The Siege of Mariupol
Experience the harsh reality of the Russian invasion during the Mariupol siege through the eyes of Ukrainian journalists in the documentary “20 Days in Mariupol.”
Winner of the Best Documentary Oscar at the 2024 Academy Awards in Los Angeles, the documentary “20 Days in Mariupol” offers an unflinching look at life in a city under siege by Russian forces during the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Directed by Mstyslav Chernov, this performative documentary delves deep into the lives of civilians trapped in the crossfire, bringing their stories to a global audience. It is astonishing to see how the film details the complete breakdown of economic, social, and legal order within just 20 days of blockade and bombing.
While the film specifically addresses the Mariupol Siege in 2022, it is a timeless piece of film art, representing the fate of civilian life in war zones throughout history.
This article describes the motives and experiences of the film crew and highlights the film’s educational potential. Additionally, it is important to mention that a crew member, Evgeniy Maloletka, won the World Press Photo of the Year 2023 for his photo of the maternity hospital bombing in Mariupol.
Background of the Siege of Mariupol Documentary
Story
“20 Days in Mariupol” was directed by Mstyslav Chernov, who also contributed as a journalist and cinematographer for the project.
The film was produced by a team including Chernov along with Evgeniy Maloletka, who served as a still photographer, and Vasilisa Stepanenko who helped in various capacities.
When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the Associated Press sent a small group of staff members, including Mstyslav Chernov, Evgeniy Maloletka, and Vasilisa Stepanenko, to Mariupol because the agency recognized the city’s strategic importance in the Russian war effort. Soon after, the Russian army encircled Mariupol, and the Ukrainian journalists became trapped in the besieged city, struggling to continue their work documenting the atrocities of the Russian invasion. As the only international reporters remaining in the city, they captured what later became defining images of the war: dying children, mass graves, the bombing of a maternity hospital, and more.
Their collective effort resulted in the World Press Photo of the Year (awarded to Evgeniy Maloletka) and the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service (awarded to the team). Later, they decided to make a documentary from all the footage they recorded during the siege, which won a series of prestegious awards, including the 2024 Oscar for Best Documentary.
Mstyslav Chernov
Director
- Motivation: Chernov, a seasoned war correspondent and videographer, was driven by the need to document and broadcast the realities of the siege of Mariupol to a global audience. His goal was to capture the human impact of the conflict, focusing on the experiences of civilians caught in the crossfire.
- Intention: He aimed to provide a raw, unfiltered look at the effects of war, emphasizing the importance of free press and the role of journalists in war zones in bringing untold stories to light.
- Relation to Earlier Work: Chernov has a background in covering conflicts and crises, having reported from war zones in Eastern Europe and beyond. The 20 Days in Mariupol documentary is a continuation of his commitment to frontline journalism, using his skills to expose the truths of warfare and its consequences on human lives.
Evgeniy Maloletka
Still Photographer
- Motivation: As a photographer, Maloletka’s motivation was aligned with Chernov’s: to document the harsh realities faced by civilians during the siege. His photographs aimed to capture the poignant moments of despair, resilience, and the daily struggle for survival.
- Intention: By showcasing these powerful images, he sought to evoke empathy and action from a global audience, highlighting the urgent need for humanitarian assistance and international intervention.
- Relation to Earlier Work: Maloletka has extensive experience in conflict photography, with his work often focused on capturing human stories in extreme conditions. “20 Days in Mariupol” serves as an extension of his portfolio in conflict journalism, furthering his narrative of visual storytelling in crisis situations.
Vasilisa Stepanenko
Producer
- Motivation: Vasilisa Stepanenko (24) is a Ukrainian freelance journalist and video producer. Born in Kharkiv, she began working as a freelancer with the AP in January 2022, one month before Russia invaded the country, and traveled to Mariupol along with her AP colleagues to cover the brutal siege of the city.
- Intention: Stepanenko aimed to provide an on-the-ground perspective of the war’s impact on civilians, countering the Russian government’s claims that they only targeted military installations. Her goal was to highlight the true nature of the conflict and the resulting humanitarian crisis.
- Relation to Earlier Work: Stepanenko is the youngest member of the team (24). Before the war, she studied journalism and worked as a videographer covering various social topics. As a student, she immersed herself in Ukraine’s artistic and cultural life and also worked as a model. However, the war propelled her into a career of hard-core conflict reporting, which she has pursued with extreme dedication and at great personal risk.
Perspective of the documentary
The perspective of the documentary “20 Days in Mariupol” is largely from the viewpoint of Ukrainian journalists and civilians experiencing the siege firsthand. This provides a narrative centered on the Ukrainian experience and the human cost of the conflict.
- Narrative Focus: The documentary may exhibit bias by primarily highlighting the suffering and resilience of Ukrainian civilians, which can be seen as emphasizing the atrocities committed by Russian forces.
- Emotional Appeal: The filmmakers’ intent to evoke empathy and drive home the brutal realities of the siege might lead to a portrayal that strongly aligns with Ukrainian sentiments and perspectives.
While this perspective is crucial for understanding the human impact, it may not fully encompass the broader geopolitical complexities or the viewpoints of all parties involved in the conflict.
Producer Vasilisa Stepanenko
"My life changed completely"
“There was a life before Mariupol and a life after. Before the war I studied Journalism and was active in modeling. There was time for fun, dressing up nicely, going places, enjoying life. Now I work and survive.”
"People's stories have always been important to me"
When I finished school and went to study journalism, I knew from the second year that I wanted to work. Because I wanted to write, film. I went to work at the “Objektiv” news agency in Kharkiv. I was accepted and I was very glad that I was given a chance. Because at that moment, I think, I didn’t know anything. And for almost three years I worked in Kharkiv, covering the news. Social topics and people’s stories have always been very important to me, I worked with the topic of children with rare diseases.
I started working with the Associated Press a few weeks before the start of the full-scale invasion. We were working in Kharkiv, my hometown, and in Mstislav’s hometown, doing a story about how people are feeling amid this news around the world that maybe a full-scale war is about to break out. I started working as a producer. And my work was quite ordinary: looking for characters, organizing filming, making a plan, helping with interviews, editing.
Then we went to Bakhmut. I went to Donetsk region for the first time. This was a few days before the full-scale invasion began. There we decided to go to Mariupol, because we understood that, probably, if the war happens, Mariupol will be an extremely important city for Russia. And maybe it will be dangerous. Therefore, on the night of February 23-24, we went to Mariupol and arrived there an hour before the start of a full-scale invasion…
Photographer Evgeniy Maloletka
World Press Photo of the Year 2023
Iryna Kalinina (32), an injured pregnant woman, is carried from a maternity hospital damaged during a Russian airstrike in Mariupol. The photo, taken by Evgeniy Maloletka, won the World Press Photo of the Year and is fully featured in the documentary “20 Days in Mariupol.
When Russian forces invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022, they immediately targeted the strategically important port of Mariupol on the Sea of Azov. Russian shelling devastated the city, including numerous civilian targets, such as the maternity hospital photographed here.
At first, Russia labeled reports of the attack on the hospital, which resulted in three deaths and some 17 injuries, as fake news. Later, the Russian foreign affairs minister Sergey Lavrov said it had been deliberate, claiming the hospital had been taken over by paramilitaries, and that patients and staff had been evacuated.
Director Mstyslav Chernov
"I Never felt breaking the silence was so important"
“In those first days about a quarter of Mariupol’s 430,000 residents left while they still could. But few people believed a war was coming, and by the time most realized their mistake, it was too late.
One bomb at a time, the Russians cut electricity, water, food supplies and finally, crucially, the cell phone, radio and television towers. The few other journalists in the city got out before the last connections were gone and a full blockade settled in.
"The absence of information in a blockade accomplishes two goals:
Chaos and Impunity."
The absence of information in a blockade accomplishes two goals.
Chaos is the first. People don’t know what’s going on, and they panic. At first I couldn’t understand why Mariupol fell apart so quickly. Now I know it was because of the lack of communication (Watch people looting each other’s stores).
Impunity is the second goal. With no information coming out of a city, no pictures of demolished buildings and dying children, the Russian forces could do whatever they wanted. If not for us, there would be nothing.
That’s why we took such risks to be able to send the world what we saw, and that’s what made Russia angry enough to hunt us down.
I have never, ever felt that breaking the silence was so important.
Educational Goals
“20 Days in Mariupol” can serve multiple educational objectives and explore several important themes, making it a powerful educational tool in various contexts, moutlined below.
Reality of War
The documentary offers a visceral insight into the impact of war on civilians, illustrating the destruction and human suffering caused by conflict. It moves beyond strategic and political discussions to show the grave realities of war.
Impact Conflict on Civilians
By focusing on the siege of Mariupol, the documentary underscores the hardships and resilience of civilians in war-torn areas. This can lead to discussions about human rights, international humanitarian law, and the role of global institutions in conflict resolution.
Journalistic Ethics
The film highlights the challenges and ethical dilemmas faced by journalists in war zones, emphasizing the importance of delivering the truth despite the dangers. It raises questions about the role of journalists in conflict, the risks they take, and their responsibility to report accurately and ethically.
Media Literacy
Russian media claimed that the March 9 bombing was “a great staging” by Ukrainian propaganda” and the injured pregnant woman was actually a pregnant blogger from Mariupol. The film can teach students how to critically evaluate sources of information, understand the construction of narratives, and appreciate the importance of firsthand documentation in shaping public perception.
Historical and Political Context
The documentary provides context to the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, offering a basis for discussions on geopolitical dynamics, historical tensions, and the broader impacts of such conflicts on global stability.
Empathy and Global Citizenship
In this former Fitness Studio people sheltered against the bombing. By presenting the human stories behind the headlines, the documentary encourages viewers to develop empathy for those living in conflict zones and reflect on their role as global citizens in a connected world.
Documentary TyPe
"20 Days in Mariupol" can be best classified a Performative documentary
“While ’20 Days in Mariupol’ certainly contains elements that are typically poetic, observational, expository and participatory, after careful deliberation, we are inclined to classify it as performative. Below is our reasoning.
Poetic Elements: While the soundtrack significantly defines the mood, this mood serves more as a means to support the narrative rather than being the documentary’s primary aim. Despite the strong poetic elements, being poetic is not its central purpose.
Observational Elements: The documentary employs a ‘fly on the wall’ method for most scenes, which positions it as observational. However, through editing, voice-over, music, and interviews, the film adds a strong personal viewpoint, transcending simple observation.
Expository Element: The director’s voice-over guides the viewer through the story and defines the perspective, adding an expository quality to the narrative. Yet, the commentary carries a strong emotional charge, transcending the typical expository delivery to deeply engage viewers with emotion and empathy. Rather than presenting a logical argument in an authoritative, distant manner—characteristic of the expository mode—the narrator in ’20 Days in Mariupol’ is profoundly emotionally involved. The goal is to captivate the audience not through logic and reasoning but through a vivid conveyance of emotion and empathy. The film strives to immerse the viewer in the harrowing experience of being in Mariupol, besieged and harassed by the Russian Army.
Reflexive Element: This mode draws attention to the filmmaking process itself, questioning the authenticity of documentary filmmaking and challenging the audience’s expectations. In ’20 Days in Mariupol,’ numerous scenes highlight the difficulties of the production process, such as the lack of internet for sending content to AP editors, the challenges of moving through the city, and the scarcity of electricity for charging batteries. These elements not only underscore the logistical hurdles faced during filming but also emphasize the documentary’s commitment to truthfulness and open communication. However, these aspects serve not merely as an end in themselves; they also reveal the ordeal of the siege for civilians and the press, thereby deepening the viewer’s understanding of the conditions under siege.
Participatory Element: There is much to be said for classifying ’20 Days in Mariupol’ as participatory because the director and crew are integral parts of the story. This documentary bears resemblance to typically participatory documentaries, such as Michael Moore’s ‘Bowling for Columbine,’ where the presence of the filmmaker is very explicit, marked by direct interactions and interviews. However, in contrast to the typical participatory mode, where filmmakers often confront their subjects to steer the direction of the documentary, the filmmaker in this case fully identifies with his subjects. Feeling equally trapped by the Russian blockades as the civilians featured in the film, he fosters a profound sense of empathy for their ordeal. This deep identification and emotional engagement suggest a lean towards the performative mode, highlighting the personal and subjective experiences of the filmmaker.
Performative Element: Considering all the options and acknowledging that ’20 Days in Mariupol’ contains elements from several documentary modes, we think the film is best classified as performative. This mode is characterized by the filmmaker’s personal and emotional connection to the subject, which seems particularly relevant given the journalists’ emotional involvement. Performative documentaries often use the personal experiences of the filmmaker to explore larger truths or social issues. By using a performative approach, Mstyslav and his crew not only present the harsh realities of the siege of Mariupol but also deeply immerse the audience in the emotional landscape of being trapped in a besieged and bombarded city. This approach can make viewers feel more connected to the situation, enhancing the impact of the documentary.
