Perhaps being a former Moscovite myself and having an elastic sense of humor prevents me from tossing this movie into the 'arthouse/festival crap' trashcan. It's not the greatest film of 2005, nor is it complete garbage. It just has a lot of problems. I also sincerely doubt this movie was banned due to any 'ideological fears', or 'conservative taboos' or any other reason this movie might conversely be called 'courageous' and 'uncompromising' abroad. It was banned because the censors knew 99% of the Russian film-goers would find it offensive because of the bad taste exercised during the shooting and editing of this otherwise dull film.

So we have a strong opening shot. Wonderful sound design, excellent premise - laden with meaning and symbolism. The usage and placement of symbols will consistently be of the film's strongest aspects (not that the number 4 is a daunting visual challenge). Over the next 40 minutes we have an equally strong setup. An amusing and well-written bar conversation among the 3 (main?) characters, and we feel pathos for these people, the great country of Russia, the human condition and all that. Then the movie starts slowing down. We begin to wonder what -yawn- lies ahead.

The rest is quite boring, simply put. Sure, the guy in the village tugs the heartstrings, and there are some slightly amusing moments. Nice sound, sure. But the enjoyment of this movie, not to mention the plot, are seriously compromised by the pacing problems. And this, this lack of a payoff for sitting through all the (nicely-shot) abject misery and bleakness, is what ultimately will make people angry at the 'offensive' stuff (personally, the main offensive scene bordered on being endearing, in that pathetic way harmless drunks can appear).

If you want to watch an enjoyable movie where Russians get wasted for prolonged periods of time (the entire film), watch Particulars of the National Hunt. Much more rewarding post-Soviet stuff. So yeah, a 4 out of 10 for 4, nice and symbolic of my post-mediocre-film condition.
What is the sentiment of this review?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
negative
Kanske att vara en före detta Moscovite själv och ha en elastisk känsla för humor hindrar mig från att kasta denna film i "arthouse / festival skit" soptunna. Det är inte den bästa filmen från 2005, och inte heller är det fullständigt skräp. Det har bara en massa problem. Jag tvivlar också uppriktigt på att den här filmen förbjöds på grund av några "ideologiska farhågor", "konservativa tabun" eller någon annan anledning till att den här filmen skulle kunna kallas "modig" och "kompromisslös" utomlands. Det förbjöds eftersom censuranterna visste att 99 % av de ryska filmbesökarna skulle finna det stötande på grund av den dåliga smaken som utövades under inspelningen och redigeringen av denna annars tråkiga film. Så vi har ett starkt öppningsskott. Underbar ljuddesign, utmärkt premiss - lastad med mening och symbolik. Användningen och placeringen av symboler kommer konsekvent att vara av filmens starkaste aspekter (inte för att siffran 4 är en skrämmande visuell utmaning). Under de kommande 40 minuterna har vi en lika stark uppställning. En rolig och välskriven bar konversation bland de 3 (huvud?) karaktärer, och vi känner patos för dessa människor, det stora landet Ryssland, det mänskliga tillståndet och allt detta. Sedan börjar filmen sakta ner. Vi börjar undra vad -yawn - ligger framför oss. Resten är ganska tråkigt, enkelt uttryckt. Visst, killen i byn drar i hjärtsträngarna, och det finns några lite roliga stunder. Fint ljud, visst. Men nöjet med den här filmen, för att inte tala om handlingen, äventyras allvarligt av pacingproblemen. Och detta, denna brist på lön för att ha suttit igenom allt (snällt skott) eländigt elände och dysterhet, är vad som slutligen kommer att göra människor arga på de "offensiva" saker (personligen, den huvudsakliga offensiva scenen gränsade till att vara ömsint, på det patetiska sätt ofarliga fyllon kan visas). Om du vill titta på en trevlig film där ryssar blir bortkastade under långa perioder (hela filmen), titta på detaljer från den nationella jakten. Mycket mer givande post-sovjetiska grejer. Så ja, en 4 av 10 för 4, trevligt och symboliskt för min post-mediocre-film villkor. Vad är det för uppfattning i den här recensionen? ALTERNATIV: - negativ - positiv
Maybe being a former Moscovite himself and having an elastic sense of humor prevents me from throwing this movie into the "arthouse / festival shit" garbage can. It's not the best movie from 2005, nor is it complete rubbish. It just has a lot of problems. I also sincerely doubt that this film was banned due to some "ideological fears", "conservative taboos" or any other reason why this film might be called "courageous" and "compromising" abroad. It was banned because the censors knew that 99% of Russian film visitors would find it offensive because of the poor taste practiced during the filming and editing of this otherwise boring film. So we have a strong opening shot. Wonderful sound design, excellent premise - loaded with meaning and symbolism. The use and placement of symbols will consistently be of the film's strongest aspects (not because the figure 4 is a frightening visual challenge). In the next 40 minutes, we have an equally strong line-up. A funny and well-written bar conversation among the 3 (head?) characters, and we know pathos for these people, the great country of Russia, the human condition and all this. Then the film begins to slow down. We're starting to wonder what -yawn - is ahead. The rest is rather boring, simply put. Sure, the guy in the village pulls the cords of the heart, and there's some fun moments. Nice sound, sure. But the pleasure of this film, let alone the action, is seriously compromised by the pacing problems. And this, this lack of pay for sitting through all (nice shot) miserable misery and gloom, is what will ultimately make people angry at the "offensive" things (personally, the main offensive scene bordered on being tender, in the pathetic way harmless drunks can be shown). If you want to watch a nice movie where Russians get wasted for long periods (the whole film), watch details of the national hunt. Much more rewarding post-Soviet stuff. So yes, a 4 out of 10 for 4, nice and symbolic for my post-mediocre film conditions. What is the opinion in this review? ALTERNATIVE: - negative - positive
negativ
negative