Rezensionen von Ehsan_Alikhani

The casting is weak.

There are excessive pauses between dialogues, giving the impression of a dramatic reading rather than a cinematic experience.

The sound design is extremely irritating-for example, the singing of Hajji Firouz or the noise from fireworks.

The beginning of the series is confusing. It's unclear where we are in the story or where it's supposed to go.

The dialogue scene with the drunk Irish photographer was a turning point that completely discouraged me from continuing the series.

It's unfortunate-this could have been a good story with a strong concept, but as a series, it simply doesn't work.

In the early years following the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Saddam Hussein violated the treaty signed with the previous Iranian government and launched an invasion, driven by a desire to access open waters. The Iranian people have historically demonstrated that when facing foreign aggression, they set aside internal disagreements and unite to defend their homeland.

However, the film portrays the war as a concern exclusive to hardline conservatives, implying that intellectuals, such as university students, are detached from that reality. At one point, a student who has returned from the front line sets himself on fire in the middle of class, claiming he was deceived.

But deceived by what? He went to war to defend his country against an aggressor-an Iraq that initiated the conflict. Where is the deception in that?

The film also shows women being flogged for having romantic or sexual relations with men. In reality, no woman is flogged merely for not being a virgin or for being in a gathering with men. Such punishments, when they occur, require legal evidence and a judge's order.

I was born and raised during the early years of the Revolution. I witnessed the limitations and have, on occasion, even been assaulted by religious hardliners. I lived that reality. I know that era of Iranian society. So I consider myself qualified to reject this film's portrayal.

The film is highly exaggerated. It portrays women as the primary victims, whereas in truth, restrictions applied to both men and women alike. The depiction of religious extremism on campus, forced confessions, and fabricated punishments is misleading and overstated.

In one scene, a woman nostalgically remembers a time when shops were open, contrasting it with a present where cafes and bookstores are shuttered, presenting the country as desolate and dark. This is simply false. Even during the war-and especially after-it's well known that the development and growth which had begun during the Pahlavi era continued and still does.

This film is no different from the biased Instagram or YouTube videos where a content creator, driven by a specific agenda, tries to paint Iran in an unfairly negative light and portray it as backward.

For many years, Iranian-made historical series were into two categories: they either narrate the religious stories of Arabia and Iraq or, if they are about Iranian history, they focus on dark depictions, portraying governments as oppressive and the people as living in misery and despair. This has amplified the sense of identity loss in a nation, pushing them towards watching foreign series like "The Magnificent Century".

But this series is exactly what caught my attention after years, made me stop watching foreign films and series, and fully immerse myself in it. This series quenches a nation's thirst for authenticity and historical identity. It provides us with a fairer and less biased portrayal of Iranian history-a past that is not so distant and has significantly influenced the current fate of our country. It teaches us not to see everything in black or white; a king can be a gray character, a high-ranking official could be concerned with the rights of the people, the dignity of the nation, and the safety of foreign travelers. This series showcases another side of Iran during those years: economic prosperity, international stature, and societal flourishing. (Just before the interventions of European colonialists in Iran began.)

Though there are flaws in the details. For instance, some actors have had cosmetic surgeries (like Ash Mehrabi); some actors' accents are modern (such as the prison guard in episode seven); or there are issues in set design (like the stagnant and murky water in episode five). However, overall, the depiction of that era is well-executed, and in its own way, it is the first of its kind. The use of computer graphics has made it more captivating and realistic. The makeup is well-done, the costume design is appealing, women are depicted more realistically and without heavy censorship, and the city and market designs are engaging. Even a non-Iranian viewer would be tempted to follow the story of this series (if it has proper English subtitles). And most importantly, the story is patriotic and emotionally moving-a grand narrative that includes smaller subplots, making the viewer curious and engaged.

The story features heroes (which is the most important element): a people's hero, a government hero. Adventure, teenage romance, action, fear, comedy, mystery, human kindness, law, references to famous historical religious figures, and nationalism are well-integrated into the plot.

Iranian history and literature are filled with tales of heroes that, if portrayed correctly, not only resonate with Iranian viewers but also captivate foreign audiences.

If I were to rate this series by today's standards, it would score between 6 and 7. However, considering the available resources and comparable series, I would give it a score of 9.

From my perspective as an Iranian viewer, the film feels superficial and exaggerated. It seems to have been created primarily to convey a message, but it lacks authenticity. It appears more suited for foreign film festivals, aiming to provoke the jury's emotions and win awards.

When you cannot create a strong, impactful story, the easiest route is to evoke pity: portray your country as miserable and pitiful, align with prevailing media narratives, and use female and child characters to manipulate emotions and secure recognition.

I am not saying all the narratives are false or unrealistic, but someone whose daughter goes to school, or someone working as a contracted driver for a governmental organization, etc. Would find these portrayals exaggerated and detached from reality.

It seems the writer and filmmaker are depicting an Iran that we do not live in.

The film's subject could be good, but the story doesn't start properly.

I myself didn't know until the middle of the film who the children and mothers shown at the beginning were and which characters they were in the film.

Additionally, no one in this film will understand who the Mojahedin are or who Maryam Rajavi is.

In fact, only those who knows the reality on which the film is based will understand the it. As a result, they don't need to watch the film.

Because watching the film will only confuse them more. For example, in the scene where a man is dancing on the rooftop, it's not clear whose wedding it is.

In my opinion, the film is more of an audio-visual clutter, so my optimistic rating for it is 5; just for the subject and the good performance of Jaleh Sameti.

Moreover, those white LED lights in the garland weren't made in the late '80s; they belong to the late '90s.

Positive points of the movie?

It can be shown in art classes and give hope to art students that if they continue their career, their works will not be worse than "Column 14"!

Negative points of the movie?

The film takes place in a fictional society created and imagined by the filmmaker.

The settings and events in the movie are superficial and unrealistic. It has many flaws and story bugs. And like any other low level movie, insists on becoming more and more bloody, negative, and disgusting.

I friendly ask audiences to not waste their time watching this movie.

Also kindly ask the film maker to think about another job. You're not good at this bro.

The movie addresses social issues of women, but the filmmaker's approach does not delve deeply into these issues. Despite having many actors, the film fails to engage the audience from the beginning. Even the humor in the movie is superficial and weak. Overall, it is not a movie that captivates the audience, and the issues raised in the film are only superficially addressed. In fact, it seems that the issues are merely being copied from other sources without any attempt to provide a unique perspective. The director's efforts to tackle women's problems are also superficial, and I believe that the problems in this movie are just repetitive and shallow stories.

What is its name, sir? Theater, documentary, craft? But it's good; To relieve loneliness and busyness. There are some people who have money, they buy it and put it on their windowsill..

Why someone make a movie like this? So what? The script is equivalent to a bachelor's thesis.

Why should a video camera be used for this? Why should the battery be discharged for recording such movie?

Do you want to make a sculpture on wood? Like that?!

The wiring of the house is rotten? The wiring of my grandgrandfather's house is still not rotten!

Why that lady's makeup is like that? In the early morning and in the middle of the night, such make-up...

Is the lamb lost in the forest? How really? What is going on in your head? Where do you live? Who sees?

Isn't it better to watch a Bollywood movie? Or even the first silent film of the Qajar Shah. It has more of a cinematic aspect.

I wanna ask the director or screenwriter; Do you really tell the others that "I've made this movie"?

As a viewer, I am even ashamed to say that I have seen this movie.

The atmosphere of the film encompasses fantasy, comedy, and romance, but becomes disappointing after a short good start.

Elnaz Habibi portrays the role of a girlfriend well during the first minutes, but the story lacks depth, and the characters are underdeveloped. The marital disputes and agreements feel clichéd, leading me to suspect the government's involvement in promoting marriage and family. Some scenes resemble TV commercials, with more attention given to design than storytelling. However, the scene design feels unnatural in some parts too, for example signs of newly purchased (unused) kitchen items are obvious. The casting choices are flawed, particularly the youngest son's role and performance, which negatively impact the overall quality of the movie.

Perhaps the positive point of the film is its attempt to show forbidden scenes in Iranian cinema, such as hugging and kissing, husband and wife sleeping in the same bed, etc., which reminds us that after the Islamic revolution, we forgot showing how to love to our children (And now we are worried about marriage and population decline).

All in all, this movie did not meet my expectations from the director of Italy, Italy.

My score is 5.5.

I have nothing to say about the movie. It's an inferior movie, created for entertaining the ordinary audience, and I don't believe it successfully achieved its goal.

The funny thing I want to discuss pertains to the portrayal of the Indian bride. Why is it that Iranians consistently turn to India when seeking to depict a beautiful foreign bride? Have Iranian directors ever closely observed Indian brides? Tara Attar's appearance bears no resemblance to that of Indian women; Instead, she closely aligns with the false image Iranians often have in their minds regarding the beauty of Indian women.

Even within Indian cinema, there is a tendency to cast non-Indian actresses -even persians- due to their fair skin, oval faces, and taller stature, which are considered more conventionally attractive traits.

Wouldn't it be preferable to uphold our Iranian pride and, if showcasing a foreign beauty is deemed necessary, opt for women from regions such as Scandinavia rather than continually resorting to Indian and Lebanese brides?

In the end, I must say that the make-up and acting of Hossam Nawab Safavi were surprising, and I give a positive score for that.

I don't know how these actors didn't feel ashamed to act in this movie, but I was ashamed to give zero, because of their strong background. Two points just to respect the brilliant history of these actors in their previous movies..

Don't do this; Don't make the audience distrust you; Let us be sure that a good movie has been released when we see your image on a movie poster. You are very capable.

I don't know how these actors didn't feel ashamed to act in this movie, but I was ashamed to give zero, because of their strong background. Two points just to respect the brilliant history of these actors in their previous movies..

Don't do this; Don't make the audience distrust you; Let us be sure that a good movie has been released when we see your image on a movie poster. You are very capable.

The script of Kandahar considers domination as normal in the strangest possible way. If thousands of men and women are killed during the bombing, it is considered a normal and considerate business in the region, but everyone who is important to the Americans must save his life, even if it is done by drones and helicopters and by completely sacrificing another person!

I really don't know if this movie is a thriller or a comedy?

It is not clear how an American spy with an unknown identity was able to get out of the nuclear power plant in Iran and blow it up; By putting a key on the network cables! A key that has a flashing red LED, and when it is connected to the center, its light turns green! Do secret spy keys really have flashing lights? (Can't stop laughing)

This is one of the situations in the film: Americans have come near Qom and are building high-speed internet in Iran!

As an Iranian who knows what kind of dictatorial and strict government governs Iran, I must say that no foreigner is allowed to manipulate telecommunication networks. Iran is full of local telecommunications, IT and security engineers who know how to set up and maintain the infrastructure. Internet TV has been available to the public for nearly 15 years..

Throughout the film, there are several high-angle shots of sensitive military locations that appear to have been captured from a drone. The question here is that it is not clear exactly where these drones are and at what distance they are filming in high quality in real time from the entire Middle East!

And the strangest thing is that, despite all these drones, the American filmmakers still don't know that the city of Tehran has nothing in common with the dry and barren streets of Saudi Arabia that are shown in the movie (instead of Iran). The Farsi font of TV news is separate and inverse! The commander of the army has trimmed his beard with a razor! I can't believe it!!

The idea of the creators of Kandahar regarding the ending of their work: if you become friends with the American hero, you will finally meet your family and achieve salvation, but if you are Iranian and against America, your body will be returned to your homeland!

Kandahar is another work of Gerard Butler that pops up on streaming services like mushrooms every year. Works that often have a customized approach. Kandahar is made for domestic use in America to give American citizens a focused look at the foreign policies of the American government. A view in which America is always the hero of the story and has come to the Middle East to purify everything!

In the end, I must say that Navid Negahban's acting is worth considering.

Hoping for peace and tranquility for Afghanistan, Iran and the Middle East.

I watched this movie during several days. I couldn't finish it. It was boring and confusing. I did not understand at all why Ali Mosaffa should make such a movie? I don't know if it was a movie or a documentary? Even the documentary can be followed because there is a topic and a target in it. But this movie, was really a waste of time and money. It was also unrealistic . For example, as a bearded man from the Middle East, you never can communicate to the people of Prague so easily. It is impossible that the Cafe girl find you, ask about your day, or the police arranges meetings with you and give you documents.

It was an interesting series, the role playings are good. Its story refers to different aspects of World War II, which are less discussed in other films and series.

It is good to look at the war, its aspects, and its effects from the point of view of the German people.

Of course, the entire series is full of alcohol and cheating :)) Now I understand why Germany is among the most adulterous countries, with high divorces.

The point that is well shown in this series is the simplicity and patriotism and law-abidingness among the German people, which almost explains why they continued the Second World War and did not realize that it was wrong. From this aspect, this series makes you have a more positive view of Germans.

There is no doubt that this animation is for adults and is not suitable for children and teenagers, either in terms of its darkness or in terms of its hard and weird literature.

I think everything about it is at the medium level; drawings, frame rate, characters are not well processed , dubbing, etc.

I think that the only strong part about this animation is music which is perfect.

I watched this animation twice because it was interesting to me, but I have to say that I was interested in Shahnameh since I was a child and one of my hobbies was reading the book of Shahnameh stories, and this animation had nothing to say compared to those books.

Maybe it would be better if the years spent making this animation were spent on publishing some illustrated or comic books of the Shahnameh.

I have nothing to say about the story, since the story has nothing to say! A temporary event/issue starts in this episode and is resolved in the next episode (or two episodes later), and you, as a viewer, feel like your time was wasted, and you don't know what the story of the movie is? Where is it supposed to go?

Relationships are not well made. For example, eight episodes have passed and you still don't know exactly what happened between Hatef and his father? Except those Hatef dialogues while taking shower, which are copied from "Kafka's letter to his father"!

The movie is full of cigarettes. Most Iranian writers and directors are always smoking. First thing in the morning, before eating, after eating, while talking, while walking, while waiting... and this theme of smoking is included throughout the movie. With cigarettes, they want to show sadness, mystery, depression, regret, happiness, cliché etc. Cigarettes are supposed to cover the weaknesses of the writer and actors.

About scenic design, like other Iranian films; No care has been taken. The elements inside the scenes are sometimes from 10-20 years ago! It seems that none of the film crew remembers those days of 1970's? While I, as an ordinary viewer, without any special efforts, constantly encounter goofs.

I saw it until now because of its popular actors, but it had enough time and offered nothing. No more chance.

My beautiful Iran, every day by her window, dreamed of an escape from this impasse; and the religionists stole her love.

Five positives for Mary Epic performance. Nothing else.

My beautiful Iran, every day by her window, dreamed of an escape from this impasse; and the religionists stole her love.

Five positives for Mary Epic performance. Nothing else.

My beautiful Iran, every day by her window, dreamed of an escape from this impasse; and the religionists stole her love.

Five positives for Mary Epic performance. Nothing else.

My beautiful Iran, every day by her window, dreamed of an escape from this impasse; and the religionists stole her love.

Five positives for Mary Epic performance. Nothing else.

Nafas (En: Breath) is one of those movies that some audiences like very much and others don't like it at all. But I am the one who loved this movie so much and watched it curiously until the end.

"Breath" is a calm poetic story told from the point of view of a child with the brilliant acting of Sara Noor Mousavi.

Some may consider the lack of a story and storyline as one of the most important weaknesses of this film, but in my opinion, this is a strong point of the film. Without facing a particular story, you sit in front of the intellectual concerns of a seven-year-old child for more than two hours and travel with her in her imaginary world without getting tired.

The beginning of the movie is very good and the audience gets well into the story. Many details have been paid attention to in Mehdi's character, but I think that the biggest problem of the movie is its script. Which has no ups and downs.

Love scenes, humorous parts, and even mourning the loss of a brother are not well processed.

The actor plays his role well, the atmosphere of the film has the potential to say something, express its core meaning, everyone is ready, but it is the script that is empty.

I really liked the use of Turkish dialect and the music of the film. Also the lighting and decor were well.

The film represents the current atmosphere of Iranian society. It is different, and should not be compared with previous criminal or heroic police movies of Iranian cinema.

However, it would have been better if the puzzles were resolved or continued as complex as they started. But, unfortunately, ambiguity and confusion have replaced the complexity and mystery in the story!

In addition, I think the connection between the end credits music and the movie is well established.

Javad Ezzati's acting is good and he has tried his best, although in some parts, his youth is clear from his face or the way he talks.

(I believe that this movie is very Iranian and may confuse or tire foreign viewers, for example, why is the cheating of that cyclist interesting? Or what is the story of Lake Urmia, which has become a barren desert, etc.) But for me, as an Iranian, that is exactly the reason I watch movies.

The challenge of "laughing to hide the sadness" does not leave not only the characters of the movie, but also the audience for a moment.

This movie is far away from Iranian cliché and every moment of it is surprising while is simple as well. The acting is brilliant, even the young actor.

The depth of the story is felt by those who have been involved in the migration phenomenon. Those who once only saw the beauty of their homeland and kissed its soil with love.

However, I think the movie should have ended in the night sky scene; Or at least in the foggy morning scene.

The movie is well made, and Mohsen Tanabandeh's acting is good. But one negative point for the unrealistic and customized dialogue between the mullah and the killer at the end of the movie.

From today, I want to take my phone and make my first movie with its camera; I'm sure it will be better than this movie.

I better not call this a "movie", otherwise it will be called the worst Iranian movie.