions asked and messages delivered, very convincing in what it would like to tell us.

Is there good? Are there good people? What does it mean to be a good person? Can the good people pay for their love and honour with their freedom? Can the good people be so humble and reconciled to return to jail voluntarily? Is this at all understandable to atheist/ material/ Western people? How people react to an impasse in their life? Can love save everything?

If not the answers, at least the questions are there in this movie.

The reason I am giving 9 out 10 in the rating is that there are a bit too many twists/ turns in the storyline. Most probably this is the wind from the Middle Eastern deserts coming to the large and welcoming scene of world cinema. Probably the movie is looking for the broadest possible audience? Why not, I can practically understand and justify all this...

Excellent movie, very close to the level of The Salesman, Separation, About Elly. Strongly recommended even as a textbook of film-making today.

Scenes from a Marriage (2021)

Cheated upon matures to cheat himself?

[6/10 · 18 June 2022]

A TV series that will touch probably all the people who had a separation or divorce in their lives, i.e.majority of people on Earth (or at least the North-Western part of it).

Unfortunately, I find it not convincing that a man originating from a traditional family (Jewish in this screenplay) and having been "taught to everything in sex" by his wife could remain so much cold-blooded and in control after he understands about his wife's infidelity and could later turn himself into a someone "like everybody" starting to cheat on his own account.

In my view, this concept is very much westernized and Americanized and for me decreases the value of the production.

To return to the old family house with your ex 2 years after the divorce and while having a partnership with the mother of your second child (a son), is probably very human but not in the good sense in my view.

Another element that is worthy a mentioning in my opinion is the arrogant behavior of the wife's lover. He plays a role of practically owning the woman, first not letting her to return to her husband and later on somehow patronizingly sending a voice mail to the husband trying to calmhim down that he would not prevent the lady now to come back home... I thinj this is more liberal than necessary. Infidelity comes from the need of freedom, variety, excitement, new opportunities and it is just ugly to turn it into being owned and patronized by someone else.

Otherwise I can easily highlight a very good actors' playing, very intensive dramatic dialogues and, last but not least, the intimate scenes are shot with a great level of authenticity and all this deserves congratulations.

TV series that attract attention but the overall message is a failure for me.

The Worst Person in the World (2021)

Woman in post-modernism?

[7/10 · 13 June 2022]

The movie definitely has some weaknesses but, on the other hand, leaves the spectator thinking. The latter gives the respective value.

Otherwise we see the story of a contemporary girl in s post-industrial, post-modern liberal world.

And what we see? Lack of orientation, lack of perseverance, inconsistencies, searching for herself throughout the whole life but declaratively a pro-femminist?

How the main heroine met her new partner? Her current man was busy with his art and could not go out... so she went alone and joined a strangers' wedding party in a unknown place. She drank, danced and noticed a man was staring at her... Then she initiated a talk and... wanted to smell his perspiration... and to accompany him while pissing...

There was a good cultural contradiction between her ex dying from cancer and seeing her as "the best human being in the world" and her uncertainty (in her pregnancy and motherhood), her lack of confidence and practically lack of idea what she wants to do with her life...

Who is the worst man in the wolrd? Probably a confused femminist and egocentric girl in a world too liberal?

The Last Duel (2021)

The Last Duel and Probably the First Cry of Feminism in Feudal Europe

[10/10 · 23 January 2022]

The movie is really impressive as a make, scenes, details, and, of course, the presentation of three points of view on one and the same events.

The big topic could be said to be the situation of women in the medieval Europe and particularly France.

The story lines, the thesis and the movie messages (questions) are very clear and convincing. The movie raises the questions of the women's right of sexual gratification, the right of a choice of the partner, right of divorce - all practically not existing at that time, the right of a complaint against sexual assaults, etc.

The main female character - Lady Marguerite - is a well educated and raised-up woman from the French middle aristocracy. She is made to marry an illiterate soldier - squire and later a knight, Sir Jean, because of her father's treason to the King and the consequent suspicious reputation of her family of origin.

It happens that for more than 5 years the spouses cannot have a child - she simply is not getting pregnant. In the same time an old friend and now a rival of her husband is attracting an attention.

During one of the travels of her husband, there is a sexual intercourse between the "handsome and charming" Jacques and Marguerite. This is the plot tie of the movie and the three different points of view to it as well as to the preceding and succeeding events actually make the movie a high level piece of art.

Lady Marguerite makes a complaint it was a rape. Of course, the big question is why she decided to act like this?

There are grounded assumptions that most probably the mother-in-law of Marguerite, the mother of Sir Jean in the movie, had staged the "rape" thus ensuring a successor of the family and women's survival in the "men's world".

Why, indeed, Lady Marguerite decided to speak about a "rape" and to provoke a trial that may have lead to dire consequences for her?

Is it because it was a real rape and she wanted to fight for justice? Is it because she was completely faithful to her husband and wanted to be fair with him?

Or she wanted to escape the vague and threatening consequences of an affair with Jacques, ruining her husband, whose property actually she was (according to the feudal norms), and having a very unclear future probably branded as an unfaithful wife with an unwanted child and on the streets or even murdered?

It seems she had taken a very smart decision assuming a very high risk (probably not fully acknowledged in the moment of the decision) - knowing her husband pretty well, she bet on his pride and honour, on his vanity, she stood beside him and strongly supported him against the lover/ "rapist", even in a public trial. Lady Marguerite gave such a support to her husband that motivated him practically to win the duel and to give a good future for the family and especially for Marguerite herself.

Such a woman's decision is difficult to be seen nowadays, what to speak about 14th century. This decision is modern and sufficiently clever even for 21st century. Instead of sinking into a love affair with devastating consequences for everyone, including for her own life, she had chosen to take a strong and risky stance and to "invest" in values like family, husband/ spouse, pride, honour, fairness, openness, combativeness, new generation, succession of the family line, future.

If I see a somewhat of a weak point in the movie, this is the moment when she tried to blame her husband for his vanity and the risk for her life. A twist from the ever challenging attempt to through accusations to the spouse, the other, the feminist to the man, etc. Fear against decisiveness, selfishness against togetherness... Hope the movie is not too much in the sensitive "Harvey Weinstein" and "Me too" lines.

Anyway, this is a movie making the spectators think. Like every piece of art of high quality, it raises more questions than giving concrete answers.

How important is the sexual satisfaction against family values or partnership/ support? Is it worthy to ruin a family and spouse for a short affair with a charming stranger? How can we survive smartly? Do we have to sacrifice the lover for the sake of the spouse? Can we choose between ruining, humiliating the partner and stimulating his/ her pride and dignity? How best to invest in our own future? Do we reproduce ourselves with good genes? Can we invest both in ourself and in the partner with whom we live together?

Probably the last duel in France in end of 14th century had turned into one of the first shouts of feminism in Europe?

The Woman of My Life (2015)

Very good contemporary international movie

[7/10 · 28 November 2020]

I was first hesitating whether to write a review but reading the only review here and the relatively low rating of this movie, I felt somehow obliged to say my alternative opinion. And it is that the movie is a surprisingly good one from an unexpected team of creators - Bulgaria, North Macedonia, Iraq and Romania.

For me the 'secret' is in the fact that the screenplay is based on a true strory proposed by an Iraqi journalist.

The main line that the 'woman of someone's life' is actually the 6-years girl with whom the 6-years boy was engaged in his childhood is a very good concept well put into an art conflict with the monsterous reality of the Cold War, the competing East and West, the hypocricy of the politics and the secret services, no matter who/ which they are.

The movie as if comes to confirm that yes, it is possible to feel belonging and to follow the pre-determination of a child engagement, yes, it is normal and even easeier and more predictable, practically it seems to be the best solution, if the partners are chosen well in advance by the elderly, who already have experience and know each other's families, yes, it is worth it to follow your finacée, even if or just because the engagement had been done in the wonderful childhood years, yes, you can and you have to fight and cross borders for your love and for your finacée, who had been decided for you by the family and God - major values in the respective community. The shocking contrast to the so-called ''liberal'' values actually adds a lot of value to the movie itself.

Another successful aspect is the authentic way of presentation of the communist and authoritarian regimes (Bulgaria and Iraq in the movie). The hypocricy, the deception, the abuse of human rights, the exploitation of human fates for any political reasons.

Like in real life, of cource, the personal stuff prevails the political one.

Good move deserving a high recommendation!

Tehran Taboo (2017)

Position of the child in the ancient tradition

[7/10 · 10 January 2020]

In the times when Iran is more than just a breaking news, this movie comes to satisfy curiosity about this mysterious, isolated but grand and ancient country.

The movie is loaded with social criticism, despair, hypocrisy, deception. Probably this makes it weight a bit more than necessary in the eyes and tastes of (experienced) spectators. There is a loud cry for the women's rights, which is somehow, of course, expected.

However, there is one thing, one theme, that actually made me write this review. This is the theme of the position and role of the child in the Middle Eastern traditions and culture. A culture that had largely impacted Europe and the West and still could be sensed in the border areas between the two worlds and/ or in the psychological disorders on the West.

The main hero is a muted kid of 5 who is witnessing the prostitution work of his mother and other peculiar elements of adults' everyday life. The concept that the children are a complete property of their parent(s) and the latter can do whatever they want with their kids is shown very well in a contrasting conflict with the modern, post-industrialisation and globalisation understanding of the West for protection of the children's rights. In this sense, the authors of the movie deserve big congratulations for the courage to try - successfully - to shock the Western audience.

This Persian/ Middle Eastern or even old-tradition, generally speaking, concept for the social role of children demonstrates a set of parents-children relations, which probably existed worldwide before the era of the added value, market economy, competition, mobility, globalisation, now covered - as we can see it - by social and human rights protection.

Having said that, I am personally not sure whether the Western public may even understand the movie message being bewildered by the shocking scenes of a child's life in his "first 7 years".

As a conclusion, I think this is a movie to be recommended, a movie showing Persian taboos and probably hinting about Western taboos regarding the capacity to look objectively and impartially on what is happening just next to us, out of the "golden billion"...

Professor Marston & the Wonder Women (2017)

Controversial and interesting - interesting and controversial

[8/10 · 9 September 2018]

The first impression after or even while watching the movie is close to stunning - the film respects with its directness/ straightforwardness and honesty. The participation of charming/ handsome, even though not extremely beautiful, characters, the general tone of sexy indecency and the good build up of the plot really raise the movie high.

I see on IMDB here that the overall rating is 7.1 out of 10. I personally gave 8 but I can admit I see 2 relatively big problems in the film.

The one is in the eternal controversy between the abstinence (including in Christian sense) and submission to the temptation. I am not completely convinced that in the 20ies of 20th century we may have a male professor to an entirely female class in the college. If we have a division of classes on sex basis then it is hardly understandable to send a clever and handsome 30+ aged professor to teach in psychology 20+ aged female students, even in front of his wife. Of course, it is then only natural that there will be at least a sparkle between one/ some of the students and the attractive self-confident professor.

Here comes the obviously superior and advantageous position of the professor and his wife towards the inferior one of the curious young student, who volunteered to be their assistant. And we are in front of the question - how much we have the inducement, the seduction, the temptation, and use and, why not - the abuse of the situation. The age difference between the professor and the student is 11 years (in real life) - yes, it is human to make errors, it is human to be attracted, to be tempted, to seduce, to like, to love, to surrender, to comply, to submit... But can we ask on what price? Don't we just have another evil mind, another 'smart ass' professor who simply conquers a much younger girl?

In this line, initially Betty (the spouse) declared she is not sexually jealous but... the tables turned already on the first meeting with the young attractive girl. Yes, people, including women, can easily change their mind, but don't we speak again for the personification of the interests and the urge to dominate and... practically ab/use the situation and even the other people?

There is a well presented confrontation in the movie between the 'normal'/ expected/ standard behavior and the personal choice of the main characters, basically Olive (Dotsy). The latter tried to follow the societal norms but she got largely discouraged in this and practically induced/ seduced to ''the other'' side by the elderly, more experienced and obviously smarter couple. A very good scene was when the Olive's fiancée tried to limit her contacts with the 'patrons' and Betty confidently announced that he cannot just give a ring to the girl and then hold her in the box of the marriage. It is a very nice statement, seeming to be in favor of the rights of women and personal freedom but... practically it sounds only as a justification to keep the beautiful young girl for other purposes, ''for us'', simply because we like/ love her and we are aware of her hesitation... A good episode of the movie is that Olive decided to be true to her boyfriend and she annulled the engagement turning the ring to him.

The second problem I saw in the film and something that surprised me a bit was the general notion professor Marston to be presented as a feminist. Let's not forget that the film director is a woman. Honestly, I am myself pretty curious to see a prominent man standing on clear feminist positions. I can admit that for the first part of 20th century to raise questions for the free choice of women, for their education, what is 'normal' in general, is probably a big feminist step forward. On the other hand, to make children to 2 women, to keep them or at least one of them - 11 years younger - in a well-induced submission sounds like a set of tricks of a clever and sufficiently handsome 'smart ass'. Ok, a man who succeeded in selling out his controversial comic strip full of kinky sex, but who got a heavy disease (cancer) and left 2 women and 4 children relatively early in his life.

Just let me generalize again - I cannot easily see a feminism in a harem-type domicile of one man and two women, a man making children on his choice with either of the women, etc. The love/ sexual story between Betty and Dotsy (Olive) exists in the movie and adds a lot of color to it but is denied or at least put under a serious question by the real granddaughter of the professor, so... if feminism is in the female-to-female love... it as if goes against the feminism... Sorry!

As a conclusion, let me say it is indeed a very interesting movie, raising a lot of question and, for good or a bad reason, also the question whether we see the story of a genial man and ''his wonder women'' or the story of a lucky dominant smart ass who succeeded in making children to a few seemingly loving women in his short life...

Everybody Knows (2018)

Sad story but probably sufficiently authentic

[8/10 · 10 May 2018]

I went to the premier of the movie with a great anticipation and I can say it fits well into what could be expected from Mr Farhadi.

Honestly speaking, I was hesitating whether to rate it 8 or 7 out of 10 because probably this movie is standing a bit lower than his ''The Salesman'' or ''A Separation'', for example.

Let me build my review from negative - from my point of view - to more positive features of the movie.

The topic of a kidnapping is very much explored in film industry and unfortunately it bears a predefined/ prejudged drama, which very often sounds or looks like a cliché. The shock, the panic... the decision not to call the police and to start to collect the money for ransom... I find an interesting reference here to ''The Salesman'' where our family in the main role also decided not to call the police in Tehran for the incident - probably a nice twist showing that people all across the world are actually the same and this could be considered a part of the universal message of most of Farhadi's movies...

The character of Irene practically turns into a true victim of the whole story being just at age of 16... One of the last cadres of her being devastated and exhausted and suffering somehow look well authentic but show what is the price and who has to pay it for the ''games'' of the adults or other people in general. Following the open-end approach of Mr Farhadi, the reasonable questions are - what will be her fate, will she overcome this trauma, will she forget and how, will she remain a victim for the rest of her life?

The meeting and the talks between Alejandro, the husband, and Paco, the lover, of Laura seem provocative and probably they are pushing the limits but... my que is - is it the same also for the European ''libertine'' culture? It is understandable that in many parts of the world it is unthinkable to meet the lover of your wife or to raise a kid from another man and this is presented also in a controversial way in the movie. Nevertheless, the character of Alejandro is subject to mockery, including for his faith in God, leaving to us, the spectators, to wonder whether the author would like to present him as a divine or a looser-type man... or probably the both?

Let me move towards some more positive things. Following the title, I personally liked the general notion that most, if not all secrets are actually calling to be revealed or discovered, therefore - often a lot of secrets are known by everyone - ''Everybody Knows''! This is simply how it happens in true life.

Another thing I love in Farhadi's movies is the intention of the characters to practically dig as deep as possible and to reach to the bottom of what it has to be.

In this context the full clarity about the events, including the (open) end revealing who had organized the kidnapping but leaving it in the mist whether people will actually tell about it, is really worth an appreciation.

From my personal point of view, yes, I simply agree that past plays a big role nowadays, yes, old deeds do matter, yes, infidelity and children from another man are life-changing events, yes, there are a lot of secrets ''known by everybody'', but for which people are often reluctant to talk, yes, there are weaker and stronger persons and often the ones seen or called ''weak'' attract and receive mockery, yes, often in true life the most innocent become victims, yes, a lot of people accept to make big compromises or simply continue to live the life as it is... but at a high price...

''Everybody Knows'' is the next good movie from Mr Farhadi, hardly overtaking his previous masterpieces, which could be considered an unexpected surprise at the time, but anyway, this is an authentic psychological drama, unfortunately or fortunately - trying to warn or teach us something like every piece of the big art - with sad and even deep dark connotations...

About Elly (2009)

Do we have the right not to love?

[10/10 · 1 May 2018]

Yesterday I watched "About Elly" for a second time after 4 years from the first watch. Honestly, I kept the movie as a kind of a reward for myself knowing pretty well that this is simply a masterpiece.

I would not like to repeat the numerous superlative reviews of the movie. The plot is just amazing, the suspense/ mystery is magnificent, the dialogues are extremely well constructed with the right timing and weighting of the words, the cinematography is remarkable... Probably there are 2 moments of slightly exaggerated camera shivers to pass over the stress intensity (the drowning incident and the moment the fiancee acknowledged the truth) but this is more than forgivable.

In addition, I can say that I don't remember to have watched a movie with such a cast of actresses - not only the beauty and charm but a wonderful presence in the roles. Merila Zare'i as Shohreh resembles - I would not like to do a blasphemy - the Christian's Saint Marie.

I would like just to share what I think is the core message of this great movie. The focus is without a doubt in the women's right of a free choice of a partner, the right of a divorce or separation.

However, the biggest question for me is the following: is the call, the thrill to fly free as a kite allowed when we are bound - again as a kite - in a relation with another person?

The movie presents in a more than wonderful way the cultural contradiction between the oriental/ Middle Eastern/ Asian/ old custom concept of belonging, loyalty, "a partner for the whole life", "learning to love/ the art of loving" (reference to Erich Fromm) and the Western liberal gender equality, the sexual revolution of the 1960-ies, polygamy, frequent separations/ divorces, etc.

Making the spectators think and raising burning questions - who can do this better than Mr. Asghar Farhadi?

And yes, the right questions seem to come without an end. What a drive for freedom can bring to us when we are in a relationship? Would it be suffering and death? Wouldn't it be much healthier and better for everyone, if we simply remain humble, accept the reality and devote to the partner? At what price can we remain loyal? When and why the love disappears? Should't we impose on ourselves to love our partner? Can we afford ourselves to stop loving? Can we build skills, can we learn to love? Does a relationship create a feeling of being a property or it is just a loyalty and faithfulness?

At the movie's open end - a Farhadi's specialty - the fiancée seems to tend to preserve the dignity of Elly taking the responsibility to inform her family about the tragic incident himself. Love will probably prevail over the attempt of freedom?

The movie clearly shows that liberal attitude and behaviour in a relationship can bring misery, therefore, can we really allow ourselves not to love?

Granitza (1994)

Great film for the communist times in Bulgaria

[10/10 · 20 March 2017]

The film was accepted very badly by the people feeling nostalgia towards the communism in Bulgaria but honestly speaking, this is probably the best film ever made for that era.

The movie is a gathering image of the cynicism, hypocrisy and the deception in the late communist society of the country. Practically, it is based on real statistical data for the people killed trying to cross the border and escape from the communism to neighbouring countries - 105 casualties officially recorded in the period 1962 - 1990.

The movie reveals the personal tragedy in choosing to kill in order to get ''free'' from the ''system'' represented in the film by a military border check-point. The film makes a very good contrast between what is moral and free, on one side, and how failing in morals actually leads to murders in the hypocritical world of communism, on the other side.

The film contains some repulsive scenes, which are not intended for children, but as a whole it sounds pretty authentic and the film crew deserves only admirations.

Understandably, not easily acceptable by the general public, not a funny and leisure-time movie, but a true and honest picture of the decay of the late communist times.