Kamchatka (2002)

A dictatorship starts in Argentina, and Harry's family is against nowadays dictator, so, to avoid being killed, they have to hidden in a isolated place. How is this for a typical ten-year-old boy? how can cope with all the things that he is not yet unable to understand? This is the main point of the film, which is moving and interesting. Harry is the main character and he told us the story as he remembers it, so everything is from his point of view, the point of view of a kid that only wants to play and enjoy himself, but he can't due to his situation. The actors (all!) are perfect, with very specially emotive acting of Darin and Roth, how everything is going hell but they don't feel hopeless in any moment, they'll continue fighting until the end. as they take cover in Kamchatka, not the physical place, meaning and spiritual fortress, which is the place to resist, if you are there, anything can destroy you, because you will be free... The history is very interesting and it catches you from the beginning with a very great visual force that makes you to enter in the film and think what you'd do in their situation. As a bad aspects two thing to comment: You are not told what is happening in the world while the film starts, so you must know what happens in Argentina in 1978 in order to understand why are they hiding. In addition, and this is usual in Argentinian films, the rhythm is very very slow, which can bore some people. This time, however, the action demands to be slow, so it is not as bad as some other films. Tu sum up, a precious touching and interesting film of characters and great actors. Recommend to see it with something the dry your tears, they maybe came at some moments of the film.

This film leaves you all possibilities to form your own impressions. From the beginning till the end there are no data which supply you information about the the characters, what was their fault, what did they do and what would happen after. Still, all these questions are automatically answered when one knows and realizes what was happening in Argentina. The close harmony in which the family lives, the game the father is playing with his son has a educational life value. He will learn how to manipulate and stand in the world when he has grown up. The decision to bring their children to their grandfather,the running after a leaving car, gives you all the reason to use a handkerchief. Who wants to leave his children behind? What will happen to the parents? It is amazing that still today, there are people like Mr Zorrequita who deny that this ever happened. They simply did not know??? Where have we heard this before? A beautiful film. TOP

Kamchatka is a terrible film. I believe what seems to pass for "understated" is its plain dullness, and the main character (a kid whose POV is nominally carrying the movie) doesn't show a single instance of child-like perception - save for a couple of commonplace animal shots, the kid sees the world exactly as the rest of Piñeyro's characters; a polite, well-framed shot by Alfredo Mayo. Since "Caballos Salvajes" I've been trying to figure out who the bad guys are in Piñeyro's films (back then, bullets always came from outside the frame). I'm sad to report things have gotten even worse, since now we need to resource to _our_ (external) knowledge of the period to understand what's going on. He seems to get away with it because, sadly, not that much happens in the movie, anyway.Kamchatka might be worth seeing, however, if you're interested in recent developments in the political genre. It was interesting to me how, by trying to detach itself from the political movie tradition, it achieves the complete opposite: this is a film that couldn't possibly make sense unless you are not only aware of the external circumstances that affect the characters but also have already a clear position on the political conflict in case.As justified as the generic, elegiac tone of the movie may be in the real world, its fictional consequences are devastating. It leaves us with no real characters and not a single dramatic scene proper.Characters here are archetypes and, most of the time, it's not entirely clear of what. It doesn't help that the movie looks often derivative of other films that have successfully portrayed the specifics of perception in children (the soundtrack mimicking Thomas Newman is particularly painful in that respect).Piñeyro's former writer (Aida Bortnik, who also wrote The Official Story) used to be quite annoying to me, but at least she seemed to know and like drama as a tool.

Like "Harry", I always enjoyed playing TEG. If you have never played it, don´t worry, for it´s actually pretty simple: one board with fifty countries, and three or four players trying to control 30 of them to win the game. But Harry has never played with so many people - he just plays with his dad. And when its only two players, it is a fight to the death: all 50 countries or nothing. Harry has never won before, and he is very close to winning - but his dad, controlling this little, obscure region on the edge of the board, this remote place with a tongue twister of a name, Kamchatka, still manages to resist for hours and hours. As Harry will learn later, surviving against all odds is indeed possible... and as he warns us as the movie begins, this will be the last and most memorable lesson he has learned from his father.A touching tale made up of childhood memories, Kamchatka tells the story of a middle-class couple in Argentina in the mid-70s, during the military dictatorship that horrified and scarred the country. One day, without warning, the couple take their two children to an abandoned house, desperately trying to escape. But of course, the children understand nothing of this - instead they are forced to leave their lives behind and even change their names. The movie cleverly focuses on the older of the two boys, Harry (who actually names himself after Harry Houdini), and suggests the horrors of the period through subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) metaphors, sometimes with a sense of humor you wouldn´t expect for this type of pictures.The good thing about "Kamchatka" is that it is not a history lesson - you never know exactly what the parents (and the other people that come and go into the children´s lives) did to be hiding, but it doesn´t really matter. What matter is that the film accurately portrays the heartbreaking situation of a man and a woman who do not know if they´ll live to see their children grow, and are still strong enough to fight back and try to smile for them. We don´t know what they did when they left the house every day. We don´t know what happened to their friends and co-workers. We don´t even learn their real names - like so many of the "desaparecidos", they are the anonymous victims of a goverment that almost destroyed a country. We only see the couple through the innocent - but oddly wise - eyes of their children.Ricardo Darin and Cecilia Roth have once again proved with this movie that they are some of the best actors in Argentina right now - I´ve seen them both in more demanding roles, mind, and this is far from being their best performances... and yet they are both believable and their chemistry with the children is perfect. Director Ricardo Piñeyro knows what he is doing, and it shows: with this type of material it is dangerously easy to fall into the trap of making a cheap melodrama, and yet he manages (for the most part) to avoid making the picture overly sentimental or manipulative. Kamchatka may not be a perfect film, but it´s heart-felt and beautifully filmed.For viewers who wish to know more about this dark time in Argentina´s history, you may rent the excellent Oscar-winning "The Official Story".