Harvest Time by Marina Razbezkkina

Harvest time does an excellent job depicting a very difficult period during Soviet history. This movie illustrates the delicate line between work, family, and pride. Antonia, a mother and wife to a warfront vetran without legs, is forced to take sole responsibility for the well being of her family. After recieving the Red Flag for being the best tractor operator in the region. This award brought her great prestege within her community becuase she is the first woman to ever recieve the Red Flag. When the Red Flag is threatened by a plague of mice, Anotonia becomes obssessed with its preservation. After its destruction, she becomes overwhelmed by the duality of her roles. The death of her husband, which was probably initiated by his drinking habits, later followed by the death of her son in war became too much for Antonia and she moved out of the house. I had trouble following why this happened and the events that took place after.

The Recruiter by Gulshat Omarova

This movie was very well filmed. It displayed an assortment of camera angles which seemed to correspond with the action taking place. I enjoyed the far away shots that captured large scenes of action such as when Schizo was recruiting men for fighting.
I was suprised at the varying dynamics in this film and how it illustrated the tough times of that area. It also higlighted the racism in that area. Schizo was basically a pawn to a white alpha-male figure, Sakura, who was in a relationship with his mother. It was very disheartening to see the Shakura and Schizo's relationship dynamics change so rapidly and extremely becuse it was obvious that Schizo looked up to Shakura.
The movie provided realistic insight into the times. It took twists and turns that I didn't expect which catorgorized this movie as a winner in my book.

Russian Ark By: Alexander Sukurov

Sukurov did quite the job utlizing his set, the Winter Palace, organizing his camera crew and actors/actresses, and controlling the action within the individual frames. His talents allowed him to complete the longest uninterrupted shot and the first feature film created in a single take. If he wouldn't of been able to maintain control of any of the previous factors, the movie would have lost much of its peculiarity, mystery, and flow. He accomplishes this by being the invisible narrator and the various camera angle. Since Sukurov plays the narrator, he is able to direct us to the planes of action he want us to see. He really takes advantage of the variation of the camera angles by zooming in when there is a change of scene and then zooming back out when we arrive in the correct set.

Sukurov's overall idea for the film, including the director-narrator character and his interactions with various fictional/non-fictional characters from different time periods, allowed him to manipulate the setting because there are many, different planes of action occuring. He is able to interact with some of these characters while in other scenes he is not seen at all. This in it self creates varying feelings to individual scenes. This creates and extravegant film filled with lavish costumes which are surrounded by luxurious settings. Although the plot is quite unorthodox, it plays out beautifully. He chooses to highlight centuries of Russian history, which was extremely interesting, and portrays the contrast of culture throughout the ages. Many of the operas and plays that were shown throughout the film were from the time of Catherine the Great but we also see other events such as the formal court proceeding offered up by a tsar. . The climax of the movie is a grand ball in which there are hundreds of people entering in through a grand staircase. I wondered if there was any meaning in that some scenes the narrator-director was seen vs. the scenes he was not visible in.

Overall, the film was one of the best maintained, uninterrupted films that I have seen. I learned so much and was still awe struck by the filming, casting, and costumes.

Unknown Title (It slipped my mind)

This film really opened my eyes to the lack of individuality among many people. It wasn't very suprising that the young women, who was so vivacious and filled with life, was able to tear two mens long standing friendship apart. The fact that the whole day was simply a charadeto prove a bet seemed to tell me that that type of uniqueness is nearly impossible to find at real, face value within many individuals. I mean honestly I fell in love with her too. Although she was a little bit out there, a tad bit outspoken, and at times a complete wreck, she possessed stong passion for life which is hard to find.

I also loved how this movie was filmed. It basically a one shot film which beautifully displayed St. Petersburg. I was very impressed by the architecture around every turn and the abundance of people out and about. It seems like the city was proud of their historical background and worked hard to preserve it within the infrastructure. There was much diversity among the buildings they walked by which was fantastic because I am generally able to see similar structure within an area. Overall, this film protrayed St. Petersburg in a genuine, vibrant light which makes it appealing to anyone who would watch the film.

Night Watch

Bekmambetov's film Night Watch definitely came off as a big-budget film. I feel like I've seen this movie at least 10 other times. The storyline was overly predictable and I really don't find an interest in vampire flicks (unless its Buffy!) From the beginning, we are introduced to the clash between "Dark and Light" and we learn that there will be a Great One who will finally appear and end the unfinishable battle. We also learn that the Great One will choose the side of evil- which he enevitably does.
We see the young boy's, who is the Great One, initial awakening to his future destiny. He is taken into the force of the Darkness but awakes surrounded by people of the Light, one of those people being his long lost father. In the end, he sees that the side of Light is corrupted and is not much better than the side of Dark. This aspect of the film was one of the only refreshing ideasbecause in nearly all films, whether they be love, comedy, action, or thrillers, the good or Light side will prosper.
I can understand why this was such a hit in Russia. The rapid montage, the exciting fight scenes, and the dramatic special effects make it extremly entertaining on a visual level. However, the plot was very confusing and intricate. I found myself putting the elements of the plot together until the very end of the film. I had a difficult time drawing connections between the various levels of conflict. It's even worse because the ending was overly predictable. It was like I had all these high hopes for an end to all the confusion but I was left with the same ending I had in mind the entire time.
Overall, I wasn't too fond of this vampire thriller. The plot was confusing, the ending was predictable, and the characters relationships were really unestablished.

Brother

Balabanov's film Brother pulled an interesting take on a "hero." Danila's character was pretty complex. We are left to ponder his status in HQ and are basically left clueless to most of his past. He seems to be easily persuaded to kill because he has a natural knack for it. On the one hand, Danila is a mean, lean killing machine but we are also shown his sympathetic, compassionate side. We see him kill strangers for the ones he loves, help the poor abused Sveta, and trust his brother to the end.
I find it interesting the the mother said that Danila should look up to Viktor when clearly that respect should be switched around. It was so unfair that Viktor set Danila up after all Danila had done for him.
I found Danila's obsession with music added an interesting spin to the plot line. His love for music served multiple purposes such as an escapes from the present, an overall relief of his life, and an outlet to meet new people and experience new things.

The Return

Zvyagintsev's The Return struck me as rather odd. At the end I felt like I was trying to pull all the loose ends together to try and find the meaning in the whole charade. Zvyagintsev may have intentionally led me to these feelings. I felt just as lost, confused, and scared as Ivan and Andrey.

Zvyagintsev says that it's impossible for any serious Russian director to be able to avoid Tarkovsky and that is blatantly demonstrated in The Return. Since recently watching three other Tarkovsky films, The Return could have just as easily been directed by Tarkovsky as it was Zvyagintsev. The parallels were innumerable. From the scenic shots, to their views on nature, to the filming of them running through the woods of long, lean trees, to the continual use of water, or the overall message I recieved from the film. It was unbelievable!

The mother, and grandmother, seemed to demonstrate some of the unusual detachment the father demonstrated. She believed that it would be completely fine to allow her two young sons to leave with their father whom they haven't seen in twelve years. She is unusually casual at dinner and seems to have grown far apart from the boy's father.

The father seemed like he would have had a scarred past. He seemed to have trouble controlling his usual instincts when it came to handling his children. Instead of considering them precious, he treated them as if they were any one of his other friends. He did show bits of compassion but these seemed quite spread apart. In the end, the boys were able to survive because of the few days guidance provided by their father. I thought this was an interesting spin near the end of the film. I didn't understand why his father choose to bring his sons along on his "mission." That part of the film seemed completely irrelevant especially considering he was going to send the boys home after they were in the diner.