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...

Soldier's Ballad

I can see that this film was one of the first "Soldier's Journal" movies of the genre. Meaning that you see him on the battlefield and off (soldier versus son). It has a very basic plotline surrounded with subplots that "happen" to the hero, instead of choices that he makes. This makes it a character study. And a very nice one, at that. I liked the leads. I felt that Alyosha was a well-rounded character, and the actor that played him did a very good job. I was reminded of Ryan Phillipe. Also, was I the only one who thought that Shura looked and acted a lot like Jessica Alba?
This film's message was different than the previous war films. It focused on the life of the soldier instead of the fight for the nation. It was saying that a Russian soldier is only human. That he does exist off of the battlefield. And I like that in a character study that backdrops on the history of a different culture.

The Man, The Terrible

Astonishing piece of work. I was actually saying as the credits rolled, "For a film finished around the 1940s, this was quite an art." I could feel the passion behind Ivan as he desperately attempted to maintain control of his country of states. I could feel the anger and betrayal he found as the boyars turned their backs on him for more power in a seperated Russia. I could feel the sadness in Ivan as the woman he loves, Anastasia, dies. This film, more than anything, showed me an (what I assume to be) accurate portrayal of a early Russian leader who just wants a solid-ruled nation under one banner, not several; and in that, what he is willing to go through to acheive his goal: One Russian Nation.

Burnt by the Sun

I found this to be a dark, almost twisted view of the Russian reality. So, really, it's one of the more accurate portrayals of the culture in cinema I have seen. The protagonist, who the audience wants to empathize with by the time he speaks of a fairytale, turns out to be a cold-hard government "collector". The character shows that a person is both a family-man/decent-fellow and then there is the "for the nation" side.
The not-so-happy ending is a more realistic story arc as well, especially given the era it focuses on; this era often found the families suffering for the good of the country.
The repetition of a classic Russian anthem throughout the story is an attempt to pass the notion of "all is well when well goes to all". In the song itself, there were lines such as "as the crimson river flows" speaking about blood; "when no love is left" which is self explanatory. The anthem is a message that the underseed of proud Russian people is an understanding that the ending may not be happy until the very end.

Just Like a Circus

I know I have been saying this lately, but I really liked the film that our class viewed today. It seems like with the evolution of cinematic technology comes the evolution of film quality. The music tied in great with the story, the actors can actually present realistic characters, and the developing story was enjoyable.
The cultural tie-in was more evident as the story continued... this American girl becomes a pariah to her known culture, but finds open-hearts and kindness in the citizens of a "free" nation. And the countless pictures and flags of Stalin in a Russian parade in the finale made the whole thing feel real. Sort of.
I understand the pride and the perpective, but as perspectives go, it depends on whose opinions are being viewed.

The Man With a Movie Camera

I found this to be an interesting- almost bohemian movie. It should be noted that the only reason I can call it a movie is that it was filmed by a director and screened to an audience. As the prelude states (or warns, to some), there is no plot, no actors, and no general direction. This is what intrigues me.
I would call it a documentary. A documentary of normal Russian culture during the time of filming. The director walks around with the camera, shooting the general population- some are aware, others not so much. And the best part is... people just keep living there lives as they would if there is NO camera. A documentary in every sense. I enjoyed it, and the soundtrack added to the Russian flavor.

Battleship Potemkin

Quite honestly, I like this movie much better than many naval movies recently released (this includes Pearl Harbor). It has a nice, efficient, clean feel to it. The men cast in the movie were most likely sailors at the time- because they play the part wonderfully. My previous strategy of focusing on the music and the movement has been trumped by keen interest in a good story. I believe it said on the screen that it was based on a true story, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. The film is a well put-together cinematic adventure that successfully links the pride and personna of the Russian people from the Era. More movies like that, and I will gladly watch a Silent film every day until the end of the term.

"Child", "1002nd Ruse", "The Dying Swan" Response

There is no question about it- Silent Films have a very distinguished feeling when compared to Talkies. Though I haven't viewed many Silents, I do respect them. The history, the rules they set for the future of cinema. It's all very entertaining.
An advantage I see in Silent films is focus. Since the on-screen players cannot talk and the director doesn't want to turn it into an on-screen book, it requires the actors to make things simple and easy. Expressions are distinct, the story is straight-forward, and the plot is always to-the-chase.
The director knows that he/she must keep the audience interested, and the lack of sound creates an interesting challenge alongside it. How do you keep an audience quiet, entertained, and intrigued by a movie where the only audio comes from an orchestra? The answer is on the screen. The actors must be appealing, the sets must look realistic, the story must be easy to follow. These guidelines set the bar for the cinematic adventures of the future for Silents and Talkies alike.
As a viewer, I found the biggest problem was to stay focused and entertained. The viewer must want to see what is going to happen on screen next, or the seat will be empty fast. So far, my adjustment strategy for watching a Silent film has been watch the characters, watch their motions and expressions. Listen to the soundtrack. That seems to work pretty well for the shorter films. I'll have to get back on the long-stride ones.
Silent Films are a landmark to the industry and helpfully represent the upcomings of a Russian culture.

Irony of Fate or Enjoy Your Bath, Pt II

The second half of Enjoy Your Bath seemed to be more romanticized than comedic. True, the similar comedic gags (physical confrontation, catchy wordplay) were involved, but they took a backseat to the storyline- oddly enough reminding me of a heavy Russian soap-opera. Indeed, more cultural reference and pro-pride messages came across. It was obvious to me that a clear-cut message the writers/director wanted in the story was that mistakes or sad circumstances have consequences. In that same message, however, it is also clear that they want those consequences to turn to fortune. The classic battle for the beauty involved Ippolit (typecast as a powerful yet easily-tempered man) and Zhenya (the loveable emotional "hero"). In true classic fashion, the emotional protagonist is the better man as opposed to the "powerhouse" type. I can see a metaphoric connection from a hopeful Russian writer's theatrical tale to a Cold War between waring nations.

Irony of Fate or Enjoy Your Bath, Pt I

I am finding “Irony of Fate” to be a good film to begin class on. The devices are simple, easy to find; The characters are near stereotypes of many comedic pieces; The cultural differences are also easy to see (Socialism abound). In regards to connection to American cinema, overall, I see many similarities- like the general outline previously stated. When, in the course of watching the film, I am following the cinematic efforts so well that by the end of the Act, the only difference I see is language and location, the comparison is there. Russian humor exists- apparently- around three things: alcohol, relationships, and temperament. In resemblance, early American cinema (circa 1970s pertaining to this film) also focused on these topics regularly. These must be universal topics of comedy.