Le Disciple

A world-wide vision on the religious fanaticism, since it is not a Russian history, is a history that must be located in some part of the world and in this case it was Russia. From the outset, I have no doubt that Russian cinema is very intense; I am not an expert in the filmography of that country but the last Russian films that I have seen are truly visceral, anchored crudely in reality. This film is 80% masterfully directed in the intensity of its plot. Added to that brilliant baton, the interpretations of the protagonists are superb and the soundtrack is truly exquisite. However, there are two things that I did not like: the photograph could have been sublime due to the subject that was treated and it was not, and the end, after so many minutes of filmic intensity, is diluted with the scene of the school board meeting. Without a doubt, it is a recommendable film, it is a beautiful sample of the contemporary Russian cinematography.

This is the cinema we should be watching right now to rest a little bit of the same old famous faces from Hollywood and the same narratives.

The storyline adapts itself to the times we are living where the ultra Orthodox thinking is starting to rise again. Maybe it's not the end we were expecting to happen but it's the one a Russian direct can afford in their own political context.

The first DVD I've seen in which there is no menu (e.g. chapters; audio; special features, etc.) at the start. It just started, I was initially worried that subtitling would not be present, but turns out subtitling was actually well done & accurately translated. Script is centered about a high school student (possibly in Moscow, Russia), and his isolation from his schoolmates because his newly developed obsession (or is it devotion) to a literal interpretation of The Bible (literalists don't see it as an interpretation, but as the only direct & unquestioned revelation from God) sets him at odds with everyone including his mom. His actions turn most students/school personnel against him (but not all) disrupting the school. He causes his biology teacher to be confrontational to the point she loses it. He believes a true devotee must be willing to die (martyr) for their place in Heaven. Most Christians (including conservative Russian Orthodox Church members) & everyone else will have Hell (i.e. think William Blake's burning Hell) as their destination. He believes prayer is only honest when done in secrecy/privately; temples/churches & anything equivalent to gold (wealth) are a ticket to Hell. Lots of remarkably unbiased intelligent discourse presenting his pov while he tries to defend himself & change others, including the science/biology teacher who is his main counterpoint. To showcase human debauchery there's full nudity (no sex); excessive consumption; vainness. Not a dry talking heads story, but an engaging, at times amusing (in biology a sex-ed demo with a carrot & condom turns hilarious), dramatic story w/a surprising ending.

Yet another bleak, cynical Russian take on the modern world and its moral conditions (Leviathan, etc). Here, Russian director Kirill Serebrennikov and German playwright Marius Von Mayenburg re-tread the age old argument that pits Christianity against the modern worlds view on human morality. Made in a somewhat trendy, dismal style, with too many shaky hand held shots and some overbearing music - these movie makers, as with so many others over the decades, seem to think they have reached an informed conclusion so, able to convince us all of their superior intellectual standpoint. They have both chosen to overlook the fact that vast numbers who went before them, have concluded that it's an unwinnable topic that leaves more questions than answers – in fact, many who set out to fight against and disprove the wisdom of Christ's word, converted over to it.

They use many of the Bibles strongest passages to substantiate their subservient arguments but the language presented on both sides of their viewpoint tends to suggest that perhaps: The Wisdom of Man is Less than the Foolishness of God. Their protagonist is portrayed as a psychotic who quotes almost verbatim Bible scriptures but, he is ultimately shown to be as crippled as the cripple he tries to heal, then harms. This character offers no real basis to mount a genuine argument. As another reviewer has already stated: Laughable.

Set in a current (surprisingly undisciplined) Russian school, many of the usual hooks are put-out to appeal to our basic instincts: Sexual freedoms (with lashings of nudity and sexual situations) ~ Anti Semitism (with the biology-sex-ed teacher being both anti-Christian and Jewish, in fact - her character simply allows for situations of associated Christian based hatred, to be easily introduced within the ideals of the modern world) ~ Next, there's the headmistress and the teacher of religious studies - both shown to be perhaps out of touch (as one might expect). These movie makers have perfectly armed themselves with so many manipulative character devises to support their biased point of view. It's too easy to mount an argument by designing characters to serve an already formed view.

If the topic leans your way it could appeal - otherwise, stay away.

Nowadays Russian cinema is more political than ever. And its political word is not shy, it frankly declares war against either bureaucratic or societal corruption (or both), as we can see in Leviathan, Durak, and this film. But the most dangerous enemy in this war, is the scope of the enemy. If you define the whole corrupt society as something to destroy, who will be your allies in this war? No one, for sure. You're as lonely as Don Quixote in his delusions.

Actually, the idea of "the Holy Bible in a human's body" as a character is striking, strengthened by the undeniable references. The viewers are forced to observe how religious fundamentalism can threaten the society, especially when the people around cannot see the big picture, cannot imagine what will come next and feed the beast naively as if donating to the church.

But as I mentioned above, despite the power of its criticism this movie too is unfortunately flawed with the problem of being incapable of providing solution, like similar others. The film rightfully asks: "This religious fundamentalism is poisoning us! What is the antidote to it?" But the answer is perfectly oxymoronical: "We need idealist individuals, but hopeless at the same time due to their loneliness..."

So, according to me it's clear that these "pessimist-idealist" characters represent the directors themselves. They can foresee what's coming, they want to do something, but when they look around they realize that they don't have anyone to cooperate with. So, disappointed with this loneliness, they get critical of the society much more than the problems the society is experiencing. So, contradictorily, what we as the viewers have in the end is not a motivation for action, but a reflection of the pessimism of the director dictating us to sit and smile cynically at the inevitable self-destruction of the society.