The Film Gourmand Posted by FilmGourmand 6 years ago in 11:47 pm
When I have watched Nikita Mikhalkov’s film «An Unfinished Piece for Mechanical Piano» for the first time, I was so, no, not shaken, more likely, dissolved in this film that has decided that it will remain as my favorite film for all my life. This first viewing has taken place in frames of festival of young film-makers in 1977 at a cinema "Lithuania". Till now I remember, how we with friends broke on superfluous tickets, and finally I was lucky to get this ticket.
Till now I remember, how Nikita – young, beautiful, harmonous (32 years old, only for 10-12 years elder than me and my friends at that time) – before the film beginning told what fight to it should be sustained at festival in San Sebastian. And the main competitor of its film was not any, but «Star wars» by George Lukas. As Nikita told, promoting of this fantastic blockbuster at festival surpassed all conceivable frameworks up to that even invitation cards on a viewing session were checked by the robot-character of this film. Naturally, at that period not only sex was absent in the Soviet Union, but also advertising was not acceptable. And consequently we have absolutely understood Nikita’s feelings when he, going mad of uncertainty in the hotel room, has received phone call from the friend Malcolm MacDowell who was at that festival the chairman of jury, with congratulations on a victory.
My God! As we rejoiced for the idol (after all we had already watched «A Slave of Love» and «At Home Among Strangers, Stranger at Home»)! And as we rejoiced to that news on a victory was informed by other our idol of that time (after all we had already watched by then «A Clockwork Orange» and «O Lucky Man!»).
And when, after Nikita’s performance, we have watched a film also, we have unanimously decided that its victory is absolutely deserved. And even after years when «Star wars» have reached our cinemas, we have not hesitated for a time at all in this confidence.
After that, the first, watching, we some more times watched this film. And each time after viewing argued to a hoarseness, discussing the smallest nuances of a picture up to what did Nikita wish to tell by a solar patch of light on a Pete’s chain in a final shot of a picture. We quoted the whole pieces of a film literally. On a hostel continually it was possible to hear: «And who is the rascal so it is your Mitka. He drinks cologne himself and offers also to me». Or: «on a visit it is necessary to treat a sherry».
And a phrase about that “in Belgium or Holland philosophical thoughts are transferred from one to another, from one to another, and we have in Russia … Kamchatka also”, we used for any occasion. And without any occasion as well.
Then, after rough changes in lives of our country, a film became not to be forgotten, but has receded into the background, pushed aside there daily cares. And here, before start of this blog I have decided to reconsider it again to freshen the sensations. Good land! Here that means – a film masterpiece! The film absolutely has not become outdated! It has appeared marvellously actual.
Then, in 77th, young and single, we turned a deaf ear to a phrase of Anna Vojnitseva (Antonina Shuranova) «Sofia will be with you, Platonov – with me, Sasha – with Platonov». It today, after the lapse of many years during which many of us have replaced on some wives and husbands, this phrase sounds is fresh and modern.
And how in a film is shown the irrepressible passion of separate silly people to give out empty maxims for true of the greatest value. For example: «Russia is a great plain on which the dashing rushes person». In my opinion, the phrase «Freedom is better, than non-freedom» was said with the same pathos. And with the same look. And the decision to give to peasants-mowers lordly dress coats and shoes? Isn’t it similar to the decision to allocate to large families on 0,5 acres of land in Siberia?
And the inescapable desire of the Russian intellectual Triletsky (Nikita Mikhalkov) to leave from idiocy of a provincial life? And sensation of the full otioseness by 35 years at other intellectual Platonov (Alexander Kalyagin), from which or in a whirlpool, or – to a bottle? Unless all it for the years last from the moment of creation of a film, has increased, and, repeatedly?! And marriage shout of a maral in wood? Unless it not a prediction of that, in what our TV led by the First channel will turn?
Here also it turns out that this film – maybe not forever, but for many-many years, surely. And this is a distinctive sign of a masterpiece. Or there are other opinions?
This article hasn't been commented yet.
Have a comment? Please register