Watch Prisoner of the Mountains For Free

Pretty Good

best movie i've ever seen.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

By definition this is a war film, however the vast majority of the film is something else. The main protagonist, Zhilin, is a novice enlistee, played by Sergei Bodrov Junior. Whereas Sanya, the senior officer is played by an incredibly emotive Oleg Menshikov. Both of these men are captured after being knocked out during the course of a small skirmish with local militants in the Caucasus region, and are held captive in the hope that an exchange of prisoners can be made. War is an existential event, setting our perspectives into two options: life, or death. As one might assume, the role of manhood within this film is evident and in a sense acts as a determining factor as to who makes it out alive. Sanya shows cracks within his inner being; he goes from moments in which he is radiant with boundless energy – dancing on the roof of the aul in which they are held captive, and in another instance he is seen sobbing uncontrollably while chained to his fellow soldier. Obviously this is a perilous predicament, but Vanya (Zhilin) is able to keep a level head under this pressure of not knowing whether or not he might make it out of these mountains. In fact Vanya is able to make friends with his captors, both Hassan and Dina – the daughter of Abdul Murad. Sanya when in his brighter moods is able to socialize and make fun of the tongue-less Hassan, and Vanya seems to go along with this. Overall it is this glimpse into the human side of war that helps to make it a good movie, but it is the ending that truly makes it all worthwhile. As a viewer you feel horrified, because you have begun to see these "mountain savages" as living breathing human beings. Given the ongoing war at the time of the movie's release, it is likely that it could have been filmed in this particular time period (before or after 1996).In terms of rating, I would give it a 9 as it's not the most cinematographically groundbreaking film, but it does gives people a glimpse into the inner sanctum of a lesser understood culture. There are some amazing shots that show the rugged beauty of the auls, which are the dwellings carved into the sides of cliffs. Furthermore, it is possible to get a taste of the way of life – how humans regardless of nationality just want to live by whatever means possible, and that war is not something to seek out.

Based on a short story by Tolstoy, Prisoner of the Mountains is a wonderful, bittersweet anti-war story directed by Sergei Bodrov. Two Russians soldiers - veteran Sacha (Oleg Menshikov) and rookie Vanya (Sergei Bodrov Jr.) are captured by Muslim rebels and kept in a remote mountain village, as Abdul-Murat (Jemal Sikharulidze) plans to exchange them with his son.Character relationships are the core of the movie. First, the camaraderie between the two prisoners - Sacha is cocky and bitter, Vanya is young and naive. The two have nothing in common aside for their captivity, but they slowly bond, and their growing friendship is so well-acted, it doesn't come across as clichéd. Even more interesting is the relationship between the two prisoners and their captors - Abdul-Murat, his young daughter Dina (an excellent Susanna Mekhralyeva) and their mute guard (Aleksandr Bureyev). A typical Hollywood movie would have made this sappy, but their interactions here are low-key and convincing.Menshikov is perfect as Sacha; the actor makes him increasingly likable as he bonds with Vanya and the rebels, but never loses the character's edge. Likewise, Bodrov Jr. gives a vivid portrayal of quiet Vanya. Sikharulidze plays Abdul-Murat as a cold but decent man who occasionally shows glimpses of kindness. And Mekhralyeva is magnificent as young Dina - one of the best performances by a child actress I have ever seen.Without spoiling anything, the bittersweet ending is powerful, effective and memorable. A must-see.10/10

Sergei Bodrov shows here that he is one of the most talented filmmakers in Russia today, with this riveting tale from the Chechen war. "Kavkazskij plennik" stars his own son Sergei jr. and Oleg Menshikov and both do a fabulous job as the Russian soldiers imprisoned by the Chechens in Caucasus.This movie is just what the world needed at such a time-an open hearted and humanistic telling about the evils of war and the uselesness of it all. Although the Russians can sometimes seem portrayed as the better side here and Chechens as ruthless, primitive, barbaric religious fanatics, the portrayal of the Russian commander quickly erases that impression. Here we see the laid back and careless attitude that mirrors the real Russian generals' attitude.The film is pretty tragic, from the death of Menshikov's character and to the tragic and unfortunate killing of Abdul-Murat's son, yet it leaves some hope in the end as Abdul-Murat shows pity for the young soldier whose mother has appealed for his release directly to him. But just as you think that this film will end well, the airplanes come. The ending is truly remarkable and well shot. It echoes the message of the absurdity of war and leaves us with little hope for the peace in the Caucasus.10 out of 10.

Prisoner of the Mountains provides an inside look into the Russia/Chechnya conflict through the eyes of two captured Russian soldiers, Vania and Sacha. The unlikely duo forms a friendship out of their will to escape their imprisonment. Despite the serious basis for the story (the continuing war between the two countries), the film is very multifaceted in that it contains comedy, love, and suspense. In this respect, I greatly disagree with another user who described the film as `bleak, tedious, and uneventful.' The main reason this film succeeds is that it does not only focus on the war and battles between the two sides, but rather develops the underside of the conflict-the characters on both sides.This user likens this film to watching polar bears sleeping because violence only makes up ten per cent of the plot. I have seen movies that are as boring as this analogy. Prisoner of the Mountains does not qualify as this type of film. Bodrov incorporates many different types of scenes in the plot action that evoke a variety of emotions from the audience. There are serious scenes, such as when Sacha and Vania are captured, which elicit fear and apprehension in the viewer. In contrast, there are also more humorous scenes, as in when Vania continues to meddle with the gun he and Sacha stole, after Sacha warns him to be careful, and the gun fires, causing them to lose their only bullet. In this respect, Bodrov makes his film very well-rounded by incorporating various types of scenes that play to different emotions. While the central plot is serious in its portrayal of the war, Bodrov includes less intense scenes in order make the film more interesting and develop the personalities of the characters. The scenes in which Vania and Sacha are shown `getting drunk, whittling, chatting with passers-by, and making friends with their captors' serve to help the audience understand the backgrounds of all of the characters, as well as show character transformation. Through discussions between the two soldiers, the audience discovers that Sacha's at first exterior most likely results from the fact that he is an orphan. In time, we see how Sacha grows to respect Vania, despite his naive nature, and becomes a father-figure to the younger soldier, ultimately sacrificing his life for him. Moreover, we learn how Dina grows fond of Vania and ultimately defies her father to help him escape. In this respect, these scenes are the main point of the movie. In this viewer's desire to see violence, I think he missed the obvious. Bodrov wants the viewer to understand the feelings and motivations of characters on both sides of the conflict. Had the film shown one battle after another, the audience would not have been able to understand the characters because only fighting would have been shown. In this respect, the non-violent scenes are critical to character development as well as the overall impact of the film on the audience.While violence is the setting for the film, it is not meant to be the sole focus of the plot. Consequently, rating this film based on its lack of violence does not do it justice because violent scenes purposely comprise only a part of the action. This reaction would be similar to evaluating a straight play, which had a few musical numbers, as if it were a musical; you would obviously be let down and give it poor marks because your expectations would be too high. In this way, I do not feel that more violent scenes would have added anything to this film. Bodrov sought to illustrate the general tense atmosphere of the situation through the initial capture of the soldiers, the failed escape of the soldiers, the death of Abdoul's son and the expected shooting of Vania. These incidences of violence effectively convey the difficult environment to the audience. Additional killing would have been gratuitous in light of Bodrov's main emphasis of character development. Overall, I found this film to be incredibly engaging and interesting for its depiction of the bitter conflict between the two countries. As a westerner, I can say that the scenery was nice, but that it was not the only good aspect of the film as this viewer states. Perhaps the name and subject of this film is misleading. To a person who wants to see a lot of violence in films, Prisoner of the Mountains would not be my first recommendation. To this viewer, I would suggest The Betrayed, another film on the Russian/Chechnya conflict with significant violent footage. In forming impressions of films, it is important to take into consideration why the director made the film as he/she did. In this instance, it is clear that Bodrov did not only want to present the violent nature of the war, but that he desired to explore the individuals behind the conflict.