The are a lot of good movies from Sovjet era you can find: "The cranes are flying" is a legendary Russian (Sovjet) movie that brought some new tricks into the world cinema. Roger Deakins loves its cinematography a lot! Drama "Moscow doesn't believe in tears" is great, "Burnt by the sun" of 1994 is very good....
1. The microphone shadow is not a mistake because it is a TV programme inside the film. So, this scene was supposed to have a documentary feel to it. The audience is aware that it is a film. Self reflexivity. 2. The Poetry is by Andrei Tarkovsky's father. 3. The colour pallets change according to the protagonist's presence in the scenes. This film is shown to us pretty much in first point perspective. So whenever the protagonist is present in the scene, the narrator, as a child or as an adult, the scenes are in colour. And whenever the protagonist is not there, like the scene where the mother is running to her workplace in rain, it is like the protagonist's interpretation of what happened. So, it is in monochrome. Same goes with scenes with dreams. Except, we can't see the film entirely in that way. Because, in certain scenes there are time jumps within one single shot. And in one scene The protagonist is there, talking with his ex wife (played by the same actor who played the younger version of the mother), the scene was supposed to be in colour, but it is black and white. Which forces me to believe that that part of the conversation never happened. The protagonist only thinks/misremembers/wishes that the conversation had gone that way... But, at the end... this film is the literal example of "try not to understand but feel." 4. 28:58 That's the protagonist. We don't see his face. He is dying. The whole film is this dying man recalling his life in bits and pieces. The dying man happens to be a poet.
@@nathansreviews3377 I find it fascinating. It is a visual poetry in every sense. However, I don't feel as much of a personal connection to it, as I do feel with STALKER. Tarkovsky often taked about how literature and classical music, or music in general are superior forms of art, and he wished that film can reach that level as well. And, I think in this film he came quite close to achieving that.
@@imdiyu Thanks for sharing your thoughts! That makes sense as to what Tarkovsky was trying to bring across a poetic vibe. Definitely agree right now that I connect with Stalker more too.
![BRASIL vs. URUGUAY [1-1] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-hWBAuxF1eY/mqdefault.jpg)
The are a lot of good movies from Sovjet era you can find: "The cranes are flying" is a legendary Russian (Sovjet) movie that brought some new tricks into the world cinema. Roger Deakins loves its cinematography a lot! Drama "Moscow doesn't believe in tears" is great, "Burnt by the sun" of 1994 is very good....
Thanks for the recommendations! Cool Roger Deakins likes it. I'll add them to the list!
1. The microphone shadow is not a mistake because it is a TV programme inside the film. So, this scene was supposed to have a documentary feel to it. The audience is aware that it is a film. Self reflexivity.
2. The Poetry is by Andrei Tarkovsky's father.
3. The colour pallets change according to the protagonist's presence in the scenes. This film is shown to us pretty much in first point perspective. So whenever the protagonist is present in the scene, the narrator, as a child or as an adult, the scenes are in colour. And whenever the protagonist is not there, like the scene where the mother is running to her workplace in rain, it is like the protagonist's interpretation of what happened. So, it is in monochrome. Same goes with scenes with dreams. Except, we can't see the film entirely in that way. Because, in certain scenes there are time jumps within one single shot. And in one scene The protagonist is there, talking with his ex wife (played by the same actor who played the younger version of the mother), the scene was supposed to be in colour, but it is black and white. Which forces me to believe that that part of the conversation never happened. The protagonist only thinks/misremembers/wishes that the conversation had gone that way... But, at the end... this film is the literal example of "try not to understand but feel."
4. 28:58 That's the protagonist. We don't see his face. He is dying. The whole film is this dying man recalling his life in bits and pieces. The dying man happens to be a poet.
Thanks for your input. Much appreciated! What do you think about the film?
@@nathansreviews3377 I find it fascinating. It is a visual poetry in every sense. However, I don't feel as much of a personal connection to it, as I do feel with STALKER.
Tarkovsky often taked about how literature and classical music, or music in general are superior forms of art, and he wished that film can reach that level as well. And, I think in this film he came quite close to achieving that.
@@imdiyu Thanks for sharing your thoughts! That makes sense as to what Tarkovsky was trying to bring across a poetic vibe. Definitely agree right now that I connect with Stalker more too.
Love Tarkovsky. Check out Andrei Rublev.