The sun has set on a Tenerife hotel, and a poolside conga column formed by any of its guests shuffles merrily into frame. In the foreground sit the Kovalenko family. They do not partake in the festivities. The father, Roman, instead, reads aloud the latest accounts of Russia’s bombardment of their home country.
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began just a fewer nights ago, on what was expected to be the last night of the Kovalenkos’ holiday. With no flights home available, they are confined to the island, to passivity, until further notice.
While the conga image could easy be an allegory for a very current, Trump-approved indifference to Ukrainian suffering, it in fact comes from a movie that is almost a year old. Under the Volcano (2024), the prescient sophomore effort from the young Polish manager Damian Kocur, was Poland’s submission for Best global Feature at this year’s Oscars. It continues to play the festival circuit to much acclaim. Kocur, who besides co-wrote the script, spoke with me via video link about this startling film’s commitment to a faithful portrayal of displacement, its unconventional casting, and what it notably chooses to omit.
The beginning of Russia’s invasion sets the scene for the film, yet we never see its events directly. Aside from grainy news footage of an flat block on fire, the unfolding horror shows itself exclusively through the dazed reactions of the Kovalenko household – comprising Roman (Roman Lutskyi), his wife Anastasiia (Anastasiia Karpenko), and his 2 children from a erstwhile marriage, Sofiia (Sofiia Berezovska) and Fedir (Fedir Pugachov). They desperately receive updates on their phones, call friends and relatives to establish their safety and, powerless to do much else, proceed their leisure activities. “I was reasoning that it would be a good thought to talk about the war without showing the physical affects,” Kocur tells me, referring to his thoughts upon reading a real-life paper communicative that then inspired the Kovalenkos’ predicament in the film. This is “because most of the victims [of war] will be purely intellectual victims, not the physical victims of rockets, bombings, you know, most people endure in a different way.” As an outside observer of the conflict, Kocur felt obliged to keep any distance: “I don’t feel I have the moral right to show the war as it is due to the fact that I am not Ukrainian,” he stresses at respective points in our discussion. “I was trying to combine my own safe position – due to the fact that I was in Poland at the time, like how my protagonists are not in Ukraine […] with this feeling of guiltiness and helplessness.”
The mass-proliferation of violent images online, Kocur contests, has only strengthened the case against a more explicit approach. “I think nowadays it’s easy to get those images of pain, suffering and war. On YouTube, just by clicking a link, you can see dead bodies in Gaza or in Ukraine. I don’t think movie has the request to do that, to show it. [Film] is more about hiding now, talking about things not in specified a direct way. Just like photography took distant from painting the request to depict the planet realistically, social media has now taken this request distant from cinema.”
But this is not to say that the movie reduces the war to an abstraction. Kocur, aided by the observational, “slow cinema”-style camerawork of cinematographer Nikita Kuzmenko, ensures that the Kovalenkos’ all interaction – with each another or those they meet on the island – bears any of that “guiltiness and helplessness”. Otherwise banal incidents are tied up in the larger calamity. erstwhile Anastasiia pushes an unamused Sofiia into the sea to encourage her to loosen up, it could simply read as a misstep in the already prickly relation between a stepmother and stepdaughter. Or erstwhile Roman beeps at a British tourist blocking a road, the violent reaction that follows is typical “Brits abroad” fare. But what truly frustrates Sofiia is that her telephone – her sole means of contacting friends in Ukraine – is in her hand as she falls. And the emasculating image of Roman sat behind the wheel while a alien assaults the household vehicle comes on the heels of his wife having already probed his willingness to join up to the far little trivial fight that awaits them at home.
Kocur acknowledges parallels with Ruben Östlund’s Force Majeure (2014), which sees a parent’s mediocre conduct during a controlled avalanche turn a household ski vacation into an existential bind for all involved. He says the films share “this feeling of, “we are trying to live average life in circumstances that don’t truly let us to,” due to the fact that inside there is this kind of dark energy”. For Kocur, this translates to “old patterns and old conflicts going up like lava in a volcano”, hence the film’s title (Tenerife’s Mount Teide features throughout). But he issues a caveat to the Östlund comparison: “the situation of my protagonists is even worse. 1 of their relatives can inactive die, so the threat is real.”
Fittingly, there are moments erstwhile a figurative eruption appears inevitable. The presence of Russian holidaymakers at the hotel is painful. Sofiia films a Russian female at the pool before following her to the door of her hotel room. The teenager, reckoning with her sexuality, is given to filming young women on the island, but this minute carries more menace. Anastasiia, for her part, lambasts that woman’s household erstwhile their cheerfulness at breakfast becomes besides much to bear: “Having a large time?” she asks in disbelief. Kocur derived specified exchanges from real accounts of Ukrainians crossing paths with Russians abroad: “one guy told me that he was sitting on the beach, and he looked at this Russian guy and he thought possibly he should kill him, before the Russian guy [does the same to him] on the front in a couple of months.”
This kind of painstaking authenticity is crucial to Kocur. As with his debut, Bread and Salt, all the roles are filled by non-professional actors (aside from the central married couple). These are “real people and real emotions”, as the manager puts it. I learn, somewhat disconcertingly, that erstwhile Sofiia breaks down upon proceeding carnival fireworks, it is in fact a genuine trauma consequence based on the actress’s experiences in Ukraine: “[Berezovska’s reaction] was so strong that I thought to myself, “we gotta keep it in the movie, we gotta usage it.”” Roman Lutskyi, though an established Ukrainian actor, besides draws on his real past during a charming minute of respite where his character tells Sofiia about the romance (and rap battles) that coloured his youth. The film, with its “slow cinema” pacing and deficiency of actual game beats aside from the outbreak of war, nevertheless maintains real urgency thanks to these moments of stark naturalism.
No little bold is the attention this Polish-Ukrainian collaboration pays to Tenerife’s West African refugees. “My aim wasn’t just to make a movie about the war in Ukraine, it was more about saying something about displacement,” Kocur says. “Making a movie about displacement without showing those who landed on the same island as my protagonists would just not be right.” Kocur draws parallels between the Kovalenkos and “maybe the only ones who can truly realize their situation, due to the fact that they lost their homes too”. In doing so, he had in head the moral implications of his native Poland accepting large numbers of Ukrainian refugees while “there are so many people from the mediate East and African countries that we don’t want to let in”. That even those seemingly favoured Ukrainians have since become a target of increasing disdain in Poland has possibly vindicated Kocur’s refusal to discriminate.
Out of that refusal comes a moving pairing. Sofiia meets a boy named Mike, and the pair sit on the quayside as he recounts the boat crossing that resulted in the death of his best friend, presumably a real communicative from another non-professional. The equivalence between the groups is not a facile one; Kocur admits that their circumstances are “maybe not comparable at all”. Indeed, the pair’s gathering cannot be called a dialog in the actual sense of the word – Sofiia does not remark on Mike’s story, and, amusingly, they cannot agree on who played the male lead in Titanic (“Brad Pitt”, Mike insists). But it is simply a movingly human minute of togetherness.
This approach allows the movie to transcend the specifics of the events of February 2022. Its concern with human displacement on a more universal level is what shines through in the end. But this is not a inexpensive or easy move. Kocur’s eye for precise, naturalistic item argues that universality is no barrier to complexity. Tellingly, the otherwise heartening scene where Roman recalls his youth ends on a note of irresolution: “To victory,” toasts Roman, beer in hand. “Over what?” asks Sofiia. An easier question, given the circumstances, would be “over whom?” But this is not a movie that poses easy questions. On casting Sofiia, the film’s most complex character, Kocur says that “it’s much easier working with teenagers, they don’t cheat as much as we do.” Neither does the manager cheat his audience, for that matter, and Under the Volcano is all the richer for it.
James Low is simply a freelance author and fresh Cambridge postgraduate in Slavonic Studies writing about east Europe and the Caucasus.
New east Europe is simply a reader supported publication. delight support us and aid us scope our goal of $10,000! We are nearly there. Donate by clicking on the button below.
