AK-47

On one hand, this is a technically good piece of filming. Costumes, vehicles, decorations, sounds, small details of the everyday life look very true. The overall picture is simple, but beautiful. A pleasure for an eye.

On the other hand, the story is very shallow, flat and non-engaging: just 5 years of Mikhail Kalashnikov's life condensed into an hour and a half. And also, quite... let's call it 'pleasant'. Saying that, I mean there's no conflict in the story, no struggle, no tension, no unexpected turn. The road to AK-47 just unwinds before us, smooth and wide, and dotted with signposts. Just like Mikhail Kalashnikov himself! Who as a character looks just an-all-round-good guy. Quite pleasant to glance at, but there's nothing much to examine and explore.

You can't really call this a biopic, because there's no real biography in it, no personality - only large milestones. Instead of diving deep into the tangled thicket of man's life the story just flies by at speed, barely touching treetops. And it is not the story of Kalashnikov's invention, too, because you can't really trace the path of the thought on its way from the idea to the final triumph. Not a drama, certainly, because there's no drama. And not a struggle, again; rather a chain of fortunate events. If Bilbo's journey of "There and Back" was of this kind, I think the book would start right at the Lonely Mountain. And the dragon would give up.

The most fitting words would probably be "a formality". A well-built panegyric formality. A layer of gilding upon the relic, that makes it glittery, but smoothes out its real features.

Watching this you will lose nothing, I think, except 90 minutes of your life. On the other hand, you will probably gain nothing, too (except maybe picking up some names).

I'm sympathetic to the notion that a society must create a mythos. We in the US have invented cinematic portraits of Washington, Lincoln, Edison, and other greats that are so whitewashed that when realistic views are presented that they're considered revisionist!

However, the old Soviet style glorified heroes are so airbrushed as to be caricatures: Handsome, selflessly devoted to duty, darkly introspective. In short, models for inspiration rather than illumination.

I just saw the English dubbed version of this film and the voice actors did a pretty good job. Don't know how accurate this was compared to the real history, but it sure was entertaining and kept my interest right to the very end. Propaganda, so what? You'd be hard pressed to find any fictional movie, docudrama, documentary, or fact based movie of similar genre that doesn't have propaganda. Hell, the Americans are experts on it and I wish us Canadians were better at it.

In "Kalashnikov (2020)," the intriguing tale of the iconic assault rifle AK-47 and its journey through the Soviet Union unfolds. The film delves into the intricate backstory and technological advancement of this renowned firearm.

However, the portrayal of the AK-47's character feels somewhat one-dimensional, lacking depth. The film occasionally exhibits overt displays of Soviet pride, veering into propagandistic territory and diminishing its overall credibility.

Nevertheless, the scenes depicting the AK-47's testing are undeniably impressive, showcasing the weapon's formidable power and enduring impact.

"Kalashnikov (2020)" offers a captivating perspective on the genesis of a weapon that has left an indelible mark on history, despite some shortcomings in character development and narrative authenticity.

While the dubbing is an unfortunate aspect for none English speaking films I do prefer the move to be dubbed. An interesting story about the most famous gun in world ... the acting is just above average (6/10) the the script cinematography and plot is above average.