Reviews on movie Fathers (2)

The tape begins with a wonderful monologue by a random taxi driver. After it becomes clear made much later roll call with the tape "Brother-2" - there, too, taxi drivers came from anger to the world around them. However, in our tape, the taxi driver is not just a misanthrope. He is proud of his "success," admires how he moved to Moscow and joined the party, how he beat up his ex-girlfriend and put a skirt over her head and gave her vodka. Such a beginning sets the vector of the entire tape. Garmash plays a member of the party, but at the same time a complete scoundrel.
Another thing is the main character. Boris Shcherbakov plays a bright man who is sent to the most difficult areas. And he quite copes with the tasks set.

The intrigue of the tape in his disagreement with his mistress. The girl is fascinated by the respectability of her man and is very surprised when she realizes that his methods are too cold and cruel. She insists on a breakup, he is trying to save a relationship that is already obviously doomed. Our hero has a family and a very influential father-in-law. These moments allow us to believe that the authors deliberately made a roll call with Ryazanov’s Forgotten Flute Melody, responding to him with a much sadder development of events.
So we come to the antagonist. It turns out to be the character of Oleg Borisov. A humble front-line soldier resents the experiences of his daughter. And this reaction is just as harsh and cruel. He buys a gun, saws off the gun, and sets up a meeting for his daughter. . .

We need to evaluate the scripting of the tape. At first glance, everything here may seem clear. The film exposes the character of Shcherbakov. In this vein, the character of Oleg Borisov appears almost as a source of justice coming from the people. Which, of course, is not the case.

We have three men - a taxi driver performed by Sergey Garmash, Oleg Borisov and Boris Shcherbakov. The reactions to the actions of others and the ways to achieve their goals in each of them are unusually radical. Instead of settling the problem, each of the men tends to "cut the living." This circumstance adds excessive moral instruction, weighting the tape.
At the same time, Oleg Borisov and Boris Shcherbakov exist too well and believably on the screen. And each of their screen meetings demonstrates impeccable acting skills, the clash of two opposite male charismas. They are the ones who draw this picture.

6 out of 10

The film 1989 puts the "diagnosis" of the processes that began shortly after the death of Stalin (the film takes place in the first half of the 1960s) and ended with the death of the USSR in the 91st.
Those creative people, certainly individuals who did not “break” and did not betray themselves and their ideals (" not lost themselves from the song “How young we were”) understood even then, everything is going to the destruction and “disintegration” of their country, their homeland, whose freedom was paid so dearly. By the end of the 80s, there were very few such “ideological” people to resist the global historical processes that took place in the USSR and throughout the Western world.
A film about a “private case” in which, like a drop of water, reflected the whole range of hopes, illusions, relationships and realities of the time. The time when the outspoken Trotskyists came to power in the U.S.S.R. and selection to the party, which had in fact completely replaced the Soviets by that time and was the "leading and guiding force" of the entire Soviet society. And let it look like an agitation and a slogan shouting from all posters - but it was true, because Soviet power was in the hands of party officials of all ranks: in production, in the army, in art and agriculture, not to mention the media, politics and science.
This film is a document of the late USSR era. The document, which future historians, if they are not biased by the authorities, will study along with other documents, is a truthful, “honest” and quite legitimate document, because people who survived that time will confirm that the “truth of life” in it (the film) is simply striking in its reliability.

Yes, there are some not essential for the "main" - episodes and "gaps" of a cinematic order, but do not forget, the film was shot more than 30 years after the events. And made in the title of the review “THEY AND WE” is a reflection on the video on YouTube by K. Semin with Vladimir Menshov, in which the great director confirms indirectly what I wrote here.
Have a nice view.