A drama filled with the symbolism and hopelessness of the life of a simple Russian man.
Ekaterina Artyomovna is a librarian in a small mining village. Aspiring to become an independent woman, she left home and changed many cities and jobs. The price of individuality is loneliness. Once made a movie about gentlemen, and here about the lady of luck. And, like, found his place, groom, stability. I no longer want to live from fatigue. And Rudyard Kipling's favorite poem, "The Commandment," doesn't help.
The diamond tiara of this film is certainly actress Natalia Negoda. She rarely appeared in Russian films and lived in the United States for many years. She's like an icon alive here, an idol. Grace Kelly, who has been battered by life. Print experience and past years as a picture in the corners of the eyes. I really like these women's faces. With the stamp of the past.
Greatly showed the love of a mature woman. Whenever feelings burst into our soul, we always become defenseless and ready for anything. How the heroine wanted to be next to this man, how she began to give herself all.
A stunning scene in which the heroine goes to the exit of the restaurant, and a caravan of naked strippers, young and beautiful, swims towards her. They're only shown from the back. Dozens of beauties without faces and one Natalia Negoda, for all time.
It's also a movie about hypocrisy. The fact that the most correct people who beat themselves with the heel in the chest, fighting for justice and honesty, in fact are the last scammers. Because when you shout too loudly, you suspect you're trying to prove it to yourself. Why do you want to convince everyone of the obvious?
A separate delight is the policeman performed by Oleg Bilik and the cute village mafia Sergey Neudachin. Beautiful as dawn. Everything you need to know about the images they portray.
If Alexei Mizgirev’s “Stream” caused a range of irritable and vague feelings in me, then “Dumben, Drum” suddenly pleasantly surprised, despite the drag. In the TV program “Closed Show”, the discussion of the film, as usual, reached the consistency when the conversation is full of terms like “black”, “province”, “intellectuals”, “Russia”, “we”, “time”, “society”, “90s”, and so on. This film, of course, everyone interpreted in their own way, while most of the points of view are true and authentic, but personally I would not take globality as a basis - we do not touch on everyday documentary about life in mining towns. I would like to analyze the place of the heroine herself in a particular society, in a particular period of time, focusing more on the fateful result of the confrontation between her character and her love.
The red line runs through the entire film. A middle-aged librarian succumbs to the call of a heart that chooses an ordinary sailor, and her existence causes a shift, a change. Not the outside is the inside. The feeling felt for a man, deep and inevitable, gradually breaks the heroine, forcing her to rush from resentment, dangerous and sacrificial, to the desire to correct everything through forgiveness, which in itself is impossible. Which leads to tragedy.
Let “Buben, Drum” was revealed only in the second half (with the first did not immediately work out to cope), I finally managed to imbue with the work of Mizgirev as a director, and the desire to see his next films has now become much more than it was after “Silicon”.
7 out of 10
I will say right away, I liked the film, but as a fan of Nashen art house, I note that this is clearly not its best representative. It would seem that Comrade Mizgirev, already a great master of thickening colors, that is, showing reality without any flirting with the viewer, suddenly decided to point the way to something bright. No action, only catchy slogans, like, endure, be sure to tambourine mantra - tambourine, drum, drum, drum ... And if there is no strength, well, or dry in the throat, then there is no need to live at all. Here is a straightforward advice, unpretentious, completely devoid of a polemical note. Primitive, which discourages interest. But the Russian people are multifaceted and no matter how you try to lock it into a frame, he will still be able to tell a little more about himself than the director himself expects. It must be a great talent when your vision grows during the process, obscuring you completely. Mizgirev has it in full.
In this picture, only female characters are of interest, when men only make it easier. Here is an intelligentsia stealing books from those who spoil state property. Who is faster, or you can remain a man in spite of yourself? The question of conscience, or time dictates its rules. You can argue endlessly and you will. The film absorbs the viewer, telling the fate of the main character, but her environment came out completely faded and spoils the overall impression.
I will recommend the film for viewing, this is really a “live” movie, despite the artificial shouts, which will not leave any viewer indifferent, especially the acting pitch is so strong that any scripted roughness goes to the background.
I wish everyone a pleasant viewing!!
Watch because it's the director of "Duelista" and because the main role is Natalia Negoda. Zinochka Kovalenko’s sparkling noodle in Tomorrow Was War; a supernova in Little Faith; starred for Playboy in white socks. After the incomprehensible "In the city of Sochi dark nights" - everything. And suddenly, twenty years later, the main role. That's it! Colleagues and critics crowned and nominated with all possible awards. And that the average viewer does not know anything, so in the order of things in the author's film. It is not for the viewer, not for the private. For a movie party.
Just such an expensive luxury hobby. How to build retro cars. To shoot for two million American dollars a film that at the box office will collect fourteen thousand six hundred. There are many awards (and nominations). There's little use, and the pleasures are great. Well, why did you go wild, the mass viewer is not ready for the perception of complex things, you are also not ready. The movie is good.
The movie is good, yes. I don’t like it, I just don’t like people being reduced to cattle. Because they're down here. Why is she living in this poor dorm at 45? What, such a highly spiritual ascetic, a guardian for raising the cultural level of the Rasean province? It does not care about the cultural level, the Russian province and itself. I don't care. He hates everything, including himself. And can you explain something other than subconscious self-rejection of life in such conditions?
Eck's gone. The starting conditions of the girl are not the best. Really? And what about starting conditions, they play a decisive role when you are 20. It's time to forget at 45. Two college degrees, you say? My father never wanted a soul. We draw conclusions: she is untalented and learnable; at the start mentioned above, she received an experience of love, which in adult life makes a woman inspire love and is able to translate it outside. This covers different areas: sex, tenderness, caress, the ability to see beauty where no one sees and show it to others who would not see without you.
What is it? The body was driven into the framework of the poorest possible life; the soul was dried to the root; the brains went into a void, and fell away. If there were brains in the beginning, I'll add. I doubt it. Come on, Assol. I waited for my captain to sail (for complete happiness he had to be deaf-blind, as in an anecdote). Come on, Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk. I overstepped everyone and everything for great love, and the man with the shit turned out to be. Come, Medea, all for revenge.
And the books stolen from the subordinate library, which archetype to fasten? The Blue Thief (" he called her Sashchen, she called him Alchen)? You're so wild. That’s why it’s very good and true in the details. In each individual detail: the squalor of provincial life; a woman starving without love; men who are divided into alphonse and pack mules. And the internal logic of linear storytelling is impeccable, not in the case of most arthouse films, where yawning logical holes on the cart can be entered. There is no surgical scalpel here.
During the assembly, the master made a micron error, slightly shifted the accents and the result was unviable. Yeah, those are the 14,600 fees. Because it is wrong to reduce to the state of cattle. Right lift.
What's the movie about? How bad did people live in post-perestroika times? What is a woman willing to do (probably in menopause) for a random man? The ambiguity of human actions? How low is it to sell art (in this case books) and thereby denigrate it? I don't understand. I think the film is made on the principle ' think it out for yourself'.
In my opinion, the film is simply not beautiful. Lyadova’s indistinct muttering against the background of Negoda, trying to portray a strict aunt, looks almost comical. And for the main character becomes ashamed: first she reproaches the schoolboy of irresponsibility, and then all with the same stone mine on his face, which reads poetry in front of the children's team, hints that he wants ' to order' person. Well, that doesn't fit into a household movie. And Negoda plays skillfully, as he did twenty years ago. It’s not about acting, it’s about choosing words and phrases for actors.
The sympathies that have just begun at the beginning of the film for the ordinary female librarian, who is as diligently performing her duties as it seems at first, are rapidly fading. It makes sense. In the afternoon, Catherine is a pedantic librarian in a strict suit, in the evening - a salesman at the station. The main character, reproaching the student for drawing in the book, it turns out, is no better than a little bully. And quite rightly, when demanding money for a spoiled copy, looks like a extortionist in the eyes of others. Hunjoy in every sense of the word. Observing the relationship, if you can call it that, between the thief and accidentally turned out ' the devil on the horns' sailor, I want to conclude that Catherine ' works ' not for herself to survive, but is a puppet in someone's hands. Bullied, forced to work for people up there. Perhaps the same dentist, allegedly in love with her without memory. Lost self-esteem, a humiliated woman is ready to crawl on her knees, to be a litter for a man who, learning about how she earns a pitiful ruble, simply spits her: ' Not the art you do, but the toilets to cut ...' But are these words so cruel to a woman who would do anything to keep her from being left alone?
The film is heavy enough to watch, the shots change each other monotonously, like events in the lives of people devoured alive by everyday life, clinging to the slightest opportunity to survive. However, there is no hopelessness. 'You can't live - don't live' - this is probably the most appropriate slogan for the film.
The film definitely makes a oppressive, heavy impression, the plot is saturated with despair, however, I really liked the film due to a very harmonious script, good acting of actors, the vitality of the scenes (any person who grew up in Russia will feel the surroundings well).
I like this genre of cinema, Russian drama is not for everyone, but often these films are replete with long and obscure scenes that could be cut in half or cut completely. When I was about to watch “Drum, Drum,” I was mentally ready to get bored while watching. What a surprise it was when from the very beginning I saw not a single incomprehensible, stretched or implausible scene. Every moment makes sense, Mizgirev brilliantly, from the point of view of composition, solved the problem of implementing the script.
Each acting character will be clear, easy to feel, at the same time, they are all unique and unique. All the same applies to the paintings played out: a dying library, a drenched railway station, a cheap restaurant with a clutter for luxury or a collapsing polyclinic - all this is familiar to a Russian person and, perhaps, will be understandable to a foreigner.
10 out of 10
It feels like all our directors have been trained to make a nasty movie. Maybe they even had an item called 'Hopelessness and discouragement Russian'
I didn’t like anyone, not one character, not a line, not a plot. NO-THING-GO
So... a librarian-stealer with a claim to great intelligence. Does the movie show why she steals? Is her life that bad? Well, even if so, but she also positions herself as blameless, sublime, detached from all worldly joys. You're lying to yourself? The scene where she reads a poem to a handful of boxing kids is so preposterous and preposterous that all she had to do was shake her head. I do not feel sorry for this woman one iota.
Next. Her ' best' friend: Lyadova in her repertoire. The name justifies it. In every film, she is a cheater, a girl of easy behavior. I'm sorry, but... Are they the best friends?! Don't be ridiculous, a librarian can't even gossip with her girlfriend, advise or sympathize. I was so funny their dialogue about Pushkin’s book, oh terrible, it was, apparently, very metaphorical, so much that even I, a philologist by training, did not understand it.
Sailor! The most disgusting character of all, even worse than a policeman falling to the floor at the sight of blood.
There was another strange man, a dentist with his battery-powered toothbrush, who discusses Natasha Rostova with his colleagues at work. Seriously?! Laughter and only.
The picture is an example of a real movie - juicy, beautiful, selected shots filled with the right color scheme for the director, well-set light.
The story is typically Russian: an elderly librarian, strict, verbose, clenched in a fist by her own life, in which the main thing is the struggle, meets a sailor who came to the city.
In this story - everything: the "lead abominations of life" of the Russian hinterland, universal apathy and misunderstanding, aggression and severity as the only method of living life, and even love - as if tortured, some "according to necessity", which does not heal, does not bring happiness, but cuts through life, turning reality like hell into hell even greater, the easiest way out of which is shown in the film.
The film, in fact, is not about Russia, not about the fact that “everything around is bad”, but about love. Love that manifests itself in such a distorted form that it becomes an instrument of spiritual murder, not rebirth.
Here and typical for Russian society cliches - "find / pick up a peasant", not because of the heart, but because - it is necessary; and the man himself - silent and indistinct, able only to demand, not to give.
All this is such neo-dignity, “poor people” with a complete perversion of the spirit and some artificial search for artificial happiness according to the standards proposed by society.
Is there any other way out of all this than the one chosen by the heroine? Yes – gets on the train, and go where your eyes look, and say to the beat of the wheels “drum-drum”.
Good, lively, "juicy" Russian cinema.
Woe from um The story of the search for love, mixed with survival in the province, raises the theme of ordinary people and their way of life, away from industrial cities, by contrast demonstrating that while progress and prosperity are everywhere, the “nineties” still reign around, and the cruel realities of life of small towns and villages plunge into a gloomy atmosphere where the rays of hope for love and the desire to live still do not fade. But first of all, we are clearly shown that there is simply no life in these cities. As such, life is long gone, leaving behind only the struggle for existence, where everyone survives as best he can. Someone got used to the daily monotony, someone is still waiting for something bright in his life, and someone, having a tit in his hands, does not understand his real happiness, continuing to look for a crane in the sky. The main character, devoted to his work and work, exists at the expense of rational truths. Trying to understand this world with reason, and not with feelings, begins a real grief from the mind. Instead of a beautiful restaurant, a sane mind will tell you to live within your means, and now a scene later will be eaten by some Cheburek, and all the dialogues will be a set of separate phrases demonstrating a strong statement of the positions of the character, but at the same time taking somewhere in the distance of primitive rationalization of circumstances. And the problem here will not be the love drama of the main character, but only the technical complexity of perception. Shooting about the real life of the people of the province, the director does not set the task to shoot a realistic film. It is impossible to believe any dialogue, with all the sharp and honed phrases, because people do not communicate this way, a collection of short monologues without special connections can not be called communication between people, and it remains either to disown the realities of what is happening, or simply to perceive the text directly, and not how this communication is played out by the actors. Thus, an attempt to introduce some thoughts will cover the very story that takes place in the film, leaving only strong phrases and not too clearly spelled out images, where the blonde visitor will slightly resemble V.V.P. on the outside, and in fact more like the Craig type of Bond, and the line of the neighbor after the first question on literature will be so banal predictable that the story will lose all intrigue and interest. A set of dynamic scenes, here omit the details of the storylines, and darkening provincial life will add a couple of creepy episodes with blood and a severed head, allegorically against the background of words about cocktails and Thailand, showing a provincial restaurant and striptease, without special goals to convey the essence, but only for the sake of supplying those very comparisons, allegories and modest metaphors. And the characters will lack not only sincerity and truthfulness in communication, but also clearer characters, brightness of images and plot attention. And in the end, we will come to the theater of one actor, where Natalia Negoda, who returned to the screens after a rather scandalous film “Little Faith”, will show the ability to present a strong character, with survival instincts in a difficult for life mining village, but the spark of sensuality was crushed by a breath-hold in this very province and attempts to look at the world from the point of view of reason and rationalism. And it is not for nothing that the name of the film is mentioned here in the scene about breathing, showing a metaphor for modern life, where in large cities the “breath-out” is in full swing, personifying a full-fledged human life, and in the province only breath-holding and this very “drum, drum”. 6 IZ 10 Original