Thread: Films & TV: Russian & Non - Q&As/Reviews/Links all in here!

Foreign Films (Not American or Russian)

My first year of photography and film school, 1981-1982, was a magnificent year for foreign films and a documentary film. “Art House” films as they are known here; because, you can usually only watch these types of films at small “art” movie theaters and not the “regular” movie theaters. There were three films that changed the way I looked at not only "art" but the world durning that time. Before then, I had no idea that there was such a thing as a “foreign film” or that a movie could just have music as its dialogue. I learned that there was a complete a totally different world of films out there than I had ever known. It was a BIG wake up call to me and I drank it all in. It was a number of years before I found another foreign filmed that I enjoyed as much or thought about as much as those other three... 1988 to be exact. The four films I speak of are Das Boot, Diva, Koyaanisqatsi, and Nuovo Cinema Paradiso.

I’ll start with Koyaanisqatsi today and we can discuss the others later.

WARNING
If you have NOT seen this film and plan to, do not search for information about it as it will give away the opening sequence and if you are going to watch it, you really should try to figure out what you are watching in those first few minutes on your own. It is very cool and once you figure it out it is like Ooooooooh. Wow. (I admit it was much cooler on the big screen.)

Koyaanisqatsi: Life out of Balance, 1982
Koyaanisqatsi, is a Hopi Indian word translated as "life of moral corruption and turmoil" or "life out of balance."

Yesterday, I discovered that MGM has put the entire movie in one video out on YouTube for everyone to see (I hope that includes people outside the U.S.). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sps6C9u7ras

I saw this film three times when it came out and each time I saw new things in the film. With the exception of the sometimes slow rhythmic chanting of “Koyaanisqatsi ,” there are no words in this film. It is only the masterful music of Philip Glass and the slow motion and time-lapse photography of cities and many natural landscapes across the United States. The film is stunningly beautiful in showing the most spectacular images of not only some of the more recognizable landscapes of the U.S. but of also waves of rolling clouds that appear to be like their own ocean and cloud mists over such a brightly colored green mountainside you would swear it was spray painted. You will travel to cities at night and see the cars whirling around the roads at a hectic pace in a blur of red and white lights. You will watch as people scramble up and down escalators at New York's Grand Central Terminal and a San Francisco BART (metro) Station… there is so much more than this and all of it will amaze you, with its breathtaking colors and awe-inspiring views and yet... at the same time, make you think.

The movie shows the yin and yang so to speak of our world. An example of that almost irony or just plan juxtaposition is the one of the sunbathers on a beach, then the panning of the camera to reveal they are right near the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

But what exactly is the film about? The director of the film,

Originally Posted by Godfrey Reggio

the Qatsi films are intended to simply create an experience and that "it is up [to] the viewer to take for himself/herself what it is that [the film] means." He also said that "these films have never been about the effect of technology, of industry on people. It's been that everyone: politics, education, things of the financial structure, the nation state structure, language, the culture, religion, all of that exists within the host of technology. So it's not the effect of it's that everything exists within [technology]. It's not that we use technology, we live technology. Technology has become as ubiquitous as the air we breathe..." From DVD interview.

I hope that you will watch the movie and make certain that you turn the volume UP to get the THX type experience. Also, remember to see how long it takes before your eyes and brain work together to figure out what exactly you are looking at in the opening sequence! Finally, remember that film was made 27 years ago.

If you do watch it or have already seen this film, please post your reviews and/or comments (but don't post what the opening sequence is, I don't want to spoil that for anyone as I remember my first time trying to figure it out)!!! I hope that MGM has not blocked it for you non-American folks!

I've seen Koyaanisqatsi years ago in our history class. I don't remember the opening scene so I can't comment on that.

Unfortunately, the video isn't available for me and since Belgium usually doesn't censor youtube, I guess it's just not available to viewers outside of the US.


I do remember having mixed feelings about this movie when I saw it. I loved the images and the music but I couldn't help but thinking why on earth we were watching this movie in history class. Also, we watched on a regular television set so I reckon a lot of the effect was lost. I would love to watch it on a big screen with a surround sound system.
You made me want to find a copy now and watch it again!

Originally Posted by devochka

I've seen Koyaanisqatsi years ago in our history class. I don't remember the opening scene so I can't comment on that.

Unfortunately, the video isn't available for me and since Belgium usually doesn't censor youtube, I guess it's just not available to viewers outside of the US.


I do remember having mixed feelings about this movie when I saw it. I loved the images and the music but I couldn't help but thinking why on earth we were watching this movie in history class. Also, we watched on a regular television set so I reckon a lot of the effect was lost. I would love to watch it on a big screen with a surround sound system.
You made me want to find a copy now and watch it again!

devochka, that is interesting that you saw it in history class. I was also surprised that it is under the "Documentary" genre.

I don't know about your library system over there; but, ours actually has a copy of it and I placed a hold on it because my Hubby HATES to watch things on the computer.

You are correct, I would LOVE to see this one remastered and rereleased in a large theater in surround sound!!! So, dim the lights, and crank up the volume!

I also found it on these sites with no downloading, fees, signing up or anything like that, maybe one of them will work for you. If not, let me know and I will keep hunting:

http://quicksilverscreen.com/watch?video=42923
http://www.fancast.com/movies/Koyaan...isqatsi/videos
http://antigravitybunny.blogspot.com...anisqatsi.html
http://www.watchdocumentaries.net/20...f-balance.html
http://beta.sling.com/video/show/80055/74/Koyaanisqatsi

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Originally Posted by iriroma

I've just watched the movie "Losing Isaiah"! So many emotions!! This story did touch my heart!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYuqYqD1 ... re=related

iriroma, you could have said watch "Loising Isaiah" or "watched the movie." Either one of the those would be fine; however, you need to do something with the "the" or take it out. OR "I have just finished watching the movie "Losing Isasiah"


I have not seen the film; however, I do know about it and I am wondering what did you take away from it? Did you have any views on this matter before watching it? Did your views change afterwards?

Rockzmom, thanks for having corrected me.
No, I didn't have any views on it. I just bought the DVD because I liked the plot of the movie. (BTW the plot summary you'll find here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Losing_Isaiah.)
Actually, I feel sympathy just for the baby who had to suffer thanks to his biological mother (who was black). I didn't like Isaiah was given back to her only because the court decided that his adoptive mother (who was white) wasn't capable to raise the black baby. But did anybody ask the child WHAT he wanted?!
At the end they didn't make any final decision - Isaiah's biological mother had to look after him but she didn't cope with it, so she called the adoptive mother...
But those scenes when the baby was being taken away from his adoptive mother, when he fell asleep in the bathroom squeezing in his little hand the hairpin his mother gave him, the way he was missing his mother and some other scenes were really heart breaking.
Also I have to admit that I liked the perfomance of the actors.
And in conclusion - it's a heavy movie and it's quite difficult to say who is right and who is wrong.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Koyaanisqatsi

As the director stated the movie really creates an experience or impression sequence to a viewer. The viewer should make himself ready to such an approach where the screenplay is not some kind of a story where some meaning must present but the screenplay is a sequence of impressions. Like an instrumental music at the end of a songs album.

Nevertheless, having such an aim to make an experience giving movie, Reggio still had to choose something what to shot for visual sequence. So, he chose a surveying type of shots. Except opening and closing sequence, the movie resembles some kind of a nature series about bugs or ants. The resemblance is enhanced due to absence of human personality of any kind. Like a silent photo of what somebody outside can see if he is able to see such an infinitely wide angle of things. So, the movie occurred to be a snapshot of the cross-section of that time. I suppose this is why the movie was used to the history class.

Going back to the posts about Mark Zakharov’s movies, I think that one of his masterpieces, The Very Same Munchausen,
is full of sarcastic irony and humorous allusions to Soviet reality.
So, no wonder why this film was so popular during Brezhnev's rule.

I found very humorous (doubly humorous) these two sentences:

Итак, господа. Я пригласил вас, чтобы сообщить пренеприятнейшее известие.
Черт возьми, отличная фраза для начала пьесы.

So, gentlemen, I have invited you in order to inform you of a most unpleasant bit of news.
Damn, a very nice sentence to begin a play with.

And I’d like to wish a good 32nd of May to everybody who is happy to have a new day and, of course, is fit for it.

Originally Posted by Vbar

is full of sarcastic irony and humorous allusions to Soviet reality.

I find this observation surprising, but... thinking more about the movie I think that it might be correct.
Funny, but I never saw anything hinting at Soviet reality in this film; although there are many others in which I saw it (which means it's not because I never lived under Brezhnev). For instance, in another Zakharov's film, "To Kill A Dragon".
I always thought that "The Very Same Munchausen" tells us about universal human's values/troubles, such as stupidity, betrayal, irony, and many others... Although it's hard to deny that there are many things in the film which have very much common with Soviet reality.

The film depicts a great variety of characters and each one tells us a different human story along with its positive values and its defects.
I quite agree with you.

Needless to say, when I speak about Soviet reality, I must rely on what I have read or was told. There is one character in the film (the Duke) who may be seen as a parody of a specific soviet leader: Brezhnev.

The film portrays the Duke as incompetent and disinterested in politics. He is very funny when
he learns of the possible war with England: he goes to the globe and asks, "Where is it, where, I ask you."

The Burgomaster acts both as a sort of tutor and as translator for the poor Duke.
Another funny and allusive scene.
Jakobina: Did you sign Baron Munchausen's request for a divorce?
Duke: Who signed it? Did I sign it?
(Burgomaster nods)
Duke: Yes, I signed it.
Jakobina: So he can marry Marta?
Duke: Why marry?
(Burgomaster nods)
Duke: Yes, he can marry.

The Duke seems to be both protected and controlled by those around him.
I read some anecdotes where the leader relies on texts provided by others, which recalls
the Duke in Gorin's / Zakharov's Munchausen.

Here’s a couple of anecdotes about Brezhnev (I’m not sure who created them, whether Russian or American joke-writer).

Suslov comes to the door three times and knocks. Each time Brezhnev gets up, puts on his glasses, and reads from a piece of paper "Who's there?" Suslov does not answer because he "forgot his glasses at home" or "forgot his note."

At the opening of the Moscow Olympics he five times reads "O" followed by stormy and lengthy applause. By the head gestures of the joke-teller, the listener understands that he is reading the logo of the Olympics at the top of the page.

Originally Posted by Vbar

character in the film (the Duke) who may be seen as a parody of a specific soviet leader: Brezhnev.
The film portrays the Duke as incompetent and disinterested in politics.

I feel like this comparison brought in by head and shoulders. Duke's incompetnce is a clear result of the hereditary nature of his power, which is not the case for Brezhnev. And Brezhnev was enough competent before he got senile imbecility. They look too different in too many aspects.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Originally Posted by Vbar

character in the film (the Duke) who may be seen as a parody of a specific soviet leader: Brezhnev.
The film portrays the Duke as incompetent and disinterested in politics.

I feel like this comparison brought in by head and shoulders. Duke's incompetnce is a clear result of the hereditary nature of his power, which is not the case for Brezhnev. And Brezhnev was enough competent before he got senile imbecility. They look too different in too many aspects.

Я прошу прощения for anything that might have happened to your head and shoulders.

I am only too aware of my deep incompetence about Russian history (and not only).

All I wanted to say can be summarized as follows.
The Very Same Munchausen was produced in 1979. By the mid-1970s Brezhnev’s mental health was not very good.
So, is there anything that prevents us from thinking of Zakharov’s allusion to his contemporary Soviet leader?
The success of a satirical, ironic allusion may depend on how the audience succeeds in “getting” it. And a political allusion (from ludere ~ to play with, jest) may become increasingly obscure, until eventually it is understood by the author alone.

So, you may be quite right when you say “They [Brezhnev and the Duke] look too different in too many aspects”.

Originally Posted by Vbar

So, is there anything that prevents us from thinking of Zakharov’s allusion to his contemporary Soviet leader?
The success of a satirical, ironic allusion may depend on how the audience succeeds in “getting” it.

KGB has gone, so nothing can prevent us from thinking anything. However, the ironic allusions that we "get" are not necessary the same allusions which was intended by Zakharov. Is there something that could prevent me from thinking that Zakharov wasn't so narrow-minded when he shot his film? Look, the Soviet Union doesn't exist twenty years. Brezhnev died about 30 years ago. I think, half of the members of this forum doesn't remember those times. Nevertheless, they like this film. May be they see more common allusions.

Originally Posted by Полуношник

Originally Posted by Vbar

So, is there anything that prevents us from thinking of Zakharov’s allusion to his contemporary Soviet leader?
The success of a satirical, ironic allusion may depend on how the audience succeeds in “getting” it.

KGB has gone, so nothing can prevent us from thinking anything. However, the ironic allusions that we "get" are not necessary the same allusions which was intended by Zakharov. Is there something that could prevent me from thinking that Zakharov wasn't so narrow-minded when he shot his film? Look, the Soviet Union doesn't exist twenty years. Brezhnev died about 30 years ago. I think, half of the members of this forum doesn't remember those times. Nevertheless, they like this film. May be they see more common allusions.

Gogol died in 1852, but nothing prevents me from thinking that more than half of the members of this forum have been able (or could be able) to appreciate Zakharov’s allusion to Khlestakov (even if Ревизор was published in 1836).
So, I do not think that it is necessary to have lived in some particular period of history to 'remember' certain events. It is sufficient to read ( or have read) some books…

As it was implicit in my first post, I, too, like this film and consider Zakharov a very open-minded and intelligent person.

Thanks for your attention.

P.S.
I wish you a happy 32nd of May.

Vbar, Welcome to this thread!

You have sparked a nice little debate here which I am trying my darndest to follow; however, I must say that you lost me very early on at...

Originally Posted by Vbar

And I’d like to wish a good 32nd of May to everybody who is happy to have a new day and, of course, is fit for it.

Was that from the film or a inside Russian joke or what?

According to many modern statements Baron Münchhausen was famous not only due to his feats which he performed with his strength, dexterity and smartness but the Baron was also known as a very talented and intellectual person. He believed to make a lot of scientific discoveries. One of the discoveries was his calculation of Earth rotation period in relation to the day duration. He found the very small difference which if be gathered for hundreds or thousands of years would be enough to make a whole additional day. Like the Feb 29 added each four years for the leap-year there should be one more day added each several hundreds or thousands of years. So the baron placed it just after the May 31 when he realized it and named the May 32.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Vbar, Welcome to this thread!

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Vbar

And I’d like to wish a good 32nd of May to everybody who is happy to have a new day and, of course, is fit for it.

Was that from the film or a inside Russian joke?

From the film – Part one - after about 51 minutes (00:51:4.
- I, Baron Karl von Munchhausen...
- Look at the date!
The year of 1779, May the 32nd.
- How is it possible? Baron, you are mistaken, this date does not exist.
- It does!
- Well, if yesterday it was the 31st of May then what date is it today?
- The 32nd.
. . . . . . . . . . .
- Thomas! Are you happy that we now have the 32nd of May?
- Not quite, Baron. On the 1st of June I get my wages.

CoffeeCupp & Vbar... thank you for the explainations!

I had this movie (which I have not seen; but now have a copy to watch) and another moive mixed up This is why I was having such a hard time following the conversation and did not remember the line May 32nd!

I will now put this movie on my schedule to watch ASAP so I can get caught up with these comments.

By the way, I have been watching (a little bit at a time) "Hello, I'm Your Aunt!" The opening montage of this is fantastic. Very timely as I was just talking about silent films. Me, of all people, who if you follow this thread know slap stick is not high on my list of favs, am enjoying this movie VERY MUCH!! (yes, the previous was a poorly worded sentence with absolutely NO correct grammar or structure. You highly skilled ESOL Russians may edit away at that one. Take your best shot!)
Rockzmom.

I love "Hello, I'm Your Aunt".

By the way, the movie title became a widely used quote.

I also see that there was an American version of this movie "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" (1988 film directed by Terry Gilliam) I have requested a copy from my local library so once I have finished watching both versions I can compare the two!

Online: Mega (English only)
part one: http://www.megavideo.com/?d=xxfm7gc3
part two: http://www.megavideo.com/?d=md0m6heq

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096764/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adv...ron_Munchausen

Baron Munchausen is a character from The Surprising Adventures of Baron Munchausen (or Baron Münchhausen's Narrative of his Marvellous Travels) by Rudolf Erich Raspe — a collection of tall stories published in 1785, based on the German adventurer Karl Friedrich von Münchhausen, but with many debts to earlier works. The tales were adapted and re-published in German by Gottfried August Bürger in 1786 as Wunderbare Reisen zu Wasser und zu Lande, Feldzüge und lustige Abenteuer des Freyherrn von Münchhausen and became much more popular in this edition.

The stories were also made into films in 1911 (Les Aventures du baron de Münchhausen), 1943 (Münchhausen, script by Erich Kästner) and 1961 (Baron Prášil). His most famous adventures feature in a 1979 movie Tot samyi Münchhausen by Russian director Mark Zakharov, which depicts Baron Münchhausen as a tragic character, struggling against the conformity and hypocrisy of the world around him. Gilliam's film has many visual similarities to the 1943 version and the production company was legally obliged to add a disclaimer to the film's posters and closing titles to the effect that Gilliam's Munchausen was an original movie unconnected to the earlier version.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkrF4swOnOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D707NV_j7HY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckHRXat2Zq4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AItEljPaGM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVZIDdf4RsI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1srWXcqlV_I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjnhQv853Tk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq7ZIDxP6Ew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0HDdbYhlgE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRq0mUsIuHc

These are for "Hello, I'm Your Aunt!" with English subtitles. Thanks StudyR for posting these links and by the way, they come from "birubirFilms" which use to be "GalaBiR" who was banned and is now back up!!! So, a number of the films that were listed on my summary page I need to go back and update with new links!!!

Originally Posted by studyr

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkrF4swOnOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D707NV_j7HY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckHRXat2Zq4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AItEljPaGM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVZIDdf4RsI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1srWXcqlV_I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjnhQv853Tk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq7ZIDxP6Ew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0HDdbYhlgE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRq0mUsIuHc