Kedma

2002
6.1| 1h40m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 06 June 2002 Released
Producted By: ARTE France Cinéma
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

In May 1948, shortly before the creation of the State of Israel, hundreds of immigrants from across Europe arrive in Palestine--only to risk arrest by British troops.

Genre

Drama, War

Watch Online

Kedma (2002) is currently not available on any services.

Director

Amos Gitai

Production Companies

ARTE France Cinéma

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
Kedma Videos and Images

Kedma Audience Reviews

Cebalord Very best movie i ever watch
Onlinewsma Absolutely Brilliant!
InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.
Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.
maurice yacowar Kedma is not really about 1948. It uses that setting to dramatize the irresolvable conflict in Israel that if anything has increased today. It's a retrospective prophecy, explaining what's going on there now by purporting to reveal its roots.The opening scene suggests that Israel allows no personal retreat from the community's situation. An ostensibly personal moment turns out to be most public. The first shot is a woman's back as she prepares to drop her cotton slip and join her lover Yanush (Andrei Kashkar) in bed. When he shortly leaves her we see this intimacy has occurred not in private but in a crowded below-deck on the refugee ship. In the camera's slow track through the surprising crowd the personal story dissolves into the national.The film shifts from the romantic promise of that first shot into the absurdities and shock of war. The refugees -- hungry, tired, all their possessions in a bag or suitcase -- disembark into a shooting match between a hapless British military unit determined to keep Jewish refugees out of their mandate and a small, armed unit of Israelis trying to help them in.In a very reticent film, two passionate speeches carry the core: a victimized Arab's and a disillusioned Polish Jew's. Gitai gives equal consideration to the Jewish refugees and to the Arabs they displaced. For more see yacowar.blogspot.com.
riio i must say that i am surprised. i didn't want to see that movie because i assumed that if it was created by Amos gitai i shouldn't expect to enjoy it.i saw kipur before and free zone and i didn't like it. but i must be honest that i actually cried in the movie because it is so sad and its very close to the story of my family. all of my family are Holocaust survivors.my grandmother and her husband and two children came to Israel on a ship.her husband was sent immediately to fight in the front in order to help the besieged Jerusalem and she never heard from him ever since.we finally found his grave 10 years after she past away.so i definitely sympathized with menachem and his girl. that was the realty for many Holocaust survivors that came to Israel and i think that this is what yanosh the main charged is lamenting when he says;*we have no history,the non-Jews did our history for us,not we,we would have never made it the way it was,we couldn't do anything to stop them*.the battle scenes in the movie are very realistic and exciting though very tragic .the common fighting of both man and women in the battle field is also very impressing. the way of fighting described in the movie is very typical for the war of independence and the fact that the camera is always on the attacking side and doesn't give a full picture of the battle zone or the view from the enemy angel and actually showing the viewer how a battle go in realty from the fighter point of view meaning allot of noise,yelling and screaming,explosions,confusion. this is very different from traditional war movies that show in different shots one side action and the other side reaction like a soldier is shooting and then in the next picture you see an enemy soldier is getting hit on the other side and the noise and screaming is usual buffered.the surprising point of the movie is that the one of the main characters of the movie was in real life an Arab-Jew that was known for its anti-Israeli opinions but in the movie he play a brave Jewish fighter.on top of that the same fighter is talking to Arabs that flee the country and while doing so he repeat the Israeli opinion on the war that say that the Arabs that fled the country escaped it as oppose to the Arab view that claim that they were all physically depopulated by the Jews. gitai is also touching one the war myths about the 35 soldiers that were sent to transport food and medicine to Jerusalem and found and old arab man on the way and spare his life after a long moral argument among them self but after they realist him he called all the Arab villagers and they all came and killed the soldiers and mutiled their bodies.i recommend every one to see the movie,though i don't think that movie is better then *exodus*with Paul Newman and *giant shed* with kirk Douglas when it come to describe the war of independence.
ynhockey The story of the founding of the State of Israel is one of war, suffering, refugees, political intrigues, miracles and whatnot. Taking any of the above attributes and making a movie that focuses on it cannot leave you with a bad movie. Even a completely talentless director could make an entertaining film out of the Israeli independence story. But somehow Amos Gitai managed to make even this important and exciting episode of modern history into an amateurish and boring series of scenes, which is hard to actually call a film.The movie can be summed up fairly simply: Have you read Antigone, or another similar ancient Greek tragedy? Well, imagine an ancient Greek performance of Antigone filmed with a $200 camera, without any cinematographic additions. The scenes are not linked in almost any way, the dialog seems uninspired, as if read from a piece of paper, and the 'message' of the film is told by a raving side character.The acting is terrible, the choice of cast mediocre at best, and while the film makes use of several languages, even someone who understands them will have trouble watching the movie without subtitles, because most of the actors themselves don't pronounce anything correctly.In short, a horrible movie from a horrible director. Not recommended to anyone.
aligant03 I watched this movie on TV because of the interesting subject - the founding of Israel in 1948 or rather the immigration and war that preceded it. The film shows a group of survivors landing ashore in Palestine and their first steps in the new country. They bring all their bad history with them but are supposed to fight for their new country at once. The director raises the controversial issues of Jewish "ethnic cleansing" against the Arab population and Jewish feelings/deeds of revenge after surviving the holocaust. Unfortunately the effort is wasted on a very theatrical, sometimes dull film which was obviously made on a low budget. Also way too intellectual in my eyes, too.