In his memoirs, Oleg Ivanovich Borisov reflected: it was better not to star in forty gray films, leave behind three or five: “Check on the roads”, “Working village”, “Train stopped”. That is, “Worker’s Village” was exactly in the top three or ten of his favorite tapes. And not by accident. The film was filmed just a few years after the vaudeville hit "Behind Two Rabbits". And what a change. Instead of an easy and impressive hangover, we have an old man tired of life. He feels sorry for himself, experiencing blindness, finds salvation in alcohol. A man has to pull a baby by himself. Can you do that?
But it won’t just be about one family. In the center will be several fates. This is the boss who suffered from unscrupulous libel; and a young officer who found his tragedy at a dance party; and a woman who left her family; and a growing boy. Such a gloomy panorama takes us away from the usual Soviet cliches. Moreover, we are shown how superficial and devoid of spirituality all these comradely courts and "public influences" are. However, the authors show life as it is, striving to see the prospect, hope for a better future.
A few words about the acting work of Oleg Ivanovich. Wonderful scene of singing in the train. Blind war veteran, guitar, little son, hat with money... Every moment is touching. No less memorable was the description of the usual evening route - the hero decided to return alone. A blind man wanders in a wasteland, next to new buildings.
Interesting and the interaction of Oleg Borisov with Lyudmila Gurchenko, his on-screen wife. Together they made six wonderful tapes, but, perhaps, it was in the “Working Village” that Gurchenko’s game was most expressive and serious. Before us there is a young and ambitious actress, ready for the most difficult acting challenges.
So I recommend this movie to watch. You should not expect any special slackness from him. Obviously, the picture was heavily edited, a lot was probably cut. Many lines are only marked.
Vengerov’s film is based on the story of, in my opinion, a wonderful Soviet writer Vera Panova. This film is a surprisingly full-fledged and multi-layered material that accommodates the life of generations in two hours, which unfolds against the background of historical Soviet eras: the pre-war construction of socialism (the first shots of the film), the Great Patriotic War, the restoration of the national economy in the first postwar decade, the denunciation of the cult of personality after the 20th Party Congress, the thaw and the finale - the beginning of the Brezhnev Soviet Union. The film was made in 1965. Against the background of all this Soviet history, people with different characters are shown, whom fate brought together in one village and one metallurgical plant. All of them came out of the war with losses ... someone became physically disabled, and someone morally, someone lost sons, and someone husband. And most of them give each other a shoulder, they are not indifferent. There are a lot of thoughts in the film, a lot is written about them, but the final episode is not written anywhere. Comrade Moshkantsev - in Stalin's time, the party company of the plant, which signaled to the director and eventually planted him, and he took the chair. After the 20th Congress, the director returned, and comrade Moskantsev was retired in a cozy house, in the village ... in a squirrel, a dense, bald man with a positive view of the harvest ... A clear caricature of the just removed from power N.S. Khrushchev ... That’s why the film was shown in 1966. . .
Watching and making discoveries is interesting. A film is like a good book in one breath.
Yes, as well as the wind of “freedom” blew into perestroika and this wind blew a lot of dirt on memory and history (and apparently it was on the set of this film that A. Herman stocked up with texture dirt, using it further in each picture, and when the floodgates of “freedom” again opened a new stream already fresh ... he brought the “creator” to “Khrustalev” and “Chronicles of the massacre in Arkanar” (he does not raise his hand to fit into this context the name of the original work)). And on this "humus" immediately rose "masterpieces" of our "flexible" creators.
In their view, freedom is “Earthling” in jazz performance (no, not a opportunistic decision, no!). The constant religious refrain, with a tinge of its backwardness and stupidity, has no relation to the persecution of religion on behalf of the first in the history of the Communist Party of the USSR. Seka. – We do not condemn the “cult of personality” of the “paper”. The very "debunking" of the "cult of personality" is absolutely across the then course of benefits (sarsm).
Further, the difficult fate of a disabled person of war, yes, it is, but the laws on pensions, all who were affected by the war, were issued (by the criminal redhead) in early 1942, despite the hard times at the front.
So, looking at such huge gaps in the canvas of the narrative (in the base-foundation), made for the sake of continuing to be in the main stream of goods (otherwise why? – unsubscribe in the comments of opinion), you already begin to seriously doubt the presentation and interpretation of characters and situations, in this film, by these authors. So sometimes for a meaningful understanding of the meaning of the inherent and its evaluation in the cinema, you need knowledge of history, a little deeper than the school course.
They also swung at the "slip of time" by playing a lot of conflicts, at different levels, in the script, but did not reach not one, at least to something - that. Various genres are also claimed, but again the ends of their development and culmination are confused and lowered into the water.
As much as I love films of the USSR of the 60s - so much my disgust is strong for this director, who shot "in Stalinist" and tried (failedly) to "cross" into social and everyday life.
2 out of 10
Accidentally came across this film on the disc-collection of Lyudmila Gurchenko. The first thought was: “Is there not something better to add from the work of a great actress than some social girl?” How wrong I am...
First, the film reveals one interesting detail: in such places, people’s minds are captured not only by the desire to fulfill and exceed the plan set before the workers – there are also their own Marmeladovs and Karenins, and Tolstoy’s “all happy families are similar to each other, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way” is implemented in a very interesting, and most importantly without the eternal Soviet allegories and half-silences.
The film really touches on the social question, without it we have nowhere, but it is not presented dogmatically, with a well-known claim to the comprehensiveness, the truth of the position expressed from above for everyone and everything. For this reason, the film will not occur to anyone to call agitational, it does not dictate, sustained in the best traditions of Russian drama of the nineteenth century. The fashionable word “thaw” in this case is absolutely justified comes to mind; such a soft, unobtrusive, but at the same time questioning the official ideology position could not be expressed in another period.
Another important factor for viewing may be the fact that the characters were embodied by wonderful actors: already indicated above Gurchenko in the role of suppressed life and not enduring life with a disabled husband, whom the war deprived of sight. The filigree performance of the role, which combines bitter sarcastic humor with the taste of balagurism and the inexhaustible tragedy of a man’s non-acceptance of his dependent position, opened the actor Oleg Borisov to me. Strong and female roles of the so-called second plan, tired of bearing the burden of widowhood and ready to plunge into a new sense of Pauline performed by Tatiana Doronina and Frosya, came in search of a better fate religious wanderer (again, recalls the tradition of the previous century), not finding understanding in the face of “official people”, but causing in ordinary villagers the best feelings, the desire for light.
Summing up, I note that the importance of this film is that it reflected its era without embellishment, without the “romantics of the harvest”, but not falling into the black, as it was at the end of the era of the Union.
8 out of 10
A two-part television movie born of Khrushchev’s thaw. It is surprising and strange that it was not twisted in perestroika times, and therefore few people know this picture.
It all begins with a pre-war working-class village, where people who are quite satisfied with life rush to the beginning of the work shift. Surprisingly, some of them are quietly filling up with beer. Well, that's not the point.
The main action of the film takes place after the war. Of the three faithful friends in the village, only one remains - Leonid Pleshcheev, now a blind disabled person. He has a wife and a son, but he doesn’t work, suffers from his inferiority, is angry with the world, seeks solace in vodka. The wife, unable to withstand such a life, decides to move to another city, but the son on the way runs away to his father.
But when another of the inseparable trinity returns home alive, the fight for the fate of Pleshcheev will begin with renewed vigor.
A special place in the film is given to Stalinism. There are disputes about the role of the collective, and denunciations, and arrest, and a black car, and an announcement to factory workers about the debunking of the cult of personality ... But most importantly, the willingness to “signal” again, if possible. There would be a demand.
I read that it was in this film that the studio brand of the film studio “Lenfilm” – “Bronze Rider” first appeared. The director of the picture in the credits is indicated by Alexei German, which can be considered his great creative debut.
It’s amazing that this movie came out at all! It's too brave for 65! Something that may seem daring right now!
“Worker’s Village” is not a drooling story of a war invalid, it is a drama in which, as in our lives, everything from the man of war syndrome, to the cult of personality and the struggle for faith is involved. But the most important thing is, of course, love and friendship! These feelings are literally imbued with the picture of Vladimir Vengerov.
Wikipedia says that Pleshcheev is the best role of Oleg Borisov. Quite possibly. Although Gurchenko and Simonov and Doronin are beyond praise! The actors are not just “playing”, they are like living in this “Working Village”! Believe them, from the first to the last minute. This is very valuable in itself!
Look! More than two hours will pass unnoticed!
10 out of 10