They got together. Wave and rock,
Poems and Prose, Ice and Fire
Not so different from each other.
This is the blues taxi. The combination of two principles: cattle and genius, “ordinary” peasants and “imaginary intelligentsia”. They both drink and drink.
The understanding of life by a simple working peasant is an animal beginning in everything: in love for women, for work “so all Russia is working hard”, lynching “teached and will teach”, etc.
“People have been starving all their lives,” Cristina ironically eats a huge piece of pork.
“Goat, cattle, beast,” – so in the hearts of Seliverstov calls Shlykov.
Interesting image of the neighbor Shlykov - grandfather. A socialist, a communist, a hero of labor, who reads newspapers and thinks he knows everything about life. His favorite phrase, pronounced meaningfully: “The fate of Russia is being made.”
Shlykov, re-educating Alexei, tries to awaken animal instincts in him, rejoices when he grabs a knife.
Alexei, in a red shirt, symbolizes such a “guy shirt”: walk like that, “everything is paid”, “everything will be”, for money you can buy everything. Everything except harmony. Such a typical intellectual, locked in a box, a time frame when his talent is not needed by anyone. Other values prevail. He is a rebel hero with a saxophone (a symbol of freedom). The saxophone takes Leha to other dimensions. And here we read the roll call with Richardson's character "Look Back in Anger." He calls his condition “I swim.”
The time when professors became loaders. Yes, and Alexey for some time turns into a huckster, sells vodka. “No complexes,” he comments. His monologue is remarkable: Here is my country... here I live, gnawing at myself. But this is my people and I love them.
Alexei’s influence affects Shlykov, he cries, seeing Seliverstov’s performance, dances, even begins to despise his warehouse party.
Here! We rejoice in the belief that art will save the world.
But as history shows, the intelligentsia and the people are always far from each other. And an inflatable doll, presented to Shlykov, as he thought “a friend”, revives animal feelings in him.
Documentalism – night Moscow, “October”, lit on houses letters of the USSR, Lenin’s poster and the first glowing screens. And in contrast - car wash, speculators, sitting either in the basement or in the wasteland.
Such a mix in everything - the old has not gone to the end, the new has not come to the end.
Such a strange time, such a blues taxi in everything.
The tape of Pavel Lungin perfectly reflects the era of perestroika. A man of the last generation, a man of the system – a taxi driver Shlykova and the image of the new time, a spiritual and creative musician Lehu. Peter Mamonov perfectly conveyed the image of a drunken musician, who shows not just a desperate life, in attempts somewhere to interrupt, to profit, but the whole time of the country against the background of disintegration. Mamonov’s image proved that the “Stalin” system has outlived itself, and adherents such as the taxi driver Shlykov are an excess of the past.
The exposition presents us with a meeting of a taxi-park worker – a strong, strict, self-confident man with representatives of the new time: a musical team where saxophonist Alexei is eager for constant festivities, movements, completely without thinking about the regime and system of the country. The film allows you to see the whole system through the usual activities of Shlykov – the emphasis on charging in the morning, on the routine in the taxi park, where a large team harmoniously performs their duties.
In addition, outside working hours, the taxi driver allows the viewer to see various echoes of enterprises, cultures at the intersection of generations. Meeting with a musician is against the system, and the debt that Leha has to pay. The director perfectly betrays the emotions and rudeness of Pyotr Zaichenko, who needs to achieve justice. In this regard, surprises and amuses, sometimes, the behavior of the musician. A man of one day who now earned, then drank and again without a penny in his pocket.
We look at the situation from different points of view, and if the taxi driver tries to blackmail, picks up the saxophone, then Alexey picks up the guitar. This is a representative of the time when you can have a drink with a foreigner one evening and wave to America in the morning. Without stopping, without looking at the past, while Shlykov is attached to work, to his neighbor in the communal room, to his girlfriend, with whom he sometimes spends time.
Episodes with the sale of the saxophone delight with the departed culture, spirit and time. People changed before their eyes, why Shlykov was not delighted with modern youth, from the Lekha musical collective. These people are simply breaking his crude, "Stalinist" regime. On the other hand, the attachment of heroes to each other causes an interesting phenomenon. Re-education, as Shlykov’s concept, should take place in the sweat of the brow, in the factory, by honest and fair work. But is a saxophonist born for that? Dialogue in the taxi park when washing a car sensitively conveys the difference between generations. One taxi hero, the other has the blues. This is how the country lives, and the restructuring was carried out.
The attachment of the characters to each other began to magnetize with every minute of time spent together. But if Shlykov saw a lost soul in the musician, which must be corrected by the method of “five-year plans in 3 years”, then Alexei was looking for opportunities for existence due to the directness of the taxi driver. A musician is the face of creativity. Ego playing saxophone in a foam bath. His attempts to show that he is of a different kind, that he is not part of the system, are magnificent and impressive. The episode of playing musical instruments in the nude against the backdrop of sunny weather and singing birds recalled a shot from the French drama Bernardo Bertolucci “Dreamers”, where the characters also looked out the window, behind which the revolution of the “fed society” took place, and Charles de Gaulle resigned. Only Bertolucci was naked Eva Green, and in the USSR Peter Mamonov.
The picture shows how inexorably new orders destroy the old foundation. No matter how much Shlykov opposes changes, they reach the whole country: this is reflected in the behavior of the girl Kristina, on the atmosphere of the workers, on the celebration of the birthday, and the fault is the saxophonist Alexei, who by his behavior and play inspires new hope to the people around the taxi driver. For a greater comparison of generations, the lodger Shlykova conveys the spirit of wartime, sets the tone of patriotism, when a generation later Alexei is already talking with the famous, Western musician and things more relevant. This is the dissonance of the ages. The director delivered everything perfectly.
The ironic ending for Shlykov shows that all attempts to change something will lead to nothing. A very strong episode with an inflatable doll and “gifts” from abroad, which finally prove the change in society. The final actions of the taxi driver are the cry of the soul, they are the remaining forces to fight the winning system. What can a human “robot” lead to a strong change in society? To accept the blues, to lose the taxi. The titles at the end showed that she became a hero. And... if there were none, the picture would have come out in an innovative way, but not everything ends so well.
Hardly there is a film of perestroika, which would not comprehend in its language the rapidly changing life, but few spoke about the collapse of the old world as poetically and heartfeltly as the directorial debut of Pavel Lungin.
This story about the difficult relationship between a taxi driver-worker and an alcoholic musician offers the viewer a new view of reality and this seems to be ahead of time. The changes that our hearts so demanded, but which in fact were not so unambiguous, Lungin exposes a deep metaphorical reflection. Pretending to be a chamber drama, "Taxi Blues" is fraught with amazing accuracy casts of the era.
The main characters meet each other by accident. Harsh taxi driver Shlykov one night picks up a talented saxophonist Lehu, who in between concerts in DC drinks everything he earned. Lekha does not pay for the fare, and Shlykov decides to find him and pay back the debt on his own. Thus begins their strange story, which turns into mutual hatred, then sincere affection. They are repeatedly attracted and repulsed like magnets, unable to break this almost mystical connection.
But one has only to look closely, and in the voluminous images created by the duo of Peter Zaichenko and Peter Mamonov (who here shows almost a new type of Soviet hero), one can see a micromodel of Soviet perestroika. Times change, and to replace the physically strong rude proletarian - the master of all trades - comes a vain and weak-willed intellectual who is poorly adapted to life - but subtly feels and with all passion gives himself to the little that really knows.
The last generation of the old hardening froze in confusion, unable to keep up with the new, which is relentlessly striving for tomorrow. This shattering of epochs, being shown through the relationship of the two heroes, produces a special effect. “Taxi Blues” accumulates the anxieties and aspirations of its time and becomes a kind of prophecy. The categories of good and bad blur and lose their meaning before the course of history. The future belongs to those who have music.
One of the best films made in the later years of Perestroika
One of the best films made in the later years of Perestroika, I consider Taxi Blues. Many now ask what Pavel Lungin is so good - look and understand.
In Soviet times, this movie would have become a classic, in Yeltsin’s it would have caused a scandal, in Putin’s it would have caused a heated discussion and mutual correspondence on Facebook.
But he was unlucky to appear on screens in 1990 - an era of timelessness, when the walls of existence were cracking at all seams. The film was noticed - it even won one of the prizes of the Cannes Festival - but somehow quickly forgotten.
Well, fine, but it looks relevant 29 years later, accurately describing the conflict between two types of Russian man - hard communist Ivan and a man of peace, Creakle Alyosha.
The communist works in a taxi (today he would chase for Uber) and tries to firmly stand on his feet in a world falling into the abyss, while Creak Alyosha boozes and blows at the duda (now he would write a rapper or do stand-up).
When their paths cross, Ivan fiercely but lovingly tries to re-educate Leha, but in the new economic reality, his attempts to redraw the slacker and proto-hipster lead to unexpected results.
I recommend this philosophical parable that without doing good, you will not get evil, to all fans of domestic dramatic cinema - by the way, the role of Creakle Lehi was played by young Peter Mamonov.
7 out of 10 Yesoda
This film is a bright representative of Soviet and Russian cinema of times of great changes, perestroika.
The story of this film is an enchanting demonstration of the dramatic clash of energies, bubbling at the end of the Red Empire. This is a picture of that unique time. Time is like a broken-down taxi rushing along the avenues of a crumbling country. The spectator who will become a passenger in an old Volga with checkers, of course, will be accompanied by a premonition that the transport is about to overturn and explode.
Wonderful time. Breathe before the disaster. From somewhere the sound of a saxophone blows the wind of change. The older generation feels something, but cannot express what it is. All that remains is to grumble about conspiracy theories and look for the culprits. Who is to blame?
Employees, decent and strong, now and then face something new and incomprehensible. It is alarming, it is disgusting, but, it turns out, it is difficult to live without this new and living, having tasted once.
Lungin brilliantly paints portraits of that time. So picturesque that they come to life on the screen, and the viewer already feels the smell of communal and drunkards in queues for vodka.
Bright film, light. The picture is about a difficult relationship and a difficult time, vague, but he speaks intelligible cinema phrases, and the touch of absurdity of what is happening gives a lot of joy to a viewer like me.
Well... For someone, Taxi Blues will be a great way to feel nostalgia, for someone a new journey to places that have been... But it's hard to believe. Most importantly, this film will reveal what the hearts of those who dreamed and loved at that time wrote in eternity. They dreamed of life and loved life.
Lessons from Freedom: Dreams and Hopes of Perestroika Cinema (Part 5)
“Taxi-blues” by Pavel Lungin, despite its repulsive stylistic bad taste, a lot of frankly kitschy scenes of holidays, drunkenness and escapade, is a tape extremely important for “perestroika” cinema, clearly and vividly expressing one of its basic conflicts – the clash of intellectual and cattle. The nationalist-anti-Semitic soul, making everyday life in the late USSR truly unbearable, accompanies not only the hero Pyotr Zaichenko, but also the evil grandfather performed by Vladimir Kashpur, Shlykov’s colleagues in the taxi park, his friends, and the directorial skill of Lungin-debutant does everything possible to give an unsightly, nauseating picture of the late “owl” with its gray porches, shabby communal cars, ubiquits, ubiquitous alcoholics, munching and rudeness.
There is already freedom, but almost no one knows how to use it: the director unfolds before us a panorama of permissiveness in such a way that Shlykov’s xenophobia is understandable and logical (not without quotes from Scorsese’s Taxi Driver). However, in this enclosed world, which fully demonstrates the terrible price of freedom, there is a place for creativity, the mysticism of creating new worlds, conversations with God - the music of Lekhi Seliverstov, born in his head and heart (operator Denis Evstigneev shows this extremely unusual alternation of large and medium planes, as if tearing the fabric of gray everyday life), and is the only justification for this freedom.
Although Leha is not just not perfect, he is terrible in everyday life and communication - a pathetic alcoholic, a vain intellectual, a complete insignificance from the position of athletic and strong-willed Shlykov, he is a person without taste and measure (his escapades show this well), but creativity, the mysticism of the birth of music in his mind and subconscious pays off all his shortcomings. Unlike Moro, the hero of “The Needle”, he did not remain undefiled from the vulgarity and filth of the surrounding world, he also bears the seal of kitsch of the late “scoop”, a decaying and stinking empire. For this reason, Lungin surprisingly subtly demonstrates the irrationality of the relationship between Lehi and Shlykov, in which interest and compassion are intertwined with envy and hatred.
Shlykov does not understand Lech, but feels that there is something inexplicable, inviting, attractive, so unlike himself, so sometimes he tries to teach and re-educate Lech, as the Soviet government did for many years in relation to its “prodigal” children-informals. However, the belligerence of Shlykov’s soul is as simple as three pennies, his dislike of the irrational, his measurement of everything and all physical labor only once retreat before the poetic energy of his lekhin talent, and this changes his whole life. Lungin expressed something so significant in his picture that even with the death of the Union, the conflict he felt remained one of the nerves of Russian life (as shown by the recent tape of Taramayev and Lviv’s “Winter Way”, which in many ways repeats, up to the scene with tears, the collision of “Taxi Blues”).
Ordinary laborers, people of manual labor, who often have an extremely conservative worldview on the verge of xenophobia, apparently will never understand people of art, intellectuals and intellectuals – those who work with the mind and heart. And this is not only a problem of Russia, it is one of the main existential conflicts of all time. “Perestroika” was a short period in our history, when time itself took the side of the creative minority and in every possible way protected it from the hatred of the majority of so-called “ordinary” people. Of course, this minority is not ideal, it too, like the majority, bears all the vices and shortcomings of its time, but it is the bearer of the Divine spark, it only moves history (at least art and human thought) forward.
“Taxi-blues” is a melancholy, but not a hopeless picture, filled with the belief that the human, beautiful can be awakened in the squalid majority, for this only people of art, intellectuals and intellectuals should be given the opportunity to create, do their thing, and not make them “love the mat”, then the density of the vulgarity and tastelessness around us will dissipate, if not completely, then at least partially. In short, we all need to learn to endure the negative consequences of freedom, to accept its cost in the name of the mysticism of interhuman creative communication, for which it is worth living.
General impression: 'Taxi-blues' a kind of movie about male friendship, I would even say difficult. Two completely different men in character and mindset suddenly collide together. One man takes a depressive mood, and the second, if it floods with melancholy, is ready to teach others. What he is trying to do with the story.
One musician, a creative person. Such a person just needs to create, otherwise he will bend, dry like a flower. As a rule, creative people can not work, well, if you take work as physical labor. Not what they don't know, they just don't want. The Creator must be hungry. Therefore, many creative people throughout their lives give themselves to their work, and it is good if this business brings money, if not. Such a creative man is Lekha (Peter Mamonov). Its complete opposite is Ivan Shlykov (Peter Zaichenko). Shlykov works in a taxi, a person who works and does not tolerate parasites (at least this is how Leha looks in his eyes). It so happened that Leha owed Ivan money, the amount is considerable, so Shlykov first tries to knock out rubles from him, and then realizes that he became close to Leha and even became something like him. Which is funny.
The contrast of two different men gives rise to comedy in the plot. What is happening looks with a smile, the episodes look funny, and fun from both dialogues and situations, but the closer the finale, the sadder. The dramatic basis, clinging to the story, smoothly dissolves to the end of the story, becomes sad from the turn, which turned out to be quite a life situation. The film is soulful, with some special warmth shot, I would not even be surprised if the characters are drawn from the director and his loved ones. And the situation is not invented, because there is something in it that will always be: the creative impulse of people and hardworking fathers Carlo, who, alas, can not recognize subtle natures, because recognition is a defeat.
There’s a lot to see in the movie, it’s definitely worth watching. Whether you like it is a difficult question. I hope so.
Pavel Lungin is an outstanding Russian director. In his films there is a psychological study of the human soul. Reflections on the country. He directed the great film 'Island' which is the greatest film about faith, redemption and repentance. The director of the film ' The Tsar' where the psychological state, the politics of the person who has risen at the head of the state is investigated. His sins and repentance.
In 1990, in an era of change, Pavel Lungin staged his debut film 'Taxi Blues'.
The title of the film consists of two parts: taxi and blues. On the one hand, a taxi is a symbol of everyday life, earnings that are available to many men.
On the other hand, the blues is a musical direction prone to minor tones. Two concepts are so different to each other, appearing in contrast.
The film is about two people: a taxi driver Shlykov (Peter Zaichenko), a strong and strong man who regularly rocks in his apartment. It acts as a symbol of a generation of people earning a living by ordinary physical labor available to the masses. It is characterized by male willpower, strong, pumped body, roughness.
The second person is Alexei Seliverstov (Peter Mamonov), a musician. Petr Mamonov previously played in the film 'Igla' But in general, the director P. Lungin and P. Mamonov, as an actor, had further creative fruitful cooperation. The actor played the leading roles in the films of the director 'Island' and 'Tsar'. In the film 'Taxi Blues' Petr Mamonov played a musician performing a sad melody. He is an asthenic build, unlike Shlykov's strong build. He has no constant earnings, constant lack of money, poverty, inability to find a stable job. He is a musician, a creative person, but it is not easy for him to adapt to the world around him, to earn money.
Two different contradictory characters that came together one evening during a taxi ride.
What's in the movie? Gray streets, interiors of premises. Bathroom. And the main drawback is drinking, sometimes drinking with women. It's not easy, it's hard to watch. But here the creative style of Pavel Lungin is already displayed: gloomy, cloudy weather, which is accompanied by a somewhat low mood: such are the films ' Oligarch', 'Island'. Maybe it's postmodernism. Difficulties in a new time. I don't know how to live, what's next. Therefore, heroes lead the way of life that they lead. There is almost no work, work, enthusiasm.
And on the one hand, P. Lungin showed, perhaps, what was, perhaps what did not pass - heroless time, difficulties with difficulty, with work, finding oneself, confusion, where ' the truth is in guilt'.
On the other hand, there is no positivity that the soul craves. No way out. We have a man of work, a man of art, but where is spirituality? Spiritual search for the level of sublimity of the prose of Ivan Bunin, the philosophy of Nikolai Berdyaev, the painting of Isaac Levitan, the poetry of Alexander Blok. Was not and is not this spirituality? Maybe she was at that time and is now. I want to see it, see it, feel it.
Directorial debut of Pavel Lungin. It is more of a comedy drama than a tragicomedy. And while the story is tragic in many ways, things happen on the screen that make us smile, albeit through the bitterness of reality.
In the center of the plot before us is an alcoholic genius saxophonist musician and a simple but positive hero, a typical man who works as a taxi driver. Once the saxophonist threw him and did not pay, the taxi driver searches for him and makes him pay the bills. This begins the confrontation and friendly relations between the two heroes.
This is a very colorful film, in which we encounter completely opposite people and through their conflict we can see the good and bad sides of each of them.
The whole film is filled with pleasant sadness. Since the main character is a saxophonist, a melancholy saxophone plays throughout the film. This music seems to give our country some hope, but does not want to be completely hopeful, as if it says that it does not want to cheat. Night Moscow, which begins a new decade, the glow of lights and new neighborhoods anthills, such as Chertanovo.
And yet this film eventually stumbles upon the phraseology, which is sometimes so difficult to accept “the goose of the pig is not a comrade”, no matter what warm memories they have.
But “taxi blues” can be attributed to the section of comedies, since in many ways this picture is saturated with warm moments that come immediately after sometimes difficult moments for the soul.
I think the film is primarily about how two completely different people managed to understand each other.
Taxi driver Shlykov, frankly, at first does not cause sympathy. He is a man of crude and rigid principles. Despite the physical strength and hard work, this man even seems cruel. But if you look closely at him, you find that he is not really bad. Analyzing some of his actions (for example, the fact that he took back the report to the police when he found out how long the accused could face), you find that he is capable of compassion and humanity.
Saxophonist Lyosha at first seems too frivolous person, very fond of drinking. However, this is only at first glance. In fact, he is a kind guy who values freedom and a talented musician. It should be noted that this is a Soviet man living under a totalitarian system, in a country of constant restrictions. However, despite this, the saxophonist Lesha is a creative, soulful and free man! He loves company and, of course, music. Seeing his passionate love for music, you understand that this is a guy with a deep soul of a creative person.
So there were two people with completely different mentalities. Fate keeps bringing them together. The relationship between them, then warm, then heated. But I'm sure they could understand each other! I wish you all to be patient and understanding with people who are very different from you.
“Geniuses in our country have nothing to do except how to sleep...”
Excellent work from the master of Russian cinema.
Oddly enough, the movie was made 20 years ago, but still relevant today.
I've read a few film reviews and I don't think they've revealed the film. Everyone understands the film in their own way.
In the characters I saw the Artist, in the broad sense of the word, the bluesman saxophonist of the Seliversts and the Country (taxi driver Shlykov).
Two opposites, which by the will of fate were together. They hate each other, but at the same time they cannot live; they try to understand each other, but do not understand.
An artist is a holiday person who tries to express himself in everything, living to the fullest.
And a country that works hard every day, that has little or no spirituality left. Empty and littered with unnecessary rubbish (like Shlykov’s apartment), mired in this grayness (for this reason, it is not by chance that gray is not characteristic of a taxi).
Also, it is not accidental that Shlykov’s friends, grandfather, in a communal room, who still shouts ... if there was no war ..., people in a taxi park, even more “dreamy” than the main character; and Shlykov’s girl, a typical representative of those people who destroyed and still destroy the country, with her stealing and “easy”, or rather thoughtless behavior.
It is very interesting to show how, by the will of circumstances and human indifference, it is possible to lower a person, an artist, to the bottom of the bar of existence, when he will die from this hopeless state.
The film, oddly enough, I would say optimistic, its final part. Because most artists, the geniuses of their time, no one knows, they either put up with general grayness, or destroy themselves with alcohol.
However, all this changes when the artist is in demand.
How interesting is Shlykov's envy shown when he saw Seliverstov on a huge screen in the city," ... or maybe he is really a genius...?
Then, attending the concert, it would seem that Shlykov was imbued with music, moving in one tact with everyone who was in the auditorium. Maybe so, but I think the real motive for the change in attitude was envy. The envy that there is already a man in front of him, and not the scum that I wanted to see.
In truth, a gorgeous gift Seliverstov, which he made Shlykov — rubber woman.
A hint that living people, in this country, do not know how to handle, here people are only used.
9.5 out of 10
Lungin’s debut film came out at a turning point in 1990. The film is complex, about the struggle of the new and the old. The new in this film is represented by Alexei Seliverstov - a drunkard, bohemian, musician and vagrant, played by the genius Peter Mamonov. Old, more precisely conservative, in the image of a taxi driver-worker of the old school played by Peter Zaichenko.
The struggle of the old against the new (read the workers against the intelligentsia) is concentrated in the opposition of the hardworking Shlykov and who held nothing in his hand heavier than a glass and saxophone Seliverstov. From dislike, heroes pass to a certain sympathy. Heroes want to be sympathetic.
The plot of the film is quite simple and the question of the film is how we go to happiness. Everyone has their own happiness, and everyone goes to it with their own steps.
It should also be noted that critics called the film anti-Russian, blamed Lungin that it denigrates the Russian people, denigrates reality and so on and so forth. But I'll notice there's nothing to blame on the mirror if the face of the curve. All this was; and drinking vodka on the streets (and now there is) and hazing at work and domestic instability. But there were good things. People believed in something. They believed that they could cope with all the difficulties of the post-perestroika period. I think the movie is about it. But despite all the hardships, the heroes go to happiness. And both come to him. In its own way.
Scenario + directing Lungin + a wonderful acting duet + an accurate display of the atmosphere of the late 80s - early 90s gave us the most soulful film of our cinema. I also want to mention the psychedelic sound of the saxophone.
The debut directorial work of the former screenwriter Pavel Lungin is devoted to the ineradicable Russian dream of a better life, almost a key national idea of the twentieth century, originating in Chekhov’s plays. In the late 1980s, the rock band “Nautilus Pompilius” made it an almost national hit “Goodbye, America”. The second, no less relevant, view of the picture can be outlined in the perspective of the ever-relevant theme “A Jew in Russia is more than a Jew.” And yet the essence of the key conflict here rests not so much in national as in social relations.
Lungin (as few people in the transitional era of perestroika) managed to reflect the essence of the philosophy of “sovka” – a man born of socialism. The scoop, as a social type, appears here in the image of a simple Moscow taxi driver Ivan Shlykov, professing the cult of power and paying tribute to him with daily pumping of biceps. Shlykov is a symbiosis of a passionate lover of truth and a small jerk who does not disdain any left earnings. It is he, the hegemon-half-blood, who undertakes to re-educate the ever-relaxed saxophonist Lesha Seliverstov, who once threw Shlykov for ten blood rubles.
Seliverstov is another example of a social homunculus, a cross between a declassed element and a representative of bohemian youth. The essence of the conflict determines their relationship of “friendship-hate”. The clash of the correct Shlykov, who lives as it should with the inert Seliverstov, who exists as he pleases, leads to a serious drama of characters. Shlykov can neither understand nor forgive Lesha’s insidious ability to live as he wants. Having before his eyes an example of a free spirit, Shlykov, no matter how he tries, can not reach him.
Then he looks for a sincere disposition from Seliverstov, not realizing that he cannot be his friend by definition. Debilitated, he resorts to a third, tried and true way: he decides to dedicate Seliverstov to simple human happiness by forging a similar one in himself. Lungin especially does not try to hide the plot and ideological connection with the famous “Taxi Driver” (1976) by Martin Scorsese, the main character of which intended to redraw the world by force, according to his ideas about it. The collapse of Shlykov’s latest illusions is Lesha’s trip to America.
Now he is even more acutely beginning to realize the injustice of life: why is this five-minute alcoholic, drug addict and homeless person eating the fruits of pleasure in a fairy-tale country, and he, Vanya Shlykov, all so impeccable, is forced to sip with his lap? And unable to soar, but ready, if necessary, to subdue and destroy, Shlykov is likened here to Salieri, who did not resign himself to the awareness of his own insignificance. And Lesha Seliverstov, Mozart, in spirit, at least briefly, but still soars above the poverty of the life in which all this time reigned the principle of “it is impossible and not supposed.”
With the obvious social background of the story, the director managed to stratify the conflict into several other important components. This gave the tape greater artistic weight, marked, among other things, by the Cannes Prize for Best Director.
The film was shot on the edge of the eras of belief in communism and striving for capitalism and everything Western. The incomprehensibility, the uncertainty of the future, the change of landmarks, concepts are very well felt in the film. In general, the film was shot in an unusual manner for our cinema. Events quickly change, one after another, and it is not always possible to immediately grasp the meaning of what is shown. If I didn’t know the actors, I would think I was watching a foreign movie.
The plot revolves around two heroes, whose characters are absolutely opposite: the hero of labor, an ordinary Soviet hardworking taxi driver and, in contrast to him, a bright example of “impregnated intelligentsia”. It would seem that they could have in common? Yes, there may be nothing, but this strange encounter will change both. It is very interesting to observe the development of characters, their ability to adapt to rapidly changing circumstances. It is also interesting to look at the reality of that time: devastation, drunkenness, no one knows what will happen next and what to strive for. The ideals of the past are beginning to erode - plowing day in and day out, "as the Russian peasant always did," now becomes out of favor. Western trends bring such concepts as “show business”, “American dream”. You can become rich and famous in an instant. The gap between people is growing every day.
The ending of the film largely predicts the further development of events in our country. Perestroika, from which everyone expected something special, “European” eventually turned into a lot of tinsel and colorful wrappers. But when you see a broken trough with your expectations and concepts of life and honor, you can not fix anything. Could an ordinary person change the inevitable?
Stunning picture Paul Lungin A strong, personal, sad story at the border of two states, passing from one to another. The feeling that the collapse is near, that it will not pass – all this perfectly reflects on the mood of the culture as a whole. Many real artists feel and try to somehow reflect, express their opinion, their sorrowful or joyful attitude. For some, this is a real emotional leap into evolution, into the wagon of capitalism’s happiness, giving the fullness of the free market and countless opportunities in everything. For others, the new world is defeat and evil fate, imposed on us by third parties for a purpose (you can invent anything you want). Obviously, everyone has their own opinion, it must be respected and accepted.
Pavel Lungin created a world at a crossroads, the collision of turns, which are not bypassed, attracts each other and they affect each other. Life and exploitation of life, existence and a way to level everyone before the inevitable fate, the eradication of something new, extraordinary, ingenious and at the same time on the other side of something incomprehensible, unnecessary. Destroying and piggybacking everyone, creating your own kind. But both worlds are original and full of ideas in their own way. There is nothing evil in them, nothing disgusting or disgusting in them, they are good in their own way. Like all people, some brilliantly play the guitar, others with millimeter accuracy build a house. To force one’s ideas and beliefs was never lost or forgotten, but only concentrated anger and aggression.
The film clearly shows the worried attitude of the author to the vague reality, to the real grief prepared for the Soviet people. It is still hard to believe that the body of life of the country was dismembered and almost incoherently lost.
A talent and a gift that through the ages will be remembered and honored, because this is the little that is given to man from God, from nature. These abilities are intended and belong to the whole world, the main and heavy burden of the possessor is to demonstrate them to society, to instill real art, to tempt and lure in the network of education.
It's an amazing atmospheric movie. Melancholy and point decadence coexist and create a real living, attractive world that can be felt with your eyes. Awesome camera work. The phenomenal musical component of the film is beautiful, memorable and incredibly spiritual.
A great movie, displaying a giant layer of problems in an uncomfortable slice of society. Strong and instructive, sincere and unburdened, unbanal and magnificently directed, leaving the fullness of the aroma of majesty. Perhaps the film is a little dry and irritable, but it is small.
Stunning acting tandem Peter Mamonov and Peter Zaichenko. The real twins of the mirrors of their souls. So different characters, so close that it's hard to notice it when the evidence is in front of you. A tandem of sincere people who grew up in the same country, but fundamentally different character. Trying to understand and help each other. The stunning chemistry between the actors begins with the first frames and sweeps like a beam of light trying to tune into a dialogue between two people who fundamentally different views on life.
It's a great movie. A great story of relationships on a philosophical level. Of course, the film is not unambiguous, but in the world you rarely find such a quality.
The image of Ivan Shlykov absorbed all the “simple” people, as Soviet writers liked to call them. He is an ordinary hard worker who works from morning to night, tries to be honest, defending his ideals, relaxes getting drunk in his kennel (you can not call his house otherwise) and in his own way struggles with the “black man”.
Lech Selivester - on the contrary, the very embodiment of life! In his face, life opened to Ivan from the other side. He was able to feel it and even understand it. However, understanding does not give an opportunity to change anything. That is why Ivan, trying to catch up with this life, eluding him every moment, finds himself in a circle of even greater problems (makes new karmas).
This metaphor is similar to the very essence of life of modern people who live without realizing themselves in this life. Many still do not understand what happened to film, lamenting in old age that life swept through as one day.
A connoisseur of human souls about the painful, about the years of perestroika, about the time of hopelessness and hopelessness, about the time when it is customary to forget about the human, but just survive, about how important it is to abandon the long and look uphill, not forgetting that you are not just a creature, but a Man! And yet hope dies last. Two completely different people, converging briefly, forever change each other's fate. Their short interaction becomes a turning point in the path of each of them, makes each of them look at themselves from the outside, acts soberingly and gives a chance to believe in the best, a chance to change everything. The truth is that every meeting in our lives is not accidental. 10 out of 10 Lungin is my special case, out of competition and points. Just bravo! . Original
Perestroika left an indelible mark on the souls of the people of our country. National principles collapsed, others took their place. This is a painful process, painful morally.
The author tries to find the reason for the ideological collapse within the country, and within each of us. The two main characters Ivan Shlykov and Leha Selivester are contrasted to each other. A taxi driver, a worker, a man of inviolable principles of order and self-control, would never get along with an alcoholic, a loser saxophonist, a weak-willed but free-thinking man. And the plot artificially brings them together for the purpose of an ideological experiment, the result of which proves the insoluble conflict of two opposing moral aspirations - to freedom and to order. Attempts to unite will never yield results - either freedom will be imaginary, or order will turn into a mess.
This approach gives the picture a kind of cameramanship, each action and character are symbols of folk experiences. The director exposes social problems - shiny and slim on the outside, Moscow rotting in the alleyways. Exaggerating the vices of drunkenness and poverty, the author thereby ridiculed the stereotype of a popular brotherhood built only on hedonistic beliefs.
And yet Lungin takes the side of freedom of thought. He seems to feel sorry for Lech, a failed genius, an alcoholic who cannot come to terms with the traditional order. And no matter how right Shlykov was in his convictions, he still remains guilty.
The film was well received in the West. The picture was awarded the Golden Globe, and Lungin received the Palm Branch in Cannes as the best director. The idea of “the desire for freedom” marked the coming coup.
