There was no sex in the USSR. What about modern Russia?
If in the USSR there was no sex, then in “Loyalty” it is in abundance. The latest creation of Nigina Saifullayeva has earned the title of one of the most frank and even scandalous in the history of the newest Russian cinema. Let's try to figure out why. So, what is the basis of the conflict in the film?
1) People don’t know how to talk to each other.
2) People have different temperaments.
It happens and it is not criminal.
(3) Sometimes you need to thoroughly check your life partner to dispel or confirm suspicions.
It is not criminal, but rather humiliating and unpleasant.
Of the minuses. There was an impression that the characters of the film behave in a manner somewhat unsuitable for their age. Tea isn't 18 or 20 years old. Also, this behavior is very strange for the heroine, who works as a popular obstetrician-gynecologist in a prestigious clinic. Not just behavior, but lifestyle in general. Such women do not choose to marry actors of provincial theaters.
So on the output we get a mixture of genres, which, in general, only adds to the intrigue. Erotic drama with elements of thriller and fiction. The obstetrician-gynecologist is so tired of the physiological aspect of her work that she dreams of romance. Without receiving a corresponding response from her emotionally tired husband, who is burning at work (who has even enough drama due to the costs of her profession), the heroine plunges into the abyss of debauchery, finding the embodiment of her boldest fantasies in casual acquaintances.
Their pros. The director and screenwriter of the film are women. And they presented the story emotionally, very femininely. Instead of calmly sorting out the problem, GG rushes to break firewood, outlines his head. When you are rejected, there is resentment and revenge. In addition, from the point of view of psychology, promiscuity is the desire to assert yourself and increase your self-esteem, when it is very important for a woman to prove to herself: I am still desirable, attractive and sexy. GG Lena drives herself into a trap: at first she is attracted only by revenge, but then she gets so into the taste that she can no longer stop. Not everything in the film is said directly and not everything goes right under the nose of the viewer. A hint of something is enough. Personally, I had the impression that not all episodes of betrayal were presented in detail.
Investigating the problems of a relatively young family, the filmmakers conclude that the key problem is a lack of trust. And here, I think, I can relate myself to GG. Distrust is like torture. It eats like a worm. We often tend to invent, exaggerate and catastrophize. And if the grain of doubt falls on fertile soil, and there was a precedent, then write is lost.
"Treason" causes persistent déjà vu. Screenwriter Lyubov Mulmenko previously wrote the script for a similar film “Another Year” – about the suffering of another young couple who could not understand whether they need each other or not. And actresses Marina Vasilyeva and Anna Kotova have already starred in Nigina Sayfullayeva in her debut “What’s My Name”.
We see Alexander Pal in a rather unusual role for him. His participation in "Loyalty" certainly enhances the movie's viewability. However, Pal manages to shine his comedic talent in the drama. Notice his intonation when he plays Seryozha, the husband of Lena's gynecology. Sheel in the bag can not hide, and indomitable or desire, then the habit of laughing break through on the cinematic landscape, where they seem to have no place.
If Pal is a fairly famous actor, then I saw actress Evgenia Gromov before “Loyalty” in only one film project – “Psych” by Fyodor Bondarchuk. Whether Eugene was so unprofitable light fell in “Psych”, or the role was so limited to her, but in “Loyalty” it opened for me from a much more attractive side. And with dark hair, by the way, it goes a lot more. The color of the face only benefits from this.
“Loyalty” on the editing lost thirty percent, mainly due to scenes clarifying the relationship of the main characters before the collapse. They didn't move the plot, they just gave the opportunity to get to know the couple better. They decided to abandon them to make the film more rapid, dynamic. Some scenes really slowed down the action, some I miss, says Mulmenko. Perhaps they decided to abandon these scenes in vain, because misunderstanding between the main characters causes a chain reaction of misunderstanding among the audience. “Why, why the hell can’t they just talk or at worst go to a psychologist?” – I wanted to shout throughout almost the entire film.
Bottom line: Talk to each other. This will help to avoid many irreparable consequences that cause each other emotional pain. It will also lead to the realization of what and who needs in this life. Personally, in my understanding, not sex alone is alive. Sexual attraction simply by definition cannot be at its peak all the time. And after its intensity decreases, warm and tender relations will be relevant, for there will be no strength, no life, no hormones to constantly practice African passions. But, I emphasize, this is my personal opinion. Someone thinks and feels differently and goes in search of adventure.
7 out of 10
What can you expect from an erotic drama? In my opinion, a more or less smooth narrative that does not cause cognitive dissonance is more than ok and here it is all right. A simple and clear story, wrapped in a pleasant visual style, clearly did not imply any hidden depths.
Simple and understandable characters and their motivations, existing in the realities of gray morality, are quite the place to be.
Yes, if you include criticism, there's a lot to complain about, but why? Did anyone really expect any breakthroughs from erotic drama?
Is that not realistic? Are you sure? Congratulations, life takes great care of your psyche.
Is that immoral? Seriously?! Are you ready to take the seat of the judge?
There's no clear idea and a dead end? This is what gray morality looks like. Without meaning, tasks and conclusions ...
In summary, the picture is quite the place to be, just do not expect something that the nature of the genre does not imply.
7 out of 10
There are many bright pictures with a similar plot, and this is a win-win option: the theme of treason does not need to be explained to the viewer in detail, there is no need to explain the motivations of the characters. After all, people who are at the critical point of jealousy can do anything and say anything.
In general, it became interesting whether our film business can screw up even with a story as simple as Loyalty.
The feeling of bias in the fact that the next platform without any claim to art, will earn viewing metrics only on the star composition (Pal, Kotova, Agranovich) and the nakedness of Zhenya Gromova, did not leave the first minutes of the film.
And then the artist suddenly became bold, and surprised.
Justified their presence in the film and Pal, and all erotic scenes.
The thing is, when you see it, you don't have any vulgar thoughts or excitement. You're thinking.
To achieve this effect is the real merit of the director. Bravo!
Amazing shooting (so much so that you can write a separate storyboard review), cool color and sound, and locations, and music.
The case, when apparently the budget of the film was correctly distributed - it was enough to the final, not to descend to the "tough end" and "not to go through" with jokes.
The film “Loyalty” now personally for me stands on the shelf with my favorite films about infidelity and relationships, such as “Chloe”, “Voyearists” and others.
9 out of 10
Nigina Sayfullayeva’s “loyalty” is perhaps the most important thing that has happened to Russian cinema over the past five years. Even at the level of the stated topic, we can safely talk about the breakthrough of some old dogmas and the search for dialogue.
Nigina Sayfullayeva is the bright face of the wave of Russian women’s cinema, which sometimes explores the taboo aspects of our society without hesitation. Of course, now the degree of frankness of Russian TV series has stepped far forward, but it is the feature film that still tramples on the well-known paths.
Loyalty is a sad movie about the human muteness in a relationship, the loneliness of the two, supported by the ghosts of former feelings, the inability to look and accept yourself, shame for their desires. Taking into account that we (okay, the generation over 30) massively do not pronounce their feelings to a partner, and almost need to be ashamed of their sincere desires, locked emotions can detonate into a big bang. It is such an explosion that is happening in the relationship between Lena and Seryozha, and aftershocks will stir young people for a long time, leaving them morally crippled.
Sayfullayeva in an interview does not hide the importance of psychotherapy, including family therapy, stressing that many problems can be solved in the bud. But given our dislike of clinics (the structure, not individual doctors) and the mentality of strong people who despise others for weakness (this is how we perceive the request for help), the faults will only intensify. And the fact that today at least began to talk about it, I hope in the future will help open hundreds of doors that will no longer be afraid to go.
And despite the fact that “Loyalty” is a distinctly female movie, it is not merciless to a man, which is what women’s freedom fighters love to sin. It is recognizing the same guilt in family cataclysms (and we are not talking about frankly marginal cases), it is possible to establish this dialogue. For this, Saifullaeva can safely forgive all the artistic shortcomings of the picture.
If I could give this movie more than 5, I would put 10.
Other critics mean it as a revolution.
I'll say otherwise.
This film reliably shows the relationship of couples who in Soviet times had sex in pajamas, in the dark and with their eyes closed.
I will not analyze the motivation of the characters, give an assessment of their actions, etc.
Sapienti sat, there is no point in crucifying before the unthinking.
I will only say that the heroine - Lena - deserves universal sympathy.
I'll also note.
Erotic scenes in this brilliant film are for an end in itself, and an integral element of the plot.
Let the chaste be angry, but life is as it is.
And in the movie, it's real.
Underline.
Erotic episodes of the film are made very restrained.
But, nevertheless, in the heat of passion, they surpass real amateur scenes, familiar on porn resources of civilized countries.
Played beautifully.
"Loyalty" is filmed on a thin line between eroticism and softporn. It's shocking. This is striking. It's under discussion. They talk about the degree of frankness, authenticity and credibility. Meanwhile, Saifullayeva acted like a real magician: putting a shocking frankness in the spotlight, hid a rabbit in a hat behind her. Loyalty isn't about that at all. Not really. The theme of sexual intimacy in its various forms in the film is present. Moreover, the director and her co-writer on the script Lyubov Mulmenko, perhaps, for the first time brought her new overtone to the screen. The attitude of Russian society to the topic of sexuality over the past few decades has changed so rapidly and unpredictably that it looks on the surface dizzying kulbits of a first-class gymnast. From the sincere in its immediacy phrase “There is no sex in the USSR” to the unbridled freedom of sexual relations, only a few years have passed. Strict taboos and suppressed desires, frustrations and complexes were replaced by freedom without a cross. And she, in turn, getting rid of some frustrations and complexes, produced new ones. Puritan mores were replaced by “shoulder” prostitutes as heroines in Russian cinema. The song became clearer, but it didn’t get better. Modern sociology notes that very young Russians, those who are now 16-20 years old, are increasingly choosing asexuality as their lifestyle. Indeed, why bother with problems that are happily resolved extremely rarely, but carry so much headache? There are other joys of life. They are chosen by the new generation.
Formally, the heroes of Loyalty are much older than the new young asexuals. And that's the point. Spouses Sergey and Lena with the creation of a family fit neatly in that time period, when the slogan “Freud’s case lives and wins” was still relevant, but slightly annoying. The first person to eat them was their husband. He's an actor. He has a theater. In the theater - not only creative joy. There's intrigue, complexity. There you need to create an image of the hero, cooperate or conflict with the director, support friends. And at home - restrained to cold spouse: polite, calm bore. Who knew that jealousy and suspicion were raging in the heart of this Snow Queen? Who would have imagined that as a compensatory function, Lena would choose the path to “everything serious.” Compensated for indifference spouse fleeting, short sex meetings with strangers. Here, of course, allusions of the sea spilled. From “The Last Tango in Paris” with its theme of semi-anonymous sex without names, no biographies, no details to “Slicing the Waves”, where the main character Bess made sexual sacrifices for the health and life of her husband. For the life and health of Sergei, Lena has nothing to fear. But to return passion and interest in the marital bed is quite possible - the adventures of the wife in other people's bachelor apartments, hostels and desert embankments can be considered from this angle. And here, the creators present all possible types of sexuality and arguments to justify adultery. From vulgar physiology to alcoholic gloom. And the reactions are very different: from cold indifference at the most pathetic moment to a complete loss of pulse from passion. All these very different in temperature sexual scenes have only one thing in common: they are filmed without a breath of mystery, without a sensual flair, without pink saliva - a difficult, painful, but necessary physiological process. With about the same facial expression, these people probably poop - each in different ways, without much desire, but you need to still.
And one important point: Lena is a doctor. Not just a doctor. Obstetrician-gynecologist in some fancy maternity hospital type high-class example of public-private partnership. By virtue of her profession, she is devoid of any romantic filters on how and why children are born. And here in this detail lies the key to the main, in my opinion, the theme of the film, which for some reason few people noticed.
Lena doesn't just know how babies are born. She also knows that everyone is born alone. My mother is present in this process. Even Dad sometimes. The doctors are here. Here Lena confidently and professionally makes intrauterine turn of the fetus on the leg - so it will be easier for doctors and less painful for the mother. No one asks for the fruit. When planning pregnancy and childbirth, doctors and future parents treat the future person, at best, as a pet. The future desires, interests, inclinations of the new person are not taken into account by anyone. This situation is typical and understandable: it is impossible to consult an unborn creature on the topic: and it will be convenient for him if he is turned on a leg. But this is just the beginning. Lena's dialogues with her husband and lovers are permeated with the same moods. Both those who bring the scientific physiological base under adultery, and those who flit through life with the motto “Today Lena, tomorrow Jeanne, the day after tomorrow who will have to” in all their messages to the desire for sexual intimacy, the second participant of this act is considered exclusively as an object of desire and only. There are only your own desires and your own vision of life. Nothing else counts.
Conscious loneliness is the main life philosophy of our time. Moving away from real people into the world of digital messages, communities and feelings is what I thought Nigina Saifullayeva made her film about. And eroticism on the verge of light porn, it needs only a catalyst for the problem. With extreme physical intimacy, people are universally distant from each other mentally and emotionally. Emotions are now in text messages, love online, and passion in online games. Real life has pure physiology. In fact, Saifullayev and Mulmenko repeated the trick of Abdulatif Keshish, who enveloped everyone with his “Life of Adele”. Everyone rushed to discuss the problems of same-sex love in the French Zahlupank, and the movie was not about that at all. Lesbodrama Kesheesh was needed to sharpen his favorite theme of impenetrable barriers in today’s “free” society. Even mutual semi-forbidden passion, which overcame rigidity and bigotry, could not break the social barrier. Those who eat pasta with beer for dinner will never be related to those who at the same time eat oysters, washed down with white noble wine. But almost nobody talked about it. Everyone talked about tolerance and the possibility of same-sex marriage. With "Loyalty," it turned out exactly the same. A movie about total alienation and withdrawal into individual shells is interpreted by most as a film about sex and jealousy. No wonder. Now 300 different viewers are watching 300 different movies in the same room. And in this sense, everyone sees, interprets and evaluates what he sees individually. And in this context, any interpretation of Loyalty works on the basic idea that everyone now lives and dies alone. What was required to prove
I'm not a reviewer, but I will write. My husband and I watched this movie 2 days apart. He found this movie when we were in a similar relationship. Even down to the phrases, everything was repeated. My husband said he saw me, he saw me. I looked at myself, too.
The heroine who lives in marriage (there are no children, but maybe they were not shown to us) and loves her husband. There is a husband who loves his wife, but does not show it. On the contrary, when I looked at him, I also thought that he was cheating (just like in my real life). Revenge is a "retaliatory" betrayal. My husband told me that she had gone further. But I think she wanted a banal love. Feel how couples feel at the beginning of a relationship. After all, the heroine’s husband did not have sex with his wife, but he found time to walk with a colleague after work. My wife doesn't say hello, not yet. Dry kisses. Lack of sex. What else could a spouse think about, but treason. . .
After watching this film, honestly, I have been crying for a day, drawing a parallel between the characters and my life with my husband.
The previous authors of the reviews said correctly, they do not see their previous events, because of which everything happened. It was a common domestic dispute.
I really liked the movie. I think it will please those who have been in this situation. The rest will not understand.
In the end, it is not clear how their lives turned out. My husband said they had a free relationship. I thought they decided to forget what happened and move on.
Russian film directed and co-writer Nigina Sayfullayeva. Drama is a participant of the main competition program "Kinotavra-2019".
Anyone in a relationship is a must-watch movie!!
It has an excellent, accurate, vital meaning that you should never draw premature conclusions, do not wind yourself up, fantasize about your partner unimaginable nonsense. Ask directly if your suspicions suddenly drop, if you suddenly feel something wrong. It is important to learn to talk to each other, listen, hear and understand your partner, before you do stupid things that you will regret later.
Talk to her husband immediately, if she asked him directly, then all subsequent events could be avoided. But alas and ah.
In general, I do not understand why the characters are together, they are not only intimately incompatible (she has hypersexuality, and he has a low level of sexual activity), but also in principle different people.
The fact that the film is instructive and not worth saying, because it is obvious. Everyone will take something out of it for themselves, maybe look at their relationship from the outside, if the situation is identical, someone may finally decide to talk to their partner, because you need to talk to them.
And I would describe it in three words: jealousy, treason, divorce.
Jealousy does not lead to anything good - always remember this.
Enjoy your visit!
The film “Loyalty” by Nigina Saifullayeva very much liked, it is one of the few works of a similar genre was emotional and aesthetic luck. Apparently not created with any special claim, he managed to reproduce the “subjective truth” of the main character (played by Evgeny Gromov) in the muddy water of the surrounding spaces.
The main criticism of the film is based on “illogical” behavior and excessive sexual frankness.
Those who criticize “Loyalty” for the lack of logic in the actions of the main character commit the “mistake of the viewer”, whose field of view is assumed to be wider than that of the participant in the events. On the other hand, many women who denounce and ridicule Elena’s behavior in Loyalty have a frank intonation, if not cruelty, then “cruelty” and contempt (”appreciate my righteousness!”). Many try on the role of Elena on themselves and "reject with anger."
Well, as for the frank scenes, first they were necessary for the placement of emotional accents, and secondly they turned out to be quite moderate and aesthetic. Seriously, if the explicitness even approached von Trier’s Nymphomaniac, the degree of tension increased, but the film would not spoil, that’s for sure.
I can also say that the game of Evgenia Gromova pleased. She managed to get into the image very smoothly and accurately.
In general, to do something like the movie “Loyalty” is rare, but it should be more often sought.
The film is short and the events are fragmentary. We don't know anything about GG's previous life. It's just a stretch of their lives. The couple has obvious problems both in relationships with each other and in the intimate area. In my opinion, the husband is quite an adequate man, which can not be said about his wife. I thought up all sorts of shit in my head, and talking about this with my husband is not fate. And she and he say they love each other. I believe him, she doesn't. Too easily she went to the first betrayal. I think she did it because of her sexual dissatisfaction. Suspicions about her husband became only a reason to justify her treason. This betrayal was the trigger for her subsequent actions. As I said, the film is fragmentary. Events are not shown in a continuous stream, but nevertheless from a close look it becomes clear that there are many intimate partners in the life of the heroine. She feels no guilt or guilt towards her husband. No matter what she said to him, no matter what tears in her eyes shone. She lies calmly and constantly to her husband. Watch the movie and you will understand it. We should not be deceived by the reaction of our husband in the film. His laughter and bravado are purely defensive. We see that this fact is now a constant pain in his head. He only knows a small part of it. What else can you say after watching the latest footage of the film? The couple probably broke up. Lena walked very quickly down the stairs leading down. From a walking married woman having sex with different men for pleasure, to a prostitute. You have to live on something. Notice her little black dress at the end of the movie. This is her work uniform.
The main character does not cause positive emotions. But the performer of the role of Lena Evgeny Gromov is good. And a very pretty woman.
Vulgarity. The first impression is how vulgar it is. . .
As the credits rolled across the screen, I didn’t even realize the movie was over. What was that? Why is this even filmed? There are a lot of questions, the director does not give answers.
Sex scenes, which are the main character of this picture, look disgusting and awkward. This is not an adult film, not erotic, not art house, I am lost in definitions, while watching there was a feeling of watching a home video shot on professional film and not intended for public viewing. Stupid, empty dialogues, equally empty expressions of the characters. You don't empathize or believe them. None of the characters are even half revealed. The motivation of the main character is banal and boring - revenged. . .
It is a pity that the questions will remain unanswered. Perhaps the director did not have time to convey to the viewer within a rather modest timekeeping the idea and deep philosophical meaning of the filmed, but I suspect there was no meaning. In recent years, sex scenes in Russian cinema began to replace philosophical problems, the idea, the scant imagination of the director is compensated by shots with naked and not always appetizing buttocks of actors and breasts of actresses. Dear directors, this is a serious vulgarity! Nothing in the world is more exciting, more complex and more important than human relationships, why and why do you show them on the screen so meaningless, ugly and lifeless?
The problem of family sex and betrayal is as relevant as it is beaten and rubbed with thousands of paintings and TV series, in different shades and with different success, scope and talent, shown to us every year in the format of TV series and movies. At the same time, how talented this topic is revealed in 'Big and Small Lies' or 'Containers', just as wretched and soulless it looks in 'Loyalty'. I don’t understand why go so far and shoot it, if you could throw the project in the trash at the stage of reading the script...?
It's not about loyalty, it's not about cheating, it's not about relationships, it's not about love, it's just about nothing. I am sorry for the time spent watching and decided to leave the review, so that someone might read and save precious minutes.
I sympathize with the talented actors in my opinion, who simply had nothing to play there, except for a sluggish imitation of intercourse.
' Loyalty' Is Nigina Sayfullayeva an interesting Russian art experiment or a film that will go down in the history of our cinema?
The novelty of the film (actually reduced by critics to openness in considering the topic of sex) is a purely Russian novelty: let us recall the intimate self-realization of the heroine & #39; Day Beauty' In ' Loyalty' another reason, but a similar way to solve the issue of dissatisfaction - both personal and sexual (the degree of openness of intimate scenes is not considered, but in this point the West will also give us a head start).
On the other hand, acting, especially the eyes of Evgenia Gromova, is something almost from Soviet cinema. For a long time in Russian cinema there were no such expressive eyes – strong emotions were often transmitted by shouting or acting.
But the world on the screen, in which there are only those who are involved in the main action (sorry for the tautology), that is, an absolutely unpopulated world – without a background and almost without extras (compare with the world of paintings by Alexei German, for example) – stubbornly sends to our cinema of the beginning of the century (XXI). And not to say that this is a reference to the peaks and masterpieces of cinema, but rather to the times of very modest financial opportunities.
But the heroine is sorry in the end! Did the movie work?
I deliberately do not consider the story itself, because it is the way it was conceived and embodied by the writer and director. How to treat it, a personal matter, I am normal: it can be (and it happens). But the fact that the heroine evokes sympathy (Paly’s hero to a lesser extent) is certain. You believe in Lena’s drama, and this, in my opinion, is a sign of real art.
Of course, ' Loyalty' is a purely female view of the problem of the relationship between men and women (“Arrhythmia' or, for example, ' Another year' in this respect, more ' balanced'). Sergey (Alexander Pal) is not revealed almost completely. His loyalty to his wife is shown through external circumstances, and what else is going on in his head can only be guessed (unlike Lena, whose actions are dictated by a mixture of resentment and dissatisfaction and are quite understandable). This ' undisclosure' the husband of the heroine, on the one hand, does not distract from her, but, on the other hand, does not allow you to look at the situation from a different point of view. Maybe for the purity of the experiment is a plus, but for a work of art - rather a minus.
Not happy that the film is almost not shown the surrounding reality, it does not benefit its visual fullness. After all, in addition to the characters (and the acting work is really good!), I want to see the world in which they live. But there is the Baltic Sea, which sometimes becomes one of the characters of the picture.
The open ending (only for me?) and the ambiguous title (Self-loyalty at the expense of infidelity to her husband / Faithfulness as a victim of Jealousy), allowing for different interpretations, also add expressiveness to the film.
Summing up: the movie is good, albeit a little amateur.
Jealousy is the art of doing more harm to oneself than to others.
When the summary of the film on the page of this film provides key information, one can even say that the plot will spoiler: ... Lena suspects that Seryozha has an affair on the side, but she suffers in silence and does not betray her jealousy. Instead of finding out the relationship with her husband, Lena herself begins to cheat on him with random men ..., then, starting to watch the picture, you expect that from such a plot plot will get at least a full-fledged psychological drama, or even a thriller. What did I see as a result? A young married couple of decent, working, wealthy people (in these roles Evgenia Gromova and Alexander Pal) live as if they have been married for fifteen years, or even more – quietly, calmly, bored, without passion. In general, as neighbors - polite, cultural neighbors. Whether they have always been so emotionally unemotional, how many years they have been living together, which in general united such different people, in my opinion, remains unanswered behind the scenes of history.
Accidentally read in her husband’s phone ambiguous text message changes the measured life of the main character: now she suspects him of treason, follows him, thinks up what she did not see. Her suspicion and jealousy grow and diverge like circles on the water, and a seemingly normal, intelligent, adequate woman comes up with nothing better than to start cheating on her husband. Of course, it is difficult to guess what he is thinking about, who he loves and whether he is hiding something behind his soul; the writers and director of the main character refused the right to “talk?”, okay; but why such radicality in the decision she chose? And the elementary sense of self-preservation, and the most ordinary disgust? She's also a doctor, not some low-key fringe. Other than meaningless stupidity, I can not call such a choice of heroine. There is a saying: “I will frostbite my ears” – this is exactly the same thing. If this action of the heroine was somehow justified, if it would somehow follow from her emotional or psychological portrait, it would somehow be explained in script. But it's not. Therefore, I think such a plot move seems to be an attempt to attract the audience with candid scenes (even the poster of the film depicts a half-naked female body), as well as to shock with the display and physiological details of the sex scenes sounding from the big screen. Only the authors missed the fact that the times of “Little Faith” are long gone, and after “Containers” candid scenes of sex no longer surprise anyone. As a result, waiting for a serious movie on the eternal in essence theme of love, betrayal, loyalty, infidelity, betrayal, you get some kind of blanket.
From the positive moments of the film, I want to note the real, living beauty of the lead actress - actress Evgenia Gromova. I hope to see her in other interesting projects in the future. And also beautiful - picturesque, bright and airy landscapes of the Baltic coast, captured by the operator Mark Ziselson.
So if you're watching the movie, it's because of those two things.
A plausible story describing the reality of many couples and very plausibly showing the dark sides of wives in these couples.
Often, a man is portrayed in marriage as a source of infidelity, but in fact, almost every woman has flirtations, intrigues, or just correspondence in which they reveal to former lovers or new acquaintances about their dark interests.
What a huge number of men wind around any woman from teenagers in clubs to bosses on a robot. Women are surrounded by them 360 degrees at any given moment of their day. And you just have to look this way, think about it or want a random connection: from resentment to compare or just out of interest, how any of these men can be in your wife in a few minutes. And you'll never know that in your life. And once feeling the taste of unexposed treason, not everyone can stop, and the heroine of the film is in this situation.
The sincerity with which a woman does not understand how these few guys end up in her, how disgusting she is from it is shown very believably. And almost all husbands believe in these tales, as almost all husbands are excited by the idea that he shares his wife with someone else.
Lena’s wife is an obstetrician-gynecologist, her husband Sergey is an actor in the local (like Kaliningrad) theater. The husband is cold and seems worried about the upcoming premiere of the play, but his wife, looking into his mobile phone, sees in him adultery. Not finding a place for herself, Lena almost accidentally goes into all serious.
But it's no coincidence. One can only guess what a woman wants: revenge? to understand what the husband found in treason? or a reason for, as some reviewers write, revealing her own sexuality? It must be admitted that the director succeeds in erotic scenes - in them her character reveals both physically and emotionally. This luck contrasts with the general trend of conservatism of modern cinema in general - as one of the quinters has expressed for a long time & #39; Rarely when the tit on the screen will show' and here - a fairly complete set, for which it is sometimes necessary to overcome the embarrassment. This has probably not happened since... Little Vera. The erotic performance there was quite programmatic and has a clear parallel in modern Loyalty - the problems of Saifullayeva's marriage are caught, among other things, in the sphere of the body - not quite in 'platonic'. And in this she argues, for example, with Zvyagintsev's Unlove.
But let us pass from the form to the content of Loyalty - it is seen in two conflicts.
The first is the already marked gap between the trend towards conservatism and the openness of the current world. One could see this borderline even by placing the action in Kaliningrad, whether Europe or Russia. What is the conservatory and what is Gomorrah? By the way, a typical episode with police officers, clearly professing double morality.
But it's a warm-up. The second conflict is the change in communication. The trigger of the action becomes the virtual environment, because everything else becomes the lot of individual experiences, but not the clarification of the relationship between husband and wife, doctor and patient, colleagues, etc. First, these are text messages read, then text messages sent (the husband of the patient), then a post on the Internet. And the characters trust them more than the words and feelings of their partner. Anyway, there's a discount. Or rather, an altered connector. The world moves smoothly into these networks – phones, photos, social networks, immersing in a lonely experience. This is how the main character lives, Elena, who is trapped in conservative ideas about loyalty and infidelity (this does not mean that they are wrong), and without having a verbal algorithm for getting out of them - which may be easier than asking her husband directly, but she prefers to live with her fear of losing her husband and seeks replacement (something her husband, some fear) in the arms of random lovers. . .
The body has some credibility, but there are more mysteries than answers. Love with your husband? I guess. But even she needs an incentive - treason, and in the spirit of the Express newspaper. Then what is treason itself? Lust? Or something more complicated? But the nature of this complexity is hard to put into words - it's the same boundary. Lena goes into episodes, but does not want to be ... a whore (which neither the prude and aggressive morality of the Stepford wife & #39 wants to understand, nor the concept & #39; be simpler & #39; her boss). But both 'beam' in the first scene, and the explosions of sexuality in the following do not answer the question: What about it? Moreover, the husband also behaves paradoxically, objectifying it to stimulate his desires. What's the ending? The choice between free love and insensitive loneliness?
Maybe the time of loyalty is over. Because the old morality of marriage is dead - has it been either abandoned or formalized? Is it a time of pure verbality? In the minds of male heroes, for example, words, if necessary, in conjunction with sex. What do women need? A mystery. . .
I finally watched the film “Loyalty” by Nigina Saifullayeva. Once, as it turned out, she also struck with her sincerity tape - "What's my name", where she opened the aspiring actress Bortich.
I am now in love with Evgeny Gromov! As the director somewhere told, she took her because of the look, not the ability to play what she wanted! She's great in this movie! We'll lower our eyes. Her impeccable appearance. She's an actress! Woman! Impeccable and vicious, at the same time... Voice. I've often "leaded" to my voice. She's amazing! Not an actress, no! She is a woman, a girl, in all her devilish persona!
The film was originally called Jealousy. And you know that. It might be a better name, but not in this life. This film is probably for those who have lost meaning in this life for further development within their family, for the development of our common relations.
Alexander Pal answered all the questions – the main thing is to talk when you started a family! We don’t have enough to save the family.
The film is really on the verge of eroticism and vulgarity. But that's not what matters. It’s more important to look at ourselves – is that what we want? Sex or relationships?
Don't try to understand a woman, or God forbid, you'll understand.
For me, the directorial talent of the author of this film is undoubted. I wanted to write about what the film was about, not what it was about.
You can talk a lot about what the movie really is, about the crisis of relations, about misunderstandings between spouses, and about little else. But in my humble opinion, this tape is about sexual liberation, which the director offers us. If we do not feel right about our other half.
For me personally, this is a study of the first timid steps of the beginning of betrayal, which results in a real yet unknown life, relegating the past to the background for unnecessary. The replacement that is taking place is like a mute question, what really is? Do you really know yourself?
In order to make everything look decent and noble, the director reduces everything to some kind of irrational rock. Compounding the growing distrust, which pushes to this "very obvious step" - adultery. It is no one’s fault that this happened. Instead of just talking straight. This option will not be offered to us, simply because we need to somehow justify the act. In this case, first we do, and then we go to understand.
The action benefited both husband and wife. Treason awakened in the main character animal nature, which was kept within the framework of morality and external decency. She found her way, which she hid under the reflection and bush of various sophisms. And the sluggish husband immediately began to feel a lost attraction to his wife when he realized that he was very turned on by his wife in the role of a prostitute. This is the fucking happy end.
I must say, the movie turned out to be too European for me, some Ozonovsky, both in the picture and in the content with a too free and perverse view of human sexuality. So that my friends are not afraid, we try, throw away the unnecessary tinsel of piety and forward to the cherished calling hedonism!!! Take off the masks condemning prudishness, now everything is possible and everything is allowed, – this is the message I saw from the director Nigina Saifullayeva.
Absolutely empty, one-dimensional and far-fetched cinema. In fact, this is a short film, artificially stretched to almost a full meter. The story is presented exclusively in the form of a bundle (a family couple where the wife suspects the husband of infidelity), and the climax and denouement are completely sucked from the finger (or some other organ of a similar shape). At first, however, it is not clear why there is a need for all this pornography, which is thickly smeared narrative, but then it becomes clear that if it is cut, then the film will not remain at all. And the festival audience will not pay attention to it. And so shocking, scandal, or even a prize. What exactly is there? A wife who suspects her husband of infidelity without good reason? A man always tired of everything, including his wife? The crazy driver, who just saw the woman in the car service, immediately offered her sex in the car (which flowed smoothly into the street), and then ran away from the cops, who, obviously, immediately caught them (but when he saw her the next day, he abandoned his wife, because he could no longer live without this stranger)? This hellish nonsense doesn't even want to be told. Russian cinema once again foamed a puddle. And the spray went all the way.
I write a diploma, but I couldn’t pass the film Loyalty. It is now fashionable to denounce Russian cinema. But I'm not one of them. Let me explain why.
Russian people are comfortable watching Russian cinema. No, not even like that. True Russian cinema. Because it is congenial to our mentality. My shirt is closer to my body.
There are many beautiful Russian paintings. And loyalty among them.
The picture, the work of the operator, is just one of the main weapons. Thunder's body. Sorry, I couldn't resist. Shoot, though there wasn't much of it. After all, a film about female infidelity. Female infidelity was filmed beautifully and passionately. But for me, I didn't have enough clues about that betrayal. It all happened too quickly. I wanted to understand the drama of the heroine. Well, thank God I found out in the dialogue with the husband of the heroine at the end.
Kaliningrad and the sea are a charming frame of the picture. Sunnyness, design of a bright apartment, prestige of the clinic - all about Europe. You will not see the Russian outback there. Perhaps this is a reference to progressive Europe, with its increasingly open relationship? Free.
I lacked the inner conflict of the heroine. It lacked color, expression, catharsis. Everything was smooth. Even after the betrayal, I see changes in the character and sensuality of the heroine. But I don't feel it. I understand that according to the script, this girl is an excellent doctor. I thought the tipping point would be brighter. But come on.
The shooter did the job. He organically fit into the role of a simple loving man. Although, I confess, I wasn't expecting it. Because how can a woman's intuition fail?
In fact, everything seems much cooler than just suspicion and jealousy. As noted above, the heroine of Lena really very conveniently covered up her sexual dissatisfaction with her life in this way. As you can see, they are going to Moscow. There's relief on Lena's face. And the desire to start with a clean slate.
The couple came to a new stage of intimacy only after broken firewood. But as the trailer says, "Why not just talk to each other?"
A film about the relationship of a young couple: here is a conditional Seryozha and he is a conditional actor, here is a conditional Lena and she is conditionally a doctor.
Conventionally, since the film is impersonal and in a sufficiently bright and straightforward presentation demonstrates the result of discommunication, pride, frivolity, irresponsibility, inability to make concessions, solve their problems in a variety of modern couples!
Look from the outside. Instead of calmly talking on an equal footing, clarifying all the issues of concern and living in agreement - Lena first thought up the situation, tried to check, but did not receive enough information for conclusions, already succumbed to emotions and became nervous, jerky, began to lie, cry and as a result a radical step - treason.
But the director of the film took this into account in her film, showing the reverse side of the ' medals' and the fleeting decision to just sleep - each decision has its consequences. Such significant decisions as treason have serious and very long-lasting consequences.
After all, responsibility here and before himself, and before his spouse, and even before those who were in a particular place at a particular time and will ' Fate' released conditional Lena par. Even in the face of indirect cheating, there is a responsibility. They have their own lives, their own destiny, their own personal boundaries. What if they're colleagues? Yes, the professional remains a professional, but the spirit of companionship is lost. People around here are staring. Life breaks down - this is what Nigina Sayfullayeva in this tape says quite clearly.
In general, of course, the feed in the tape came out quite straightforward and aggressive, but the meaning inherent in it is very noble: love each other, appreciate, talk, listen and hear. It is difficult, but the support of the spouse will not let you stumble.
Russian drama with elements of erotica (or erotica with elements of drama, I did not fully understand) ' Loyalty' The director is a girl, she is a screenwriter, so the situation is described as illogical, but emotional (the desire to insert the letter ' a' in the middle of the word was barely overcome). We have: husband, wife, conflict on the basis of jealousy. Conflict truth at first occurs only in the head of the main character, but she turns out to be a girl stubborn, purposeful and brings the situation to the crappyest possible. And for everyone.
The plot is not very confusing, but very far-fetched. Although, I do not rule out that the problem is that I look at the situation exclusively from a male point of view. I find it hard to imagine myself as a girl in principle. To imagine the reasons why, as a girl, I would allow men to have sexual intercourse with me is all the more remote and obscure to me. Allowing this to strangers is akin to a gesture of maximum despair and self-love. There is a suspicion that jealousy in this particular case is only an excuse to satisfy some secret desires and disagreement about the existence of a monogamous Russian society in the modern framework, but this is not certain. The finale, as befits a domestic film about relationships, open. What will happen to the heroes is unknown, but not particularly interesting.
Pal tried, but the film is too serious for him. He opened up in the genre of comedy largely due to his appearance and 'intellectual' facial expression, here I had to suffer more, which he does not work so well. Gromova is a very pretty girl, God forbid she will have big films and roles in her career. Erotic scenes do not shine with originality, but they also do not cause rejection, everything is confident, honest and qualitative. Solid (without hints) four.
' Jealousy' - a typical representative of the Russian ' semi-author' dramas with erotic shades, which, unfortunately, did not add to the film neither depth, nor emotion, nor views.
6 out of 10
Undoubtedly, the theme raised in the film is important, and most importantly, win-win: after all, now in our country sex begins to occupy its proper place under the sun.
And one more, already medical fact. The picture convincingly demonstrates the organic connection between sex and the psychological health of people. The main character clearly needed the help of a psychotherapist. A timely visit to the latter would not allow her to become a victim of her own fantasies.
However, the film gives the impression of an opus-short film from a high school student of some “Spinks”.
The tape is little professional: gray in the picture, with indistinct dialogues and a search of intimate scenes on the verge of porn.
The plot is hard to believe. A woman bypassed by male attention, but fully accomplished as a person, is unlikely to behave in a similar way as our heroine.
External expressionlessness of actors match their little-intelligible game.
And finally, the final scene on the bus is also poorly understood.
Stresses the routine of history? Or is it the beginning of a new life from scratch? When she will not hesitate to travel on public transport. What about my husband? Forget it! Now she knows herself fully and will correctly and carefully apply her sexual experience! But career? Well, work is not a wolf, it won't run into the woods. In general, the picture not fully thought out by the director can be varied endlessly, without changing only the scandalous and sexual component, the guarantor of success among the audience.
At the same time, who knows? If it were not for the chain of events that took place, would she have found her unique sexuality? After all, the film is mostly about that.
One of the first pinches of salt was eaten by Lena and Sergey in a joint life. Grieving, wrinkling this unexpected test. A cry of silence strikes the soul of the wife, but an awkward, short-sighted partner. He does not see the obvious, does not understand the obvious. Distracted from the main thing in passion concerns him. And the world of two becomes shaky, unstable. Worse, the grains of disparate facts suggest first to reflection, and then, as if in a criminal-detective plot, allow you to build a version where guesses, conjectures become the end of the chain. Oh, Lena-Lena. Oh-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho! How can I not understand you? Poor girl. And bitterness is a disgusting ally in such matters. And it is not revenge that takes possession of the pulsating mind, but the impulse to remove the painful shock from the awareness of what is happening with the drama of the act. And the betrayal of the discharge of nervous tension is ready.
In the erotic drama immerses the viewer directing genius of the lady-creator. The captivating drag of confusion from desires, fantasies with a fall almost to a fallen woman with shots in the viewer. Scenes devoid of Puritan censors in front of us. Censors hiding their complexes-clamps from others under the howl of frenzy with the inadmissibility of morality. They are loud and loud, and they are loud.
Is there something wrong with the movie? Did he send? Disgusting? Pornographic? Nope. Not at all. He's beautiful. The story entrusted to the viewer is sensitive, touching. With us, shamefully lowering their eyes in the auditorium from the influx of teared mouths, they shared what was happening behind the curtains of someone else’s monastery, brought to trial the incident-misunderstanding. Passion is stupefying. Passion is all-consuming. Passion boiling flesh here and there. In her eyes. In her requests-claims ' pranks'. In Her fleshly desires. And the world of these two is a beautiful place where we, of course, do not belong. On the other hand, it’s great to be here. What a hypocrite.
And is the bathroom scene inferior to that of Mickey Rourke and Kim Basinger in the all-time erotic classic - 'Nine and a Half Weeks' (1986)? It is there, the impulse of desire has broken all the norms of decency with the dogmas of the rationality of morality. It was there, in the dark of night, in the rain, on the street, on the stairs, like a wedding bed, a foaming passion ripped off each other's clothes. A moment of animal stupefaction 'magnetism'. Haven't you seen this before? Didn't you feel that? Didn't you feel the fullness of it? Nope? Well, then I feel sorry for you. ..
. What kind of woman, what kind of woman.
I'd like that.
Amazingly good Evgeny Gromov in the role of Lena. Playing with the yoke of an actress here? Or just a game? She let us in. She let me touch her. I shared a secret. I'm not ashamed. The beauty is not ashamed! Thank you.
I am shocked that a female director dared to make such a film. And the script, moreover, female co-creation. That's amazing. A civil feat, at least in front of us. Without vulgarity, sensual, highly artistic.
A pood of salt should be eaten during a life together. A whole pood.
I'm for that movie. And exactly ' for such a movie ' Penetrating, clever, subtle. An awakening thought. It's all about questions. Thanks to the author's idea. How did this happen to these two? Why did that happen? I mean the first part of the story. Where is the exciting touch of flesh lost? Why does the husband ' not drag ' the wife in the bedroom? More ' no drag ' Aren't all couples going through this? And why is this happening? Because passion never goes away. It just stops, fades, falls asleep. Right? Wake her up... and all over again. Like the wedding night. But how long? 'A bullfight of love' (by the way, a Japanese film with the same name about the same ...) prepared. And it is the bullfight of love that the director shows us when self-love, when the feelings of a man are offended. When they scream indignation. Kill now? Rape? What will he do? The mute clouding of reason in passion is demonstrated. And, in my opinion, even moderately, demonstrated. Without scenes in the spirit of masochism, and after all, you will agree, it would certainly be appropriate here! As one of the colors in the demonstration of the excited state of the deceived spouse. With slaps on the buttocks, with indignation and intoxication simultaneously mixed... I took her by force. The animal's passion burst out in rage. Can you feel it? Getting the point? So, more and more inflamed and excited at the same time (I mean him).
And all this has to be in the audience. Like a gunshot. Like a cannon of fire. To fully convey the sensitive side of the moment of these two at the moment... That's it! That's right!
What do Puritans offer? How in Soviet cinema, in the spirit of truncated prim morality to solve the plot? She puts her hands on his shoulders. He hugs her by the waist. Classical music is on the rise... Camera transition to the landscape outside the window... The audience understands everything, the audience thinks it all... The baby was born on time. Nine months later. How? A camel. How? The wind blew. And why show anything else? Really. Really. Politburo, applauding. . .
Similar messages to me, that genius, from ' Carnival Night' 1956 remind me. Seraphim Ivanovich Ogurtsov. Remember? You can't! Prohibit! Correct immediately.
However, fullness, Father... More than sixty years ago, Eldar Ryazanov ridiculed human stupidity, which, as we see, is alive. Not changing.
You could of course brand the main character, reproach for promiscuity, hang labels, but does she deserve it? Not at all. Episodes ' Crimes' hers, only episodes are. Without continuation, without openwork for the permanence of treason. That is why and 'red', in the impulses of passionate clouding of the manifester's aspiration, ' flung off'. The tragedy at Lena's gynecologist, in the family. Tragedy. And that is what makes her guilty, insignificant.
8 out of 10
Obstetrician-gynecologist Lena has a difficult relationship with her husband Sergey. She feels that he is pulling away from her, getting cold and acting as if he is hiding something. Finding a suspicious text message in his phone, Lena concludes that her husband is cheating on her. To feel welcome again, Lena begins to cheat on Sergei in response, gradually destroying their marriage. . .
The acclaimed film ' Loyalty', shot by Nigina Saifullayeva, unfortunately, looks boring and flat, and even the fact that they originally wanted to call the film ' Jealousy' and then changed the letters in places, does not introduce versatile and witty interpretations of this picture. Contemporary Russian directors seem to pay special attention to catastrophically uninteresting topics, frankly stating obvious facts, passing them off as full-fledged and primary truths.
After 'Scenes from married life' one should not sink to such a superficial level in the depiction of interpersonal relationships between a man and a woman, between a husband and a wife. It is clear that ' Loyalty' as it illustrates Baudrillard's thought that in the modern world about sex is increasingly spoken and less often engaged in it (by the way, it was already done in the film 'Sex, lies and video'); but it is important to understand that sex is not limited to relationships. Behind the bright bed scenes, which, according to the director, are a dramatic frame, interpersonal dialogue and the other side of the family are lost.
Today, it is difficult to surprise the viewer with naturalistic eroticism, neatly bordering on porn, although, perhaps, in domestic cinema this is an innovation and exotic. Of course, it is impossible not to note the subtlety with which Saifullayeva works with actors (probably, that is why she managed to open a new star for the second time - now in the person of Evgenia Gromova), and how skillfully she turns the vision of sex on the female side, centralizes a woman and her worldview, but in reality the topics that are raised here are false and far-fetched. Ultimately, this tape remained notorious ' Jealousy' and in general it is about the fact that if couples do not talk to each other, it leads to the destruction of their relationship. It is much more important to go deep into this situation and understand why they do not talk, why they close themselves and spend their lives in a state of alienation.
Husband, wife, tortured lovers on both sides (in one case, contrived, in the other - quite real) and a situation that caused first jealousy, and then a break in loyalty.
What's embarrassing:
1. We have no background, perhaps the wife cheated and earlier, just now caught on to the contrived story of her husband’s infidelity, which would change again (location of local & #39; discotheque & #39; she found immediately, without Google, and seduce the first guy on the beach was not difficult).
If the author gave us a hint that ' all this already happened' and the husband specifically pushed the heroine to cheat, because (and he himself says this in the film), ' he likes to think that she can be a whore', the story would have a looped character, and the actions of the characters would make more sense.
2. If they wanted to tell us, ' how does a wife feel when she cheats' then... we were not told. Yeah, she gets to know her body, yeah, kind of lets herself flirt. But how does she feel? Shame? Overcoming yourself? She suddenly lets go and begins to justify herself? There is absolutely no conflict. Throughout the film, she is told in plain text: cheat, this is normal (a colleague-doctor, men who are led to her ' seduction' and a husband in the end, who forgives everything and even seems to feel some pleasure from all this).
The only conflict we see is between the heroine’s aspirations for a good, good marriage and how cheating entered their lives and probably began to poison her. Maybe not. In any case, she expresses contentment and cheating, and not cheating on her husband.
Kristen Stewart, I think we found you a worthy replacement.
3. Many liked the lack of morality in the film, the director looks at what is happening as if detached, allowing the viewer to also be a simple observer. But it seems to me that this technique played against them: in the end, we do not have either a changed heroine (yes, she has become more relaxed, but what does it say about her personality? the situation she did not survive and did not work, there is no completion), nor made for himself conclusions of the heroine's husband (he admitted that he is in principle satisfied with everything). Is this recognition a development of his character? Nope. The event did not break him, the feeling that he knew everything about himself before.
Conclusion: remove explicit scenes from the film, let unknown actors play these roles and the film will fall apart, cease to interest the viewer.
The film is about a woman who suspects her husband of cheating and decides to revenge him with the same coin.
The heroine drop by drop collects evidence, sees in ordinary situations terrible signals for herself and easily embarks on the slippery path of treason. Without inner experiences, long reflections, without the first failed attempts. Changing, it turns out, is very simple... It's easy to screw yourself up. Apparently, in her case, you just had to find a reason to do what you wanted to do for a long time.
Probably not for nothing she successfully works as an obstetrician-gynecologist for many years. We were told exactly this profession. Either she saw enough, listened to it, or she initially lived in this interest, which she, finding a reason, quickly realized. But. Let’s not forget that the heroine’s husband is an actor. Let in the regional theater, it is unknown good or bad, but the actor. And we can't rule out that he didn't lie to her. Because a smart man never admits what he did. Unless, of course, he values the relationship and does not want to break up.
Maybe this whole story is just a sketch of modern couples? Who don't know why they live together. Met once so different, something between them flared up, happened ' not sluggish sex' and then there was nothing to strengthen the relationship. There are no common ideas, themes, views. Even the kids. They're not burdened with anything. Everyone, like a lazy fish, swims with the flow, casually kisses his partner goodbye and leaves on business. He kisses out of habit. Otherwise what? He's calling inertia. But why?
The director wants to say to us: “Here, guys, don’t live consciously!” Look around. Why do you need a slurred life, empty dialogue, no physical contact? Where is your love, where is the meaning, where is the joy of touching each other? Live separately and enjoy life, but only with married people be careful, because it is a small town, a career, everything. Or rather, I want the author of the film to tell us that.
Yes, there's a lot of sex in a sex movie, whether we like it or not. The other question is, do we need to see it or not? Sex without pleasure, sex in public, sex with inadequate men. But it is only with her husband that she enjoys it. Or not? Or does the heroine care? You only need sex, and the quality of it is not important?
This is not a story about feminism, this is a story about a man who has long wanted to put his body on the line. And if no one condemns a man for this, this is allegedly his nature, then for a woman such spontaneity immediately has consequences. Work, society, husband: the heroine is branded by everyone, except for her friend Ivan. Why is a man a hero, whom we will call a “cable” for treason, but we will keep all statuses with him, and a woman automatically loses her regalia and is called a curse word?
Loyalty raises so many questions before each of us and makes us think about what we really want from a relationship, and do we want it? When we say “I love,” do we take responsibility for our choices? Does it make sense to keep this very loyalty, if you really can not figure out whether a loved one is nearby or not? Do you look in the same direction or only at yourself in the mirror?
7 out of 10
The film, hitherto unknown to me Russian director Nagina Sayfullayeva, was short-lived (only 1.15), but extremely frank, in intimate and erotic terms, family drama. The movie was great. Impressions, emotions. As some people write about the candid scenes - "wow fu gross." Dear ones! If you have sex causes such strange emotions, read at least a summary before going to the movies. In "Loyalty," everything was delicate, moderate, and topical. Despite the indigestible theme, the film catches already from the first frames and does not let go of the viewer’s attention until the very end. And the reason for this is not a piquant plot, but a highly artistic production. That is, how the material is presented. This is directing, and rhythm, and acting, in general everything.
This is a great movie, useful for couples. On the one hand, it is shown that understatement or unwillingness (fear) to know the truth in a relationship with her husband causes a woman to take decisive action, instead of just talking and understanding. On the other hand, the true essence of a woman with her secret desires, which she embodies and does not feel guilty at the same time, until she begins to condemn society.
The very theme of fidelity in the film naturally runs through a clear storyline. Is it just about loyalty between people? Here and loyalty to the profession, and loyalty to their principles, and loyalty to conscience. Yes, it seems to me that loyalty to conscience is the main idea that the director wanted to convey to us.
But the film is designed so that everyone in it looks for answers to questions, combining what he saw with his relationship.
And in the end, the biggest question - what can happen to the heroes next? - also decide the viewer.
Everything seems good in the relationship between husband and wife. And love, and social status, and financial prosperity, but comes obsession with betrayal and relationships begin to collapse. The director transfers the role of the bad guy first to the husband, and in the end, the wife turned out to be bad.
Family life in the modern world, probably, and should be, few people who do not come to mind the idea of cheating on a husband/wife. But the moral of this film is that the main characters are too strangers to each other, which is also relevant, despite the fact that they fit the “ideal of family”. Cheating helped to understand that love is made up and people are too far from each other. Loyalty would lead to the collapse of the family eventually, so it’s good that it happened so early and they will still have a chance to build a true perfect family, but separately.
But still, I think the film is too superficial, scrappy, commercialized. This includes the marketing expression “sex sells”.
6 out of 10
Perhaps one of the most anticipated domestic films of recent times. Of course, the attention was drawn to the candid trailer. Pal and Gromov also inspired confidence.
It's really, really bad. Under the guise of supposedly beautiful #sex drama, we were given a crumpled and slurred story without any meaning. There is not even a hint of a plot in the picture.
But full of candid scenes, very frank. They are shot in a Western manner, but with the tastelessness inherent only in our cinema. It feels like the director forgot why he wanted to make this film, what meaning he wanted to put in it. Having been fascinated only by the visual component, all other aspects remained empty.
Alexander Pal is an undeniably talented actor. It was as if he didn’t know what the creators wanted. The charisma did not work out, alas. Evgenia Gromov is truly beautiful, perfect, and this is all about appearance. The image of a strange girl suffering from mental disorders she did not succeed.
Bottom line: behind the screen of the allegedly revealing art house is actually raw and not a quality filmmaker. Touching on the alleged problems of infidelity and relationships, the film is empty and meaningless, or this meaning is somewhere very deep. Don't waste your time.
Discourse: It’s like I’m in someone else’s dirty underwear, but what am I actually looking for?
Jealousy. One of the terrible things that can really ruin your relationship. It doesn’t matter if you give a reason or just see something that isn’t there. I'm jealous, but I'm trying to calm it down. But the heroine in the film behaves like a girl of easy behavior, in fact it is humiliating.
What's the point? Lena (Evgenia Gromova) is a talented obstetrician-gynecologist, suspects that her husband started an affair on the side, but she suffers in silence and does not betray her jealousy. Instead of finding out the relationship with her husband, Lena herself begins to cheat on him with random men. And this part is not quite clear to me, the picture is confused because of the behavior of the girl, she sleeps with everyone, stalks her lover to make sure he is really busy at work, but what if he is with a woman? Revenge, which covers her most important – love and feminine dignity. Revenge to sleep with someone else? And then tears, how was she wrong? It turns out that Lena wanted it, wanted casual sex, wanted something, but lost an important thing.
Truthfulness. Play with words, swap letters, and loyalty produces jealousy. But should I say, is she here? However, there is, Serezha (Alexander Pal) - an artist of a provincial drama theater. He loves Lena, intimacy and tenderness they have, sex - no. The most important thing you want to see in the film is his touch with his wife. A beloved man will hug, kiss, and the hero makes it clear that he cares about everything. Scenes of a sexual nature are very frank, and I want to watch it and not. Why? Because while Lena tumbling with strange men, with the affection of a nymphomaniac, it is disgusting to look at these urges, but if her husband appears in the frame, everything changes. The actors managed to show love in such an intimate moment.
LOVE. Take a man, take a woman, everyone sees love in their own way. A man is attached to a woman, he feeds on her love, this does not mean that he does not love. Just love is a complex concept, there will never again be romantic relationships and those feelings that were at the beginning of the path, not everyone can support them, but if a woman’s feelings cool down or dull, it turns out that the man loses his fuse, it is not for nothing that the hero of the picture tells his wife that she has cooled to him. And indeed, we see how neutral the character, crushed by his jealousy, turns into a licentious woman. It was there, just dormant for the time being.
Trust. The very first thought that slipped through my head was why she didn't ask him after seeing strange messages on her phone and coming up with an excuse, twisting herself. Because that's the kind of character, but it's a shame that there's no disclosure like that, so there's the one-sidedness of the character and even some important things.
MORAL. Of course, it is, as do not need to do, because even Dragunsky wrote that all the secret becomes clear. Having received what she deserved, Lena broke not only her love, but also broke someone else's happiness (here I want to add that for the best, but not everything is shown in the episode, again, one-sidedness). It’s like the director says, look what jealousy can lead to, but the problem is that such jealousy humiliates a woman. And it turns out that the heroine falls for the male body.
The film is beautifully shot, chic tandem of Pal and Thunder, whether they are nude or just in the car discussing a song, attract attention. And looking at them is really nice. They draw many scenes, and although the film is not long (82 minutes), and touches only a couple of days from the life of the couple, leaves behind a lot of thoughts, I want to think, I want to write and for that thank the Director. You can see how much I have written. Despite the rating of 5, the review is still neutral. This movie is like a globe, you look from one side and see one another. Not because it is false, but because we are all different. So what did you see?