The Sacrifice (Offret)

Made in 1986, this is the final film by Andrei Tarkovsky. It was made whilst he was dying of cancer and died shortly after the making. This was filmed outside of the Soviet Union, in Sweden, home to one of his most admired directors, Bergman. 

The film takes place hours before a nuclear catastrophic event -- World War III. The protagonist is relaxing in a field with his son refered to as "Little man", joking around with him, and also venting his philosophical qualms (the lack of spirituality in modern manking) as the child plays in the grass. Those not familiar with Tarkovsky's films would find it slow, boring, and difficult. 

What is strange, is there's this working class man -- the 'friend' -- and the university professor (the main character) discussing Nietzsche and other modern philosophers, whilst the working class guy randomly circles around on his bike, as if in a lucid dream.

The man makes a prayer to God, saying he'll leave (sacrifice) all he has if the war ends/never happens. Perhaps it was all a dream? One of the real disasters in the film was a major camera breakdown, resulting in one very important shot going to waste. If you pick up the DVD, you'll get another disc with a documentary on Tarkovsky, and the filming of The Sacrifice.

Whilst preferring the atmospheric nature of Tarkovsky's post-apocalyptic Stalker I found The Sacrifice stunningly beautiful. There are extremely long shots in the film, one being over nine minutes. The use of imagery is varied against a rural Swedish setting, but a careful eye is required to notice the shifting from colour to black and white -- a style Tarkovsky had used in other films. The natural flowing of the character's placement on set, the stories the post-man has, the way the family interacts, and isolates itself from each other -- it all flows into a gorgeous work of art, with such careful symbolism throughout.

Tarkovsky is not a very accessible "entertaining" film-maker (he claimed that films set out to entertain insult him); some viewers claim his work makes a great demand on the viewer's attention span, but surely there are other ways to depict disaster other than explosions?

This film allows us to see into the soul of Tarkovsky. The music from Bach, Japanese flute, Swedish traditional songs, and the essential rich philosophical dialogue is just as unforgettable as the imagery. Tarkovsky's work on the screen seemed such a natural, beautiful form of art and for that, unlike many others that found The Sacrifice upsetting and left the cinema in '86 with tears, I'm upset because there will be no one like Tarkovsky.

Japón

This is the first film from Mexican director Carlos Reygadar made in 2002. Why is it named so?

It has a nameless protagonist that isn't exactly likeable due to something* that happens early on, and gives this film a bad reputation. 'The man' (left of the DVD cover) claims to have come from the city, and travels to a remote village to end his life. Sounds interesting already, right? The other 2 on the cover are the guys he travels with.

It does have some "disturbing*" scenes. A lot of it had to be cut, and a lot of Mexico are upset and angry. I don't understand what's so disturbing about it, especially on the copy I have anyway. A lot argue that it looks at man's humanity and compares it with nature. I don't think people can be so certain in what they claim. There's a miserable 50-ish man, an old woman, the house where he stays looking over this landscape, and a general depiction of country people. The dialogue doesn't seem to be important at all, the actions of the man and the scenery are where the film offers its viewers its true appreciations. There was quite a funny post on the IMDb message boards criticising the director for stealing from Tarkovsky and not having original ideas. Seems like quite a triumph in itself to mimic the work of someone like Tarkovsky, so I can admit I enjoyed it for that reason. If you've successfully stolen Tarkovsky's work and it's recognised that you have, it must be good!

Despite people hating on it there are beautiful widescreen shots of the landscape alongside great music throughout the film. There are some very cool scenes looking at the man and the nature around him, really exploiting the canyon for some great cinematography. I wouldn't call this "moving" or emotional, the characterisation just doesn't offer itself in an accessible form, which I liked. 'The Man' was an intriguing character. We learn more about the character (some reviews will tell you he represents Death, and 'existentialism'), and slowly see his intentions change, thanks to an old Native American widow. In the end I suppose you're meant to realise that he's just a man, an animal; that's what he's portrayed as anyway. You do feel some sympathy towards him, but then you do towards animals as well.

There is very little dialogue to confirm what a lot of reviews like this one are saying. It's like they have to make a certain wordcount, or apply the same attitude to every film where everything must be fully answered and understood in an acceptable form. Opinions are worded as cold hard facts as opposed to speculation. See how many reviews or comments you can find that call this film pretentious..

Зеркало

Zerkalo; known in the UK as Mirror.

This is a film by Andrei Tarkovsky made in 1975. It's regarded as Tarkovsky's most inaccessible film, and probably his most 'experimental'. Some sites even claim it's a "learning curve". Just sit and watch it, it's just a different experience. You don't need "tools" to watch this film, you don't need to follow a story line. You'll follow a series of emotions.

This is actually a really beautiful film. I don't actually think that I am able to describe to you in words what the film entails, as its all series of childhood memories. Somehow, Tarkovsky was making me feel nostalgic. Childhood nostalgia. How he managed to do that through the Russian countryside I do not know. Perhaps whatever presence is out there in the Russian countryside is also present within myself. I would say tranquility, but the film is far too speculative for that.

I think this film, as seems to be the case with all of Tarkovsky's I've seen has so many aspects of depth in it's very nature. His father, Arseny Tarkovsky was a poet, and a lot of his poems feature in this. Poems don't tell stories the same ways in which novels do. I think this film is the closest film gets to poetry.

You'll probably find such 'advice' from the movie sites online, but it's something I think you'll learn to adopt if you have an open mind. Does that mean you'll have to endure and force yourself to like it? No. It just means that film, in its rawest form, is a series of moving images, and the storyline of a film shouldn't actually be necessary. Let the visuals and genuine artistic value of this film tell the story for you -- adopt your own story and your own perspective.

A quote from Tarkovsky: "A book read by a thousand different people is a thousand different books." - perhaps the same can be said for this film? I think it can.

Here's another: "A literary work can only be received through symbols, through concepts - for that is what words are; but cinema, like music, allows for utterly direct, emotional, sensuous perception of the work." This quote alone gives you an insight why he'd combine his directing talents with his father's poetry, right?

Even the sounds in this film will just change the way you think about sound completely. Yes, music is supposed to do that, but film as such a visual form of art tends to neglect music completely and uses it to enhance certain emotions that the viewer is supposed to feel from a scene. The case with Tarkovsky is that sound seems to be prominent force, and the visuals enhance the sound. A greater example is in Stalker.

Imagine walking into a deserted art gallery and have no choice but to be pulled into a nostalgic presence from so long ago, you are left questioning who you are? That's what this film did for me, even if the subtitles on the DVD version have been criticised, I still love this film. Perhaps I'd love the VHS version even more. To conclude: I don't know what rip of this film I have.

Ivan's Childhood

This is a Russian film from 1962 directed by Andrei Tarkovsky.

It's about a Russian boy whose village is destroyed by the Nazis, and he becomes a prisoner. He manages to escape and ends up convincing the Russian army that he'll spy for them, and he does.

This is a fantastic film, and Tarkovsky's first. Apparently, he's not even credited in this. I can't say much about this film without spoiling it.

It's about the loss of childhood innocence. I knew when I was watching it that if I wanted to say something about it, it would just ruin it.

A lot of directors were influenced by this film (Bergman etc), but Tarkovsky itself wasn't pleased with it. I can understand why to some degree, as there's only small bits that emphasise his style.

Oh, if you've seen Come and See, this is similar, although not as terrifying.

AllMovie Link
imdb link

Andrei Rublev

This is a Russian film directed by Andrei Tarkovsky made in 1966. It spans 2 DVDs and is 205 minutes long, and has 7 chapters.

Andrei Rublev was a great 15th century Russian icon painter. This film depicts the lives of people in 15th century Russia, and Tatar invasions.

It's a very difficult film to analyse, as are most Tarkovsky films; there's so much content involved in them. It's quite religious, but it's more about artistic value than religion. It's more a film about the value and power of art and how Rublev deals with all in madness at the time. I've only seen Stalker, but I also plan to see Solyaris, The Mirror, and Ivan's Childhood by the same director. Andrei Rublev is hailed as a master piece. I really want to watch it again, I found it very interesting.

This is a very slow-paced, beautifully photographed film, and really does make me think. I think a lot of the ignorance portrayed in the film, and the fact that it's from USSR 1966 is still relevant in our society. So we don't (usually) resort to outbursts of violence and total slaughter, but people probably would if they could. The Sun thoroughly encourages such behaviour - "GOT HIM!"

My copy of the DVD from Fopp.



Here is a link to a gallery of screenshots I have taken using smPlayer.

Powered by ScribeFire.