Chernobyl

Human memory is set up in such a way that the major events around us are similar for most people; we remember exactly what we were doing that day. I have that with 11 September, 2001, and with Chernobyl. The day it went up, we had beautiful, cloudless, sunny weather and half the town was catching rays by the dam, myself included. A light rain fell in the evening, although according to the forecast it was not supposed to rain. And I believe that it’s not just my imagination, because it’s said by more witnesses, but the next weeks the milk tasted differently, probably the comrades put iodine in it or something. The comrades covered up and covered up, and then when it blew up, what I found terribly funny was that the first mention of the catastrophe was only on the third or fourth page of the newspaper, a little footnote. And about the series: excellent stuff, no-nonsense, heading straight for the chamber, without carrying any unnecessary plot ballast. That’s how it should be. (30/12/2019)

I'd be even happier if the series would be cast with less prominent stars. After all, Stellan Skarsgård is already unmistakable, Emily Watson's face also gives a hint in advance what kind of heroine her nuclear physicist will be (whether positive or negative), and Barry Keoghan, for example, has never made anything normal, so his presence alone implies certain associations. I would add to this criticism with a few obvious screenwriting crutches: It was as if the recruitment of the miners was taken from a classic western and a few other scenes were very much in the style of the American way of life and their understanding of law and morality. But these are all small things that have no chance to jeopardize an otherwise excellent whole. I myself belong to the Chernobyl generation and the vague news of what happened accompanied my entire childhood. I thus very much welcome the opportunity to experience five HBO-produced episodes on the theme of reconstructing the events and stories of the people immediately surrounding the disaster. I like the idea of just hinting at some key events in the first episode and only explaining them in the lavish conclusion. I also appreciate the individual story of the woman firefighter who lived through the whole tragedy, but above all also survived. And while I had hoped that the intrepid nuclear physicist might not be a piece of fiction, on the other hand, I understand that such knowledge and courage in real life does not belong to a single person. Chernobyl is an important event and if the Russians come up with their own version, I will be there to see it. (14/06/2019)

The Chernobyl series is considered by many TV series fans and journalists to be the event of the year, and they spare no praise for the work of Craig Mazin as a screenwriter and Johan Renck as a director. I am not going to ride on freely exalted enthusiasm, we have plenty of others for that. I'm not afraid to say that it is an impressive work and above-average spectacle, but that can be expected from HBO and its immense potential, where the dominant role is played by the catastrophe itself, with a great probability. Nevertheless, some aspects of the project seem somewhat schematic, exaggeratedly dramatized, played for effect, and do not correspond to the situation (the fact that I am a professional in the field also plays a role, and details that a layman easily overlooks disturb me). I have a definite opinion about some of the characters. I perceive them differently than how they are served to us by the series creators - see the character of Dyatlov - that guy was indeed an arrogant bastard, but also a fighter, and his defense and arguments were completely different. Although admiration is expressed for how perfectly the series imitates the Soviet reality, in my opinion, it is limited to visually depicting the environment, and I think that poverty and dilapidation are emphasized too much. Nuclear workers were among the privileged elite and Pripyat was a new and glamorous city of the regime. The spirit of the time, the position of the players in the story in the Soviet present, and their awareness of their own possibilities were different. Sometimes, unbelievably naive dialogues can be heard, instructive for today's, let's be openly honest, Western viewers of the series.  "Heartbreaking" sentimental scenes of the "execution" of cute puppies are also filmed for them, which also sounds quite funny to those who know. Do you have any idea how the selection of boars during the threat of swine fever, the reduction of pigeons in cities, or ducks in reservations, or the mass slaughter of herds when suspected of salivation, take place? Some elements are exaggeratedly emphasized, while others, which are much more interesting, are not explored. Generally, I have a feeling that five episodes were too few, and most of the characters with tremendous potential just passed by in the series and the viewer has no chance to develop a proper relationship with them. For me, my overall impression is still 80%, taking into account that I found my own thing in it, and a lot of what bothers me, I attribute to the effort to tailor the project to the taste of the target audience. (03/06/2019)

Undeniably quality TV, which is almost impossible to follow with both an emotional and a rational perspective. As the number of episodes increases, the frustration factor is fanned from an enflamed injustice to almost a burning anger over all the cruel wrongs and resulting suffering. Because of this, I can't give it a fifth star on principle, even though the phenomenal Stellan Skarsgård deserves it with every (un)blinking look. (27/08/2019)

Chernobyl is not a series, but rather a gripping five-hour film that pays tribute to everyone involved in preventing a potentially even bigger environmental disaster than the one that actually occurred. It fantastically examines the various stages after the explosion, enabling us to experience the human tragedy and the national disaster from multiple perspectives (from firefighters to President Gorbachev). The shooting of contaminated dogs. Miners and their leaders helping out. The gradually emerging understanding and respect between the main male characters (the scientist played by Harris and Skarsgård’s politician). Decomposing bodies of irradiated people in hospitals. The casting and acting of the KGB chief and his appalling attitude… This film contains so many strong story elements that it is practically unbelievable. It is also a chillingly accurate reflection of the shoddy, dishonest and unscrupulous political system on which the Soviet Union built its “glory”, only to later rot away from the inside. (29/07/2020)