denis888
I still cannot make much of that film. Made in 1967 and savagely ruined by the Soviet Censorship, it was never aired and promoted much, and I never heard of it until much later in modern Russia. I was intrigued and wanted to see this work. People told me it's a work of sheer genius and a sheer art. I watched it many times, very accurately and diligently. I still am deeply disturbed and confused. But then, what do we know about war? Is it a grand epic Technicolor feature with great actors and epic special effects? Or is it a dull deep monotony of pain and misery? Here, it is neither. It is so casual, simple and brutal, that you just sit with an open jaw. Yes, I agree that often the camera work makes it almost impossible to grasp who shoots and who is killed and why. But then, this is a severe and sober reality of war - dry, vapid, gory, sad, hopeless, tragic, heinous, suffocating and dreary. This was probably like it was. No heroism every minute or acts of feat. Maybe. But for the most part, it was dry and painful. Just like the movie
jeremiah59
The movie itself makes no sense at all. No sense, no plot, no point. It is quite futile, barren, uninventive, totally confused, boring, and above all stupid. Obviously the director was trying to find a cure for his personal political frustrations, or even the frustrations of his country. Who knows? The message of the movie is so vulgar transparent, poorly scripted and performed, that it is unintentionally funny during the entire movie. Why this movie has been considered to have a cult status - is beyond me. Some people may enjoy and appreciate this kind of an art - but I don't.And as one of my friends brilliantly said: "The positive comments about this movie are just like in the H.C. Andersen's story "The Emperor's New Cloth" - everyone confirms and yells "The cloth is wonderful!" while there is no cloth at all!"
Guy
Plot: There isn't one. The film is about the battles between the White (conservative) and Red (Bolshevik) armies in HungaryThis is a film more interested in choreography than character and suffers as a result. Do not go in expecting a narrative because there isn't one. Instead you see Reds and Whites clash in a constantly changing situation. First one side will be captured, made to strip and then shot or driven away. Then the fortunes of war will change and the victors will become the losers and suffer the same fate they have just dealt out. The camera swings from one side to the other, following each action with a celestial indifference. There are no characters as such, almost no dialogue, no explanation of the historical context. Instead the film constantly stresses the similarities between the two sides leading to its ultimate and quite trite anti-war conclusion: we're all the same so why do we fight? It is telling that the only way to show this is to strip the actions of the characters of all context.Once you get beyond the choreography, the interesting vignettes and the occasional moment of brilliance (the band in the woods) you realise that this is an Emperor without clothes. Without a narrative, characters or ideas to feast on the viewer is left bored and uninterested. It is a little like listening to a comedian tell the same joke over and over. A curiosity.
Vishal Agrawal
Just a little recap. March 2nd 1917 Nicolas II is thrown out of power and a Provisional Government is formed. March 5th another provisional government formed. October revolution led by Lenin to throw the provisional government which results in a civil war to end in three years with the formation of USSR, a republic under VI Lenin. The white army was basically supported by Ruling class and Red Army was peasant's army. The backdrop of this film is the civil war at its peak during 1918 and characters are the victims or victimizers.The whole film is just confusion. It took me a long time understand who's who and what's what. I think thats what the intention of the director is because thats what was going on in Russia in 1918. The whole confusion of who's killing who and for what reason is so beautifully captured in the film. Its a unique film. There is no central character. There is no story but if you have a little sense of history or film-making you wont move for one and a half hour. The whole concept of lawlessness is pictured with such a brilliant finesse. By the time you sympathize with a character that story or the character itself is dissolved. Every scene is unique and has some kind of a surprise element. There is nothing which can be remotely termed as artificial. There are lots of things which are very interesting to notice. People are lined up in almost every scene, none of the persons who is be shot runs away or beg for mercy, its about Russia but from Hungarian point of view etc. Should be viewed by history students across the globe. 10/10
AD
