Night Watchers

I was able to connect and enjoy this movie better than any of the previous works that we've observed in the last few weeks. It was such a good movie. The combining elements of using mythological stories from ages ago with vampiristic fantasy in an urban setting of Russian design turned into cinematic genius. I was picturing this epic as a combination between Blade Trinity and Elektra (but Night Watchers was of way higher quality than both of those movies combined). The main character was an antihero, for the first time in our series. He was a neutral character who attempted to kill in the name of good- otherwise known as trying to justify killing, or proving to himself that he is not a bad guy by killing bad guys.
I held the videogame scene in the back of my mind the entire film. I had a feeling that it would come up again. Glad to see I was right. Atop of that, the ending carried an interesting twist. It presented a realistic plot-twist to an otherwise over-the-top fantasy. Evil has a tendency of overpowering good, in the real world. Usually by the fault of the good guys or by how easy some find it to be evil. This is the last message I heard in the movie. A very powerful, almost saddening message. More movies need to carry the universal message, such as this one, instead of the nation-investing messages we've encountered all semester.

(Point of No) Return

Right off the bat, I want to state that if this wasn't a tribute to Tarkovsky, it would bear such a striking resemblance to one of his films that a viewer might mistake it for one of his works. But I'll get into that. I found myself both liking and disliking this film. What I liked about it: a mysterious father figure, a surviving soldier's attitudic overtone, the vastly changing scenary, and the general plotline. What held back my appeal was Ivan (as a character), the open-ended finish, and the suddeness of some interactions. For example, Ivan's changing moods- almost like mood swings- made me shake my head. One minute, he's afraid to jump off a platform into a lake, the next he wants to beat up his brother. Granted, these changes match those of a tween. But then the development in his character. He's so scared that he wants to go home- but he'll venture off into big blue waters and threaten his father with a pocket knife. A little too much to buy into.
But Andrei and Andrei (the directors) are comparative. Tributive and useful images and uses of the various elements (earth, fire, water, wind). The use of a photography book for past experiences and memories. An elusive father figure, an "unkind" or "unnoticing" mother, and a vacant-expressioned grandmother. All obvious tributes to a great Russian director from another.

Little Vera of the Verona

This movie was on the scale with the likes of dirty, gritty version of John Hughes American Teenager movies. Little Vera, as I've seen, is an accurate portrayal of those who suffered Russian teenage angst during the 1980s. As I said, it bears a splitting resemblance to the teen movies of America Circa 1980s, with a darker, more depressing overtone. This may be because the teen culture in Russia was far more disgruntled (and rightfully so) than teens in the USA. Our economy wasn't crumbling all around us. Our only hope wasn't marry families together to save apartment money/space. And we looked at college as a way to move up in the world.
How does Vera live?
On the edge. Drugs. Sex. Music. Like any classic rock-n-roll hair band, she followed the method. And just like those hair bands, she nearly OD'd- keeping the realism of her negative attitude/actions in a mindful perspective.
She has sex with a guy shortly after learning his name and running from the cops in a location close by. She offers to marry him not too long after. Her immaturity shines in every scene, as she constantly counters, disobeys, and stands against her parents and family. She even laughs in their faces when her fiancee makes out with her before she introduces him to his future in-laws.
This film is gritty, filled with uncut realism throughout.

Moscow Doesn't Believe In Tears, But It Does Believe In Marriage

The film viewed during class today was another "anthem" of Russian cinematic culture. I think that this film and Irony of Fate are widely acclaimed by the European public at large due to certain similarities: (1) Both focus on realistic characters, i.e. similar to real-life people; (2) The stories focus on the people who want great lifes in the big city; (3) The Romantic story. Every Russian (in one way or another) wants to meet the right person, fall in love, and live happily ever after. Sounds more like a universal than a cultural belief, considering I doubt that many Americans don't feel the same way. Both Irony of Fate and Moscow Doesn't Believe in Tears offers this love-story wish in the forefront of the minds of the people.
Mistaken love and seeking marriage seem to be a recurring theme thoughout the film. As young characters in the story, Katerina and Lyudmila keep searching for love. The problem for Katerina is the surplus of suitors who want her hand. After she makes her decision to become involved with Rodion, she greatly regrets it after becoming pregnant- and finding that Rodion isn't the type of man who will stand beside her. After that, love becomes more of a distraction from work and raising her daughter.
Lyudmila is a sad case. She aims to marry a doctor or a lawyer or a military man. I noticed that she hardly mention qualities in a man other than occupation (all of which have large salaries), leading me to believe she doesn't like love, but wants to use it as a vessel for financial security.

Ivan's Childhood Wasn't That Great

I was entertained by the idea this film presented. The acting was believable (especially by the 12 year old Ivan, to my astonishment), the storyline was easy to follow and understand, and the underlying cultural messages were- as well- very well presented.
The acting was so convincing that I felt bad for Ivan. I thought "man, this kid has gone through a lot of sadness in his life. Was he brainwashed into reconaisonce or does he truly believe in the cause of the Motherland's strife against Germany?" And then I realized that I was just watching a movie.
The cultural messages of paternal instincts trumping military duty was a nice tie-in from Tarkovsky. I am almost frustrated with him (Tarkovsky). This film had many of the tying elements found in Mirrors, yet it was so much more enjoyable to watch Ivan's Childhood than Mirrors simply (but not only) because it was very easy to follow. No supernatural throw-ins, the flashbacks were distinct dream sequences, and the time period was constant. This is one of his finer works.

Tarkovsky: Graphic Realization

It has become blatantly obvious that Tarkovsky's writing style centers around a selfish idea. In this idea, it seems that what he wants the people to understand in a message is shrouded by rubbing it in their face. At least, this is the way that I am interpretting the remainder of the chapter. Sort of an "I've got a secret...guess what it is...I'm not gonna tell you" mentality about Mirrors, at least as a lead-in to the chapter, which centers around his focus on the crew that work with him on creating "masterpieces" (His recurring camera director, Vadim Yusov, in particular, and the various set designers).
After that, he spends time talking about how difficult it is to help others understand an idea that originates from a personally difficult memory. Sympathizing aside, if you have the guts to write a script about your own life- no matter how difficult it may be- tw0 things must come in to play: (1) The director/writer must comprehend that they are sharing this memory with an entire audience, (2) the writer/director must believe that the message they are leaving behind inside of the story is worth the personal agony.

One Messed Up Mirror

I have been describing this movie as if it were directed by a Russian Stanley Kubrick. I have yet to be proven wrong. Professor Isham challenged the class to figure out the plot and the time period of the film. Well, I am a man who stands to challenges; so I shall do my best:
The time period is a little easier to figure out (by no means is that saying it was easy to identify). I estimate the setting of the film to be two distinct time periods: Early 1930s and late 1950s. The war was a clear indication for both, and some of Adult Alyosha's statements were clues ("that was 20 years ago...when I was a boy").
Bear with me, but the plot was difficult to follow. None of the characters had names (except Alyosha, and this is found out at the END of the film), the plotline was convuluted with individual viewpoints that were expressed randomly, the timeframe shifted by means of a mirror, and there was no clear, identifiable main-character.
That being said, I believe the plot goes something to this extent:
Young Alyosha and his family try to make ends-meat and survive during WWII. Alyosha's imagination and reality begin to blend together due to something that he has seen (or imagined to see), and the focus warps between his family in the 1930s and the later family in the 1950s.
Ouch. My head hurts...