My Joy

2010
My Joy
6.8| 2h8m| en| More Info
Released: 30 September 2010 Released
Producted By: ARTE
Country: Ukraine
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Georgy is driving a load of freight into Russia when, after an unpleasant encounter with the police at a border crossing, he finds himself giving a lift to a strange old man with disturbing stories about his younger days in the Army. After next picking up a young woman who works as a prostitute and is wary of the territory, Georgy finds himself lost, and despite asking some homeless men for help, he’s less sure than he was before of how to make his way back where he belongs. As brutal images of violence and alienation cross the screen, Georgy’s odyssey becomes darker and more desperate until it reaches an unexpected conclusion.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

ARTE

Trailers & Images

Reviews

ivyssauro Most low reviews are from people claiming they didn't understand the movie, if you didn't understand it, it's your problem man, but giving it a low rate? it's like saying mathematic is a shitty* subject because you can't understand it. ridiculous, these people probably did not like Pulp Fiction, Amores Perros or 21 Grams, which are far more intricate movies. the movie is a Dostoevsky like tale about a man who take a wrong turn and ruins forever his life, showing the miserable and depraved evil that man are capable of. how authoritarian and merciless, and that sometimes the thief or the killer is a better friend than a cop. it also alternates time lines without a hint, which is genius and done in this way to emphasize the movie 'moral'. it's really great if you like depressive art. for me, a sad masterpiece. a movie about how miserable life is. too complicated for some.(IMDb didn't let me write the curses, great.)
Radu_A While I saw this film, I couldn't help but thinking: 'Hm, where have I seen that before?' 'My Joy' is a series of short stories - some related, some not - about men taking advantage of another, which is presented as a somewhat natural, inescapable state of affairs. It all ends with an amok shoot-out. That would be the exact formula of 'Brigands, Chapter VII' (1996) by the late Otar Iosselani, minus the earlier film's dry humor. After having had the chance to see it again, I would venture to say that the stylistic and narrative similarities are far too many to be coincidental. Losnitza also leans quite heavily on Tarkovsky in terms of photography and Sokurov in terms of montage; all in all, very little is original.'My Joy' may be stylistically appreciated as some sort of homage to the aforementioned authors, but its subject matter would appear rather a summary of common clichés than a depiction of (rural) life in Ukraine or Russia. If you have traveled in the region, you will be familiar with the horror stories depicted in this film - corrupt roadside police, hookers and theft everywhere -, but also with the fact that these bear little resemblance to reality nowadays. 'My Joy' therefore appears to be made for the consideration of those who adhere to these stereotypes, rather than those who have a genuine interest in the region.I would also agree with those who criticize the story's arguably most shocking incident, namely the execution of a hospitable teacher by two marauding Red Army soldiers after his comment that the German Army might build a better Ukraine. While it's not altogether clear if that is the reason - the execution takes place the following morning, and the soldiers loot the place immediately afterward -, I think it's not acceptable for a German production - made with German tax payer's money - to include such a statement. I wouldn't go as far as calling this propaganda, though - rather a tasteless attempt to grab the viewer's attention. If you want to get an idea about what the German Army did to the Soviet Union, and why the statement in question is so controversial, watch 'Come and See' (1985).In short, 'My Joy' is not a complete disaster, one may acknowledge its adaptation of classic features in Russian cinema. But more noticeably, it is a questionable mixture of clichés severely lacking in originality.
mehmet_kurtkaya This film opens with a compelling scene involving a trucker in the countryside. It then follows on with the camera placed in front of the truck picking snapshots of people and their daily struggles along the road. More importantly we see a population subsisting in moral darkness. There is even a scene or two reminiscent of a Haneke wannabe.Unfortunately the director plunges in this moral darkness he himself has created by revisiting history. When the film comes back to present day it falters and when it does that a second time in the rural home of a teacher it never comes back. The film loses any direction and becomes a collage of arbitrary violence. And most unfortunately this part is way longer then the rest of the movie! The director who apparently aims to lay the blame of current Ukrainian problems into Soviet era does not even stop short of a Nazi praise in the character of a teacher who blatantly hints God loving Nazis could have created a better Ukraine. This is where the film will find its place in history as a showcase of the rise of the extreme right in Europe! This is where free speech cunningly turns into hate speech and the propaganda goes totally out of control.Mind blowing for sure if that was the intention of the director! This film can be watched as a case study.
holden746 First of all, I want to say that the film simply blew me away. This film, Sergei Loznitsa's first feature is not only the best film (and discovery) of the year, but one of the biggest and most important works in cinema of this century.Before, Loznitsa was a documentary film maker and this effect can be seen in his fiction film. It is not only true and violent, but also very unconventional, different (truly ascetic, and here can be seen influence of Loznitsa's mentor, Robert Bresson), Loznitsa's use of long take is truly remarkable, in Russian cinema, long take has been used very ofter, beginning from Tarkovsky, then Shepitko, Sokurov, Zvyagintsv... but Loznitsa's use is different and unique, he absolutely refuses style (there is no disgusting exploitation of manner, that spoils Zvyagintsev's overrated, stupid and pointless "Vozvrascheniye"), he doesn't have style as a director, the film itself creates its style and language (and trust me, it's much difficult and much remarkable).And Loznitsa does very bold thing: he destroys notion of deep shot. Yes, Kiarostami shot films with digital camera (as Loznitsa does), but his shot is extremely static and Loznitsa makes very long travelings with hand held camera, what's truly new thing and it also creates a feeling of claustrophobia, of closed circle, of No Exit and it's really conceptual use of primitive cinematic method.It's extremely difficult film, but it's not art house and it's not the proud film, so called "not for everyone". It IS for everyone, but on the other hand, it should be watched very carefully: consider that you'll be shocked and maybe even depressed but I have one very useful advise: if you decide to watch this TRUE masterpiece, be patient and watch it till the end.It's really worth it.