First time watching an Estonian film.
Overall, it's okay, but there are innovations in the angle. However, there are some places where I have to complain.
First, the battlefield is too clean and tidy, exposing the shortcomings of the art set. In the first large-scale defensive battle, both sides were immaculately dressed, as if a group of military fans were in a simulated battlefield. There is no debris in the tunnel, only soft fine sand. From everyone's face, it seems that they have just come from the office. They can't see the smell of fireworks on the battlefield. This look? After repeated shelling and bloody battles, the trenches were still clean, and there were no traces of wood chips, blood, bullet marks, or burns. All these show that Estonia is still relatively elementary in terms of film art sets and battlefield restoration. In contrast, the bloody battle of Hacksaw Ridge is completely different, with broken corpses flying everywhere, greasy sweat and blood stains, and burnt and blackened traces that are particularly realistic, with a strong immersive feeling.
Second, the plot is close to a divine drama, which weakens the depth of reflection. In the first fight against the Soviet army, from the picture, the Estonia side only lost a single digit, while the Soviet army was annihilated at least one or two hundred people. This exchange is completely out of touch with the reality of 1944. Shooting the Soviets is like shooting a target, and it has a fight with the anti-Japanese drama in our country. The main purpose of the film is to depict the misery of the weak and small people in the gap between the great powers, but if you boast that you can defeat one hundred by one, then why don't you just wipe out the Soviet Union and Germany and it will be over. The population of Finland is not very large, why did they resist it? In the Soviet-Finnish war, although the Finns were defeated, they used real knives and real guns to make the Russians feel pain! Independent status is played out, not blown out. It is an insult to the heroes and martyrs of the country to unilaterally depict the soldiers of the country drinking tea and singing songs to destroy the Soviets.
Third, overemphasis on political correctness leads to rigid and naive scripts. On the one hand, the film depicts the Estonian Royal Union Army positively, and on the other hand, it shows the contempt of the Estonians for the Nazis and the head of state. This is like the super strong combat effectiveness of the puppet army, and at the same time it regards the emperor as dung. This is a very strange setting. The combat effectiveness of the imperial association army in ancient and modern China and abroad is generally weak. The reason is that it is difficult for the imperial association army to solve the problem of who to fight for and why, and it is often difficult to maintain morale. The Estonian army has never solved this problem, and has never had a national independent leadership core and theoretical support. In fact, its army has not been able to form a real combat effectiveness. In addition, demonizing the political commissar of the Soviet Army is close to being brainless. When a bunch of people have already pointed their guns at him, he actually raised the pistol again. This is how brainless it is. In fact, it is better to show the political commissar who is strong from the outside and is greedy for life and fear of death. This will better set off the hypocrisy of his beliefs. The political commissar in the film has always adhered to his cruel principles, and finally faced the opposition of the people around him without fear. It is equivalent to "death by death" and "heroic sacrifice". This can't help but remind me that the Japanese army and the North Korean army like to kill prisoners.
View more about 1944 reviews
