![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.160.130.12
me and it was as enjoyable as the first. "Enjoyable," seeing as it's a Russian film about death, is a tad ironic.
A monk said to possess special powers isolates himself from his fellow monks who already are living on an island far from others.
Yes, this is another "slow film" that asks the viewer not be a passive receptacle, but actually participate in the exercise: you have to fill the moments of quiet.
Unlike what traditional film expects from you, i.e. a reaction to events shown, this film and "The Second Circle," demand more: you must interpret what you're seeing-- you must construct your own narrative--- because it's not action oriented, it's not "dramatic" in the common sense.
Still, for those who watch it, the experience can be mystical: what is a "saint" expected to be like, how would he act? And what to make of those Renaissance depictions of Christ as a beautiful, blue-eyed fellow? Are physical beauty and goodness fatally intertwined in the Western mind?
Follow Ups:
Eisenstein for gloom and Vertov for comedy... :)
I am sure you love Ivan the Terrible. I guess too much good thing in life makes one long for depressing and dehumanizing films.
I think most people will consider the Island slow "Russian" torture. Funny that through the years Bergman was treated as the anathema, presented as quintessentially anti-humanist villain of the decadent Western cinema, all the while right there, under the nose of the authorities the darkness the likes of which the world rarely had seen, was alive and well and growing.
The Russian soul is dark and unfriendly.
![]()
and Dovzhenko. The modern guys I also like.
There is something darker about not only the Russian soul, but other peoples in that latitude, in general. Scandinavian film, art, and literature isn't the happiest.
With all its famously gloomy weather, one would expect Ireland and England to have similar darkness, but that's not the case. Compare Chaucer to Gogol. Pushkin and Chekhov to Sheridan, Wilde, or Shakespeare (his comedies). Fielding, Sterne, Pepys to Dostoevsky and Lermontov, Tolstoy and Turgenev.
I spent a lot of time w/Russians over a five-year period. I didn't find them particularly morose, but then, it was business and we always were drinking---- a lot!
Perhaps it's the effect of the Cold War, but Russians seldom are considered among the most cultured or cultivated people on earth, yet in music, literature, and film they are as great as any. In ballet, they formed the basis for an art form they've dominated for a century.
It is possible that the architecture also is first-rank, but I haven't studied it. I'm sure the decimation of the second World War destroyed most of the grand buildings, anyway; painting is one art form that Russia appears to have lagged; it may be that government suppression was key.
Edits: 01/25/13 01/25/13
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: