MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161690320 · doi:10.59236/emro.v27i2a8403

Intercepted

2025· article· W7161690320 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron Pahl

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Media Reviews Online · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningNarrativePhoneContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed by Grasshopper Film, 12 East 32nd St., 4th Floor, New York, NY 10016Produced by Rocío Barba Fuentes and Giacomo NudiDirected by Oksana Karpovych2024, Streaming, 93 mins Intercepted is an artistic documentary portrayal of the Russian invasion of Ukraine through a combination of audio phone calls from Russian soldiers to their friends and families back home, and video of the destruction throughout the Ukraine. The calls provide a shocking window into the level of propaganda employed by Russia and the openness callers had when talking about potential war crimes they committed or witnessed. However, the choice to not include any follow-up or reaction to the calls encourages the viewer to continue listening without digesting what is being said. This ultimately lessens the impact of the calls as they get buried and replaced by subsequent calls. The visuals are interesting but, apart from one segment, have no clear connection to the audio being played. The calls illustrate how important ordinary creature comforts like ice cream, juice, and being able to bathe can be to soldiers, and how basic necessities like shoes and T-shirts are being looted. The viewer is treated to a different perspective on the war then what is frequently reported and a snapshot of how the destruction has impacted the lives of ordinary Ukrainians. This film is certainly worth watching but the viewer needs to go in prepared. The film is very artistic and lacks narration or context around the audio recordings or locations that are being shown. This film is an hour and half long but could have been cut in half without losing any visual or audio content. The extended stretches of silence between audio recordings and slow rotation between visuals would make it a challenging film to show in a class while, the lack of any accompanying context would require extensive supplemental instruction. Incorporating select clips of the audio recordings into a class could be impactful, but as a whole I would rate Intercepted as recommended with reservations. The film would need to be accompanied by supplemental material. Awards:2024 Gotham Awards Nominee, Best Documentary Feature; Grand Prize for National Feature, 2024 Montreal International Documentary Festival

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8700.608

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational Media Reviews OnlineSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207