Svetat e golyam i spasenie debne otvsyakade

To Hans Grob and all people that come from Western Europe - it is absolutely understandable why you would never appreciate a film like this - you have never lived in a Communist Country, you don't know what it's like and you probably don't understand the whole idea of the film that well... Mr Hans Grob, the old man in the film that you talking about is not the boy's uncle, it is his Grandfather!

This film may not be a master piece but it definitely has emotional value for Eastern Europeans who have experienced the Communist Regime! It describes the life and the people back then adequately and all facts represent true stories from people's lives! Actors emotions and reactions in the film are very close to what one Bulgarian would say or do so I find the film very realistic and definitely the best productions made by Bulgarians after 1989.

I can not agree with Juan Brujo's review. Everything in the film industry is a cliché. There is nothing new in the ideas , in the illations etc.. But what makes this movie unique is the way that it is presented. This film is an art. It is like an opera, not everybody can understand it and feel it, but it could make you cry or think deeply about the things of your life. So in my opinion the last review is SUPERFICIAL, or the guy who has written it mistook the movie. It definitely deserves an Oscar. I STRONGLY RECOMMEND you to watch it. You will not lose anything, don't be afraid to watch it. It will "touch" you deep inside.

I went to the theater with low expectations of another boring post-totalitarian Bulgarian movie and was pleasantly surprised - it had an actual story which was told consistently, the characters were lively, there were no irritating protracted shots in silence (trademark to many, many other Bulgarian movies) and the dialogue was real. While based on a novel the movie elegantly manages to stay focused and the plot is not overstretched.

Things I didn't like: the one-sided densely evil picture of the totalitarian oppressors that rendered them preposterously inhuman, the clichéd camera (e.g. yellowish retrospectives, rotation around characters while they played backgammon) and superfluous didacticism in some scenes.

All in all it's worth watching, but eight years of script rewriting could yield a bit better result.

Pros: Very natural film. Very good reproduction of the communist Bulgaria and the lives of people who tried to survive that time outside and inside Bulgaria. The emotions go through the whole film without breaks. Excellent acting, excellent cinematography by inter-twisting the past and the present without losing the pace of emotions. Very simple and strong plot. Another confirmation that the perfection is actually in simplicity.

Cons: One mark on the leading actor Carlo Ljubec...his accent made it difficult to go deep in the role. As if he was struggling with speaking out his lines in Bulgarian which was not an advantage but Miki Manolovic play was so strong that balanced this.

Let me open with a few relevant personal facts. I am a Bulgarian who immigrated to America with my parents around the age of nine. Initially we stayed at an immigration camp in Italy. Essentially, I have experienced the journey of the young kid.

Based on my personal experience, I think the movie contained quite a few overstatements of facts like the people staying in the camp 3-4 years while their documents were being processed, or the somewhat overstated communist reality in Bulgaria at the time. Among these exaggerations, there were quite a few things that were very accurate however. For example immigrants (profugas) were pretty much fed pasta - most of the time without any sauce - while the UN paid something like $50 per day per immigrant to the camp. This amount would have enabled us to live much better had it been given directly to us.

Thinking about these exaggerations, I am somewhat ready to forgive the makers for resorting to them, since they did amplify the ideas that were being conveyed. Emotions such as the paralyzing fear of the uncertainty ahead that gnawed at every immigrant's soul aren't easily expressed without relying on parable to some degree. Perhaps a more seasoned film maker would have toned things down, but likely not.

I did find a few somewhat pointless episodes like the love scene with the singer, which did nothing for me other than sweeten the happy end. Also I think the movie would have been better served if the Sashko's past hadn't been erased through the use of a somewhat brutally cliché device like the car crash, but through a more psychological one like the dissolution of his parents' marriage or such.

All in all - as other reviewers have posted - although the movie has a number of clichés, it uses them constructively. Rather than deafening or turning off the viewer, the clichés tend to amplify the message to a level that it becomes clearer.

Basically the movie works.