This is an excellent film about a trio of young 'Edukators' who seek to 'enlighten' the rich in society by invading their homes. The early scenes are really rather disturbing as we watch them arrange furniture and plunder privacy. Then one night everything goes wrong when one of their victims arrive homes early and in their panic, they kidnap him...
But I do feel I must defend this film from some of the criticisms below, which seem not only unfair but a misinterpretation of the film.
One reviewer below (D Sutherland), states that this film is simplistic. The young trio kidnap and question him about society and his past and, in the words of this reviewer 'The rich man barely challenges the young people at all, and accepts much of what he has done is probably wrong.'
This is not the case at all. Remember that this isn't a Hollywood film. The characters are not black and white and they don't all have to be taken at face value. The rich man is an extremely shrewd character. The moment they take him to the mountain top, he carefully observes the trio, looking for weaknesses. He behaves in a jovial and friendly manner, but underneath he is clearly petrified - note the shock on his face when he sees they have a gun. He cunningly searches for any crack he can find, exploiting and manipulating the love triangle.
So to assume that when he goes along with their views that he is simplistically agreeing with them is a naive interpretation of his character. The question that arises, creating a fascinating narrative tension, is whether or not he really does agree with their views and is rethinking his values, or whether he is merely playing them and patronising them. After all, his main aim is to escape. He fears for his life. The ending, in fact, suggests that he is far from converted; and also that the trio are not as naive as the rich man (or indeed the audience) might consider them to be. In fact, one is left wondering whether or not the past he tells them has any shred of reality or is just a fiction; whether or not they did touch him and influence him or whether he just saw them as idealistic idiots - whether they made a difference at all.
If you take a moment to realise that this is a film with ambiguity and layers, you'll recognise that it's a lot more than a simplistic film with a 'message'.