Kalashnikov
- 2020
- 1h 50min
NOTE IMDb
6,6/10
5,6 k
MA NOTE
Blessé en tant que conducteur de char en 1941 pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, Kalachnikov voit la dernière mitrailleuse soviétique échouer. Comme il est aussi inventeur, il se retrouve e... Tout lireBlessé en tant que conducteur de char en 1941 pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, Kalachnikov voit la dernière mitrailleuse soviétique échouer. Comme il est aussi inventeur, il se retrouve en 1947 avec un fusil d'assaut AK-47.Blessé en tant que conducteur de char en 1941 pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, Kalachnikov voit la dernière mitrailleuse soviétique échouer. Comme il est aussi inventeur, il se retrouve en 1947 avec un fusil d'assaut AK-47.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires au total
Avis à la une
Truth is that I imagined finding myself in front of the thousand times seen pro-Russian propaganda film, full of unrealistic scenes and horrible CGIs. But quite the opposite, it is a solid biopic, without great pretenses, well acted, with costumes and vehicles faithful to the time and with little or no propaganda on it (It is striking that the only negative character in the film is an NKVD soldier). I hope that as it becomes known, its rating will rise.
I'm going to start by addressing some of the comments from reviewers who claim Hugo Schmeiser, a German weapons expert, designed the AK47. A few facts. Schmeiser was not overly co-operative with the Soviets. Moreover, they did not appear to think a great deal of his work. He received a pay cut and was effectively demoted to lesser roles. Functionally, the weapons he designed and the AK-47 designed by Kalashnikov are vastly different, too.
Comments also seem to suggest Kalashnikov had no talent. If so how did he rise through the ranks from obscurity with little education, in an empire as vast as the Soviet Union? Why are not one but many of his weapons designs so famous? If he had no inherent talent how is it his son Victor also designed well known military weapons, most notably the PP-19 Bizon, also still in use today? Hardly likely, if there was no talent to be inherited. Surely?
So lets move on to the film. Its a fascinating insight into the world of weapons design through the life of Soviet weapons designer Mikhail Kalashnikov. Its well acted, directed and has a certain passion I had not expected to find in a film about arms manufacture.
Its clear the reasons Kalashnikov strove to develop weapons were driven by a need to protect his country, not profit from death. A point much emphasised in this film. Indeed, Kalashnikov himself wrote of his "spiritual pain" in latter life when he saw how his famous creation, the AK-47, was used around the world.
What's particularly remarkable about Kalashnikov is the fact this inventor, in his early years, started off with a very basic education. He rose to prominence through hard work and the merit of his designs. A fact that is made clear in the film as he competed, with often better educated, weapons designers.
In terms of the story, some creative license has been taken. Especially in terms of his private life. He married in 1921 but this film suggests he was married a lot later.
Putting this aside, this film is well crafted, engrossing and utterly fascinating. This coming from a reviewer who is, by nature, a pacifist and opposed to war.
8/10 from me.
Comments also seem to suggest Kalashnikov had no talent. If so how did he rise through the ranks from obscurity with little education, in an empire as vast as the Soviet Union? Why are not one but many of his weapons designs so famous? If he had no inherent talent how is it his son Victor also designed well known military weapons, most notably the PP-19 Bizon, also still in use today? Hardly likely, if there was no talent to be inherited. Surely?
So lets move on to the film. Its a fascinating insight into the world of weapons design through the life of Soviet weapons designer Mikhail Kalashnikov. Its well acted, directed and has a certain passion I had not expected to find in a film about arms manufacture.
Its clear the reasons Kalashnikov strove to develop weapons were driven by a need to protect his country, not profit from death. A point much emphasised in this film. Indeed, Kalashnikov himself wrote of his "spiritual pain" in latter life when he saw how his famous creation, the AK-47, was used around the world.
What's particularly remarkable about Kalashnikov is the fact this inventor, in his early years, started off with a very basic education. He rose to prominence through hard work and the merit of his designs. A fact that is made clear in the film as he competed, with often better educated, weapons designers.
In terms of the story, some creative license has been taken. Especially in terms of his private life. He married in 1921 but this film suggests he was married a lot later.
Putting this aside, this film is well crafted, engrossing and utterly fascinating. This coming from a reviewer who is, by nature, a pacifist and opposed to war.
8/10 from me.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesMikhail Kalashnikov in his final days wrote to the head of Russia's Orthodox church shortly before his death, stating he was afflicted with spiritual torment. Kalashnikov, who died 23 December, 2014 aged 94, told Patriarch Kirill he felt responsible for the millions of deaths caused by his revolutionary assault rifle. He wrote... "My spiritual pain is unbearable. I keep asking the same insoluble question. If my rifle deprived people of life then can it be that I as a Christian and an orthodox believer, was to blame for their deaths?"
- GaffesMichail Kalashnikov could not meet his brother Victor as a prisoner on the train as he was freed long before the war.
- Citations
Zhenya Kravchenko: So we'll have to eyeball it. Measure until we get it right.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Vecherniy Urgant: Yury Borisov/Netta (2020)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Kalashnikov?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- AK-47
- Lieux de tournage
- Moscou, Russie(Mosfilm Studios)
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 000 000 RUR (estimé)
- Montant brut mondial
- 1 593 464 $US
- Durée1 heure 50 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant