Despite the fact that the picture was shot in the distant past, clearly in an amateur way, sometimes slipping into outright amateurism, it still has its share of popularity among the audience to this day, moreover, there are even ardent fans who are ready to tear to pieces any critic. Having previously read diametrically different opinions, I still decided to watch.
Calling a movie stupid, or worse, worthless, I'm not gonna turn my tongue. The thought is visible, it is on the surface. Its relevance, and most importantly, the relevance really bribes, which makes it possible to sit until the end credits.
Hazing is an army problem, a disease for all time, which is traditionally transmitted from generation to generation, infected almost everyone. And more than that, it becomes even more sophisticated, tougher, killing a person, trampling a person to the crunch of his bones, turning him into a crazy, feral substance, which only externally and then not always has common features with homosapiens.
Such an undoubted plus as the semantic load is easily lost, completely forgotten. There is a strong impression that Baskova did not think to complicate her work in any way, and the meaning itself, treacherously, sneaked into the picture, thereby distracting the viewer from high-quality thrash. Crossing all imaginable and unthinkable boundaries, the director turns everything that happens into a nasty circus show of moral freaks. Each and every one takes his own form.
I will not recommend the film for viewing, I am not particularly impressed by such thrash for the sake of thrash, but to deny the fact that this is one of the most disgusting films in this genre is impossible, and this is a great compliment, as not to spin, albeit of dubious quality. Don't watch this. Never.
You may have heard of this movie from friends or acquaintances. Reviews and a range of opinions can range from enthusiastically lauded to sharply negative, hostile. Let us not succumb to the influence of others (including mine) and form an opinion about the film on our own without a blinkered stereotyped understanding of it as a thrash with one sole purpose - to shock the respectable public and convey a certain, perhaps rather vague and ephemeral, message.
This film is life itself, and in the most concentrated version. He poses a number of fundamental questions, such as: “Who are we in this world?”, “How does the opinion of society affect us and our self-perception?”, “What distinguishes man from an animal?”, “Is aggression and violence the basis of human nature?”, etc.
The green elephant does not contain a clearly formulated idea, the viewer perceives it not with his head and logic, but rather feels, feels the invisible thread of the narrative. But will your feelings match mine? Hardly. This means that the elephant is for everyone. It will live in your head and be unique, a reflection of your personality. Anyone who wants to see in it perversions, coprophilia, necrophilia, obscenity will see who “dives” a little deeper and throws off the first impression, may be pleasantly surprised by the excellent artistic component. And what seemed to us confusion and the absence of a script will play with new colors, will be a clear reflection of the character who went, spreading his madness like the plague.
The film is not easy to perceive, moreover, if the director (Svetlana Baskova) wants to show you the depth of a person’s moral decline due to the loss of self-esteem and humiliation of his personality, then he will not be exchanged for small things and regret your delicate spiritual nature. Baskova is not familiar with the concept of delicacy, she will plunge you into the depths of hell and make you personally look into the eyes of your Devil. And whether you can stand it or not, the Creator does not care much, she will accept it as a fact.
Baskova gathered an excellent galaxy of actors – personalities, both on stage and in life, each of whom is ideal for his role, and in it he looks organic and not played (in other films Baskova this is not always the case).
Vladimir Epifantsev is a well-known performer of brutal roles of security forces, plays a brother, a character with a sense of self-esteem, courageous, but rather uncivil, not prone to embedding in hierarchical systems and sacredly guarding personal space. Sergey Pakhomov is a famous actor, singer, artist, and now a psychic (fool grandfather Pakhom) appears before us in the form of a traveler. This is a junior officer, quite harmless, kind, but cannot stand silence. Perhaps the reason for this is a difficult childhood or dark thoughts swarming in his head, the fear of being alone with himself, but this is one of the central elements of the film. In my opinion, the traveler acts as a tempting or, if you like, experiencing Satan, at least by his unconscious efforts, the degree of tension and hostility steadily increases, setting in motion a chain of tragic events.
The main antagonist of the picture - captain - plays Anatoly Osmolovsky. He is known in the artistic environment as an artist and actionist. His character is quite domineering, strict, prone to unmotivated aggression, sadism. We can see how he enjoys humiliating others.
The most controversial character of the Green Elephant is the Colonel. He was played by the late Alexander Maslaev, a man of interesting and tragic fate. What is the contradiction of the character? Mainly in the ambivalence of his attitude towards the traveler and his brother. They are like cut-off slices, i.e., not socialized personalities, and their stay in the guardhouse is a direct confirmation of this. To get a chance for a prosperous existence, they need to integrate into the army hierarchy, learn to follow the orders of higher leadership, even if they are absurd. By sending junior officers to correctional work, the colonel simultaneously incites hatred and gives a chance for social adaptation. But the contradictions in the character of Maslaev are much more, this is the absolute normality, which turned into obsessive psychosis, and love mixed with hostility to the wards, and hatred of the authorities, combined with the desire to become a leader himself. The tragedy of the colonel is that he sees and is aware of evil, but can do nothing about it – obedience to orders, broken will due to constant humiliation and fallen from impotence hands have done their job.
Deliberate poverty, sullenness, darkness, empty gloomy rooms, poor-quality shooting – all this is an integral part of the film, forming an attitude towards the characters and the reality in which they live. Gradually imbued with a sense of doom and hopelessness, which increasingly grab you by the throat and will not let go until the very end. You see the train going downhill, but you know you can't slow down. Only the road to hell remains, and it is inevitable, so we see a mind-blowing fiasco.
The slow narrative is replaced by a complete phantasmagoria, a kaleidoscope of inexplicable, schizophrenic situations, resulting in a bloody grotesque as a way out of a hopeless situation. Questioning the inevitability of this outcome, I tried to imagine the main characters living after the events of the guardhouse, but nothing came of it. The smoke generated by the corrupt atmosphere of the film does not allow you to see not only a prosperous, but even an unhappy future for the heroes. Death and insane ignorance for them are a blessing, a kind of euthanasia for the cancer patient, protecting him from painful and unbearable suffering.
As I wrote, as you watch the plot changes dramatically, you may think that these are two different paintings, connected by an inattentive editor. Your attitude will also change from disgust and organic rejection to fan love, and the changes will take place long after watching.
The junction comes for you, as the ice water, suddenly poured on your head. You will be led through all the circles of hell. You will see intemperance, anger, malice, deception, violence, lust, murder and betrayal. Someone will ask, “Why such cruelty?” My answer is this. No one has to take care of your fragile mental health. Baskova exposes nerves, demonstrates the world without embellishment. The author wants to show life as it is - funny, aimless, ridiculous, terrible, merciless, but still there is a place for repentance, mutual help, sympathy, and this gives us a tiny hope. A ray of light in the dark realm.
The green elephant has long gone into the media space and into our lives: schoolchildren, and older people quote, YouTube is full of clips on this topic, entertainment portals of the Internet are full of quite scabby, but no less funny, jokes. It has already become something more than just a film - it has become a phenomenon, and this is already an occasion for closer attention to it.
Are you ready to face your demons? If so, don’t say I didn’t warn you. After half the earthly life, you will not find yourself in a gloomy forest.
Finally. Brothers, I wrote you a review. I'm a reviewer! I'm a reviewer!
If suddenly a person saw something similar in real life (in this case, I am talking to myself) and the shocking message of the author passes by, immediately comes the understanding of the thought I said at the very beginning. Personally, I was not interested in the film both substantively and visually, and I will definitely not review it. But as an arthouse and in a sense an actionist project, I give it credit. As well as the dedication of the actors, they tried. PS. Here, just the day before, I watched the no less “legendary” American film “Pink Flamingoes” (don’t you see anything that echoes in the titles?), in which, in the first place, the goal is to shock the viewer. And it is impossible not to admit that since so many people fall for this kind of film, then their authors are right in their attempt to express themselves. How disgusting their works and can not seem at first glance. 5 out of 10 Original
I agree with the other reviewers that the actors played well. Epifantsev and Pakhomov, though with roughness, ' undergames' and ' replays' but ' made' this picture. You can't say that about directing. Baskova's idea got lost in a senseless bloody fecal thrash. The first half of the film you try to somehow formulate the idea of the director, and then you just start to fight with nausea and imagine how the actors burned on the set. The imaginary social sharpness of the picture remained imaginary. The Russian reality drowning in shit eventually drowned in it, not debunked or exposed, and the storyline never acquired an ideological component.
Plus, this film is only for the courage of the idea and the play of two (and only two) actors. Everything else must have been eaten during the shooting. .
The beaten “you are either an idiot or a genius” most accurately describes most of the work of domestic film director Svetlana Baskova and one of her first films “Green Elephant” (1999) clearly demonstrates the relevance of such maximism. Any intermediate assessment of such a specific underground implies the presence of at least some benchmark, a point of reference, about which one could argue about the novelty and proximity of a certain idea to its projection on film. But Baskova does not give such guidelines and dumps everything into a pile: intestines, feces, homosexual scenes and bizarre, on the verge of mental disorder, autobiographical stories told by the main character - "got" performed by Sergei Pakhomov (aka Pakhom), known to the general public for participating in the show "Battle of psychics" as an all-knowing and extremely perceptive fool. A grateful listener and participant in the orgy “brother” was also found, although at first it seemed that in the wild absurdity of what is happening, the director would leave the role of Vladimir Epifantsev, a cellmate who went to the guardhouse, alone and appoint him the only normal character, but half measures, apparently, were considered Baskova as cowardice and capitulation, and in the second half of the film, the brother, until recently bravely bearing the psychedelia that fell on him from nowhere, willingly plunged into the world of recklessness and sadism.
The creators of the “elephant” defiantly disregard all the laws and rules of cinema, shooting randomly and what got on an amateur camera, which could be considered as a protest, successful examples of which can be found in a variety of arts. The brilliant provocateur was Piero Manzoni, one of the representatives of conceptualism, the creator of the work “The Artist’s Shit”, which was numbered cans containing, according to the author, 30 grams of his feces. The artist coped with his task - the "bourgeois pigs" ate shit and asked for supplements, buying one of the jars for 124 thousand euros. “Green Elephant” received only numerous Internet memes, comics and videos on YouTube, nevertheless becoming a noticeable phenomenon, but the “social, political and personal contradictions of the time and our country of the time” that Baskova offers to see here are infinitely far from a reaction to the film that could justify shocking techniques, as in the case of Manzoni. Instead of a symbol of frank conversation without taboos and false political correctness, phrases and shots broke into pieces, perceived not as parts of a whole work, but as convenient blanks for jokes.
The problem, in fact, is not that Pakhom on camera eats excrement or Epifantsev rapes the gutted corpse of the captain who sent him to the guardhouse. The fact is different: pseudo-philosophical and pseudo-documentary tape so strongly exploits the subjectivity of cinema that makes you disdain its creators, who are outraged in the hope that the principle “you can’t shoot – shoot as incomprehensible as possible, and the meanings will come by themselves” will work. Someone who turned out to be either less squeamish or more merciful found these meanings by choosing the second option in the dilemma of an idiot and a genius. For those who refused to accept this incoherent and extremely slurred film, it is probably difficult or even impossible to formulate what emotional load (if we leave aside the physiological abomination of the scenes shown) carries the most famous Russian thrash.
Baskova, however, can cause emotions. Though superficially and unpretentiously, this was demonstrated in her last work For Marx. Epifantsev, who by this time became known thanks to the countless number of television series, already seems not to lie naked, and the director, according to her, began her creative life from scratch, so the characters now pronounce meaningful phrases, and die well-dressed and not cut to pieces. However, to abandon his business card - stripped Pahom - the director could not. But now familiar species appear briefly and without details. As in the editing effect of Kuleshov, where the subsequent frame can cause a reassessment of the previous one, and “For Marx” further aggravates the impression of “Green Elephant”, pressing it finally into the shameful for Russian cinema 90s, against the background of which it looks not a reproach, as the author thinks, but accidentally thrown to the surface by a freak. As Pakhomov himself expressed in an interview, the diffusion of centuries lasts 10-15 years. Shooting very actively in the first half of the zeros, Baskova was still in fact in the 90s, and in the new century, after 2010, only one of her films was released. It may well be that new time is not her time. Who knows, maybe for the best.
Creation, shot on amateur film and combining complete obsceneness, namely: obscene expressions, dismemberment, human feces, albeit fake, but feces, even somehow not convenient to evaluate. But let’s still try to give the most objective assessment of the 1999 film “Green Elephant”.
On the one hand, in the first half of the picture, you really smoke over it, lying under the table, disassembling the sabzh for quotes. Vladimir Epifantsev and Sergey Pakhomov coped well with their work, which cannot be called a film, as evidenced by the memes and humorous videos that flooded the Internet on Youtube. What is only the legendary scene of the film, when the hero Pakhomov invites his friend to eat his excrement, stating:
- Brother! Brother! I brought you some food. This is bread, sweet bread!
So be it! But the toilet humor and cast is the only thing that can catch on in the film. Yes, funny, funny, but we must not forget that this is a movie that shines with absolute nonsense and psychedelics. The camera work, just like the quality of the picture, is terrible, even if you consider 1999, where tapes with decent graphics were already in full swing. Plus, the second half of the film is teeming with disgusting moments with dirt, dismemberment, imitation of anal and oral sex (the scene with the latter, fortunately, was not shown).
So, what do we have? Absolute nonsense, where you can watch only the first half of the subj, toilet humor with all the ensuing psychedelics and Sergey Pakhomov, who did not stop at this film, and continued to act in such things. The film is not recommended for viewing persons under 21+, as well as young women and pregnant children. Also do not think while watching to enjoy delicacies, as some scenes of “Green Elephant” can lead to the process of reverse peristalsis.
5 out of 10
Only because of the actors and a sharp lift in the mood of the first half of the picture.
The fact that the film tells about the servicemen of the Russian army, for me, so the moment, probably not particularly important. There are some rather curious moments in the behavior of the heroes and in the situation, and for sure they describe in detail the situation in the troops in the 1990s, but the situation in the army is very interesting.
To me, the film is trying to convey something different. Baskova may have traveled to neighboring or not-so-planets from alcohol or substances. But it has not lost a single gram of its ability to see and transmit the whole farce of what is happening in our lives at the present stage of human development. The theme of the insolvency and danger of the social and economic structures of the present day for man is not new, but units have managed to demonstrate this pernicious influence: “by passing deep through themselves.”
The characters of the film are quite different from each other. And it was slipping into their own madness under the pressure of their own cockroaches that was the basis of the plot of the film. It does not matter who you are: a careerist, a crazy patriot, an official or a random “driver” in uniforms. This world will bring you to its foundations, finally entangled at the crossroads of life. From power you will be intoxicated by permissiveness. From the long wait you will imagine yourself a knight on a white horse. From discomfort, dampness and fear you will try to escape to your fictional culinary world. And from not connecting common sense with everything that happens in you, the beast will wake up.
8.5 out of 10
I learned about this film, like most Internet users, from various memes with “brother”. It took a long time to get acquainted with this creation. Looking at it, I didn’t regret it.
This film is one and a half hour metaphor. It's a kind of slice of society. Let’s take a look at the film below:
1. Pakhom-Goed - the media, which are trying to feed the inhabitants not the most pleasant substance.
2. Brother (Epifantsev) - the inhabitants, the society, which this very substance is trying to feed. The layman kicks, yells, does not want to eat, but there is no other (as in fact in the cell). That is why he is trying to appeal to the authorities.
3. The boss (Colonel 34 and Captain) is the boss. The main thing for him is for the layman to work. He cleaned all the dirt surrounding him with his own hands. How they do it doesn’t matter.
As a result, we have a dirty, rude, cruel, gloomy, scandalous, but monumental work that will outlive its creator.
With gratitude to Svetlana Baskova.
I got really excited about the movie and finished watching it again. Each time the viewing was more interesting, new details were revealed.
The beginning of the film is simply permeated with humor and satire, the main characters play their roles one hundred percent, but there is something sad about it. The dialogues of the main characters are built very competently. All speech consists of clear and understandable phrases.
The popularity of the film is due primarily to humor and a high level of delirium, which makes you watch this film to the end. At the same time, this film after watching leaves behind a sediment of immersion in a deep warm mess and the joy that it is finally over.
In general, the film gives pleasure after watching an outstanding viewer.
Finally, I would like to cite a quote from the song of the main character of this picture - Pakhom & #39; And life is a beautiful carnival!', which commemorates the whole action of the picture.
10 out of 10
The object of art should not be simple reality, but complex beauty.
The Green Elephant is a film with a capital letter. Like any of the arts, this picture conveys its message to us in the language of images, and here we need to give Svetlana Baskova credit - the picture strikes with the depth of its imagery and an abundance of complex metaphors. Of course, people are not ready for the means of expression shown in the film, but this once again proves, I will not be afraid of this word, the genius of the director, who was ahead of his time.
It should be understood that the Green Elephant is a non-trivial film, it is like a good book that you need to read between the lines, which, with the proper perseverance of the reader, fully reveals the author’s intention.
Watching this film involuntarily draws a parallel with the work of Franz Kafka. The green elephant does not sow hope and does not inspire naive ideas, on the contrary, by his depressive manner of narration he forces the viewer to go deep into himself, which, however, contributes well to understanding the deep philosophy of the film.
It is worth mentioning the excellent performance of the leading actors. Successfully selected duet Vladimir Epifantsev and Sergey Pakhomov, under the guidance of the master of directing Svetlana Baskova, performed his role perfectly, thereby giving us the opportunity to more deeply absorb the ideas of the picture.
Summing up, I want to say that Green Elephant is not a complex film for everyone, requiring the viewer to be psychologically mature. Because of its ambiguous interpretation, the film is doomed to have a small number of fans, but if, when watching this film you feel that you are contemplating something amazing, high, mind-blowing - congratulations, your life will never be the same.
10 out of 10
I will not write a big review, and whether, but in my opinion, the film is brilliant, no, it is not in any case a film for home viewing or recreation, if you waited for it, you are not here, a film about the difficult relationship in a closed society, how a person goes crazy and how painful society as a whole, I think the film is worth watching only to understand that "We are all people." Thank you for having such directors as Svetlana Yurievna Baskova, this has long been lacking for Russian Art House. In fact, there are more emotions, it’s just hard to express it all.
In the green-green forest, in a green-green building, in the basement, the door of which is painted green-green, in a green-green dungeon sat a green-green elephant. I have no doubt about the last two points. But I am sure that such a description will serve as a spoonful of honey in a tank with tar, from which the viewer will be poured. I’m not sure if it’s going to be there...
With this film, I took it to the next level in my search for grossness and terrible thrashing in cinema. Although I do not know whether it is possible to call the filmed on an amateur camera an hour-and-a-half film, or to keep for this creation the status of “fun as they could”.
Someone was having fun. The result was a “green elephant”, which forced to revise the standards of proximity to the focus point of released intestines and eaten feces. It's a completely different format. No, I swear, all sorts of “human centipedes”, with cellars, rapists and dirty people turned out to be highly artistic works of art, in which there is a plot, characters and a well-developed entourage, and, damn it, this is a Russian soul black! Because everything is so natural that you doubt whether the vile commentator who uttered the "film" in the credits was sincere. But what emotions, what feelings - and I involuntarily step over myself and color the review in a light green color.
Well, if you discard the main component (dirty, sadism, hopelessness), you can do a detailed analysis and analysis. I only had one conclusion. Let Russia continue to be chamber number six, but only - God forbid - not a cellar whose walls are painted in green colors. One of our brave army here is enough.
He was brought up in Soviet and post-Soviet cinema. Of course, for me, such a masterpiece is an absurdity beyond the limits of morality. The value of this film is that it doesn't look like art, if cinema is. What feelings should this product cause? I had a huge feeling of pity for all the characters in this script. And this feeling does not let me go now.
This is the first time I'm reviewing a movie, so I'm sorry about the style. Yes, this film will not leave anyone indifferent, except schizophrenics and psychopaths who will not watch it. They can't. I have a question: who can? Who wants that? How would you all react to my criticism written in the style of Russian, strong mat and insults to the Director. There is too much cruelty in this world, so why foster maniac fantasies? If a person learns what happens in life, it can provoke him to action. I may be exaggerating because of my age, but I think abnormality is abnormal.
Yeah, acting's on top. In addition to the captain, in some episodes he unnaturally overplays and filmed without pleasure or refused to take.
Just don't think I'm a grouch and haven't seen anything. I saw it. And Salo, and the Serbian film, and Fang, and Caligula, but Slonik clearly eclipsed them. Yes, many before death go mad, but you can cite the example of the work of V. Hugo (Day sentenced to death), which describes the struggle for life to the last second, how not terrible death.
So we're degrading. We recognize that with this film. Was it really impossible for Baskova to choose another form of presentation to express his script? And, so it turns out, the patient made a film for the healthy, justifying his illness. Well, then eat, bros.
Look at this acting game! Could Depp or DiCaprio have done that? How natural and realistic everything looks. That's quality! To shoot in this capacity was certainly the right decision. This gives the viewer the opportunity to fully plunge into the entire atmosphere of this film ... this creation!
Also can not leave indifferent the plot of the film, all that they tried to convey to us! Cruel lives of people. After hard service, which not everyone can endure psychologically, they are thrown into places like this. And although everything here is a little hyperbolized, but the reality is not much different! This film should show how people can change depending on the environment.
There's no extra pathos here. This film is simple and shows exactly what it has to show! More like that.
Almost everything has already been written and said about this film, which, according to the creators themselves, is not a film at all. But the era of YouTube and mass distribution of video traffic not only pulled this unique phenomenon out of oblivion, but, perhaps, immortalized it to such an extent that it is time to say: “there is a good movie, there is a bad one, and there is a green elephant.”
Such an assessment will certainly not agree with those who “do not fit”. But you can't take one.
In our time, the criterion of virality has acquired such importance in the media sphere, and therefore in the daily life of an approaching absolute percentage of people. Green Elephant is a media virus with almost 100% contagiousness. No matter how many interpretations there are, from simple dichotomy “people-power” to biblical like the four horsemen of the Apocalps or Evangelists, “Green Elephant” is primarily an object of viral, memetic metaperception.
Very detailed about this film said Pakhom, who is interested, will be able to find the video. From the point of view of the genre, "ZS" is not clearly attributed to anything, it is "out of categories." For someone, because “fi”, for someone it is a masterpiece that clearly fits the main criterion of compliance with its time.
Personally, I perceive this film as a big and beloved anecdote that stuck in the soul and makes me laugh every time, “be a hundred years old.” Blood and intestines, as well as sweet bread, for the first time shock the unprepared viewer, but on subsequent views it is all seen by other eyes. The phenomenon is that it's contextual and defined by all these cuts and remixes and stuff. Yes, even if it is an imposed trend, but what is not a positive perception, forces with the soul to make these numerous videos. After all, “we are all human.”
Brother, The Rider, Captain and Colonel.
At least those are the few who left us indifferent.
Sometimes I want to forget to watch this movie again. The film was undeservedly unnoticed in its time and became popular thanks to the Internet. I do not think that the director laid any deep meaning in it and it is not clear at all how "it" came to the minds of the filmmakers, and most importantly, WHY?
The film was shot for pennies, but it seems to have found its fans forever. For every phrase has become winged, heroes do not play, but live their part. I could not understand the first half of the film: it was filmed according to the script or filmed secretly behind real prisoners, and then from these “hidden” edited the film. It's so natural that you can't think of it. And camera work: it's just brilliant, you can, of course, say that in places the camera is not adjusted, the focus is wrongly selected and it is not clear what is removed: shoes, ear? But you and I know that this is how it was designed. This is the case when the “poop” became a “cake”, when it is unclear why the removed treshak became a masterpiece for a certain group of people (and the ambiguity of estimates and their great polarity confirm this).
It is not clear, however, why people who rated the film low, still watched it, and most importantly: what did they, who wrote negative reviews, bother to see it? It was hardly so: he talked with the director of the channel “Culture” and he advised to see this unrecognized masterpiece or found it in the collection of the Fund “Gold of world cinema” or “This is the favorite film of the Queen of England”. No, someone was advised to see friends-friends, KNOWING that he might like it, someone himself found, interested in some topic (unauthorized, Russian thrash and other sodomy). It is foolish to call those who liked the film abnormal, since a “normal” person will not even go to the page of this film in the search engine, he just stupidly will not know about the existence of this film. And if he somehow found his way, then we must admit that he was looking for it. I went to him, interested in the topic of non-statutory officers in the army, someone advised to watch the ZS in the reviews for the film “The Guard”. And for the first time I clearly didn’t like the film, it was just creepy, I wanted to wash, but then I wanted to review individual scenes, listen to Pachom’s stories, listen to the captain’s lectures and then I began to realize that this is much more than just a passing thrash. Yes, there are many unnecessary scenes, superfluous (especially at the end, where the blood is dismembered), including the process of making Pachoma breakfast. But from beginning to end, I watched the film only once – the first, otherwise rewinding the empty scenes. Now heroes.
Pahom is a typical rider. Although the kindest person in the whole film is not a single evil word, while his friend is sleeping, he prepares breakfast for him - that is the care of his neighbor (this film teaches). And what, full of tenderness, the phrase: “Brother, I brought you a meal!” But only the brother and the audience did not appreciate it and see it only feces. Smell funny and cheerful (laughing all day like Zadornov at a concert). Probably happened to everyone when you casual acquaintance, companion or just a colleague at work tells some uninteresting stories from his life and so want to say: “You can just shut up, keep quiet and that’s all.” I can't listen to your stories anymore. Or it often happens when you want to say to your interlocutor: “You understand that you are already gone, everything.” He just wants everyone to be human. People like Pachom are always around us. Smooth.
Brother. A victim of circumstance. I have to endure everything that happens. He really becomes pathetic, you worry about him, he is an indicator of how a normal person can degrade in a day. He tries to resist and stay normal, but what drives him the most is Pachom's calmness.
A typical clerk with his opinion, but regularly fulfills all the decrees of the leadership, is ready even to humiliate himself. He hates prisoners and enjoys all the power that is given him. However, it is he who pronounces the moral of the film: "Homeland gave stars." Wear. No, I don't want to eat shit. He may have wanted to wear stars himself, but he is just a chain dog, so he became a colonel.
Captain. The personification of all the bad things in people hates all worms. But thanks to him, I learned more about Japan in World War II. I know who commanded the fleet, what forces the Americans had in Pearl Harbor, that the Zero fighter was the main Japanese aircraft. You need to know, it’s a classic!
CONCLUSION: ZS is a cult film that carries a cognitive and educational function. You will learn more about World War II and the film teaches tenderness and care for others. I have also given many examples from life. I recommend everyone who is 18 will definitely like it, and if someone says that he is not, then he is simply afraid to confess that he is.
There are films that are designed to entertain the viewer with colorful images or stunning special effects, and there is a Cinema that is simply necessary to watch. Cinema, where reality does not take any special form, which balances on the verge of documentaryism and the artistic message of the author, but at the same time is presented in a completely single piece. Like a diamond. And it does not matter that this diamond is covered with impurities and dirt to such an extent that an inexperienced person will not see the sparkling edges in it. He was and will remain a diamond, and the outer shell is not important.
Like any of us, The Green Elephant is a rare treasure that depends on the right presentation. It does not matter the ability to see, here you need to be able to dig. Clean, scrape away impurities from diamond faces. This is where the real pleasure comes from. Diving into the shit that the director poured on us from the screen, we find a treasure in it, and only the goal achieved will be the main outcome for us in this hour and a half story. You need to forget, to throw away the dirt, and then you will be left with a cut diamond in your hands. And no one will judge you for how you dug it up.
Everything is beautiful in this film - and the stunning realism of the acting, and the metaphorical dialogue, and the intensity of passion that rages in the cold walls of the gloomy guardhouse. Just make an effort, dive inside the visual mass, and you will understand the true meaning of what you see. A man who is sinful, full of laziness, already overflowing with the very dirt that he reflects on the screen as if in a mirror, of course will see only mat and feces in history. But that's not the point. The point is that people are not afraid to take a step forward, work on themselves, get closer to others in the end, because the hero shouts to us from the screen – “We are all people!”. And protesting against human nature won't do us any good. Hence such an end in the "Green Elephant" - only good lives, and anger, greed and envy will be trampled by themselves.
I wish every viewer who sees in this Cinema only the desire of the author to “bring” the sweet bread we know, to make a small effort on himself, to penetrate through this veil of sinfulness and indifference, and to grope inside his diamond, with which he will then have to go for the rest of his life, as with the greatest treasure belonging only to his seeker. And then start digging further, because only this process is called life.
10 out of 10
"Green elephant" as the essence of modern society.
Few viewers behind the vulgar and cruel form of presentation of Baskova’s masterpiece “Green Elephant” can see its deep content. Not many people want to see their own life in what is happening on the screen, get to know the surrounding society and, especially, learn their role in it.
It's actually simple. 4 characters of the tape - it's us, citizens of the same prison of nations, in the case of "Green elephant" - guardhouse. Someone in this small “state” eats feces, someone cleans toilets with a fork, and someone is drunk and raving about career growth.
The whole essence of society in the picture is conveyed by the dialogues of the characters and their actions. Thanks to this, we can see a criticism of any social phenomenon and institution of the state that can only be remembered.
- it's education. Dirty, hungry Pearl and Brother teach under the whip of their boss the results of Pearl Harbor, absolutely inappropriate for their situation, how poor children Franco crammed "A-baba-gala-ma-ga" in feudal times, and how today schoolchildren teach any heresy except the necessary;
It is also the degradation of the army;
- this is careerism, manic desire of today's layman "to break through", to become famous and significant (" I, with a crust, on a white horse, command the parade! I'm a colonel! I command the parade! I'm in the stars! On a white horse! I'm a colonel! I command the parade! – such is the dying cry of the defender of the honor of the uniform ...
- the relationship of the head with the subordinate (cleaning the toilet Bratishka with a fork)...
It is also possible to analyze indefinitely in the context of today's society and the behavior of only prisoners: under.. wounding each other, tearing epaulettes, degraded art (the song about the Elephant). The process of gradual madness of people in a confined space is also interesting, which, in my opinion, is rather aptly emphasized by violence and vulgarism.
I want to wish Svetlana Baskova new creative success, but “Green Elephant” she can hardly surpass.
10 out of 10
I ask myself that question almost every day, no kidding. Of course, looking at situations in real life and making some analogy.
The Green Elephant is a very strange creature. And not just because of the story. It was shot on amateur film, without any budget and rather half improvised on the go by the characters of the film. Not to mention the fact that the actors did not receive a penny for this shooting. I'll tell you right away, it's hard to watch. I didn’t watch it until the first time. The film is tense, you watch and try to understand to the end – what is going on in this film? What do they want to show us with this picture? To say that nothing will be right, any film is shot initially with some idea. Let’s try to understand in more detail what is the essence of
- We're gonna be shot with you! Do you understand that?
On the guard get 2 officers of the Russian army, which is expected to be shot in the near future. The room in which they are kept clearly does not meet even the most minimal conditions of convenience and hygiene. But on the other hand, there is everything and somewhere even more than necessary for those sentenced to death. The pipe, which serves as a couch, also provides a “jet” that replaces a source of drinking water and showers, for two the room is quite spacious, so it could be worse. There's even a window. If it weren't for one problem, groin. Throughout the film, he has an irrepressible desire to share interesting stories from his life. About his youth, girls, service, incidents that took place there, sports achievements. Often there are some “boys” whom he asks not to touch him. Perhaps this is a kind of reference to the difficult life of Pahom, perhaps as a child he did not receive due respect from his peers and these same "boys" offended him. Becoming an officer, apparently, the situation has not changed, only the “guys” who already in the army wanted to do the most obscene things with him. Therefore, it is not surprising why Pachom appears before us in this light - an elementaryly broken psyche. Or maybe not, we can only guess what this character’s personality might mean.
All this has to be heard by poor Epifantsev during many hours of imprisonment. He seems very normal at first, which is not to say at the end of the film. Apparently, the neighborhood with such a subject and the accompanying atmosphere do their job very, very quickly. Imagine, guard, you have been sentenced to death! All right, soon you're going to lose your life and the last hours when you can just lie down and think about something, think about something that you haven't been able to get to all this time, but instead you have to watch this. Here, everyone will have a “roof” and the person himself will go in a matter of hours. And there is already before eating sweet bread not far away.
The so-called “staff” of this institution keeps us from getting bored from the very beginning of the film and adds fuel to the fire with its epic appearances, forcing work and conducting “Likbez” among the prisoners. It is not shy in its actions, and I think that in reality, in some places of this kind, it is partly so, if in some moments it is not exactly prior to such behavior.
Much of what is happening in this film is difficult to explain, but some moments, even if taken out of context, are priceless. Green Elephant, oddly enough, gives a very good list of quotes for all occasions. Sometimes I want to shout like Epiphantsev or tell a “history” in the style of Pakhom, ask a person, not if he went or looking at a clearly contradictory or unjust situation, ask the question, is it an army?
For the originality and even some genius of the film
10 out of 10
One day I saw excerpts of some wonderful movie. I didn't know what that meant. The excerpts were in the Humor section and I wasn't very funny because I didn't understand the meaning of it all. One day a friend told me about this movie and I suddenly remembered those moments. For a long time I did not dare to watch Green Elephant as I read the review that the genre of this film Trash. As a result, interest in this film arose even more as a result of the fact that the Internet appeared a bunch of different funny pictures with the heroes of the Green Elephant.
When I started watching this movie, I thought it would be a meaningless story with a humorous component. It wasn't exactly that. In the beginning, I began to like the film terribly because of its realism. This is how people really talk in life. Yes, there are a lot of obscene expressions in this film, but most people communicate with the same words. The traveler tells his stories and you immerse yourself in them, few people in life can share their feelings and thoughts. He says what he has been through in his life. It really is! What else can you talk about sitting in a cell, in a guardhouse? Everyone begins to tell the stories of their lives. The brother who just got to the Eager wants to just relax like any normal person.
In this film there is a real problem of conscripts. Most of the officers are not well-educated, and the consequence of this is shouting at their subordinates. The violence at the end of the film reveals the true hatred of people, in this case officers, who have been ruled their entire adult life and now want to be killed. Pakhomov in this case is just a man who is driven mad by these abnormal officers. That is, giving unauthorized orders that act on the human psyche can eventually drive him crazy.
It shows life as it really is. All the scenes are made realistically and for a simple person who understands everything. If you look at this movie with a look at “Oh God!” How obscene! How rude! that means not understanding the film. It clearly does not promote violence and obscene things, it shows everything as it is.
10 out of 10
About 3 years ago, I learned about this film, then I watched it, frankly, without much enthusiasm, but then, after analyzing what happened on the screen and mentally “scrolling” the plot in my head, I realized that the film is genius. But only now, a few years later, I decided to write a review.
The events described in the film take place in the last years of the Soviet Union. The main characters are officers of the Soviet army, who happened to be together in one guardhouse. There is a dialogue between them, the semantic component and the atmosphere of which can be understood, probably, only by a person who was born and lived for a long time in Soviet-Russian society. Gradually, the action is transferred from the guardhouse to another room, where the events occur, from which exalted representatives of the fair sex, aesthetic snobs make their “fi”. The further the plot - the more "guro", emotional tension and drama.
Separately, it is worth talking about the semantic load of the film. Those who wanted to see the picture as blood, dismemberment, necrophilia, homosexual act, defecation and coprophilia saw it. I am sure that Balabanovsk "Cargo 200" had an audience who found in the film only a picture of the defloration of a girl with a bottle, or sexual intercourse on a bed on which 2 corpses lie. In the end, everyone sees what they want to see. A small schoolboy with a perverted sense of humor - "ridiculous" dialogues about "brother" and "three sevens", exalted aesthete - feces and necrophilia.
“Green Elephant” is an image in a concentrated, very concentrated form of life of Soviet-Russian society: the “alphach”, who psychologically and physically dominates the “Omezhka”, the “stupid performer”, who does everything he is told, who dreams of taking the place of the “chief” and participating in the parade on a white horse, sitting in the house of officers, well, the same “chief” who rules over everyone and everything. Think about it, because our life is that Soviet guardhouse, from which it is almost impossible to escape, it is impossible to change the “alphacha” and “omezhka” in places, it is impossible to remove the “chief” and it is impossible to convince the “stupid executor” not to follow the absurd and humiliating orders. Yes - grotesque, perhaps in places, disgusting and repulsive, but essentially true.
10 out of 10
What makes a film an art: a good acting of actors, a thoughtful plot, a unique style of the director or all together? Or, maybe, in the end, art is more than a pleasant picture for the eye?
Art is a value brought to perfection in its direction. Previously, such a value was the satisfaction of ordinary, animal needs, but with the steps of time, humanity began to give priority not to simple biological achievements, such as, say, a muscle-filled body, but to something higher that can move us from a point frozen in space: the mind.
When you look at the bulk of Hollywood movies, it becomes clear that they are aimed at hurting the feeling of the stupid majority, to stuff their suitcases with a lot of money, and maybe to sprinkle the table with a big pile of coke. Of course, we can say that the ability to win the hearts of the masses is also an art, but it is difficult to agree with this in our time. Massa tends to blindly love things dictated by morality and the interests of others, so no doubt, after searching for a few minutes in Google, you will find books about which movies offend the feelings of most people. All films are made according to two or three concepts, in connection with this limitation, a skillful Gaullewood film is determined not by the idea itself, but by the acting and the pleasant picture.
After watching Green Elephant, I saw a unique idea, not stopped by moral, political and ideological regulators who try to turn a blind eye to the problems that are especially characteristic of the post-Soviet states, but an idea that reflects the existing group of people and its imperfection, and perhaps even perfection (the moment when the “brother” breaks the epaulettes), as well as the problems of our society as a whole. Here everything is: depravity, abomination, looseness, which is not acceptable in our society.
Why is Russian cinema called a bad word? Because we make films in the American way, where everything is fluffy and smooth, in other words: according to their morality, and if we explain in more detail, we make a film about our society, which behaves in the American way. Isn't that stupid? Watching “Green Elephant”, I saw the community of people that not long ago existed not far from us, of course, not in such an exaggerated form, and if you dig deeper, this film is about ourselves, as we would not like to admit it.
Concluding my review, Green Elephant is art, not because it’s an amazing cast that makes you think it’s a real prison shoot, not because the director was able to convey his sense of being in a dirty, stinking prison room, but because the film opens your eyes to the world around us and tries to solve its problems, which is characteristic of great classical literature.
What's Green Elephant about? Nothing...or rather nothing artificial. Watching this movie, you might think it was shot with a hidden camera, it’s like looking out the window and seeing what’s happening in reality. Epifantsev played well, Pakhomov considered himself in general. Maslaev, I believe, showed no less outstanding role - a soldier who suffered from the turning point of the era and turning it into a completely different side, not typical for the Soviet person. And Osmolovsky showed us the man who was formed in the new Russia - extremely evil and cruel.
Do you want to know what this movie is about? This film is about how time changes and how the present is cruel to the past.
For quite a long time was part of the people relating to this film dismissively, in every possible way spit and brush off. Subsequently, after looking, I fell ill with it forever, reviewed it many times, and I am still reviewing it. The film influenced my life, filled the void of my being with its epicity and humor. I still use the dialogues of this film as a template, changing their content to my life situations. Thanks to this film, I grew very much in the art of trolling.
In fact, the movie is not fun, it has a deep, I would even say too deep meaning, as evidenced by very thrash scenes, which I would not penetrate as deeply as the director wants from the audience. For those who are used to looking for meaning, where there is no need to subtly hint that this film, at least part of it, is about one person, about you, in which there are two completely different and incomprehensible individuals who sometimes find it very difficult to get along. The whole essence of human destiny is to find a way out, somehow make friends with yourself.
My subjective assessment is formed purely because of the uniqueness of the dialogues and acting, each here is unique in its own way, this applies to absolutely everyone, although the golden stars “here” shine, of course, on the shoulders of Vladimir Epifantsev and Sergey Pakhomov. To criticize this particular movie, everything here depends on the observer, how he looks at it, and most importantly what he sees.
P.S. Those who do not want to delve into, do not delve into (!), stay out of the topic, you can also understand.
Of course, I could write another incredibly “original” review full of sparkling humor and inimitable satire, in which I would call “The Elephant” a brilliant picture full of deep meaning and allusions to the Bible and the works of Karl Marx. However, reviews for this film are already full of similar opuses with a claim to creativity, so I will refrain from making my contribution to this holiday of wit and try to seriously approach the phenomenon of “Elephant”. After all, the joke about the deep meaning in "Green Elephant" was relevant two years ago, right?
So what caused the unprecedented popularity of the Elephant? After all, this is not the only film in this genre, and I must say, not the most shocking, but it is difficult to name at least one grindhouse film that would have won popular love, spawned a similar number of memes and fan art, was quoted not only in narrow circles of fans of the genre, but also in relatively wide strata of the population, and even retained all these attributes of crazy popularity for more than one year. Of course, some part of the success lies in the active promotion of the “Elephant” to the masses by the users themselves; however, the same “Wedding Vase”, which some time ago rushed into social networks, and did not get close to the “Elephant” even by such objective indicators as the number of ratings or reviews on the PC, not to mention folk love or steady popularity. So it’s not just shock content? I think I would not be mistaken if I say that the phenomenon of "Elephant" - in a carefully calibrated ratio of thrash and atmosphericity. Not every “psychological drama” and not every “psychological thriller” with the highest concentration of famous names in the credits can boast of such an indescribable oppressive atmosphere, morally affecting even the most unprepared viewer. Needless to say, many “trash” films of this atmosphere are completely devoid of and limited to superficial shocking blood-intestines-dismemberment? In "ZS" a unique atmosphere manifests itself in everything: in the choice of topics; in the manner of shooting, which evokes a sense of documentation of what is happening; in such trifles as the famous "mud checkers" and "flies that interfere with sleep", which contribute to the overall atmosphere of insanity; well, of course, in the delightful dialogues that should be put in a separate point, their influence on the overall perception of the tape is so important.
Dialogue (and especially their brilliant performance by actors) is perhaps the main component of the popularity of the film. It’s not just that they literally imbue it with absurdity and madness and set the tone for the film’s atmosphere; it’s also that the dialogue has become quite self-contained about the film. Many of those who watched “The Elephant” made the decision to get acquainted with the film, not least due to the conversations of the characters that were dispersed into quotes; and no less many people did not even watch the entire film, limiting themselves to watching individual episodes; many did not watch this, but nevertheless actively use in their speech certain phrases that have become winged. The filmmakers managed to work at the highest level not only the video sequence, not only shocking footage, but also the semantic component, mixing in ideal proportions black humor, absurdity and obscene vocabulary. For this picture and deserves both its widest (and not thinking to subside) popularity, and my assessment.
10 out of 10
It has been four years since my first and subsequent viewing of this film. I will tell you as it is: I was horrified at what I saw then. At that time, the characters of the painting Svetlana Baskova were not such as to be directly cult characters. But now there is a new wave! "Green elephant" has gained some wild in the good sense of the word popularity.
If we talk about the film as a mood, then the first 44 minutes go just like a crazy action that brings to hysterical laughter the very, it would seem, terrible situation that arises in the frame. This was largely contributed by the heroes of Sergei Pakhomov and Vladimir Epifantsev. One to another constantly, without shutting up, tells funny stories from his sad and sad life, which will first mix Epifantsev’s character, and then drive him to fury. The groin does not stop, and then the alarm bell rings. It comes down to hand-to-hand...
Really? Pakhomov's sorry. Today I watched on Wikipedia that Sergey himself was treated in a psychiatric hospital. His stories are presented so naively and so ridiculously that it is simply impossible not to rust like a mare. But immediately it is clear that with his head - and he is on the screen a junior officer (lieutenant) - not all right. By the way, the description of the plot in “Viki” is as funny as if this film was taken, and schooled! “Stories of the first sex, how he defecated in the sea, the proposal to perform an act of defecation so that flies flew into one place ...” – so broadcasts the main electronic directory. And indeed, as soon as those executions over the brain of the viewer are not named, to adhere to censorship!
We're used to "Elephant" as something that you can't get out of a song. That the Green Elephant is strong. Like a batch of blows "brother" went.
Actually, jokes aside. The film takes on a terrible connotation. The guard, shown at first somehow stealthily as if the amateur camera of the same Svetlana Baskova-operator filmed him without his knowledge, gives an idea that he also has mental problems. And the head-politician and does have some animal rigidity.
We can say that then the film collapsed into some unthinkable art-house thrash. Nope. He was psychedelic right away. A thriller beyond reason, which is understandably called horror.
Let's not get ahead of ourselves anymore. How it all ended was that I was in a groggy state at first. Now I can watch Elephant without feeling negative. I grew up, I got used to it. I somehow understood what Baskov wanted to say. Black is our life. It is as uninterrupted as the situation on the “lip” of guilty servicemen.
But Green Elephant is a cult movie. Lots of groups of fans, countless (and this is gratifying!) various pictures, parodies of everything and everything associated with the personality of Pakhomov in the film. All this makes "Green Elephant" - the main dish of Svetlana Baskova. And the dish is not always "sweet bread" on the plate!
10 out of 10
If the modern viewer managed to take anything out of the cinematic frenzy of the harsh domestic 90s, then, without a doubt, “Green Elephant” – the second film of the title creator of the Russian art house Svetlana Baskova – is one of these masterpieces. There is everything here: the rage-filled voice of reason in the person of Epifantsev, and the then young guru, the self-proclaimed Timothy Leary of Russian postmodernism Sergey Pakhomov, and the act of rebirth in blood, presented, however, in the form of an act of sexuality. In turn, eerie notes in this opus of concentrated madness adds another significant character of the underground scene - Anatoly Osmolovsky, whose achievements as an amateur actor is difficult to underestimate (which is only one erotic scene in the "Head" of the same Baskova). And above all this, the atmosphere of military slavery reigns, penetrating through this disrespectful tangle of lust and naked emotions.
To make such a movie in a troubled time for the country is a task in many respects necessary, and, of course, heroic. In the homeland of socialism, which had lost and had never been born, capitalism, such half-crazy burps of young talents were a breath of fresh air for all those creative youth who were obsessed with grunge, Letov and protest, who even then despised cheap hints of intellectuality in Mikhalkov’s countless opuses. Now, when the dislike of pseudo-intellectual cinema is a generally recognized mainstream without five minutes, and network memetics has become the only indisputable religion for the masses, Baskova’s creation has won the arthouse pedestal – of course, acquiring a crowd of haters. And although moral guardians, humble priests and other ghosts of the past continue to grumble furiously, the “green” masterpiece seems to become only more popular with the years – without losing its charm. "Haters gonna hate." No more, no more.
Frankly shocking, neither an amateur psycho-thrash, nor that sick distorted vision of a movie of a deranged person who captured his cockroaches on film. It is especially frightening that such a disgusting spectacle, vomiting due to the abundance of perverse scenes, is the work of a woman.
I don’t even want to try to figure out what was driving her or what she was hoping to do with Green Elephant, but she’s obviously not doing well in her head. And in general, she probably is not a person, but some hellish child who has caused a torture film for the nervous system. As a diaper fanatic, I don’t remember a single horror movie that would make me turn away from the screen. At best, I could shake at the unexpected moment, but no more. .
Immediately, because of the simply inappropriate amount of muddled ugliness consisting of matershina, human defecation (shown with all the details), homosexual violence and the morally oppressive, oppressive atmosphere on the brain, I barely endured, and barely lived to the end of this kashmar, watching it almost closed eyes. "Green Elephant" and the film, in the usual sense of the word, the language does not turn. This is some kind of manifesto or propaganda that calls for the anarchy of general madness.
But it all started, very good, especially for a tape shot for pennies on an amateur camera. Even somehow it is unclear why it was necessary to turn at first an interesting, even experimental psychological thriller into something completely sick, insanely schizophrenic ... I can not pick up other words.
For me, “Green Elephant” will probably forever remain evil in its pure manifestation, captured by the devil’s spawn in the form of a movie that scares worse than the recordings from the videotape from the “Ring” franchise. Compared to scenes like a song about a green elephant, a kurlak (who watched will understand) and a torn trachea, the deadly film killing people in the aforementioned horror film is a comedy of pure water.
Do you want to see something really scary? You just need to find this “diamond” of Russian cinema with the kindest and most innocuous name in the world – “Green Elephant”. If you watch more than half of it, you know the hero. If you sit through the whole session, you will never want to watch it again. And if suddenly someone wants to review it, then you urgently, or rather need to register with a psychiatrist. As you know, the roof goes slowly!
1 out of 10
Art and the second problem of Russia, in the context of thrash cinema.
The director of this “picture”, Svetlana Baskova, at the time of filming “Green Elephant” was still spinning in “prominent” circles of representatives of Russian postmodernism and, oddly enough, called herself a figure of this, mysterious for many, trend in art, and her talentless work was called, of course, with great pride, postmodernism. In fact, if you look at the criteria of this very word, magical in some respects, it becomes obvious that "creativity" Svetlana could not and cannot get there, in principle. And now, actually, let's talk about it in more detail.
What movie? I watched it with the hope of seeing something in the spirit of the twisted aesthetic of De Sade’s hyperbolic ideas, which the director would try to embody for the sake of fulfilling the main function of postmodernism (simply put, the idea to the masses), as Pasolini had (but his experience, incidentally, was not crowned with much success).
What's the result? There was a strong impression that the author did not particularly understand the idea of absurdity, brought to the limit, in the cinema of postmodernism; that is, the author did not ask himself banally: “What do I want to say with my film?”, “Do I choose the genre correctly, and can I say with confidence that I have enough talent and experience (and they are sometimes lacking in recognized geniuses) to make a film in such a complex genre, where one wrong step will lead to the fact that all the ideas and depth of the film will go away or disappear at all?”, and “Why do people, frankly, resort to such a method of telling a distorted story?”
In simple terms, I have a bitter feeling and a firm understanding that the directors of the film did not think about all these terms and subtleties at all, they just filmed what they could shoot.
But with all the minuses, both the film and Svetlana can be forgiven, at least partially, because Russian cinema in 1999 was already in a terrible state, and the movement of postmodernism could not yet provide anything bright, special, creative and really talented, perhaps one could forgive at least for the fact that, right, she did not continue this vile coprophagy of cinema in her other “works”, but this, alas, did not happen.
The green elephant, no matter what they say, is a typical example of a bad film, without any sense, without good actors (maybe they did not play badly, but, you will agree, what talented actor or intelligent person will play in the terrible conditions of a character who eats his excrement and this despite the fact that he will not get a penny for work?); everything goes to the fact that in the film there is no higher and incomprehensible for the common man message to “totalitarian society in the context of war” or “the madness of the individual in conditions of war.” All these theories are nothing more than ordinary nonsense, invented by nobody, in order to somehow justify the incompetence of the performing skills of all people responsible for the narrative of the film. It, this filthy “film”, causes laughter, hysterical laughter (which later will be used by the authors, they say, we all conceived from the beginning), and the film laughs the entire Internet community, and the actors have become the main fools and buffoons for a large, or rather a huge number of people.
It is quite possible that the film and there was an idea, it may still be somewhere there under the phrases like: “Brother, I brought you a meal!” and “Kurly Kurly”, and “Case back, eh?”, only the fact that it is no longer disassemble and not understand even a person who is accustomed to the complexity and veiling of the essence and ideas in the works and cinema.
Now the genre of the film is thrash (to clarify the picture, from the English word trash - garbage). And the film absolutely justifies its genre, which he received not intentionally, but given by people.
It was horrible, sickening, disgusting, disgusting and without any idea. You can't shoot that.
The film ' Green Elephant' scandalous director Svetlana Baskova is considered one of the brightest examples of Russian Art House, which in itself already sounds menacing. The author of the script, the same Svetlana Baskova, set her sights on creating a deep psychedelic picture that reveals the features of human consciousness, as well as the influence of the environment and conditions of existence on the mental state of a person, but apparently was so carried away with the idea of creating something extravagant and radically unlike anything else that made it completely unsuitable for viewing an adequate and sane person.
The main idea in the plot of this picture is to show how a perfectly mentally balanced and normal person can completely lose his mind in a day, thanks to a confined room and a neighbor who has long said goodbye to common sense. And in this, the director surpassed herself, because she managed to convey the atmosphere of insanity so plausibly that the viewer himself begins to gradually go crazy, after the tenth minute of this creation. The reason for this is the complete lack of logic and consistency of the narrative. All, without exception, all the actions of the characters are devoid of any meaning, after which there is only one question ' Why were they even needed?' The essence of the scenes ceases to capture after five minutes of the film and the rest of the time you try to understand why you are suffering so much.
Special attention should be paid to the dialogues of the characters, mainly based on the swear language, however, some of the utterances of the film, surprisingly, managed to become winged and entered the everyday life of modern youth, for example, such as ' went' and 'brother', but even they are not able to give the lines even the slightest meaning and somehow improve the picture.
In conclusion, it remains only to determine whether this film is worth the attention. My answer is unambiguous: 'Net'. Will it bring something new into your life? Again, no. Is this film worth the hype that has been made around it? No.