Movie Review: Russian Ark (2002)

Russian Ark (2002)

Alfred Hitchcocks' classic "Rope" was famously made to look like it was shot in one continuous take. The actors would do long sequences of 6 minutes, or sometimes 10 minutes each, where, if anything went wrong, the whole thing had to be redone. By beginning and ending these sequences by focusing on static objects (and some other tricks) the long sequences could be edited together to appear to be one continuous shot. Hitchcock was limited by the maximum amount of film a camera could hold.

Alexander Sorkurov, armed with new digital camera technology, created "Russian Ark" - a 90 minute film - entirely contained within one continuous shot. With a cast of literally hundreds (perhaps a thousand or more) extras, the movie took six months of rehearsal in order to film the entire movie in one day. And given that that day in Russia only allows 4 hours of sunlight, and given that the movie is an hour and a half, they had only a few chances to get everything right.

We view the movie through the eyes of a Russian man (who is probably dead or perhaps dreaming) who finds and speaks to another man, a Frenchman, in the same situation. From the visual point of view of the Russian, we float through a palace and examine the world of the Russian aristocracy - we barge into diplomatic ceremonies, we glide through extravagant balls and drop in on masquerade parties. Most of the world we see is from the Tsarist Russia period but characters from all of Russia's history inhabit the same spaces.

The movie is avante-garde, mostly plotless and mostly characterless. Nothing is certain and nothing is explained. It's obviously not going to be most people's cup of tea. But it is also looks absolutely beautiful and the movement of the camera with the first-person point of view creates a dreamlike sensation. And, let's face it, part of the enjoyment is the appreciation of how it was done - it's about the spectacle and the feat of making something we've never seen before.

6/10.

IMDB 250 7.7 - Come and See (1985)

Come and See (1985)

"And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see. And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth."

During World War II, a boy in Belarus decides to leave his home and join a Belarusian resistance force. Sitting between Nazi German and the USSR, Belarus is a fierce battleground. He'll grow up quickly as he faces the realities of war.

The first third of the movie feels like a coming of age tale - the main character, a boy of about 14 fights with his mother, plays on the beach and meets a girl. In these scenes, and in some that follow, some of the acting is poor or overwrought and some of the direction seems amateurish. But these scenes will be overshadowed by what's to come.

Based on true events, the movie will descend further and further down into Hell on Earth. It depicts the horrors of war not in the usual sense of bullets, tanks and the heat of battle. Rather, in the sense of soldiers rounding up an entire town, locking them in a barn and setting it on fire. Or the scene of a man begging for his life as he's being dowsed in gasoline. It's the kind of movie that's so brutal in its subject matter and so matter-of-fact in its depiction, that it's difficult to talk about.

I don't know when you'd be in the mood to witness atrocity but it's undeniable that its depiction here is sobering and extremely powerful.

8/10.
Total "Top 250" Movies Seen: 356.

IMDB 250 7.1 - Stalker (1979)

Stalker (1979)

Somewhere beyond the barbed wire fences and guns of a dystopian future city, lies a mysterious area called "The Zone". Is it the site of a nuclear meltdown? Is it the work of aliens? No one knows. There is rumored to be a place within "The Zone" called "The Room" where a man's wishes become reality. Two men, the Professor and the Writer hire a man (known as a "Stalker") to lead them to it.

Filmed in the Soviet Union during the Cold War on a non-existent budget, "Stalker" features minimal dialogue, minimal music, minimal editing, no special effects and the first 40 minutes are black and white. To say that it's slow is an understatement - it moves at a glacial pace. The actors - when they do speak - debate the nature of God, existence, life, science and art. It's as if Ingmar Bergman made a science fiction movie.

All that said, and even though I generally don't like Ingmar Bergman, I like "Stalker". The main strength is the cinematography. The cinematography of this movie is among the best I've ever seen in any movie. You can pick a frame of this movie at random, frame it and hang it in a gallery and it will probably belong. The sepia-tinged black and white of the first part in particular is simply perfect.

Besides the cinematography, the other main strength is the writing. Tension builds slowly as the men navigate the Zone and questions start to stack up. I found the mystery of "The Zone" and the exploration of a strange world and its other-worldly possibilities undeniably interesting. It's somewhat reminiscent of "Lost". In that aspect, the sparse dialogue only adds to the mystery. Less is more.

Obviously, "Stalker" is decidedly an "art house" film. The pacing is extremely slow, shots are extremely static, the existential conversations, the fact that it's subtitled combined with the almost 3 hour run-time all means that it's not for everybody.... or even a lot of people. But if "art house" movies don't scare you and you don't mind a movie that challenges your attention span, "Stalker" is a must-see.

8/10.

Total "Top 250" Movies Seen: 349.
Also, IMDB has split the double feature "Our Hospitality/Sherlock Jr." into two separate movies so....
Total "Top 250" Movies Seen: 350.