Hostages

I have red, haired and watched quite a lot about this historical event. Opinions always differ.. I will say briefly, that this film was more than I expected. It was way far from subjectivity and excessive romanticism what would make unambiguous heroes out of the main characters. Great scenario! Great actors! bravo!!! Great film!

The film Hostages (Mdzevlebi) directed by the young Georgian director Rezo Gigineishvili was shown at the Berlinale in the Panorama section. It is based on the true events of a plane hijacking in 1983 by a group of youngsters belonging to the artistic elite of Georgia. The hijacking resulted in multiple casualties and all hijackers, except the woman, were executed. After the USSR dissolved, the participants of these events were sometimes romanticized and represented as heroic martyrs.

The film leaves a strong impression and leaves room for thought. The closing sentence of the film – " In 1991 the freedom of movement was finally granted" – is something completely unnecessary; first of all this is common knowledge and secondly the lack of freedom of movement cannot be an excuse or explanation for the atrocities depicted in the film.

The film does not offer answers and does not explain motivation of horrific actions of hijackers, however it poses some profound questions, which is also important, especially as this event is still shrouded in mystery. The picture filmed in minimalistic style and is made in an almost documentary fashion, it is tense and grips the viewer all the way through.

Read more at: http://indie-cinema.com/2017/02/hostages/

Why is the title of the film in the original with a Russian word, when the film is released under a Georgian name.

I watched the movie the night of the premiere in Tbilisi, I had read a book based on the events. The Book is called (Flight from USSR) and I recommend it to anyone who sees the movie and finds it interesting.The book is in fact worth reading, when the film ended I was hearing mixed reviews from the audience, most of whom were confused over what they saw, just like me. I who had read the book, found the movie complex. I imagine for those who had not read the book or for people from other countries it would be harder to understand because we grew up with this story and overall we know what was going on but others did/will not.Not to the point where they should understand.Sometimes I thought that the movie focused on stuff that did not really made sense or was not important at all.I thought that the director had emphasized on other details of the same story than the book I mentioned, like he wanted to say the same story with a different angle.

On the other hand, The acting was great, I was blown away with the Wedding scene just like the airplane scene.

To sum up my opinion I would like to say that it was a good movie in general but I would preferred if it was more like the book.

It is a special film. Superficial, at the first sigh, maybe only a sketch but perfect for remind the realities unde Soviet regime. A special virtue Avtandil Makharadye as Shota . And the fine portraits of the characters. It is not easy to explain the roots and the desire and the needs of the young people looking for be in Occident. But the realism of acting gives many clues. Without explain < proposing only pieces for define, in fair and delicate manner, the enthusiasm and adrenaline , the mistakes as result of panic and fear and absence of experience, the sufferance of parents, the need to understand of a mother. Yes, it is inspired by a real case, one from many results of desperation behind Iron Courtain. But it has , in same measure, status of warning and hommage and manifesto. Its aspect of sketch is its main virtue because things like thant are only imagenated and feeled.