Tadas Blinda. Pradzia

The true is that I was waiting this movie all summer and when I was able to see it on the theater I was so thrilled and so excited. The main actor Mantas Jankavicius is a singer and this was his first time when he was acting, like acting for REAL and I was very impressed and very happy because he made his role perfectly! Even Agne Ditkovskyte's ,who is real actor, role wasn't so good as I expected. But altogether the acting was kind of good. The other thing which impressed me was the nature of Lithuania and how had director conveyed that beauty. Third thing why you have to see this movie is that this is maybe the first time when Lithuanians can be proud by their country in the films industry cause this film is worth to be well-known.

Greetings from LT. Worst movie ever - same actors act different roles, cheap horses, historic inacuracies and very bad plot. Don't waste your time, do not watch this piece of garbage.

not great. not impressive. only beautiful. for landscape. for romance/fight/politic/nationalism/myth slices. for the not bad performance of actors. for use of historical movie recipes. it is result of important work of Lithuanian cinema and this fact is essential when you see it. because it is easy to compare it with another movies or remark a not remarkable story or accuse it by to much idyllic manner to present history. but it is a promised beginning and nice clothes for good intentions. and this remains basic fact for a cinematography who desires to define itself. the superb images, the heroic way, the actors and the script are parts of a movie who enjoy the public. and Mantas Jankavicius is inspired choice for lead character. for Donatas Ulvydas - applause for this almost seductive project.

I generally enjoy movies that tell the (somewhat) true stories of real-life rebels and "Robin Hoods," such as William Wallace, Paan Singh Tomar, and Ned Kelley. Tadas Blinda certainly fits the mold, but this movie did not do him justice.

For a "true story," Tadas Blinda, Pradzia seems pretty cliché. In fact, I was surprised at how many elements it shared with Braveheart. While the acting was not great, I am not sure if it was the fault of the actors or because some of the characters were so cartoonish, particularly Konstancija. I almost expected him to begin pulling on his mustache à la Snidely Whiplash.

Of course, I did not expect production quality on par with, say, an American or Japanese film, and I was not pleasantly surprised. The editing was pretty bad in some places and the "battle" scenes felt like a "cast of dozens," which made the battles feel like little skirmishes. I was particularly bothered by the tone of the film. Something tragic would happen, and then minutes later the characters would be acting light and almost slap-sticky, or a character would be being lynched, and when freed at the last second, would immediately bond with those who were just trying to string him up. The romance also seemed a little forced, particularly with so little backstory between the two supposed lovers, and the less said about the affair sidestory the better. It just seemed like the director could not decide on what tone to set and couldn't find a good balance between the tragedy that spurred Blinda's rise to rebel leader, with the desire to show some humor and charm.

That all said, the scenery was amazing -- Lithuania is a beautiful country. Agnia Ditkovskite is equally lovely and does what she can with what she had to work with. I did also enjoy the obvious conflict, not between rich and poor, but between Lithuanians, Poles, and Russians. It was an interesting view of the local politics of the time.

This was not a horrible film, and there were moments of light genius. I would recommend this film to anyone who has a particular attachment to Lithuania or history. For the rest, you might want to go re-watch Braveheart.

This was not a great movie, I cannot understand the general rating for this and why it is so high. The lead actor, who is a singer did not do a good job. During his entire performances it was very hard to believe in what he does. I would say, not mad enough, for some parts of the movie and the for the character that he wanted to portray.

The directors work is very questionable as well, most of the major scenes in the movie that actually had a slight chance to involve viewers into action, where broken. The action was transferred and compared to another scene in the movie, making it really hard to concentrate and figure out what is going on.

Also one of the vital questions that a movie has to answer is "why?". Why is it that we show what we show, etc., etc., etc. Unfortunately there were to many parts in the movie when I was not able to figure out an answer.

It is unpleasant to sound so negative, really. But in the final end it all comes down to one question. Would you recommend this movie to a friend or anyone interested?

The verdict: Not recommended.