Lie or don't lie - that's the question. Good afternoon, everyone!
Films about eternal “love polygons” have always attracted the attention of the public with their allegedly realistic, they say, everything from life. That's right. But secretly, many of us watch or read such stories not only to empathize with the main characters, but to find a recipe for a way out of such situations. Suddenly, the authors know a universal formula for personal happiness, so that all participants in the events would be well and without moral losses, suddenly it will come in handy. Another important topic shown in the film is the choice of life priorities. Which is more important, fulfilling your dreams or getting stuck in your daily routine? Realization of talent or mercantile interest?
The plot is based on the seemingly prosperous family life of almost 50-year-old famous writer Vladimir Zharovsky (Alexander Abdulov). He once wrote an interesting book “Yellow Dwarf” and became famous. Now he writes tabloid novels for money, he does not like it, but he needs to maintain a house, his wife and maintain the status of external well-being. “Everything is like everyone else” – there is a mistress whom he does not love, but who pulls him out of the family, because it is time to get married. There is a wife (Helena Proklova), whom he does not like, but has become accustomed to her for many years. There is a 22-year-old son who seems to be big and independent, but is still naive and inexperienced with women. There is doubt that this is his son at all, since long ago I saw his wife kissing his friend when they were not yet married ... what if? But they seem to live, and somehow happy.
In the beginning, the viewing was even boring. In my opinion, these are not the best roles of Abdulov and Proklova. But gradually the plot turned so famously that it became curious how the authors will bring the characters out of such a concentrated tangle of mutual betrayals and selfish motives. The last scenes were clearly tragicomedy, as if a contest had been declared - who had trained each other's horns before. In the end, everyone was even and brought to clean water. The question of how to deal with the son, who was initially going to be “saved” from the tenacious paws of the age girl Vicki (beauty Anna Legchilova), was not resolved.
For me, the end of the film was unexpected and very twofold. What did the authors want to say to the viewer? To show how bad people can be in their lies, cynicism and self-interest? How can you exchange your talents and dreams for small things to become a “little yellow dwarf”? But where are the criteria for good and bad in the film? Or are we asked to evaluate ourselves, to think about our lives and our mistakes? Maybe. Or maybe the authors of the film believe that such relationships and lifestyle are the norm and the universal way out of acute situations is a selfless manifestation of kindness and self-sacrifice?
Everyone understood the film in their own way. Reading the reviews of the audience, you constantly come across phrases like: “Oh, this is a movie about us.” Or: “All my friends and I myself live and behave, as shown in the film, well done Dmitry Astrakhan...” People do not even have a hint of remorse, self-esteem, etc. But in the course of the film, the attempts of the main character to rise above the grayness of everyday life and begin to create, as well as reasoning on moral topics and disputes with his own conscience were repeatedly indicated. However, beyond words in front of the mirror, where the hero of Alexander Abdulov regularly conducts psychotherapy sessions with himself, the matter did not go. He said, “Am I going to spend my whole life lying to my son, and every day, every hour, hearing this lie from others?” There was hope for a strong act on the part of at least one of the characters, emphasized the proud and independent behavior of Vicki suggested this option. But, this “strong” act was the writer’s decision to “send troops with banners” to help the lost girl. No one saved her son, why? Let's make him happy, secretly. Let's make everyone happy. But this is not salvation, it is simply the silence of one’s own and others’ sins, their camouflage under the supposed common sense, kindness and forgiveness.
I would understand the irony of the authors, they say, look at the viewer what you are "G", can not make an effort on yourself, can not live according to conscience, then remain a small ugly dwarf, crawl, suffer and watch as others spread their wings. But this requires that at least one character make an effort on himself, at least indicate these efforts. The final photos of a happy, growing family put an end to common sense. The idea of the painting remained unclear to me. The position of the authors is unclear. None of the characters are punished, even morally, although they deserve it. No one was soaring over the gray weekdays, although they could. Each of them played their "options", not once emphasized in the film, as a result, everyone was happy. And the wife who cheated on her husband and humiliated him. And a husband who quietly did the same. And the "proud" girl Vic, who absolutely didn't care who threw her cub. Did they just show you another “truth”? I agree, this happens often: lies, betrayal, betrayal of your dreams are not news among us. But we see other people nearby – those who cry over their mistakes and bitter fate, set an alarm clock for six in the morning (like Katya Tikhomirova from the film “Moscow does not believe in tears”). Such in life are much less, and in the film Astrakhan they are not at all.
There is a funny character, the son of a writer. He jumps like a fun ball between the adults who care about him, who decide his fate. Imagine for a moment a slightly different script at the end of the film, let the authors forgive me. Come back early from the kitchen, where his parents sent him forever. And hear outside the door the whole truth about his beloved, and at the same time about his parents ... Here, the smile comes off his face. Here, before our eyes, he turns into a man, because in the next moment he will have to do the usual man's business - make an independent decision and take responsibility for himself. He will take responsibility for the fate of his beloved and her child, then he will become the same “combat squad with flags” who came to the rescue and saved. Then the ending of the film with a walking parade, orchestra, banners and photographs will be at the very point. But the filmmakers do not give such a chance. Neither his characters nor his audience. So my assessment is negative.
3 out of 10