Out of the Cold

Although it was rather good film and I had an opportunity to play a role of political prisoner, who is sent to Siberia, it had some historical mistakes. The events take place in 1939-40, the SS woman to whom another viewer refers is absurd. There were no Germans in Estonia at that time. Estonia was liberated from Soviet occupation in July 1941, when first German troops arrived.

This may seem only a minor detail, but if you are making a historical drama, then do pay attention to all details and historical background.

a really terrible film that goes nowhere quickly. Though it's nice to see Keith Carradine in a starring role (when was the last time that happened?), the film is truly misconceived in everyway. The only question is: why did so many "name" actors choose to be in this film. The story is idiotic at best - an Estonian Jewish tap dancer in the 30's whose career on Broadway has dried up goes back to his family's country, Estonia, to perform in a nightclub owned by Judd Hirsch. He falls in love with a girl (played by the wonderful Mia Kirschner) and falls into trouble with the Nazis. As a period piece goes the film is a clumsy mix of attempted humor and drama that isn't dramatic. Our tap dancer hero is completely unlikeable and his motivations don't make much sense. That's all well and good, but the film itself doesn't make much of an impression. What were they thinking?

Who is this Aleksandr Buravsky who gets all those wonderful actors to work for him?? And not only in this one, also in a couple of other of his ill-conceived movies. The story here starts out quite promising and soon collapses. The characters are not likable, except for tragic Deborah, the historical errors are many, some situations laughable. And I was looking forward to seeing Keith Carradine in a leading role, after how long....Just wasted my time. Why are there so many bad movies lately which dabble in the Holocaust instead of using history's lessons wisely and weave them into a good story??? There are hundreds of good true stories out there - why don't scriptwriters and directors pick them up and use them???

I must admit this - the movie is beautifully made and the chosen locations look really wonderful. That's all. The story is ridiculous and cheap, rather 'soapy'. But what angered me the most was changing the facts. At that time Estonia had already been annexed to SU and Konstantin Päts was no longer a president (because that guy in the car couldn't have been Vares-Barbarus). The tricolor flags were no longer in use. The German army came only later, during the war. etc, etc, etc People might say that this movie at least lets the world know about Estonia, but I don't really see the need for telling pseudo historic lies. Estonia's real history is so much more exciting and touching than that, and as for soapy stories, well, you can fit them in practically anywhere. I gave it 1, but I could have given it a -1 if it had been possible.

Even the wonderful little story couldn't save this terrible mess of a film. It's as if the director wanted this film to be a B movie. It's got all the formulaic features of a great straight-to-video B movie: Choppy editing with cheesy music thrown in here and there. Actors sitting in a bright and evenly lit rooms spitting out not-so-clever one liners. And most of all, a street savvy yet sleazy male lead.

I don't understand why the director wanted the main character to be portrayed as a cocky and selfish little bum. He's so unlikable that you never understand why his love interest spend her life away to wait for him.

If I have to come up with one reason to watch this film, I'd say, watch it for Mia Kirshner.