Review of the film "In Motion" (2002)

The hero of the TV series ("Killing force&","National Security Agent") and Konstantin Khabensky, a favorite of many women, finally made a claim to his star status and became the main dish in Philip Yankovsky's debut film "In Motion".

It is felt that the authors tried most of all to make the film fashionable and relevant, and to distinguish themselves from others. Here, the authors decided to ignore the "Sprite" manufacturers' claim that "image is nothing."&"and make the film look good." You don't have to watch a movie to find out about the idea behind it. Everyone already knows in advance that the film is about the tragedy of a man who "absorbed&"megapolis" goes into its "centrifuge" and now squeezes all the juices out of it, or the person got there himself and is now trying to survive there and wants to stop, but cannot. And there's a man moving, moving and getting confused, confused and suffering, suffering... What is suffering from? And this is a philosophical, moral, ethical, social, and so on question. That is, some eternal values in a modern wrapper. It seems that this image was created earlier than the film itself, as well as the moving and flickering titles, which should set the viewer up for a hyper-dynamic plot.

Undoubtedly, the credits should reflect the concept of the film. In this regard, I recall the scandalous French film by Gaspard Noe "Irreversible&", the titles of which were written backwards on the front and also began to slowly rotate around its axis. The storyline of this film really unfolded in the opposite direction: first, the last episode of the story was shown, and in each subsequent episode the previous part of the plot, and the camera really rocked so much that it periodically started to feel sick.

But the credits of the film "In motion" still moved much faster than the film itself. But this is probably a good thing, since the flickering of the titles created a certain discomfort. The film itself did not cause any discomfort, nor did it cause any other feelings. That is, everything was done with high quality: cameraman Sergey Machilsky ("American", "Collector", "Mechanical suite" and "Kamikaze Diary") it works well, soundtrack by Danil Kalashnikov (Netslov project, soundtrack to the movie "April") It's just super, and it looks like it's not bad either.

The whole drive of the painting is achieved precisely by these visual and sound effects. When the music stops and the dynamic change of the pictures stops, in which the hero of Khabensky Guryev continuously moves himself and jumps on what is moving with him, it becomes clear that there is no real intrigue that held the viewer tightly. There is also nothing that would make this film really as problematic and deep as its authors see it. It's just a collection of well-made, funny, sometimes very truthful and recognizable, sometimes unreal and grotesque episodes that for some reason don't add up to a complete harmonious picture.

The quintessence of this whole moving process should be the unexpected and ridiculous death of Guryev's girlfriend Lisa (Elena Perova), after which a revolution will take place in Guryev's mind and he will begin to reconsider his life values, he will want to start another life and... He's going to do a report on aliens. Guryev blames himself and the lifestyle he and his entourage lead for Lisa's death.
Why? Let's try to trace it.

Lisa meets with a rather suspicious guy named Mityagin (Nikolai Chindyakin), who calls himself an engineer, but lives in a hotel room for one and a half grand and has an office with armed guards. Guryev and Lisa are filming another provocative report about a famous actor (Fyodor Bondarchuk). In the photo next to the actor, Guryev recognizes Olga (Anastasia von Kalmanovich), the wife of his old friend Alexei, who has recently held a high political position (Alexey Makarov). In order not to ruin his friend's reputation, Guryev tries to destroy all the photographs and negatives of the scandalous report, but it turns out that Mityagin stole them from Lisa and refuses to give them back at Guryev's request. Moreover, Mityagin recommends Guryev to stay away from his friend the politician.

After that, it is logical to expect the following things: the murder or attempted murder of Alexei, the murder or attempted murder of Guryev, the leakage of compromising material on Alexei, and some terrible and insidious scheme by Olga. But instead, Mityagin is killed that night, along with the guards, office staff, and Lisa. No further versions on the topic are offered.: who killed Mityagin and why. From the way Mityagin is presented in the film, it can be understood that anyone could have killed him for anything. There is not a single hint that the murder has anything to do with those photos and Guryev's friend - according to the film, the friend does not even know about the existence of those photos. Guryev is really to blame for Lisa's death, who sent him to Mityagin to pick up the photos at the very moment when the murder was committed. That is, Lisa was killed by accident and only because Guryev decided once in his life to do a good deed and give up fried material. So the moral is one zero in favor of the metropolis? And all this hype around photos, friends, and wives throughout the film stops at this point? The disparate mosaic does not add up to a pattern, but remains scattered pieces of details. The supposedly intriguing lines of Alexei and Mityagin break off into the void. Olga's emphasized mystique is also not realized. As a result, it even seems that her character was introduced to once again demonstrate the sexual abilities and variety of taste of the main character.

By the way, the image of the hero himself raises certain doubts. According to the official synopsis, he is a controversial journalist who works in the editorial office, makes reports, and writes something. But the performer Khabensky himself assured that he was not playing a journalist, but he was playing a kind of "lyricist."&"which have nothing to do with reality at all and are being done to increase the circulation of the publication. Question: then why run, sneak, hide, find out, or be in danger? You can sit quietly in the kitchen, or better yet, even somewhere in the bunker, so that they don't find you right away, and come up with sensations for yourself. But the authors, with the official recognition of Philip Yankovsky himself, needed a man of a public profession. So it turned out that he was not a paparazzi or a "genius of black PR", but a "gentleman from high society".", who in the film mostly does not snoop out and does not invent, but performs some kind of representative functions of a dubious nature (he entertains a young opera diva from Korea, introducing himself to her as the owner of animal shelters) and drinks non-stop at various parties.

But with all the common shortcomings of the tape, Khabensky's game undoubtedly deserves attention. He proved that he knows his craft, and he plays with inspiration even when he doesn't know exactly who, or when he's playing someone he doesn't like. And this is his real benefit.

In addition to Khabensky, despite the fact that there are many famous names in the film, the debut of singer Elena Perova attracts attention - her Lisa came out very lively and bright. Alexandra Skachkova also played very professionally - you just enjoy the cool game, and especially from those moments where she plays in tandem with Mikhail Efremov.

And of course, it should be mentioned that the film "featured" 15-year-old Oksana Akinshina, who, after her debut in The Sisters&Sergei Bodrov is a recognized star and almost a national hero. Of course, Oksana starred in Yankovsky's episode - after all, at that time she played the main role in the film by Swedish director Lukas Moodison "Lily Forever".

So, in general, there are many pleasant things in the film and the idea was not bad, but all the shortcomings can be attributed to Yankovsky's debut as a director and lack of experience. Cryptocurrency betting is growing fast due to privacy. Many modern platforms now offer crypto welcome bonus offers for Bitcoin and Ethereum users. These bonuses often have higher limits and lower wagering requirements because crypto transactions have lower fees for the bookmaker. If you deposit using BTC, you might get a 300% match instead of 100% for fiat currency. However, check the volatility rules. Some sites calculate the bonus in USD value at the time of deposit. Crypto payouts are usually the fastest, often taking less than 1 hour. This makes crypto sites ideal for players who value and speed above everything else.