How 20 Days in Mariupol Became a Vital Firsthand Account of the War in Ukraine

blog

When the Russian invasion of Ukraine began in Feb. 2022, Associated Press journalist Mstyslav Chernov grabbed his camera and filmed as the city of Mariupol came under heavy artillery bombarding. The reporter intended not to make a film but to capture everything he witnessed. “It was a necessity,” Chernov says as he watched the city be reduced to ruins.

Chernov ended up recording over 30 hours of footage which showed a maternity hospital being bombed, mass graves and people looting shops for food. That footage became the Oscar shortlisted documentary and international feature, “20 Days in Mariupol,” showing a first-hand look at the atrocities.

Related Stories

Photo illustration of a pixelated Taylor Swift with caution signs on her face VIP+

How Celebrity Reps Are Fighting the Flood of Unauthorized AI Content

Jack Whitehall Dave Bautista Rebel Wilson Michael Buble

Jack Whitehall Lands Prime Video Christmas Special Featuring Dave Bautista, Rebel Wilson and Michael Bublé (EXCLUSIVE)

Both Russian and Ukrainian TV reported the bombing, but “the commentary was very different,” Chernov says. “It was a significant turning point editorially and historically. I realized everything from that moment needed to be recorded.”

Popular on Variety

Chernov was one of the last international journalists to leave the Ukrainian city. He escaped with the footage, which compared to most docs that use hundreds of hours, was “not that much.” He didn’t want it to be swept under the rug and to be a part of the news cycle that would disappear after a few days.

Producer and editor Michelle Mizner stepped in, spearheading conversations about turning this footage into a film. Mizner credits Chernov with the idea to show what was being filmed on the ground as a firsthand account and how that footage was used in the news. “We wanted to understand the juxtaposition of those two things,” Mizner says. “But also through the film, give him opportunities and reflect on those moments as a journalist, the feeling of futility of the work.”

The objective was to distinguish misinformation and show how a first-hand documentation was a far more reliable account.

While serving as the film’s narrator, Chernov didn’t intend that to be a first choice. “We were looking for different ways to tell the story,” he says. “I never wanted it to be a story about journalists or us. It’s always about people who we meet, tragedies they go through and resilience.”

In editing the footage, Mizner felt it was important to show who was holding the camera and interacting with the people in front of the camera. “In this case, it’s Mstyslav, who is both a journalist and Ukranian. He’s been doing this work for over a decade and reporting on conflicts around the world and his home country.”

The producer looked at the minute details of a shaky camera when Chernov captured something tragic unfolding or even a sigh in his narration. Rather than cut away, she held a beat. By doing so, the viewer would get a chance to witness both what he saw and also his reactions to the horrors of war. Says Mizner, “That ended up feeling important within the film. There are moments when he drops the camera after witnessing a terrible event. You hear him ask people – as journalistic practice – their names, and where they’re from and gather that information. But also grapple with, ‘What else can I do for this person right now to comfort them?'”

Read More About:

Jump to Comments

More from Variety

Most Popular

Must Read

Sign Up for Variety Newsletters

By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. // This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Variety Confidential

A Variety and iHeartRadio Podcast

ncG1vNJzZmiukae2psDYZ5qopV9nfXOAjpqpraGjlru0e82erqxnYmV6pa3YrGSipl2irrO11KmmpWWfqLCivoysn6iqpGK5qr%2FTZmhra2VtgnqAl3Bm