If you give your heart to art, they will be beaten, kicked out, they will not understand. If you save a living soul, they will break their heads, they will not be ashamed. And if you love much, they will drag you to the side of the road, and there they will leave to die. The Russian man is mad at everything. And the funny thing is that in all this, the main role was taken by Igor Apasyan, a Georgian director from Tbilisi. But this is not said out of some nationalist motives, but with an emphasis on the fact that in Russia, with all these intermediates, one does not need to be born in order to understand the scope and meaning.
And the director captures these meanings clearly. Yes, some fabulous characters are present, but this is caused by a dense concentration of images far from fantastic: a philosophizing zabuldyg, a crazy woman, a bandit with his colorful retinue and a lost child of the war, which we are told by the final 5'NIZZA. And after all, you do not need to go to distant worlds for formulations - 100 kilometers from Moscow (you know such a city?) and voila, here you and Klizi and Pakhany and Mityai are your own. The only difference is that they are all real.
And Apasyan, in all this fever, where, as in life, pain is mixed with hysterical laughter, managed to approach the original being as much as possible. Even the early departed Andrew Novikov, as the heroine Guzeyeva said, “who did not live to Christ age”, who played the best role in his life, becomes a kind of symbolic sign. But that’s probably a coincidence.
The main value of “Graffiti” now is that this picture has become the “golden mean” of domestic cinema. Not the agonic pain of Balabanov, not the naive joke of Gaidai (with all due respect to the above), but a monument of culture. It is a pity that such "shots" happen once in decades and such actors of the "old school" as "Viktor Passes" leave.
In the rest, the competent soundtrack and landscapes of the Russian “mukhosrani” do their own thing. I can’t say why, but it’s pretty damn good.
Instead of spending a beautiful romantic adventure in Venice, fate sends young artist Andrei to the countryside.
It would seem that what could be better than writing sunsets and sunrises in the homeland of Tintoretto and Bellini, accompanied by a beloved girl and joint dreams of a happy future?
Passing practice in the village is a kind of reference for Andrei, but this link will be the biggest and most important lesson in his young life.
Is the illusory freedom and the Venetian landscapes so valuable, how did the real freedom of the Russian hinterland turn out to be valuable?! Without realizing it, Andrey moves to the realization of this freedom with great speed, but in small steps.
In a short time, Andrew goes through a real school of life. He learns what love and devotion, friendship and betrayal, freedom and creativity are.
Igor Apasyan made a soulful, grotesque film in the spirit of Kusturica. His characters are ugly in appearance, they do not commit logical and confused actions, but they are all driven by feelings, they all want love and be loved.
A special charm to the film gives the hero of Victor Perevalov – Klizya. He becomes a friend and mentor for Andrei, and his catchphrases are born deep in the long-suffering Russian soul and achieve their goal.
This movie is just like Cliche hits the very spot with his openness. Apasyan showed how nervous the naked feelings that play the main role in this picture. The actors masterfully hid behind these images and let the soul fly to the foreground.
Graffiti is another worthy representative of Russian cinema, for which there is no shame. This is a movie that you need to watch and feel, but if for some reason you missed it, then you must pay tribute to the worthy representatives of our cinema.
For director Igor Apasyan and performers of the main roles Andrei Novikov and Viktor Perevalov, Graffiti became one of the last feature films. Not everyone leaves behind such bright brushstrokes.
We will remember you and your creation. Thank you for this movie!In Graffiti you will stay with us forever.
On the eve of the Victory holiday, I decided to write a review of this film. Not ' about the war' with lump and glossy-licked Instagram actors who have flooded Russian cinema in the last decade. This film was in some ways a shock for me, because from all hypostases, on the one hand, you can see the truth of life in Russia and in the hinterland in particular; on the other hand, I am firmly convinced that this is the last sincere and truly patriotic film in memory of the fallen in the Great Patriotic War. The main problem of modern patriotic cinema is its actual absence. A set of false and thumb-sucking scripts, glamorous actors, absolutely empty and emotionless scenarios. Everything is like that proverb - holler & #39; honey & #39; on every corner, and it does not get sweeter. And in this aspect 'Graffiti' wins by all indicators. Do not expect this film to be a literal aesthetic pleasure, moreover, some characters can cause you squeamishness or disgust, especially among urban residents who do not know how to live in the wilderness or in the outback.
Therefore, I would like to thank Igor Apasyan for his outstanding selection of actors and verified characters. That no person is a lump, that no character is a whole layer of Russian culture. We should stay a little longer.
Characters and actors. Artist. The urban youth of the early 00s in the face of an unscrupulous artist with a wind in his head and an easy attitude to life was aptly and accurately played by Novikov. And it turned out very lively and unplayable, as we usually do in films about young people. A simple student without a penny, a talented artist who does not want to succumb to the mainstream, skate, spray paint, rides at night, fights with competitors, a girl from another social class ... Everything is like Mayakovsky - weighty, rude, visible. In this role, I recognized myself – of course, I am a different person in character, but the spirit of the youth of 2000-07 is conveyed truthfully.
Ecclesiastes. He's Cliche. One hundred percent and the only in the history of Russian cinema hit the category of people in Russia, living in a barrel like Socrates. In his image, you can see the fool from Surikov’s not unworthy picture. And I would not be surprised that many viewers turned away with a squeamish & #39;fi' from the screen while watching, they say, some marginal show. But not always these people are scum or scum. Often they like such a free life, or they are deeply unhappy and could not settle in it. This is a paradox, because it often happens at the same time. Oh yes, the most important detail - this way of life live beyond the Moscow Ring Road in villages, in monotowns, in the provinces up to half of the common people. ' Did not fit into the market' as it is now fashionable to say. Go to any village - in each you will meet such Clyze, perhaps more than one. You can wrinkle, crook, but this is also our country, our people and there are a lot of them. At the same time, amazingly, they often turn out to be much kinder and more humane than many people, as they say, from the "Decent Houses" & #39;. 'This world, though made for love, was utterly unfit for it'.
Maria. Brilliant performance, one of the last bright and unusual roles of Guzeeva, where she once again demonstrated her acting talent. The role is very complex, harActor, here we see Genevieve from ' Black obelisk' according to Remarque, and features of the cruel Chekhov Ariadne.
Brush. Finally, someone dared to tell the truth about those who fought in Afghanistan in the 90s. In modern Russian cinema for some reason established 2 patterns of their post-war life: either they are shown as successful and rich people who won their place under the sun, or as representatives of crime. Also rich. But most veterans of local conflicts and internationalist warriors received instead of gratitude complete oblivion, public contempt, health problems, communication with women and total loneliness, as well as poverty and hopelessness. That’s how most people lived after the war. Therefore, the role of Mitya is very difficult, bitter, to look at him, frankly, was unpleasant. But it is necessary to watch, to watch everyone, to remember what leads to the insanity of modern unscrupulous politicians. The face of Mityai is the true face of war, which mercilessly grinds a man and spits him out on the sidelines of life. This is neither more nor less one of the most tragic characters of modern Russian cinema.
Music. Just a couple of songs, but what! The main theme of special piety does not cause, but the music of Nagovitsyn quite unexpectedly came into the theme, put a folk song, without a touch of noble romance. And another plus in the piggy bank - it seems that chanson is not in our honor, but half of the country listens to it. It’s just one more thing.
In conclusion, one of the main advantages of the film I want to note the connection of generations - the same one that can not be beaten in our cinema. But Apasyan did. It was possible to link together the creative torments of the artist, the choice between everyday life and honesty, without losing himself. ' Never have so many people cried over my work' That says it all. Therefore, on Victory Day, I advise everyone to watch not television fictional soap, but this wonderful, folk film, a film that continues the best traditions of Soviet and Russian cinema.
Another advantage that came to mind just a minute before sending a review on moderation - this film is full & #39; superfluous & #39; people, right on Dostoevsky.
At the mention of the word “graffiti” in his head there is an image of a teenager with a spray in his hand, who draws more and more zeros in the column of expenses for the restoration of urban property. By destroying this very property with its unrealized creative potential, of course. And all around the night, city slums and police car sirens. In general, a typical underground metropolis. But this is not the case at all.
The film is as far away from these images as possible. The Russian hinterland, where fate brings the capital student of an art university - typical, as the Glavger himself says, "fly shit." And then he will have to serve his sentence, painting local landscapes instead of the planned trip to Italy. But the original plans quickly collapse.
In general, the plot of the film is built in such a way that the viewer, as it were through the eyes of the main character Andrei, observes life happening in the province and only occasionally influences it. And life is very diverse. There is a touching love story of a concussed driver of a sanitation machine and a local madman, and the tragic story of a village drunkard Klisey, and the search for oil with an unexpected finale, and much more. They say that life in the countryside is boring and monotonous!
It feels like this was the director’s idea to tell as many human stories as possible, closely intertwined in such a small patch of a huge country. And it all looks very native. There are no fewer such stories in everyone’s life, and they always arouse interest. Here are the usual stories of ordinary people.
That’s probably what the movie is about. After all, in the rest it is quite standard Russian cinema by all indicators.
Yes, the film can be scolded, because it again features the ill-fated Vodka, the main character of our, so to speak, arthouse. And again, the scene is a village, a cursed place, template, but at the same time close to reality, this is a paradox.
Tired of looking at the dirt - don't look, especially, maybe it's all your narrow-mindedness. Vodka does not cross out the Man, but the useless prude brings to clean water at times. Look, look, make an effort on yourself and forget to look down on people. A good click on the nose, I felt it extremely well.
Artist in the village. Art, that is, sublime, against village life. In its modern form. The artist is so so, at the level of the local DC, but humanly correct, which is much more important. Especially for the viewer. After all, before us is the manifestation of the very tolerance, correctly directed, which teaches not to tolerate, close your eyes, but to try to understand another person and be sure to understand for real, there is no other option, it can not even be considered, it will be a crime against humanity.
The picture is full of allegories and simply frank dialogue with the viewer. There will be no opportunity not to respond - one way or another "reach out" to any viewer.
I wish everyone a pleasant viewing!!
After watching this film, there is a lot left in the soul and thoughts. . First thought: Why haven't I seen him before? Second thought: it’s good that I saw it! Because, as correctly noted, such films as 'Graffiti', you need to watch, such films can not be watched!
And all because we, people, are close to the naked truth of reality about life, about simple human desires, about (always!) hearty kindness, about hot tears on the cheeks. It all feels like smelling foliage after rain. Like a fire crackling, like ripples on water, like a haystack. That’s what this movie is about, and that’s why it’s really fun.
The title of the film deserves special attention. What is the art of graffiti? I think it is the courage to be naked without fear of rejection.
10 out of 10
It is not the cross that we carry, but how we bend wretchedly. In order not to curl at all, God give me a little God! (Evtushenko)
The Shukshin era is gone. Or we have left ourselves from that love and faith in people who were filled with Shukshi works.
Thank you to all the filmmakers for the love for people that stirred my heart. For some reason, I think Shukshin would do something similar. In any case, the characters in the film are drawn with great, truly Shukshin love and depth.
It is said that there is a chasm between Moscow, St. Petersburg and the rest of the vast Russia. It is understandable: on the one hand, the capital's luxury, money, glamour, on the other - poverty, hopelessness of the hinterland. And yet, in the outback, it turns out, there are no normal men. If they were, they would not be alive, or they would be thrown out. That's after all, there is always a reason to disappear to a Russian peasant - not war, so drunkenness or banditry.
To our great joy, a person from another prosperous world has found a way to show that we all have not just much in common, but all of us are links in one huge chain. We must therefore stand face to face and hold hands firmly. Maybe we'll get a little closer and better.
For this optimism, for the light at the end of the tunnel - thank you and a low bow to all the authors and creators of the film.
10 out of 10
After reading the description of the film called Graffiti, I tuned in to viewing a picture of street art and the adventures of a street artist. The beginning of the film in this regard was promising. A graffer named Dolphin gets into trouble with a gang of boys who are not happy with the presence of his work on their territory. Finding out the relationship about who is in charge in the area turns into a spectacular chase with parkour elements. But this is where the dynamism and entertainment in the film ends, giving way to a tragicomic story, because the picture, contrary to my expectations, was not at all entertaining. Sometimes you deliberately avoid movies like this, but they still find you. But some of them, such as “Graffiti”, belong to the category must see.
So, the main character of the film, aka Dolphin, aka Soryak, aka Andrei Dragunov – a student of the Moscow Art School, in the opinion of others, is being fooled and there is no use for him. Andrei is not particularly worried about this, but the school needs to finish, like a graduate course, and he goes to the province in search of nature and inspiration for his thesis. And our Andrey brought to God the forgotten village of Intermediate, on the inhabitants of which you cannot look without tears: one alcoholic and crazy. In Andrey’s place, others would have long since reeled. But our hero stays. From the chairman of the village council he receives an order for the design of the house of culture. Working on the creation of a huge wall composition, at first solely for money, the graffier gradually gets acquainted with the residents of the village, with their problems and pain. After spending only a few days in this village, Andrei changes himself and with the help of colors changes the lives of its inhabitants.
A film about losses, about bodies mutilated by wars and maimed souls, about wounds that do not heal, but need healing, about the fact that no war passes without a trace.
The film has obscene vocabulary, vodka pours a river, but despite this, the picture is not without optimism, calls not to forget the past, but to live in the present, think about the future and most importantly love. In one scene, the heroine of Larisa Guzeeva says: “The war is not my rival!” Yes, with love, kindness and understanding, you can conquer everything. As pathetic as that sounds.
P.S. The film “Graffiti” became a swan song directed by Igor Apasyan, actors Andrei Novikov and Viktor Perevalov, the performers of the main roles. The film-requiem on the plot, became a requiem in real life for these truly talented people.
P.S. 2. One of the soundtracks for “Graffiti” was the song of the group “Friday” “Soldier”, which so organically fit into the film that you perceive it quite differently. The emotional effect of listening to this song while watching the movie is really strong.
' Graffiti' mass cinema is not exactly that is an unambiguous plus. Another plus - it really sharp and expressively reveals all the stated problems. I can’t say that he makes you think so much – all these topics have been raised and discussed for a long time.
But! There are, of course, a number of warnings. I don’t call them negatives, but be prepared. First, don’t look 'Graffiti' if you want to get in a good mood. That won't happen, alas. Even if we do not talk about specific tragedies, the life of each of the characters is a tragedy in its own way.
Second, don’t look if you’re romantic or happy. Or you are generally such a person in life, and the Russian village for you is wooden huts and a woman in a kokoshnik and with a knave. The truth of life that is shown in the film can kill you. Personally, I (sobbing even over cartoons) the characters did not cause sympathy, because everything that happened caused me rejection. At the beginning of the film, my mind refused to believe that anything could be so terrible with someone. Each of the plot lines individually seems ridiculous and sometimes funny, but all together adds up to a creepy picture - a kind of rural branch of hell. Therefore, the fate of the heroes was considered by me as an interesting fiction. If you are not prepared for a brutal reality, it is better to refrain.
And thirdly, if you read, or someone from friends promised a masterpiece, do not be deceived. The film is above average, but it is far from a masterpiece.
7 out of 10
Never before have so many people cried over my work. . .
The film is not about the artist Andrei, not about a specific person and not on real events, but about a typical artist, as I will continue to call him.
The film itself consists of many scenes, but I will reveal only part of the work, because it is close to me. I understand the artist and his feelings as an aspiring artist. Probably many of us have heard words about our own incompetence, but we will not attach much importance to the opinion of one person if there is an opinion of the majority.
A graffiti artist can hook so many people with one (!) job! It just clings to tears. He was so attached to his work that he couldn’t leave without drawing everyone, everyone. The scene where he puts on the gifted sweater, also to tears, mine and his - he was given the most expensive, so people appreciate his work.
A huge disadvantage is the propaganda of smoking and alcoholism, this is how bad habits are imprinted in our subconscious - through the cinema. I would also like more scenes with the artist, and less strange scenes like Guzeeva on the car.
9 out of 10
And the critical mass of g**n, Zin, is fraught with an explosion on the theory of determinism.
7 out of 10 Andrey is a student of art school, more busy, however, drawing graffiti at night than doing his daytime classes. The result is that when the whole course goes to practice in Italy, he is invited to go to Muhosran to write views. Here Andrey goes there - more precisely in ' village Intermediate, final stop'. The village is exactly what you imagine - with rickety houses, the only living farm - ostrich, and a population consisting almost entirely of alcoholics and lunatics. On the first day, Andreya is noticed by the local chairman (or rather by Pahan) and takes him to a club built under advanced socialism and has since been reliably forgotten. The chairman wants to have a panel with portraits of respected people of the village in the club. the proposal was made in an ultimatum form, but after the work is completed, money is promised, and Andrei is taken. In a couple of days, the panel against the backdrop of an idyllic landscape and with slightly idealized best people is ready to take off. Only one of the models, realizing that they draw ' for memory ', demanded that her father, who died in 1942, be in the picture, or she does not agree, and, seeing a photo card in her hands on the panel, other villagers demanded to perpetuate their loved ones. And it turns out that so many people died in different wars that Andrei could not meet the deadlines for practice or be placed on the wall. . .
At first, the film reminds of Soviet non-Gaidaev comedies, those that are not quite comedies, and indeed, there is something Shukshin in it. But most of all 'Graffiti' perhaps, it looks like a film adaptation of some unwritten novel by Dovlatov. Here everything is exactly like his - funnyness and depression come from the same source, from a simultaneously absurd and painfully authentic picture of life, where everyone, in general, is degenerate, inferior, crazy from hopelessness and permanent alcoholism, charmingly eccentric and somewhat creepy. Whether it’s Ecclesiastes – a philosophizing alcoholic without a certain occupation, a concussed half-diot sanitizer Mityai, or even an anonymous person at the bus stop – they all have a cherished dream, an obsession that only allows you to survive in this village. However, it seems that Dovlatov would not have any good ending, and Apasyan still allowed these dreams to come true.
The movie is very beautiful. It’s not just the views that are actually marvelously good (and why do we rarely see these fields in movies?). The key scenes of the film are perfectly built, they have a rhythm that sets meanings, and therefore they came out shrill and bright. And the actors play great, great. Sergey Potapov created a stunningly touching and strong image, Viktor Perevalov has a surprisingly negrotesque character, who did not lose from this in fun.
On the one hand, the meaning of the film seems a little too poster (almost literally). We need movies with that meaning. Especially normal ones. I usually don’t like such a deliberate ideologicality (and also imposed sentimentality), but in 'Graffiti' it’s practically not annoying. I recommend it.
Friends, no matter what you say good about the film, the author simply overshadows the picture with booze, cattle and irresponsibility.
Probably the worst Russian film and I am amazed at so many positive reviews. Undoubtedly, the picture makes sense: the guy painted the main thing in his life graffiti. And that, my friends, is the only thing you can put 1 point for. Undoubtedly, the topic is very deep: the mother-homeland buried so many sons, but forgot to remember. And the rest is nothing to bet on. In the most literal sense: not for what. No movie. And to be honest, friends, I'm a little tired of our eternal war theme. It seems that the picture can not be good not to touch on this topic.
The rest of the film annoyed me. All absolutely characters are cattle, where there was no vodka, there is nothing to do, everyone is drunk, food is washed down with a glass of vodka and the dean even with a student in a mug (in general killed). The province was so horribly shown, eternally dirty indoors and transport. And, to be honest, this is far from the truth: to eat, you need to work on the house. The village is a village, but why show this dirt? A student admires an alcoholic, a person who has been drinking and rolling cotton can be very wise. The main character is completely irresponsible: there is no pocket money, you have to borrow from your girlfriend, which is normal for him, and then also changes her, which is also normal), and as a result, due to his attitude to study, he is sent to Tmutarakan, depriving him of the opportunity to go to the World Art Center. This is the Russian moral.
For those who have not seen it, look better 'Exit through the souvenir shop', 2010. This is really worth the attention. A film about real graffiti and contemporary art.
After watching the movies do not want to talk too much, so concise.
Victor Passes. I explain to especially young viewers - Viktor Perevalov for our generation is about the same as for you Justin Bieber, a star of Soviet cinema, especially remembered for the touching high school student Kola in ' I loved you ...'. After many, perhaps not the happiest years of his life, he became by no means a fallen angel, but simply a slightly aged and worn-out seraphim. He played his best role before leaving.
Andrey Novikov He could play the aesthete artist Gioconda in the blockbuster Bondarchuk’s company '9', promising wide fame and attraction to new trendy film projects, but refused in favor of the role of an icon painter, which also became the best for him. The cherub did not have time to suffer, leaving two years after a friend of Ecclesiastes.
Sometimes there is an underlying thought - maybe it is Russian and not at all worth resisting this saturated world of the victorious Darwinism-capitalism with its currency quotations, oil wars and hypertrophied debauchery, let the shit that feeds us & #39, bite each other for assets or die on the Eleusinian mysteries from orgasm, and we, without opposition, leaving the City of Earth, with a calm conscience to appear before the Last Court? Nope. If we are not here, then who is to praise Him? We have to endure until the end.
Pros. In general terms, the picture looks like this: lunatics, alcoholics and criminals are the backbone of the domineering, intellectual and spiritual component of a Russian village. A young artist comes to visit this village and becomes an additional bond between all these people. The whole plot revolves around the artist’s execution of a special order from the local administration; the order has a certain social orientation, and at the end of the film acquires a powerful spiritual content. I cried, really stuck, as the main character put it.
The tragedy that happened to one of the heroes of the film is also very touching. Credit.
Also of the advantages should be noted well played love story, crazy, but still touching. But, unfortunately, even here poorly worked, because the former so nasty "fly shit", the boy after an expensive gift suddenly became cute and loved. Forgive me for being a fool.
Cons. The characters of the film are selected such that their lives are too connected with the use of alcohol. The main character drinks because of the link to the profession, they say, he is an artist, and, according to the author of the script, artists must regularly take on the chest. The second role is simply a local alcoholic-intellectual. The whole picture revolves around a bottle and a glass. I didn't like it. Subconsciously created a stereotype that every day to drink about and without – this is a normal feature of the Russian people, and in particular, the Russian hinterland. But not every Russian artist by profession, and certainly not every Russian alcoholic. Despite this, the alcoholic thread of the narrative for some reason does not spoil it and is quite organically woven into the plot.
A significant part of the characters of the picture are former inmates on criminal charges. It kind of reflects the realities of life – yes, many are sitting, yes, many were sitting. But should the head of the local administration put a figure not only with a criminal past, but also with too criminal appearance? This is how it is done, and as they say, “you can’t put it back in.”
For some reason, too many crazy characters were inserted into the film. Alcoholic Klizya - in life, they are fooled by their abstruse-philosophical wisdom, are proud of drunken antics and clearly damaged the brain with alcohol. The driver of the turd is a contoured kid, kind, but too stupid. Mary is a frankly crazy woman and a whore. A local scientist went looking for oil. The madman at the bus stop is generally a dark horse, but for some reason he was regularly given quite a lot of airtime in the plot. Thus, the vast majority of the characters of the picture are outright idiots. What the author of the film wanted to say remained a mystery to me.
Probably, going on about their own lusts, the creators of the picture even in this frankly rustic everyday life and then managed to recruit a platoon of professional prostitutes, from which the main character chose a partner for “sparring”. How short-sighted you need to be to come up with and shoot such an episode, and even in a romantic way! It will not be superfluous to mention that the main character has a girl who, according to the rules of good manners, he should not cheat. But he does, which implies that the main character is just as scum as the author of the script. I think that this picture is very spoiled. It also stirred from a completely unnecessary sexual scene with the heroine Guzeeva. When will they begin to simply denote the essence, instead of demonstrating any obscenity? . .
In addition to regularly skipping “duties”, the characters of the film regularly swear, use the words of prison slang. We can only state once again that Russian cinema is now made not by artists, but by plumbers from cinema – plumbing. No wonder, therefore, in the sick consciousness of the film’s authors, a scene was born with the flooding of shit in a residential building.
In general, the picture creates a heavy impression of the so-called Russian outback, where everyone is represented either by a moron, an alcoholic, a criminal, or a whore. Normal ordinary people are assigned only the role of faceless extras, mourning relatives who have not returned from the war, so they seem to exist, they are like disembodied bearers of the memory of those who once lived in these places. In short, the Russian village in this film is polished in the most inept way, for which the author of the script should simply be drowned in the same barrel of shit.
Conclusion. Despite many disadvantages, the film leaves a good impression and positive emotions, but this is only due to the mental complicity of the viewer in the paintings of the shown human grief. After all, the common grief unites, and in such an intricately pathetic way the viewer unwittingly unites in sympathy with human tragedies with the scoundrel who so famously defecated on the Russian village.
Kids don't.
Residents of Moscow have no idea what is happening outside their hometown. Anyone who has ever seen a live Muscovite knows this. The film ' Graffiti' seems to be shot by such a Muscovite from the cinema named Igor Apasyan. He sits in his capital and sincerely believes that if he leaves it even one small step, even a few centimeters away from its administrative boundary, how immediately he will be devoured by wolves, or, even worse, by savage provincial cannibals.
Otherwise, if Apasyan is a screenwriter and director, a man and a steamer, does not suffer from provincial phobia (I seem to have invented a new word, but it most accurately reflects the state of his soul), how then to explain how miraculously he gave rise to such a miracle as ' Graffiti'? Judge for yourself: the only more or less adequate character, Andrei, a Moscow student breaks out of Moscow into the countryside, which is called by the tender word Mukhosran (as they call everything that cultural people call the Russian hinterland), where he meets with a motley crowd of Aborigines, who all look like Moscow homeless people (apparently in the garbage of homeless people Apasyan was looking for inspiration), and behave accordingly.
Cleezia, he's Ecclesiastes. He sincerely believes that he is the reincarnation of the same Ecclesiastes, more than anything in the world likes to drink and dreams of releasing ostriches from the local farm. Colorful type.
Mityai, a young guy, works as a sanitizer (this word is never used, the author prefers to use another, more offensive). Always dirty, as if he lives in his own barrel (By the way, in those days when gaskets like the one he drives were still produced, his colleagues worked in white shirts and ties, and their work was considered prestigious, because at the expense of additional payments for harmfulness had a high salary). In love with a local whore. She wants to buy her an expensive necklace, with which to achieve her location. He passed the war, for which he was awarded the Order of Courage, has a concussion, due to which he suffers from dementia and sexual dysfunction. I thought all the way, who gave him a driver's license? I will make a reservation, I throw a stone not in the garden of veterans I respect, but only at this film character.
Maria, that local whore. Dresses like a scarecrow, acts like a scarecrow, and is generally a scarecrow. For an expensive necklace, I am ready to love anyone, even those about whom I wiped my feet five seconds before. For some reason he lives in a trailer on wheels, like a hut on chicken legs, or what?
Makar Sysoyevich, head of the village council. A hardened criminal who for some reason did not prevent him from taking public office. Dumb as a cork, on the face - a bull.
In the background is a brainless geologist who somehow looks for oil where it can not be.
These are just the brightest characters. There's another moron at the stop, another moron keeps vodka in the substation. Where are some relatively normal people here? Yes, there are no such things in Moscow, and there are no others outside.
And it's also a stupid word 'nishtyaki'. Apparently, the author heard it in the same dumpster where he was inspired, and thinking that it is fashionable to say so, decided to use it as much as possible.
Nevertheless, the movie turned out to be some kind and positive that the hand does not even rise to lower it below the plinth, so
4 out of 10
Despite a very specific plot and an obvious idea - it is still difficult to say what this movie is about, as well as more or less to decide on the genre.
Is that tragicomedy? Yeah. Is it drama? Yeah, too. Is that a farce? And yes, it is enough to look at individual scenes. Surrealism and absurdity are so easily and organically incorporated into the fabric of the film that they look quite natural. So does the combination of psychological drama with comedic absurdity – but thanks to this enchanting synthesis, one perfectly complements the other. And it is from this exaggerated, flowing into the grotesque combination that the effect of recognition is created: roughly speaking, life itself is such. Depression and comedy come from the same source, accompanying each other under the handle.
What is this movie about? The fate of Russia? Yeah, that's probably the main idea. Reduced to posterity, but not down to vulgarity, and in fact in such topics it is very difficult not to do. Especially when there's a scene in the film that's directly related to watering... let's call it ' organic waste' As for the fate of Russia - well, the plot, in fact, is built that the guy by the will of fate comes to the village of Intermediate and there, through his painting, gets acquainted with the inhabitants of this eccentric, incredible place. . .
Maybe it's about art. Yeah. Art here plays no less a role than the social message: in fact, Andriukha’s painting cannot be called masterpiece – that is, the guy, of course, draws well, but just as much as it asks DC in Muhosran. However, despite the imperfection of the resulting work, it was too strong, too beautiful for the residents of this town. Actually, the quote at the top is the words of the residents of Andryukha, who, well, could not expect ... such a thing. Think of what art really does: search, innovation, aesthetic and technical perfection, or coincidence with the demand of the masses. . .
Or is it about love? Yeah, too. And love does not mean only sexual relations, although, of course, the story of Mitya and Mary is absolutely beautiful. It is rather about love in general: to work (and Andrew could stay with any of his girls!), to his neighbor (even if they are ostriches). Homeland, after all. There is so much love here that you can drown - even if one of the heroes choked with his own blood because of the cruelty of fellow villagers.
Maybe a movie about loneliness? Unfulfilled hopes? The thirst for discovery? Waiting for a miracle? Desperation?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. A thousand times yes.
It's a very textured film, and maybe unpleasant because of its texture. He is very sad - to depression and despair. Bright - to homeric laughter over some dialogues. . .
It's just a very good movie. And even though it has some posterity, such films are really needed.