I will not retell the story or describe the acting, except to say that everything was top notch. Ukrainian Folk Music in Indiana accompaniments with motifs served as a perfect accompaniment to the film. As you probably guessed, the film is biographical. It can not be called historic in full, since the film does not cover military operations and are limited to a couple, beautifully shot, flights protagonist. A lot of action in the film, and perhaps a few dialogue. This is the only negative. There is a national humor, which positions itself as a naive and sincere Ukrainian human soul. Development and the theme of the struggle between good and evil, which further exacerbates the events and intrigues the viewer. "Firecrosser" really touched. This is the film that when after the credits can say a quiet "wow" ...
7 Reviews
The second life of an Ukrainian
hof-424 May 2021
Firecrosser (the original title is The One who Went Through the Fire) deals with a real caracter, Ivan Datsenko. He was born in 1918 in the village of Chernichy Yar, district of Dykanka, Ukraine. A veterinarian by profession, he was drafted into the Red Army and graduated in 1940 from the School of Aviation at Orenburg. He served as fighter and bomber pilot and was awarded many decorations, among them the Order of the Red Banner and the coveted title of Hero of the Soviet Union in 1943.
Datsenko was shot down in 1943 over the Western Ukraine, near the city of Lviv. The Soviet Government declared "he died a hero's death." His memory was venerated during and after the war, although the attitude of the Soviet government towards Datsenko was curiously ambivalent; probably there was a secret order to play down these commemorations.
In the eighties there were rumors that Datsenko did not actually die in 1943 but was taken prisoner by the Germans and had a second life in Canada in rather unusual circumstances. This was later corroborated by witnesses (although there never was absolute proof). This movie reconstructs Datsenko's life, perhaps fancifully at times. Actors as well as production values (cinematography, special effects, music) are excellent. Director Illienko moves the story along with good pacing; the only (minor) objection could be that, at times, one may have some difficulty telling what actually happens and what happens only in the mind of a character (this probably would be clarified by a second viewing). This movie is well worth watching and shows that the level of the Ukrainian film industry is up to the best in the world.
Datsenko was shot down in 1943 over the Western Ukraine, near the city of Lviv. The Soviet Government declared "he died a hero's death." His memory was venerated during and after the war, although the attitude of the Soviet government towards Datsenko was curiously ambivalent; probably there was a secret order to play down these commemorations.
In the eighties there were rumors that Datsenko did not actually die in 1943 but was taken prisoner by the Germans and had a second life in Canada in rather unusual circumstances. This was later corroborated by witnesses (although there never was absolute proof). This movie reconstructs Datsenko's life, perhaps fancifully at times. Actors as well as production values (cinematography, special effects, music) are excellent. Director Illienko moves the story along with good pacing; the only (minor) objection could be that, at times, one may have some difficulty telling what actually happens and what happens only in the mind of a character (this probably would be clarified by a second viewing). This movie is well worth watching and shows that the level of the Ukrainian film industry is up to the best in the world.
Authentic story from Soviet Ukraine
e-poluektova25 January 2012
Ukraine is not famous with its movies but this one has potential to touch many hearts.
It's based on a true story but it's not a story of one man. Similar stories happened to many Soviet officers and soldiers after the WWII so it gives you a sense of that epoch. It's adventurous and at the same time romantic, historical and modern and has a touch of Ukrainian authentic culture.
Behind intricate plot are existential topics: love and loyalty, friendship and betrayal, religion, nation and language.
It's a beautiful combination of mystic scenes, subtle humour, powerful characters and cultural ideas.
It's based on a true story but it's not a story of one man. Similar stories happened to many Soviet officers and soldiers after the WWII so it gives you a sense of that epoch. It's adventurous and at the same time romantic, historical and modern and has a touch of Ukrainian authentic culture.
Behind intricate plot are existential topics: love and loyalty, friendship and betrayal, religion, nation and language.
It's a beautiful combination of mystic scenes, subtle humour, powerful characters and cultural ideas.
Amazing and exciting story from Ukrainian film-makers
reaver_200611 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Just came from the theater! I bought a ticket to this movie only because not was where to sit up to 3 hours before the next film that I planned see. I thought somehow spend the time because frankly, expecting something dull and pathos, as usually happens in Ukrainian and Russian movies... When I got out of the theater, I was proud of Ukrainian cinematography! Frankly, a lot could be done better, but then it would be stereotyped movie. It is amazing and exciting story of love, betrayal, friendship and faith in the future! I was touched by the purity and beauty of the Ukrainian language, live playing of actors and amazing story. With confidence I can say that this is the best Ukrainian movie that I ever saw.
promise
Vincentiu27 May 2014
a film from Ukraine. not spectacular but beautiful. expression of high ambition , it is a story who remembers more than present. because , like few good films from East is a form of testimony. and the fact who defines it is the courage to use different tools - humor and slices of magic are basic bricks - for a story not credible at whole but interesting in its message. more than a film, it is demonstration of a young cinema school with a long tradition. and exercise to defines it. far to be perfect, it is important step for a different cinema. and that fact is the good point who transforms it in precious travel to affirmation. the meeting between cold past and myths are always risky. in this case it is inspired foundation for a movie with role of promise. because, despite errors, it is encouraging message from Kiev.
Brave film, but embarrassingly bad at places.
LydiaOLydia9 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this film as part of a Ukrainian film festival that was attended both by Ukrainians living abroad and non-Ukrainians. While watching the highly touted film I was concerned about how to convey my misgivings to the Ukrainian contingent. I needn't had worried. They were more harsh on it than I would have been.
Folks, I don't know who you think you are fooling by giving this movie "10" ratings or even a 7.2 cumulative score. It wont help Ukraine s a country or the Ukrainian industry in any meaningful way to give artificially high scores to bad movies.
The plot is nominally interesting -- Soviet-Ukrainian ww2 hero pilot gets shot down and then sent to the lager (gulags) after the war. his attempts to reunite with his true love are thwarted by a superior. the pilot eventually ends up with an American Indian tribe (what?).
In practice, the plot is a bit of a jumbled mess and if we're supposed to take it in any way seriously and not just as some allegorical dream sequence or whatever it strains all credulity.
a coherent or credible plot however isn't, strictly speaking, essential to a good film. sympathetic or at least well developed characters are. the characters here simply are not. the pilot and his, ahem, "tartar" wife are bland archetypes of goodness and decency. the 'bad guy' superior probably gets the most screen time and while the actors portrayal of him is on one hand good, on the other it's hard to make sense of his motives or what.
and then there's the portrayal of native North Americans (Indians). It's a stereotypically crude, geographically and historically ignorant hack job, to put it mildly. The "half Indian" on the cover/poster wears a headdress that wouldn't be seen within 2000 miles of wherever it was (Pacific Northwest-ish--though again, the geography here is very suspect) he supposedly was. The "Chief", while doing a competent job given who he is and the hackneyed dialogue, is still obviously some white guy with a Minnesota or Chicago accent.
The "native" music is good and well exploits the similarities between some Ukrainian "wild" music and similar American Indian wails and music. Some of the editing is bold. And I wish I could give more points for boldness, but boldness doesn't make a movie - results do. And, ultimately, this is an embarrassing mess that fails to tell a plausible, coherent, or entertaining story either historically, geographically, or inter-personally.
Folks, I don't know who you think you are fooling by giving this movie "10" ratings or even a 7.2 cumulative score. It wont help Ukraine s a country or the Ukrainian industry in any meaningful way to give artificially high scores to bad movies.
The plot is nominally interesting -- Soviet-Ukrainian ww2 hero pilot gets shot down and then sent to the lager (gulags) after the war. his attempts to reunite with his true love are thwarted by a superior. the pilot eventually ends up with an American Indian tribe (what?).
In practice, the plot is a bit of a jumbled mess and if we're supposed to take it in any way seriously and not just as some allegorical dream sequence or whatever it strains all credulity.
a coherent or credible plot however isn't, strictly speaking, essential to a good film. sympathetic or at least well developed characters are. the characters here simply are not. the pilot and his, ahem, "tartar" wife are bland archetypes of goodness and decency. the 'bad guy' superior probably gets the most screen time and while the actors portrayal of him is on one hand good, on the other it's hard to make sense of his motives or what.
and then there's the portrayal of native North Americans (Indians). It's a stereotypically crude, geographically and historically ignorant hack job, to put it mildly. The "half Indian" on the cover/poster wears a headdress that wouldn't be seen within 2000 miles of wherever it was (Pacific Northwest-ish--though again, the geography here is very suspect) he supposedly was. The "Chief", while doing a competent job given who he is and the hackneyed dialogue, is still obviously some white guy with a Minnesota or Chicago accent.
The "native" music is good and well exploits the similarities between some Ukrainian "wild" music and similar American Indian wails and music. Some of the editing is bold. And I wish I could give more points for boldness, but boldness doesn't make a movie - results do. And, ultimately, this is an embarrassing mess that fails to tell a plausible, coherent, or entertaining story either historically, geographically, or inter-personally.
ambition's expression
Kirpianuscus21 February 2016
it is a special film. not only for status to be the first real Ukrainian film. but for its high ambition to propose a story who , at first sigh, is real crazy. at the sigh - a parable about a people and its trip across history. it is amusing, dramatic, full of crumbs of fairy tale, heroic and chaotic, a film about a man who discovers men, situations, worlds and truth in a lot of dramatic situations. a film who could seduce. and to remember not only clichés from Soviet cinema but the flavor of life from childhood's dreams. a film who must see. not for great artistic virtues. but for a nice story who could be inspired portrait of a part of Europe in XX century.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
