VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,3/10
3653
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Segui questi sei giovani che combattono con veemenza e senza compromessi per il loro sogno di felicità. Non sono vittime, ma giovani, coraggiosi e forti e la loro storia è assolutamente tocc... Leggi tuttoSegui questi sei giovani che combattono con veemenza e senza compromessi per il loro sogno di felicità. Non sono vittime, ma giovani, coraggiosi e forti e la loro storia è assolutamente toccante e commovente.Segui questi sei giovani che combattono con veemenza e senza compromessi per il loro sogno di felicità. Non sono vittime, ma giovani, coraggiosi e forti e la loro storia è assolutamente toccante e commovente.
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 5 candidature totali
Sfoglia gli episodi
Riepilogo
Reviewers say 'Wir Kinder vom Bahnhof Zoo' garners mixed reactions. Strong acting, especially Jana McKinnon, and high production values are praised. However, critics argue significant deviations from the original book and movie, including changes in character ages and settings. Some feel it glamorizes drug use and lacks the original's gritty realism, while others appreciate the modern interpretation and deeper character exploration.
Recensioni in evidenza
When the original book about Christiane F's live as a teenage drug addict and prostitute in West Berlin was released in the late seventies it shocked a whole nation that had turned a blind eye to some of its most vulnerable people. It's still a stunning read that lost none of its power, a lurid and detailed description of a youth lost, of love and death, hope and despair. Despite its graphic content it's become a classic that is still being read in schools. The 1981 film version was a bit sanitized by comparison, still effective in showing the grime and dirt of West Berlin's drug scene at the time, often filmed at the real locations guerilla style. Unfortunately it plays a bit too sensationalist and ditched much of the nuance and details of the book in favor of a more classic cautionary tale narrative. I'm not a big fan but admittedly it still retained a lot of the core strengths of the book.
To me the interesting question in regards to this new modern loose adaptation of Wir Kinder vom Bahnhof Zoo is: who thought it was a good idea to make heroine use, addiction and survival sex so glossy, stylish, sexy, hip and palpable to a current teenage audience?
Many movies that deal with addiction like Trainspotting, Spun, Requiem for a dream and even the 1981 Christiane F. version have been accused of accidentally or intentionally glorifying elements of drug use with its creative visuals and stylish filmmaking. I would personally disagree with a lot of these assessments, I think it's necessary to show the highs of drugs so an audience can more easily understand why people would destroy themselves for such substances, but it's a fair point to argue. However the remake of Bahnhof Zoo just goes so far that I can't in good conscience defend any of it. The overwhelming success of the book and original movie inadvertently turned many of its real life protagonists into counter culture icons with devastating personal results, especially for main protagonist Christiane F herself, the Amazon Prime series seems to try to do that intentionally. The constant glamour shots, slow-mo walking, stylish outfits, driving EDM beats, the cool and swagger of heroine chic. While the series eventually touches some of the darker aspects of these kids' lives, even that abyss is illuminated mostly with gloss and a sense of exciting danger rather than introspection and gravitas. Given the harrowing real life tales the original story is based on all the stylistic choices to make this an entertaining coming of age show first and foremost, strike me as tone-deaf at best and cynical at worst.
There are huge issues with the direction of this show. In any other circumstance the mixing of different time periods could be an interesting idea. We have a 70s esque city scape, lots of 80s and 90s fashion, contrasted with modern electronic dance music in the countless club scenes that are populated with current age looking appealing young people. The makers explained in interviews that they wanted a more timeless tale that younger people could more easily relate too but setting it fully in modern times would change the story too much. The problem with that is: the original story isn't timeless by any means. Its themes and psychological underpinnings are, but Christiane F's story is a time capsule, a distinctly West German tale from the late seventies. Even less than a decade later the drug scene in Berlin had already changed completely and no longer aligned at all with the book, let alone now 40 years later. If you want to do it justice you either have to do a detailed period piece or a complete modernization based on the current situation in the same scene (which would require lots of research and that sounds like too much work, I agree). Sadly they ended up doing a bad mixture of both. Borrowing whatever West Berlin chic and David Bowie cool they could afford, to ride on the enduring brand appeal of Bahnhof Zoo and the current wave of retro Berlin fascination, mixing it with 2020s advertising aesthetics for mass international appeal. The next may sound like a minor point but it illustrates the larger problem: I personally love Bowie dearly but the ubiquitous presence of his music and likeness is completely at odds with the modern sound and visuals of the show, but because it is such an integral part of the Christiane F. brand they of course couldn't not use it. I'm sorry but I just can't see anything but cynical marketing decisions behind every creative choice made in this show.
And it's such a bummer too. There is a lot of amazing fresh acting talent on display here. The extended length of a series compared to a film means you could have more faithfully adapted the book. Had they committed to a better thought out period play the high budget could have lead to a detailed and charming resurrection of 1970s West Berlin, a remarkable city now long gone.
Even if you ignore the exploitive nature of the series (remember: this is all based on real people, most of them children or youths at the time) it's just not a well-told show. It's boring, it lacks structure and even the aesthetics that try to be the main draw are recycled from much better movies. This is a dud all the way through and surprisingly tasteless in more than one way.
To me the interesting question in regards to this new modern loose adaptation of Wir Kinder vom Bahnhof Zoo is: who thought it was a good idea to make heroine use, addiction and survival sex so glossy, stylish, sexy, hip and palpable to a current teenage audience?
Many movies that deal with addiction like Trainspotting, Spun, Requiem for a dream and even the 1981 Christiane F. version have been accused of accidentally or intentionally glorifying elements of drug use with its creative visuals and stylish filmmaking. I would personally disagree with a lot of these assessments, I think it's necessary to show the highs of drugs so an audience can more easily understand why people would destroy themselves for such substances, but it's a fair point to argue. However the remake of Bahnhof Zoo just goes so far that I can't in good conscience defend any of it. The overwhelming success of the book and original movie inadvertently turned many of its real life protagonists into counter culture icons with devastating personal results, especially for main protagonist Christiane F herself, the Amazon Prime series seems to try to do that intentionally. The constant glamour shots, slow-mo walking, stylish outfits, driving EDM beats, the cool and swagger of heroine chic. While the series eventually touches some of the darker aspects of these kids' lives, even that abyss is illuminated mostly with gloss and a sense of exciting danger rather than introspection and gravitas. Given the harrowing real life tales the original story is based on all the stylistic choices to make this an entertaining coming of age show first and foremost, strike me as tone-deaf at best and cynical at worst.
There are huge issues with the direction of this show. In any other circumstance the mixing of different time periods could be an interesting idea. We have a 70s esque city scape, lots of 80s and 90s fashion, contrasted with modern electronic dance music in the countless club scenes that are populated with current age looking appealing young people. The makers explained in interviews that they wanted a more timeless tale that younger people could more easily relate too but setting it fully in modern times would change the story too much. The problem with that is: the original story isn't timeless by any means. Its themes and psychological underpinnings are, but Christiane F's story is a time capsule, a distinctly West German tale from the late seventies. Even less than a decade later the drug scene in Berlin had already changed completely and no longer aligned at all with the book, let alone now 40 years later. If you want to do it justice you either have to do a detailed period piece or a complete modernization based on the current situation in the same scene (which would require lots of research and that sounds like too much work, I agree). Sadly they ended up doing a bad mixture of both. Borrowing whatever West Berlin chic and David Bowie cool they could afford, to ride on the enduring brand appeal of Bahnhof Zoo and the current wave of retro Berlin fascination, mixing it with 2020s advertising aesthetics for mass international appeal. The next may sound like a minor point but it illustrates the larger problem: I personally love Bowie dearly but the ubiquitous presence of his music and likeness is completely at odds with the modern sound and visuals of the show, but because it is such an integral part of the Christiane F. brand they of course couldn't not use it. I'm sorry but I just can't see anything but cynical marketing decisions behind every creative choice made in this show.
And it's such a bummer too. There is a lot of amazing fresh acting talent on display here. The extended length of a series compared to a film means you could have more faithfully adapted the book. Had they committed to a better thought out period play the high budget could have lead to a detailed and charming resurrection of 1970s West Berlin, a remarkable city now long gone.
Even if you ignore the exploitive nature of the series (remember: this is all based on real people, most of them children or youths at the time) it's just not a well-told show. It's boring, it lacks structure and even the aesthetics that try to be the main draw are recycled from much better movies. This is a dud all the way through and surprisingly tasteless in more than one way.
Uli Edel's originale movie is better than this show, but, however I find Philipp Kadelbach did a good job of telling an intense and painful story, but what I appreciated most is the performance of the young actors, all very talented, in particular Jana MacKinnon, who is truly exceptional in the role of Christianne.
In collective this new version of the story is not great, but not bad either, it is good and this is enough for me and advances.
In collective this new version of the story is not great, but not bad either, it is good and this is enough for me and advances.
I totally understand, that if you have seen the Original movie from the 80s, you won't feel comfortable with this. Or it is very likely that you don't feel this movie at all. You are missing the grittiness, the dirtiness of the original. This actually is a more modern and more smooth looking approach and retelling of the source material.
That being said, it does not mean it shies away from some very irritating and disturbing things that happen to the characters here. And because this is a show, that spans 8 episodes, it is able to dive further into those characters. Which gives them more motivation and gives them more background. It works in the shows favor.
The actors really do their best and this new take will either enlighten you (better to try something different than just copy something 1 to 1, yes?) or annoy you. Be open minded if you can and you get more in depth - since I have not read the source material, I can't say how much is still probably missing from it. But it does look like we get a lot more than the original film was able to convey - just due to running time issues alone
That being said, it does not mean it shies away from some very irritating and disturbing things that happen to the characters here. And because this is a show, that spans 8 episodes, it is able to dive further into those characters. Which gives them more motivation and gives them more background. It works in the shows favor.
The actors really do their best and this new take will either enlighten you (better to try something different than just copy something 1 to 1, yes?) or annoy you. Be open minded if you can and you get more in depth - since I have not read the source material, I can't say how much is still probably missing from it. But it does look like we get a lot more than the original film was able to convey - just due to running time issues alone
If you were born in or around the 80s in Germany, there was no way around "Christiane F. - wir Kinder von Bahnhof Zoo". The 1978 book and following 1981 movie was part of the school curriculum to scare students straight about the effects of drugs. And with good reason. The story of Christiane, fast-tracking into Heroin addiction and becoming a prostitute at the age of 13 is shocking and was an important message to tell. Fast forward to now where Amazon took on the material to create a 8 episode series out of it in hope to make the message resound better to a newer generation. And it is an OK experience. Whilst in the original story the cast was small and the people Christiane met were either abusers or her unreliable junkie boyfriend here we get introduced to a group of people. Christiane, who tries to fit in with the cool crowd at school and fast tracking into drugs that way. Stella, the tough girl whose alcoholic mother owns a pub and suffers assault in many different ways. Babsi, a very young posh girl who is suicidal and suffers from the loss of her father. Benno, the dysfunctional boyfriend and a right tosser. Michael, who is there to also take drugs and has a crush on Benno. And Axel, a long haired ginger guy (so you know he is a good one) who is a functioning heroin taker. He's the one that has a job, gets up in time and reminds the others to try to sort out their lives. Add to this the families of all the characters and there is a lot to cover and often the show meanders into too much detail. There are also dream sequences that feel odd. The first scene shows an older Christiane on a private plane party with David Bowie (I think, not much resemblance there) and then it flashes back to "8 years earlier". We never get back to this story and I have no idea why that is in there.
All in all the show is beautifully shot, the acting is great and as with any drug related movie, the soundtrack is incredible. It is time well spent watching it and was quite an effort to make. However, it is let down by its script and writing. Instead of being a shocking display of a horrendous story, the disgusting and horrible parts are played down and the fun parts of drugs, the partying and the coolness of people is amped up. You feel like the makers tried to take a pinch of Tarantino, 24 hour party people, Train Spotting and a lot of Guy Ritchie an make a "cool" version of the story. You don't see much syringe marks or utterly messed up people. People come out fresh as a daisy after a night on the horse. The sugar daddies the girls get are complacent and dysfunctional, not overstepping any agreements. When the group all prostitute themselves they stay freelance - there are no abusive pimps or depictions of the extortion of the already down-on-their-luck people. The biggest criticism has to be that people look too good. The "junkie chic" is strong in this one and even more annoying is that the girls are depicted as much older than they were in reality. I guess making 13 year olds play prostitutes on screen went out of fashion with Taxi Driver. This show is good, but it is too enjoyable to watch. It's been stripped of the realities of the book and padded with too many characters and some B-stories that go nowhere at all. Take 10% of the disgusting depictions in "The Golden Glove" and tone down the "first it is really cool to do drugs..." and you would have had a worthy successor to an incredibly important story.
All in all the show is beautifully shot, the acting is great and as with any drug related movie, the soundtrack is incredible. It is time well spent watching it and was quite an effort to make. However, it is let down by its script and writing. Instead of being a shocking display of a horrendous story, the disgusting and horrible parts are played down and the fun parts of drugs, the partying and the coolness of people is amped up. You feel like the makers tried to take a pinch of Tarantino, 24 hour party people, Train Spotting and a lot of Guy Ritchie an make a "cool" version of the story. You don't see much syringe marks or utterly messed up people. People come out fresh as a daisy after a night on the horse. The sugar daddies the girls get are complacent and dysfunctional, not overstepping any agreements. When the group all prostitute themselves they stay freelance - there are no abusive pimps or depictions of the extortion of the already down-on-their-luck people. The biggest criticism has to be that people look too good. The "junkie chic" is strong in this one and even more annoying is that the girls are depicted as much older than they were in reality. I guess making 13 year olds play prostitutes on screen went out of fashion with Taxi Driver. This show is good, but it is too enjoyable to watch. It's been stripped of the realities of the book and padded with too many characters and some B-stories that go nowhere at all. Take 10% of the disgusting depictions in "The Golden Glove" and tone down the "first it is really cool to do drugs..." and you would have had a worthy successor to an incredibly important story.
If I could say just one thing about the series, it would be: This will find its audience in those who don't know the story. That is why it would be impossible to finish any analysis with just that, after all, what is the potential audience that is over 12 years old and has never even heard of Christiane's story, especially among Germans, Austrians and Swiss, who is the initial audience to which the series was redirected and where will much of the strength of the analysis come from?
It is logical that there will always be people who will not know, but the series makes us believe that there is an entire audience thirsty for knowing a story that has only been heard, and that will not be disappointed to find, at most, 30% of the original story. The series goes beyond creative freedom: take what is, put what is not and model biographies that, I imagine, obligatorily a large part of people will watch each other to appreciate, even if different ... and will not find.
But we need to be frank: the look is not a problem! This is critical of those who have not yet seen or have in the 1981 book and film a very solid base of expectations that are not supposed to be broken. The costume is incredible within the proposal in which the whole story was put together. If it is analyzed in isolation, it sucks! It is extremely difficult to go through pain and suffering with addicted young prostitutes dressed in fabulous fashion. Because someone with historical lace and golden boots would prostitute himself, or, you don't need to know that Christiane's jacket is Valentino (and it is!), Just know that, being what it is, a Mongolian goatskin jacket, it would never be in hands of an addict! This is not even analysis, it is consistency! How far does the lack of consistency go to make things beautiful? In fact, is there beauty at this point in history?
So, everything is very pointless in favor of what is cool. Anyone could refute my comments by saying that the series has a less moralizing intention. I agree, not only with this with the intention, to offer a new look, that the characters are less zoo animals and more human ... But there is no suffering, not enough, there is no solid counterpoint. And to what extent is it possible AND ACCEPTABLE to make such a strong story without any moral weight? No story is made simply to tell. This does not count either the real one or any other with enough weight.
Would I still advise to attend? I would advise, without a doubt, as long as the focus is maintained: The first step is to totally forget that it has the same name as a real story. Forget about it entirely and enjoy the series, because it is possible. It is perfect in creating your own universe and all the value spent is possible to see yourself at all times. It allows a superficial contact with Christiane F. and unlike the 1981 film, you can sleep (and don't tell me that Uli Edel's film tells more about her, because it doesn't! I love the film, but it shows pain and suffering and It may be better, but the series should not be neglected for that reason, comparisons of this type should not be made because they do not translate anything.) And finally, the third and last reason: it is light, clean and beautiful, and on that again fall the criticisms made above.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAccording to producer Oliver Berben, the budget for the first season episodes is more than 25 million euros.
- ConnessioniReferenced in Kino im Rausch: Die Kinder vom Bahnhof Zoo (2022)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How many seasons does We Children from Bahnhof Zoo have?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- We Children from Bahnhof Zoo
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Noi, i ragazzi dello zoo di Berlino (2021) officially released in India in Hindi?
Rispondi