★ 7 / 10
Kruty 1918 is a patriotic historical drama
thevemir
Kruty 1918 is a patriotic historical drama that recreates one of the most significant battles in the history of Ukraine, where young Ukrainian students and…
Kruty 1918 is a patriotic historical drama that recreates one of the most significant battles in the history of Ukraine, where young Ukrainian students and cadets stood up to defend their country against the Bolshevik army. The film conveys the heroism and self-sacrifice of the young defenders of Ukraine, who, despite their young age and lack of training, went to meet the enemy for the sake of the future of their country. The film successfully recreates the atmosphere of that era, and the visual and historical details set off the tragedy and heroism of the events at Kruty. The actors cope with their roles, although sometimes it seems that the story is a bit exaggerated in dramatic moments. There are also some historical inaccuracies, but in general, they do not detract from the value of the movie. The film reminds us of the courage and sacrifice of young Ukrainians who were not broken even by death. Kruty 1918 deserves 7 out of 10 for its sincerity, emotionality and attempt to convey an important moment in Ukrainian history.
Read full review
★ 4 / 10
Ukraine as victim of Russian perfidy lacks historical context
Turfseer
Kruty 1918 was developed under the auspices of the Ukrainian State Film Agency. It seeks to commemorate the January 1918 battle which ended after a few days at…
Kruty 1918 was developed under the auspices of the Ukrainian State Film Agency. It seeks to commemorate the January 1918 battle which ended after a few days at a railway station in the town of Kruty, approximately 80 miles northeast of Kiev. Approximately half of the 400 students mainly from a cadet school were killed by Bolshevik forces ten times their size.
The narrative's main plot involves two sons of the well known General Savytskyi, Andriy (Evgenly Lamakh) and Oleksa (Andrey Fedinchik). Andriy is a pacifist who initially declines to sign up to battle the Bolsheviks in contrast to Oleksa who embraces his father's commitment to defend the newfound Ukrainian Republic.
Eventually Andriy joins his friends who receive very quick basic training and are soon pressed into battle.
There is a very convoluted subplot which I didn't completely understand involving a Ukrainian scheme to drive a wedge between Lenin and Trotsky, the two principal leaders of the Bolsheviks. Also involved is a German agent, Berg, who is manipulated into delivering certain documents to the enemy.
Oleksa apparently betrays his country by getting involved in this intrigue but again I was confused toward the film's climax as the General's son shoots and kills his adversaries (before being dispatched himself).
There is also a rather weak love interest here where the brothers fall for a young woman, Sofia, who plays a very small part in the proceedings.
The antagonist here is the Bolshevik General Muravyov (Vitaliy Saliy), who is depicted as a one-dimensional psychopath, mainly confined to his private train car where he plays with his model train set and professes a serious interest in the occult.
In a highly melodramatic scene, it's Muravyov who orders the execution of the remaining cadets at the railway station, which reflects some historical truth-he was responsible for reprisals against Ukrainians in Kiev sometime after the events of this film took place. What the filmmakers don't tell us is that Muravyov was subsequently condemned as a traitor by the Bolsheviks themselves and killed on their orders.
Given the current political situation in Ukraine in which the conflict with Russia has once again reared its ugly head, it's understandable why the Ukrainian State Film Agency would make such a melodramatic tribute to their fallen heroes of yesteryear. The idea of course is to link the events of the past with the present.
Unfortunately there's little character development here as the "good guys" need a few serious flaws and the "bad guys" a surfeit of charm. There's also the issue of pacing-both the expository and battle scenes go on for way too long and the subplot involving the international intrigue lacks suspense.
The Ukrainian filmmakers would like to depict their country as the victim of a satanic adversary. But their failure to acknowledge their own tarnished legacy which dates back to this period in history, further diminishes the impact of this film.
I do not want to single out Ukraine as the only country to have a tarnished history. Let us realize that all the liberal democracies today (including the United States, Israel, Australia, Germany, etc.) appear to be moving toward authoritarianism in their embrace of what some have termed "medical tyranny."
Following the short-lived independence of the Ukrainian Republic after World War I, horrible pogroms against the Jews were committed in Ukraine, resulting in the murder of up to approximately 100,000 Jewish people. A prelude to the Holocaust, these atrocities were not only committed by so-called "bandits" roaming the countryside and paramilitary groups but by soldiers in the Ukrainian Army led by Simon Petlura (pictured as the second speaker at the beginning of the film).
Petlura was killed while in exile in Paris in 1926 by a Jewish assassin, Sholom Schwarzbard. At his trial, it was brought out that Petlura issued proclamations against the atrocities but many months after they occurred. The prosecution argued that Petlura could not control the violence especially during the chaotic times of the Russian Civil War.
It's likely that had Petlura spoken out against the pogroms at the time they were occurring, he would have lost his position as titular head of the Republic, as sticking up for the Jewish people was not a popular position to take among a good part of the populace at the time.
The prosecution at Schwarzbard's trial maintained he was a Soviet agent. Schwarzbard, on the other hand, maintained he killed Petlura simply in revenge for the murder of ten of his family members in Ukraine.
The French jury rejected the assertions that Schwarzbard was a Soviet spy and acquitted him thus agreeing with the defense's argument that Petlura was responsible for the pogroms as head of state (what's more Petlura was never brought to the bar of justice by any international tribunals of justice).
While the actions of these students were certainly noble, the overall picture presented appears to suggest that the Ukrainian people were the sole wronged party here-the oppressed victims of Russian perfidy.
We all know of the crimes that occurred during the Communist period in Russia but little is known of the Ukrainian role in the persecution of the Jewish people. Acknowledging that reality would have given this film the necessary historical context so sorely missing here.
Read full review
5.9/10
1.3K
•••
The shortened version of Ukraine is UA not UK. Hopefully, this is helpful.