If It was about a license right that deserved the “true story” treatment. TetrisDetermining who can legally distribute a game may sound like a tedious legal contradiction, but when that game was developed in Russia just before the collapse of the Soviet Union , the quest to secure those rights, was a real-life political thriller and perfect fodder…for movie drama.Watch a film directed by John S. Baird Tetrisbut those pieces don’t fit in place.
Tetris, which airs today on Apple TV+, explores this complex legal history through the perspective of Henk Rogers (played by Taron Egerton). In the 1980s, the game designer and entrepreneur became obsessed with the game after playing it at a trade fair. He went on a quest to Russia to secure the rights to the game. The move pitted against businessman Robert Stein (Toby Jones), publishing giant Robert Maxwell, and even his KGB.Ultimately, it’s the ability to connect with him Tetris Developer Alexei Pajitnov (Nikita Efremov) allowed him to secure the game and bring it to about billions of Gameboys, but everything up to that moment had an unimaginable with a twist and legality.
If this sounds like the kind of thing you can watch a two-hour YouTube video essay without pausing once, it is. And if you’re looking for a sophisticated adaptation of that story, Tetris Offers. However, the film is somewhat undercut as it struggles to express certain nuances. At times, I fall into the shallow view of the world that “capitalism is good, communism is evil.” This is not necessarily due to character development failures. There are also plenty of capitalist villains running around. But some of the Soviet characters look slightly more fleshed out than Tim Curry fleeing to one place uncorrupted by capitalism.
This dynamic is made even stranger by the inclusion of multiple Soviet officials who appear to be true patriots. What aspects of the communist Soviet Union they believe in, or why they do what they do, boils down to “what’s best for your country.” And while there are sound moral arguments that Pajitnov should be able to profit from his creations, or simply live in safety, there is little to refute this idea. who will object?
This is probably more due to the nature of history than to writing failures. As the film reveals, the last years of the Soviet Union saw greedy opportunists carve up territories during the collapse of governments. If you’re interested, now is not the time to be noting. As a side effect, however, the Soviet characters seem either completely corrupt or naively inclined to a dying ideology.
This simplistic view undermines some of the film’s real tension. Heroes like Henk and Alexei are serious and noble, and greedy executives are framed less like Jordan Belfort and more like Thanos. For movies full of nuances, these often flat features are unsatisfactory.