logo
VidMate
Free YouTube video & music downloader
Download
Voyna (2002)

Voyna (2002)

GENRESAction,Drama,War
LANGRussian,English,Chechen
ACTOR
Aleksey ChadovIan KellyIngeborga DapkunaiteSergey Bodrov
DIRECTOR
Aleksey Balabanov

SYNOPSICS

Voyna (2002) is a Russian,English,Chechen movie. Aleksey Balabanov has directed this movie. Aleksey Chadov,Ian Kelly,Ingeborga Dapkunaite,Sergey Bodrov are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2002. Voyna (2002) is considered one of the best Action,Drama,War movie in India and around the world.

During the bloody war in Chechnya, a British couple and two Russian soldiers are taken hostage by Chechen rebels. Two of the hostages are then released to bring the money for the British woman who is forced to wait for the ransom.

Voyna (2002) Reviews

  • Realistic

    provp2011-03-17

    I liked the film a lot. Sure enough, as an action film, it is more realistic than the Rambo movies, but it is not its biggest merit. I'd recommend watching the film only for the sake of getting to know the Russian perspective on things - Westerners, Chechen "freedom-fighters", the Russian army, Moscow, the Russian "outback", etc). I did not see any problem with Ian Kelly's acting, he looked quite convincing to me - after all he was playing the role of a British actor. My favourite quote from the film: John: This is an offence against our human rights! Chechen (in Russian): What does he want? Russian translator (in Russian): He wants to drink. Chechen (in Russian): Tell him to shut up or he'll get the gun-stock. Russian translator: John, shut up.

    More
  • Best war movie I've seen

    gut-62005-03-16

    This film is both very different and very superior to American war movies. The latter these days are marred by moral equivalence, sanitisation and excessively balletic theatricality, with battle scenes looking like firework displays filmed in slow motion as the orchestra swells to a cheesy crescendo. This film, by contrast, is infused with an industrial-strength dose of Russian cynicism. It's refreshing to see a lack of PC cant in its depiction of a genuinely evil enemy. For once it has a realistic portrayal of the religion of peace, with peace-loving Islamic terrorists peacefully beheading civilians for internet decapitation videos and leaving their victims in a particularly peaceful state. When they're not welshing on deals or slaughtering the infidel, they're settling scores with each other in inter-clan blood feuds. However unlike older American & British war movies which weren't made by leftists, the nominal good guys on the Russian side are incompetent, corrupt and unmotivated. The battle scenes are very realistic, neither sanitised and bloodless, nor baroque self-indulgent slow-motion Peckinpahesque spectacles. They are gory but not overly spectacular or thunderous, heroic in the abstract but sordid. Civilian casualties are inevitable, somewhat regrettable but unavoidable. It's particularly relevant to see the effete, whining, hypocritical Pilgeresque Englishman demanding human rights from those who spit at the concept, anguishing over the deaths of "civilians" travelling with the terrorists, then putting the whole party in danger with his wild shooting. In refreshing contrast to Hollywood, the acting is excellent and the plot is tight yet unpredictable. The denouement had me laughing out loud for the way it highlights the hypocrisy of everyone in dealing with the reality of war. The cinematography is magnificent, especially in the mountain tops and steep valleys. The jeep being rolled down the steep gorge was a particular highlight.

    More
  • Hollywood rests

    invinciblecannonfodder2006-05-14

    I expected this movie to be simply rubbish, instead i was won over by the quality of the acting (no thanks to Ian Kelly)and the authenticity of the setting. The cinematography was great too. Scenes of beautiful landscape would be contrasted by the gory shootouts as well as great shot of the 4x4 flying off the cliff, which upon meeting the bottom of the ravine was not met by a fireball. It is true that the firefights seem dull and even anticlimactic, however that is the whole beauty behind them. They didn't need to be sugar coated by big explosions and slow-mo deaths instead opting for a more realistic approach. Were some of the weapons real? In all this is a decent movie worthwhile watching because it allows you to take a break from the latest teen slashers and high octane Vin Diesel movies : )

    More
  • Worth seeing, though flawed

    orbit662005-12-25

    From a British perspective, it's interesting to note the only really poor performance came from Ian Kelly (John), an English actor. Had it not been for his atrocious skills, the film would have been excellent. Casting him took some authenticity away from the film, but then again, why Ingeborga Dapkunaite as (Margaret) didn't have a single spoken line in the film didn't help either! Aleksei Chadov as (Ivan) put in a great performance, and all other elements came together to make good entertainment and a rare look at the Chechen "situation". This is probably one of the most realistic films I've seen gore-wise. Family entertainment it ain't. If you're male, and looking for something different from the usual blockbuster bore-fest, then give this a viewing!

    More
  • really good war movie

    sirkaos22007-03-01

    I've just watched the movie and i liked it a lot. 1st thing i liked about it is that it gives an info about war in Chechnya, stuff i never knew much about, so that was the reason why i started to watch it. but, as the movie went on more and more good things about it started appearing. its pretty realistic, so different for regular USA action BSing (great explosions make great movie...LOL). i don't think that Muslim fighters were "bad guys" in this movie, at least they r not shown that way. yes, their prisoners work as slaves, they kill prisoners, starve them and stuff...but its shown just as a things that do happen in war. and, lets face it, they do. also, enemies (chechens) r not some people that we know nothing about, aslan in his conversation with Ivan clearly states why is he fighting and which side is "the right side" in that conflict. basically, all sides involved have their good and bad sides. fighting scenes r made just the way i like it: keeping it real, no cheap explosions to make stupid viewers say "aaahhh, thats great", no exaggeration of any kind. scenes of countryside r beautiful. the best part of the movie, IMO, is the ending. i could say that thats the point where only "bad guy" is revealed: john goes back and becomes famous and he doesn't give a f... about whats going on with his comrades back in Russia, he just lets those poor Russians and chechens rot, he himself not having any worry in the world. he just showed everything what he filmed without asking himself what would that cause to Ivan in Russia. Ivan, on the other side, showed himself to be man of principles, honest, brave, fair and firm. really nice movie, realistic, not idolizing anyone, not praising anyone, just showing the war as it is (nothing more and nothing less)

    More

Hot Search