Reticulator

Oct 062009
 

driver

So far I’ve watched up through part 5, and so far it’s great–one of the best I’ve seen. I wouldn’t have known how good it is based on the Wikipedia article about it, though:

The film received mixed reviews from critics. The entertainment magazine Variety referred to the film as “more off-putting than enthralling” and noted that while the film has been compared to the Academy Award–winning Burnt by the Sun, it lacked a main character that a viewer could identify with. Variety commented that Viktor’s personal struggles “[seemed] irrelevant” and criticized Petrenko’s “limited emotional repertoire”, as well as the poor acting of the remaining cast of characters.

I went to the Variety review that’s referred to and didn’t get any further enlightenment. I think the reviewer is nuts. The “off-putting” comment comes in this sentence:

For Western auds, however, pic’s oddly disjointed wedding of operatic emotionalism and cool aesthetic distance may prove more off-putting than enthralling.

The reviewer is perceptive in noting the contrast between “cool aesthetic distance” and emotionalism; however, so far I don’t see anything operatic about it. Maybe it gets operatic later. In any case, I happen to be one who finds the contrast enthralling. I’ve already gone back and watched some of the scenes over and over, even though I haven’t finished watching the whole thing yet.

I don’t know why it matters that there is not a main character to identify it, because there are several characters we quickly learn to care about: The General, Viktor, Vera — even Lida and the KGB guys. And there are other minor characters who are interesting, too. That’s what matters.

To mention Burnt by the Sun by way of comparison is goofy. Burnt doesn’t measure up to this one at all. It does have a central character — or should I say a central actor — Nikita Mikhalkov. But in his role as a retired military officer, I got no sense at all of why he would be admired and respected by the men who had fought under him. As usual, Mikhalkov played Mikhalkov. He just couldn’t pull off the character he’s supposed to play.

But here I am, contaminating a note about a good film with talk about an inferior one.

And poor acting? So far I haven’t seen any poor acting in this film. The screenshot above shows some great acting. The bad guy is a clean-cut young KGB officer who smiles easily, but who is doing some dastardly business in his interrogation of the General. Very realistic, IMO. Very seldom, i.e. almost never, do you see a movie that has guts enough to do that. Usually movies have to give the bad guys bad haircuts, bad complexions, and sinister mannerisms so you know they’re bad. But that’s not how the world works. The other KGB officer — the one who plays the General’s adjutant — has a little of the usual, but still it’s very subtly done.

The reviewer almost may have had a point about Igor Petrenko’s “limited emotional repertoire.” However, keep in mind that he’s a very young man. He’s playing the part of a young man very well, and there is more subtle variety to his behavior than you’re likely to get from a young Brad Pitt.

I wish I had the recording of Nature Boy that’s used in part 4 of the film. I wasn’t familiar with the song so had to google for information about it. I like the one on the film better than any version I’ve found on YouTube — even better than the Nat King Cole version I found there, though that one is pretty good. Who is singing in the film? The orchestration sounds like it comes from the late 40s or early 50s.

I see that Pavel Chukhraj, who directed the film, is also the person who made Vor. I’ll have to start paying attention to that name.

Aug 242009
 

vlcsnap-00030

This scene towards the end of part 8 of “Seventeen Moments of Spring” is superb. Heinrich Mueller (played by Leonid Sergeyevich Bronevoy) is just now learning that the Russian agent they’ve been after is our hero, Stirlitz. He already had suspicions and had acted on them, but also didn’t think Stirlitz really was the one. His coming to grips with his new knowledge is excellent acting. He’s alternately surprised, disappointed, disbelieving, irritable, and more. It takes time for it all to sink in, and the movie doesn’t rush. It gives us time to watch it happen. There is nothing trite about the way it’s played.

This movie is unlike most Russian war movies I’ve seen (and unlike most American ones, too, that I know of) in that it doesn’t demonize the Germans. Mueller and the others are played as very real people, not only in this scene but throughout. Well, we’ve only watched to the end of part 8, so I can’t speak for parts 9-12 yet.

BTW, in American movies the Germans would usually be made to speak English with a fake German accent. If in this movie they’re speaking Russian with a fake German accent, I’m not able to tell. Nor can I tell if the Americans speak Russian with a fake American accent.

The screenshot above is from the version I got from Memocast. If you click on it, you will go to a YouTube version that isn’t as good, and on which the aspect ratio is messed up. I’m glad I’ve been able to watch it in a better quality version than that.

Aug 122009
 

bur1

So, Spock was not the first space traveler to have pointy ears. There is this character in Planeta Bur, a 1962 film, booting the computer/robot. For all I know, he’s not the first, either, but he made me think of Leonard Nimoy anyway.

bur2

And here is a shot of John. Interesting name for a robot/computer, but is it in the same class with HAL 9000 or R2D2?

Aug 112009
 

vlcsnap-00025

Interesting line: “What can I say… It’s hard to be honest to the end, Pastor. And the more honest my answer is, the bigger liar I may appear to you.”

This line comes toward the end of a long dialog in part six of “Seventeen Moments of Spring.” The English is slightly awkward, but that’s how I found it on the subtitles from Memocast. I presume it’s good enough, though I must confess that in this part of the dialogue I can’t follow the spoken Russian except for a few isolated words. I wish I had a Russian transcript to study like I do with some other movies I’ve gotten from Memocast.

It’s a good scene, with just the two men talking to each other — Col. Stirlitz (the Russian spy working as a Gestapo officer) and Pastor Schlag — the two not daring to be completely honest with each other but trying to come to an understanding without revealing how much each knows. The acting is just right — expressive, not overdone.

Aug 102009
 

There is an amazing article by Josh Levin at Slate.com: “How is America Going to End? Five steps to totalitarian rule.” It makes a lot of good points, even going to the trouble of pointing out FDR’s authoritarian tendencies and abuses of power during the 1930s.

The truly amazing part is how it managed to put out so many words without once mentioning Barak Obama’s actions in the direction of totalitarianism. It mentions Bush & Cheney quite a bit, and gives a fairly balanced account of what they did and didn’t do in the totalitarian direction. Richard Nixon gets a mention. But there is not a word about Barak Obama’s new detention policies that go farther than Bush’s ever did, or his politicization of the Justice Department, or his takeovers and attempted takeovers of various sectors of our economy, or his intolerance of dissenting viewpoints.

How could anyone who is not a partisan hack write such an otherwise balanced account without mentioning our current President, I wondered.

Then I got to thinking that it’s not so unusual after all. Slate is well known as a leftwing magazine. Young leftwingers are not very tolerant these days. If Levin wants to be able to be allowed to work, breed, and not have others treat him like a pariah, it’s probably not something he dares to talk about directly. He needs to talk in parables and circumlocutions to get his point across.

vlcsnap-00015

It’s not unlike in movies made in Soviet Russia. In those I’ve seen there is (to me, at least) a surprising amount of social commentary that would probably not have got past the censors if they had discussed the topics directly. So a comedy like Kin-Dza-Dza could be criticial of a government infested with bribe-takers and abusers of power — if the action took place on another planet.

That movie is probably not the greatest example, because Kin-Dza-Dza was released in 1986 when the Soviet Union was already much more open than it had been previously. But I happen to have the movie handy, including the above part where our heroes have just reached the point when they cannot take it anymore and have decided to fight back, starting by taking down the police officer who is helping himself to bribes.

Tarkovsky’s Solaris is probably a better example. It came out in 1972, a very different time, and it, too, got by with a lot by putting the setting on another planet. That way any messages wouldn’t strike too close to home.

vlcsnap-00012

Another example is in the 1973 TV series that Myra and I are currently watching: “Seventeen Moments in Spring”, which takes place in Nazi Germany. The English subtitles for the narrator for Göring’s words at the point of the above screenshot say, “Our concentration camps are humane instruments to save the enemies of national-socialism. If we don’t put them in camps, there will be a mob law. In such way, they’ll be completely reformed and realize our rightness”. Even in 1973 it was probably easier and more effective to talk about that than about the GULAG system of corrective labor from the same World War II period, which had very similar methods and purposes.

I’m not sure if the movie was really intended as social commentary, though. So far what I’ve seen of it is a very patriotic movie that doesn’t seem to be getting in digs at problems that include the producers’ own country. But I wonder if a viewer, perhaps living in the same household with former inmates from the GULAG, could help but think about how their own country once did such things, too.

This sort of indirect system of social commentary is of course not just a feature of Soviet Russia. Authors and producers in other countries have sometimes had to approach issues indirectly, too. And if you consider the type of people who usually read Slate, it’s probably something that happens in our country, too. The Josh Levin article may very well be an example.

Late note:  Also cross-posted to The Reticulator

Aug 012009
 

I’ve uploaded my first YouTube video — a scene from Kin-Dza-Dza. The ruckus between police Sgt. James Crowley and Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. reminded me of this scene.

There has been talk about how it’s important to be polite and respectful to police. If you mouth off, they might arrest you for disorderly conduct. In the movie, the people on Planet Pluke, whether Chatlanian or Patsaki, are respectful to the police, who are corrupt and expect bribes and who also expect the visible signs of respect you see at 00:45.

But then Uncle Vova blows up at them and demands that they do their duty. And instead of arresting him for disorderly conduct, the police officer backs down.

I have a vague recollection that there are other Russian films, including others from the Soviet days, in which citizens get angry at police officers and criticize their conduct, demanding that they do their assigned duties. I can’t remember just where I saw them, but I do remember being surprised that people in a police state would talk to the police this way. Of course, there are many other films in which people are afraid of the police.

Jul 302009
 

vlcsnap-00001

Alexander asked for some comments on Seventeen Moments of Spring.

I’ve only watched the first four episodes so far, but our slow going is not because we don’t like the film. We just don’t get in as much movie-watching at this time of summer.

I have been meaning to say something about this part in episode 3, though, though wasn’t sure just how to say it without being misunderstood. And it may be that I misunderstand, too.

vlcsnap-00002

The English subtitles are as follows:

Looking at Werner who was standing near the coffin, Stirlitz only now realized how the two brothers resembled each other. Karl’s younger brother, Werner, didn’t know that Stirlitz had got him released from the camp where he had been thrown on a denunciation.

Whoa! A denunciation? I thought it was the Russians of that time could get someone thrown into a prison camp on a denunciation. Germans and Russians both used informers, but I thought this system of easy denunciation was a unique feature of certain episodes in some communist regimes. Here are some possibilities I can think of for why this film series has the Germans doing it.

  1. The Russian filmmakers are projecting their own system on the Germans, probably not realizing it.
  2. The distinction I’m making between informers and denunciations is not a real distinction.
  3. The translation into English is all garbled. (I certainly can’t follow any of the Russian I hear in this part.)
  4. The Germans really did denunciations, too, and I just didn’t notice it in any of my reading.
  5. Other.

If choice #1 is correct, it wouldn’t be at all surprising. That sort of thing happens all the time, and probably goes back at least as far as Aristophanes. American filmmakers are especially bad at projecting their own sensibilities on everyone else, which is one reason I can’t stand to watch many American films. When I see it in American films I’m irritated. But when I see it in Russian films, I’m amused.

For example, I was once amused to see a show on RTR Planeta in which the American bad guys, in a plot hatched in the White House, poisoned one of the Russians. And I thought, no, no, no, that’s not right! Russians are the poisoners. It’s a common theme in Russian movies of all kinds, and in real life (see Alexander Litvinenko). Russians even joke about it. It’s not that Americans haven’t been involved in their own nasty assassination plots (see, for example, what happened to Ngo Dinh Diem) but poisoning is just not a standard part of the American repertoire. It’s not the American MO. But it was amusing to see Russians projecting that technique onto Americans.

Maybe something like that is happening with denunciations in Seventeen Instances, too. It doesn’t really matter to the plot, but this blog is mainly for superficial remarks, so that gives me license to talk about it.

Jul 192009
 

Best find of the month: “Communal Living in Russia: A Virtual Museum of Soviet Everyday Life.” I learned about it at English Russia.

There are video clips of Ilya, who no longer lives in a kommunalka, but who takes his two young children back to see where he once lived. The English voice-over is good in that it doesn’t completely obliterate the Russian speaking. Sometimes it follows the Russian, and sometimes precedes it. Very good for language learning. There are also bilingual, side-by-side transcripts in Russian and in English translation.

There is also a page with clips from feature films that show kommunalka life. Two of these films I’ve already seen: The Pokrovsky Gate and A Dog’s Heart. I thought Pokrovsky Gate was especially good in giving an idea of what kommunalka life might have been like. I don’t know how true to life the movie is, but it makes one think about what it would be like to live in such intimate association with other families, and what it would do to the intimacy of the life of the nuclear family. It was a film that sparked some of my interest in the topic. I suggested to the web contact that another good film to add would be Vor (Thief). There are no young children in The Pokrovsky Gate, but there is one in Vor.

I would not care to live in a kommunalka, but it’s not as simple as communal apartments bad, private residences good. I found it interesting that in the book, “The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin’s Russia” (Orlando Figes, 2007) that not all people thought these apartments were a thing from which to escape. He quotes one old woman:

Life under Stalin was spiritually richer–we lived more peacefully and happily. Because we were all equally poor, we didn’t place much emphasis on material values but had a lot of fun–everything was open, everything was shared, between friends and families. People helped each other. We lived in each other’s rooms and celebrated holidays with everyone together on the street. Today every family lives only for itself.

That book, btw, would be a good one to add to the list of those on the web site. In the book there are diagrams showing how some of the apartments were laid out. There are lots of stories of how life was in them — mostly of how difficult it was. The woman quoted above is an exception to the general rule, though not the only exception.

A few other things I think about in connection with this topic:

  1. In his book “The Great Divorce,” C.S. Lewis portrayed hell (metaphorically) as a place where, when there are conflicts between neighbors, instead of reconciling, the people just move farther apart from each other. It’s a lonely place. If there is any doubt that Lewis’s portrayal is a parable we can note that when families are forced to live close together, that too can be hell.
  2. At The Spokesrider I blog about my visits to sites of old Indian villages in the U.S. I sometimes think about what it would be like to live in such a village, where when you wake up in the morning and get ready for the day, you’re in the midst of other families doing the same thing – men, women, and children. There would have been very little privacy. One can sometimes get a little bit of that on a camping outing, but what if that is the way you live all the time? It’s worth noting that European-American captives often came to prefer that life style by the time they had a chance to choose. I personally doubt it was the more communal life in close proximity that they preferred, though that may have been a part of it.
  3. My mother tells about how during WW-II, she and her father went out to North Dakota to help his brother out on his ranch-farm, while his son was away in the Pacific. Electricity had not yet reached that part of the U.S., and she says at night they’d all sit around the table by kerosene lantern light, talking, making music on a guitar or piano, and singing. There wasn’t good enough light for the people in the household to go their separate ways to separate rooms. It was a togetherness that was partly forced on them by technology, or lack thereof. I once described this to one of the leftier persons on a political e-mail list. He said it sounded to him like hell. But I think those who took part and are still alive have fond memories of the time.

By mentioning these things I’m not drawing any conclusions or making any grand summaries. I’m just trying to give an idea of why I find these communal apartments to be fascinating. I’m glad for the opportunity to learn about them safely, from a distance.

Jul 142009
 

vlcsnap-00024

Some time back I wrote about the lack of pipe organs in Russian films, and how the only one I had seen was associated with the bad guys. (Where bad guys = the Germans, in “Alexander Nevsky”). Now I’ve found another. But again, it’s in a German church. The organist is shown here in a screen shot.

This instance occurs in part 3 of “Seventeen Moments of Spring”. (Wikipidia link here because it wasn’t easy for me to find the article for that film, believe it or not.)

The word mgnovenij in the title was new to me, and I wasn’t quite sure what to do with the consonant cluster “mgn”. But the word occurs in the theme song and it turns out it’s pronounced pretty much as I had guessed it might be. At least it is when it’s sung.

Jun 102009
 

vlcsnap-00017

Looking through my collection of downloads from Memocast I found this one that I haven’t yet watched: Ne khlebom edinym (Not by Bread Alone). I’ve just started but it looks good, like something Myra will enjoy watching with me.

And pictured here is another one of those desks I was talking about, with a table protruding at right angles from the front of the desk.