Kamchatka is a terrible film. I believe what seems to pass for "understated" is its plain dullness, and the main character (a kid whose POV is nominally carrying the movie) doesn't show a single instance of child-like perception - save for a couple of commonplace animal shots, the kid sees the world exactly as the rest of Piñeyro's characters; a polite, well-framed shot by Alfredo Mayo.<br /><br />Since "Caballos Salvajes" I've been trying to figure out who the bad guys are in Piñeyro's films (back then, bullets always came from outside the frame). I'm sad to report things have gotten even worse, since now we need to resource to _our_ (external) knowledge of the period to understand what's going on. He seems to get away with it because, sadly, not that much happens in the movie, anyway.<br /><br />Kamchatka might be worth seeing, however, if you're interested in recent developments in the political genre. It was interesting to me how, by trying to detach itself from the political movie tradition, it achieves the complete opposite: this is a film that couldn't possibly make sense unless you are not only aware of the external circumstances that affect the characters but also have already a clear position on the political conflict in case.<br /><br />As justified as the generic, elegiac tone of the movie may be in the real world, its fictional consequences are devastating. It leaves us with no real characters and not a single dramatic scene proper.<br /><br />Characters here are archetypes and, most of the time, it's not entirely clear of what. It doesn't help that the movie looks often derivative of other films that have successfully portrayed the specifics of perception in children (the soundtrack mimicking Thomas Newman is particularly painful in that respect).<br /><br />Piñeyro's former writer (Aida Bortnik, who also wrote The Official Story) used to be quite annoying to me, but at least she seemed to know and like drama as a tool.