Do not be deceived: God does not scold. What a man sows, he will reap. Gal.6.7
The movie is not much to say. Romance, story, unrestrained chorus of thoughts and images poured out on the blue screens of the audience, which this time will be carried into the ears of a drowning in shit, but very colorful gypsy village, where the life of the people, doomed by the Lord to cosmopolitanism and nomads, boils, worries and boils. On the unnamed streets there is idleness: a choppy barefoot children are mischievously and noisily mischievous; in the mud, between stray pigs and chickens, old people play dice, planting their last trousers with a pernicious passion; lazy young people are staggering nearby; somewhere in a dilapidated hut by candles a healer whispers, and a fat-mouthed baron with minions trades like seeds, people, preparing another batch of weak ones for sale. And even the main character is a talented boy, born to be different, lying to himself, like Adam, steps on a slippery slope, from where there is no way back.
A special moment in the film is a festive bacchanalia by the river on St. George’s Day, slightly reminiscent of pilgrims bathing in the sacred Ganges. Here, Kusturica, although briefly, still reveals to us the pure and naked, like an immaculate breast of Azra, the essence of the gypsy heart, introducing you, my friend, into a deep spiritual trance under the binaural rhythms of Ederlesi performed by Bregovic, no doubt deserving of an Oscar for his soundtracks to this picture. Well, a low bow to the late cameraman Wilco Filac, whose close-ups for many years will become a model in the image of the portrait for many Hollywood eyes. It is with their help that it will be possible to silently tell and describe to the viewer the whole drama and tragedy of the life of each hero, leaving only question marks.
This work of art does not require in its comprehension of deep knowledge in the field of cinema, but only a sinful and open soul, capable not only to realize, but also to accept the heaven and hell of gypsy life.
This is a brilliant film with a dream language, where the boundaries between sleep and reality are erased, and the reality itself is tragic, scary and beautiful. A good title for a review would be 'Tabor goes to Ad' but I can see it has already been used. The brilliant Kusturica, who creates his works on the verge of magical realism and postmodernism, is revealed here in a special way. There is nothing to blame here, so I will only praise you.
1) For excellent camera work, thanks to which, after watching 'Time of the Gypsies' for a long time, individual images and entire paintings from there are embedded in the memory. They come to you in a dream and resemble a dream. You need to be prepared for such a sura, because sleep is illogical in nature.
2) Drama is given unobtrusively, but so piercing and so real that pulls the narrative out of a dream, as if pouring ice water. What is the scene where the main character dances after learning the news that his bride is pregnant? Of course, I don’t know from whom... These are strong passions that will catch your eyes. Animal nature, lack of logic. This is characteristic of not very educated, but beautiful, strong and free peoples.
(3) The theme of insanity runs through all Kusturica films. And here it is madness in the inability to analyze situations, in the primitive logic of the characters. But that's the beauty. It is necessary to be able to convey the psychology of the gypsy and the whole nomadic people.
4) The film is saturated with symbols and allegories, which are difficult to read by the layman and non-specialist in folklore, but for a specialist it is a pleasure. You can see it wasn't done on a bluff. So let’s say, this film can be perceived differently by the layman and specialist. Absolutely different... And that also makes me very happy.
5) I cannot but say about music, what Kusturica's films have always been famous for. But 'Ederlezi' Goran Bregovic I specifically, after the first viewing, searched the Internet and then saved to my playlist.
I would recommend this film to everyone. He's great.
From the films Kusturica previously I have seen only two films: ' Black Cat, White Cat' and ' Underground'. Both made a strong impression. I wanted to see something from his early films, from the socialist era, when Yugoslavia was united and prosperous. The choice fell on a film about gypsies. But unlike 'The Black Cat...' it's not comedy, it's drama. And on the screen we see not a prosperous Yugoslavia from the 80s, but a frankly impoverished Roma settlement, and even Italy appears to be some gray and pesky. Well, this is Kusturica, his handwriting!
So, the action takes place somewhere in Slovenia, in a large and overpopulated Roma village. Nearby is a large city with high-rises, most likely Ljubljana. But despite the proximity 'civilization', we see dirt, poverty, chalups without comforts, ragged children and geese with turkeys. In such conditions, the teenager Perhan lives together with the wise grandmother Khatija, the sick sister Danira and the distraught uncle Merzhan. Perhan appears to be a kind, honest and unspoiled boy. Does that even happen to gypsies? Yes, if you are raised by a wise and loving grandmother. But the environment around is extremely unfavorable: theft, crime, quarrels, squabbles, drunkenness. Such an environment will ruin anyone, if you lose touch with wise ancestors. Perhan is very poor, and poverty in the Roma environment is not quoted: you will not start a family, no one will respect. So the boy had to contact bad company in order to earn a decent life, win the respect of the bride’s family, and cure his disabled sister. I must say, the bride loves Perhan as he is. Totally unselfish. She is another unspoiled representative of the Gypsy & #39; tribe & #39; which is even surprising with such parents. And her mom's just a stitch. But the most disgusting character is Baron Ahmet. He is the embodiment of all the abomination that is inherent in the Roma people. Good and honest Perhan is forced to work for this scumbag, gradually becoming the same scumbag. And here he comes out of the Mercedes in an expensive suit - well, just macho somewhere! But the impression of his new image produces repulsive. More precisely - it gives rise to a thought like ' where did you turn, fool?'. You still feel sorry for him. Yes, it did, but not to the end. No less sympathetic to his fiancée. He doesn't believe her, and she suffers. Danir is also sympathetic. And not so much her ailment, but how she was treated like a cattle Ahmet. The last scene is thrashing. That's what I want to say, 'Stop!' But alas, the tin has gone up.
And some details. From the '80s, there are only cars, TVs, a fancy lighter watch, and a movie with Richard Gere. The rest is timeless. Gypsy dirty and stripped. Even in Italy 'base' Gypsies still look miserable. Italian cities are gray and shabby. Ancient architecture is specially shown gloomy and stripped: where the gypsies are, there is grayness and poverty. No Yugoslav cars have been seen in Yugoslavia. German and Italian, obviously. At least once flashed Zastava, or moped Tomos, but no, Mercedes, Fiat. So the Yugoslav Roma are not so poor? There is no spirit of socialism in sight. You can’t say it’s in a communist state. Gypsies are the same under any system and are engaged in capitalism in its wildest manifestation. The law is not written for them.
Of the technical achievements of modernity, Roma have electricity, a gas stove, and a television. There's a toilet outside. Approximately the same standard of living was in Soviet villages. And ' quality ' same road. But unlike Soviet villages, Yugoslav rural houses are characterized by lack of capital: such a shack can be raised using a cargo scooter. The toilet is shown in detail several times. Including the ridiculous comic death of one of the villains in the toilet. Oh, yeah, that's Kusturica. Black humor.
And finally, the destructive environment. Perhan's little son has been a thief since childhood. And having a wise grandmother does not help here.
Who would I recommend the film to? Everybody! Among other things, I recommend it as an educational film. Like an encyclopedia of gypsy life. All life, quarrels, holidays, fun mixed with dirt - all this is shown in very detail. Whether it is socialism or capitalism, the Roma will always be Roma.
How to tell about the film of Emir Kusturica? I think his paintings can only be felt. Because in his paintings there are so many images, fantasies, allusions that it is almost impossible to retell the plot. Here's "Hanging House" or "Gypsy Time." The story of a simple guy who just wanted to help his loved ones, get out in people, and in the end almost became a cynical businessman. That's actually the whole story. It doesn’t sound very original, I agree. But it's all about how Kusturica tells this story! In the soulfulness he puts in. The main character of the picture Perhan goes through a difficult path and many transformations in his character. He appears as a kind and even naive boy at the beginning, but gradually changes for the worse, abandoning his own views, in order to achieve his own goals. Except it doesn't make him happy. As always in Kusturica, the picture is full of strange and funny moments that are bizarrely combined with tragic episodes. “Laughter and tears” – these words can denote all the work of a wonderful director. Only he can show how the hero’s bride flies across the sky, the hero himself chats with the turkey and at the same time we see a heavy, bitter, tragic and absolutely life story. The music of Goran Bregovic is a separate masterpiece! The melodies from The Time of the Gypsies are magnificent and instantly fall into your soul. Like the movie itself.
Despite all the rave reviews and awards, the film struck more cognitive, not artistic. Not that it is not there, but it is the inner life and all this thick knot of complex ' family & #39; relationships - that's what is interesting. It’s like documentaries about different traditions.
If it weren't for music.
I’m not saying that everything is badly played and staged – quite the opposite. That's why it feels like a documentary.
If it weren't for music.
And, of course, the lack of a voice-over ' narrator'.
And the rest of the film is very reminiscent of one of the scenes of the film & #39; Viridiana' (1961), only here in the last scene took only 20 minutes. Which was quite enough, however, there is not quite about the gypsies, but the behavioral politics of the characters went very far. And, of course, it was impossible not to remember ' Promised Heaven' (1991), although here, of course, rather from the reverse association, because ' Heaven' came out much later.
If it wasn’t for the music, I’d have scolded the film for being too tight.
Perhan, a young man from a Balkan village, loves the girl and she loves him, but the girl’s parents do not give her away for a poor man. Then he goes with the gypsy baron Ahmet to Italy to earn money for the wedding.
Emir Kusturica is probably the most famous and titled director of the Balkan Peninsula, repeatedly noted at the Cannes Film Festival. “Time of the Gypsies” is the first of his works on the gypsy theme, perfectly conveying the restless gypsy soul, which is ready under the influence of the moment to give everything, to do irreparable, to destroy and trample what a minute ago was the greatest value of his life. When beautiful words and broad gestures are in hot blood, it is difficult to stop and think whether it is worth it and whether it will be possible in the future to correct what was done. All the characters of this film want something bigger and better, but subconsciously strive not for a happy ending, but for a new drama, because a well-fed measured life is not created for gypsies.
9 from 10
" I became like the wind, and my dreams turned to dust.
The third (if you do not take into account his TV productions) film by Emir Kusturica, unlike the lyrical first two, became a real drama. Also not devoid of lyrics, and perhaps even more poetic than the previous ones, but nevertheless the most dramatic and dark. Usually, after watching the films of a Serbian director, the feeling of celebration remains on the soul. And even if you started watching his movies when you arrived in longing, his work was able to dispel her. But this particular film, which can be recognized as one of its best, leaves a feeling of bitterness and depression on the back. Although Kusturica still remains true to his style: in the frame there are many beasts, poverty of the Yugoslav population, furry heroes - who, being small, do not pay attention to the big ones - spit on rules and "rule" according to their laws. Indirectly quoting another of his favorite directors, I want to note that Emir Kusturica himself spoke about the fact that when on the screen there is a pursuit by the police of a bandit, his sympathy is always on the side of the bandit. Because he is one and many cops, and the criminal he became obviously not from a good and well-fed life. The main characters of “Time of the Gypsies” (still sometimes distributors give films more successful titles than their authors themselves) – as you can understand the gypsies. What kind of gypsy lives under the law? So the characters of the picture live and survive in this hostile world as much as they can. But not all of them support a friend in a difficult time. There are scoundrels who are ready to deceive and make them do dirty things using the labor of others. In addition to the “legality” of the actions of the heroes, there are concepts more important than legal conventions. Sometimes terrible things happen on the screen - shocking by its ordinaryity of the viewer, but appearing to the heroes living by these rules - just ordinary. For example, it tells about the vicious scheme of “free laborers” – how all these rags and beggars end up on the street, where the money they earn goes, and how small children end up in such companies. You can see that Kusturica is well aware of all this, because he himself grew up in the poor yards of old Sarajevo - which, according to the director, is no longer there. The story of a few Roma families is told, but how many are in reality? What would it be like without a tribe? All this is sadly told by this touching and at the same time cruel picture.
The script was written as usual by Emir Kusturica in collaboration with playwright Goran Mihich. Subsequently, marking the 25th anniversary of the film, the director will create a musical on its basis, or rather punk – opera, which will be even in Moscow. It’s a shame I didn’t get to see theatrical musical performance. It is interesting how this movie was adapted for the stage. The music in the movie sounds really good. The soundtrack was written by the then composer of Kusturica - Goran Bregovic, with whom in the future their paths will unfortunately part. But despite this, in the films of the Serbian director - the musical design has always been and is - first-class. Particularly worth noting is the central song "Ederlezi" - which became, if I may say so, the leitmotif of the entire production. It later became the hallmark of the film and for a long time sounded on the radio. It translates as "Yuriev Day" and is truly gypsy - folk. The film gained some poetics and power thanks to its sound. Especially in the dramatic scenes that we have here. The remarkable work of the cameraman of the picture is the late Vilko Filach, who filmed the early works of Emir Kusturica. It is also necessary to highlight the main performers, some of whom before and after worked with Kusturica. For example, the charismatic Zabit Mammadov (drunk – neighbor), Ljubica Adjovic (Khatija’s grandmother) and others. The main role was played by something similar to the young Fyodor Dunaevsky - Davor Duimovich. It is through the prism of the fate of the unfortunate gypsy boy Perhan, we learn all the hardships and horrors of the nomadic life of small scammers. At first, he cannot marry without a decent household, which is why he is forced to leave for Europe. The leader Ahmed, who took over him, deceives the young man. Having survived the separation from his sister, whom he was able to miraculously find so many years later, Perhan returns home, where he learns about the infidelity of his lover - Azra (Sinolichka Trpkova) - whom he even takes as his wife. I will not reveal the rest of the plot, otherwise it will not be interesting to watch. But I will note that despite all the upheavals and tribulations that through the fault of evil fate fell on the head of the hero – even being at the very bottom of his life, or being a respected “manager” – still remained a man of a different kind than his noble surroundings. He is capable of showing sincere feelings, loves small children and they in turn are drawn to him. And this does not happen with bad people, because children with all their naive perception of the world still feel evil.
In general, this film – a fresco full of real emotions and sincere feelings – is closest to the pose of a truly “proletarian” writer – Maxim Gorky. Only his characters lived in appalling poverty and unsuitable conditions for human existence - without realizing the horror of their situation. Comparing the work of Emir Kusturica with the work of a Russian writer, it is possible to put an equal sign between the Time of the Gypsy and Gorky’s play At the Bottom without any stretches. At the same time, the drama of Kusturica is still devoid of pathos - which is simply alien to his work. But finding moments for humor and smiles, the author saturates the picture with comic situations such as a scandal over a “pregnant” girl, “raising” the house and an episode with the hero’s favorite turkey – from which his harmful uncle, in the absence of the owner, brewed soup. There was a place for folklore assumptions (as Grandma Perhanaya is a witch, and he himself is able to move metal objects with his eyes), the favorite director of reality flights and beautiful in his illogical dreams. As well as references to the favorite directors of Kusturica himself - from Chaplin and Fellini (for the New Year, Perhan's uncle plays scenes disguised as Little Tramp, there is already a traditional street orchestra) to Mikhalkov (on the wall in the cafe weighs the poster of his film "Eye Black"). And of course, the white geese – who like musicians appear in every film of the Emir Kusturica. A great, beautiful and very emotional film. If not for another masterpiece of the master – “Underground” – I would recognize “Time of the Gypsy” as his best picture!
The film is deep and heavy. He's sneaking and mesmerizing. It raises a lot of questions. To his heroes, to himself, to the higher mind. What is right and what is the fault of his main character? What does he buy and what does he pay for? When did he fail and everything went wrong?
I really love the films of Emir Kusturica. They are very deep, soulful, very ethnic and original, but at the same time easily understood and perceived. The characters of his films are like real people - the brain simply refuses to believe that this is just an actor's play, so convincing and natural. His films always have a special atmosphere, beautiful memorable music, incredible beauty shots, panoramas of beautiful nature. There are many emotions in these films and the soul is always felt. The best of Kusturica's films in my opinion is 'Life is a Miracle', although I love 'Arizona Dream' a lot more, although it's a slightly different story than traditional Kusturica. I recently decided to check out 'Hanging House.' (This version of the title fits the film more.) And here's the impression.
From a technical point of view, I saw a lot of references here to the director’s earliest films like Do You Remember Dolly Bell and quite a few things from Arizona Dream. But here these developments appear in a completely different context. I like them better, but they work in the right way. The film is shot in a rather gloomy atmosphere, which well shades its content, not at all joyful.
The main character of the film Perhan is of course sympathetic. In some ways, he is similar to the same Axel from “Arizona Dream”, they have something in common, albeit without direct similarity, in behavior, appearance, and most importantly – Perhan is also a big dreamer. He dreams of a rich life, marriage to his beloved girl, recovery of his sister, well-being of his grandmother. But in pursuit of a dream, he chooses the wrong path, and falls under the influence and power of an unworthy person. And continues to operate under his command, engaging in child trafficking. Can this go unpunished? To confess, this is the first film Kusturica in my memory, where gypsies would be considered from the most unseemly sides. Child trafficking, drunkenness, deception, the desire for profit by any means. The movie couldn't help but be pretty heavy because of that.
Of the other characters, I especially want to highlight Perhan’s grandmother, a kind and wise woman with a big soul. And the scoundrel Ahmed, who was able to deceive and convince almost anyone of his good intentions, which led to tragic consequences.
There are funny moments in the film, which are still inferior to the force of influence and the scale of the drama. There are also surreal magical moments like Perhan's ability to move objects with his eyes, which in many ways makes the film a special characteristic film of Kusturica. And the soundtrack is very important. It's extraordinary, it's fascinating, it conveys the beauty and tragedy of this story. For the opening ceremony of the Cannes Film Festival chose really beautiful music. But how does it fall on important and beautiful key scenes of the film, such as the ceremony in the river and the finale.
What does the hero of the film pay for? For engaging in criminal activity, for the awakening of mercantility, for the deadly insult inflicted on his own bride, for distrust of people and of himself, for losing faith in the best, in the future. He is rewarded by faith. But at the same time, he can not be called a bad person, the fault is rather the wrong path he took. The ending of the film as such, I really did not understand.
The film is much deeper and more meaningful than I could describe here, having watched it just once. The film is beautiful, symbolic, conveying the very spirit of the gypsies from both their good and bad sides, bright representatives of which are on the one hand the grandmother of Perhan, and on the other Ahmed. And at the same time, it's really the hardest and saddest movie a director has, but that's what it should be. A story about a great dream, getting on a slippery slope and irreversible consequences.
9 out of 10
Excellent work. Unlike many movies, this one is alive, with blood in its veins. It has lifestyles, pagan landmarks, longing and tears, and a lot of beautiful jokes about life, open and so understandable. The film is completely non-European, it is for the Balkans and those east of Poland.
And of course, actors. Kusturica has a talent to recruit people in films Completely, completely, irrevocably merge with their heroes. But in "The Time of the Gypsies" this is brought to the absolute: the actors managed to show the whole layers of humanity. Grandmother - the wisdom of the people, Sister - Hope, Son - a new life, Neighbor - fun and good disinterestedness, Uncle - excitement and faith, villagers - poverty of the surrounding strange world. All of them are interconnected, their lives correspond to “go under God”, no one disappears without a trace, weddings go hand in hand with funerals. The real Circle of Life.
Magnificent. Even the Great Movie. You have to watch it.
Joy, unearthly flame,
The spirit of heaven that came to us,
Intoxicated by you,
We entered your bright temple.
An artistic gypsy named Perhan has the gift of telekinesis, minus diopters on both eyes and exorbitant ambitions; he and his crippled sister are brought up by a grandmother who does not mind healing (neighborly) children with one touch, and all of them are haunted by an uncle who quotes gambling. One day Perhan falls in love with a woman of the same age, undergoes an external kissing course and immediately goes to get married, but is refused because of the lack of stability or at least a red diploma. Further, according to the plan, an unsuccessful suicide attempt, an erotic dream with a coveted wedding in the final, a fierce fight with relatives in reality - and now our hero is ready to go to distant lands with the local don Corleone to earn a good extra money - his sister for surgery and himself for a wedding. But something has gone wrong.
Too ideological for a postmodernist, too temperamental for walking beaten paths, Kusturica creates an aesthetic mess on the screen, building a truly three-dimensional picture that does not require appropriate glasses. In contrast to the now fashionable slow cinema, the frame comes to life not with long pirouettes around an emphatically symbolic static object, but with brazen internal kinetics, when in each visual zone something necessarily sparkles, bumbles, wriggles. While the look is looking for the usual centering on the main, plot important scenes are drowning in the garbage of household details: Perhan tries to hang himself - a mad turkey cuts circles nearby; the characters are talking in the car - endless streams of people scurry outside. The long plan of Kusturica is generally a kind of perpetuum mobile, as soon as the movement fades, you have to run the usual zoo of geese, goats, chickens, plague tomboys and other wiggling mustaches to the beat of music or exasperatingly screaming. Moreover, the fabric of reality now and then tears in Fellinev light, with barely noticeable gluings, transitions to youthful dreams. The night is removed by a walking black woman, music floats into the sky, another fantasy opens with a strange dance of bodies wrapped in bright fabrics.
In some places, what is happening resembles the first pages of “One Hundred Years of Solitude” (miracles are attached), sometimes a typical genta movie about the formation of the mafia, which is gradually covered with a crust of pseudo-values, and in some places the future Romanian new wave on neuroleptics. The sick subconscious of Europe, an undernourished folklore island, a compromise between identity and ubiquitous calculus – elements of an alien symbolic space are assembled from accessible details: Godfather in a shabby suit and ridiculous hat; an almost Hollywood erotic scene in a house with cardboard walls. Kusturica manages to show a cultural twist, in which, if you slip into the plane of social science, the local rags, hung with gold trinkets, with happy owners of iPhone loans, rhyme well, and attempts to build a consumer society where there is essentially nothing to consume, refer to a state of abstract post-socialism. Well, the motive of the journey to the west is consonant with dreams of paradise, if the local semi-pagans allow such a place at all. At the very least, dreams of a better life, where magic will take place and their destructive energies will be balanced. But upon arrival, they discover only a superstructure above the old world. The eternal dialectic of Coca-Cola and dirty jug with water, advertising signs and shabby walls with obscene inscriptions.
But “Gypsy Time” is, of course, something more than stylistic exercises in the spirit of the era. "Time" is about sinful and unhappy people who make a good mine in a hopelessly bad game. In this sense, Kusturica is closer to his comrade in the socialist (not)happiness of Keslevsky, they are related by an atypically touching sympathy for their fallen heroes, rather evil in the cinematic sense of the eighties. Perhaps, only here the Serb manages to perfectly withstand the mood, the famous formula “life as a miracle” acts exactly until the penultimate moment, when a cliff follows. Perhan, his fiancee, and everyone in the camp are looking for God, the only question is whether he left these lands. Can the Kantian imperatives stand under the barbaric pressure of tabula rasa and all-conquering nihilism? The main character compares the god with a “blind kitten”, the angel in a dream is stained with dirt. Jorge Borges was right: the most loyal friends are the departed, the only true paradise is the lost.
I was very surprised to learn that this film came out before “Arizona Dream” and “Life as a Miracle” – the film is much stronger than these two examples. Stronger in drama, imagery and detail.
“To get something, you have to sacrifice something. Here is how to get what you want: a personal choice for everyone.” The main character, Perhan, wants to marry his beloved. But her mother forbids, considering Perhan unreliable: "What have you achieved in life?" At this time, Perhan's grandmother saves the child of a gypsy baron from illness. And asks her to take her youngest granddaughter to the hospital as a fee. Perhan and his sister and Baron Ahmet go to Italy.
How far can a teenager open to the world, sincerely friends with a turkey, go? This boy dies after being threatened with stopping paying for his sister's treatment. Perhan then has a terrible night alone with himself. Then a new Perhan is born - a cruel ruthless. Because I stopped trusting myself.
Colorful characters and details (Drunk Neighbor Trying to Jump His Shadow) Uncle Perhan, who knows how to move his mustache and parody Chaplin, the villagers and the main characters - Kusturica gathered in the frame unusual and spectacular people (the same Perhan - the viewer gets acquainted with him as an awkward teenager in clothes with someone else's shoulder and glasses, one glass of which is taped with paper).
The music in Kusturica’s films is a separate “song.” It rarely sounds from a synthesizer, more often it is a live orchestra. Due to this, the music is “personal”, characterizing a specific provincial town or a specific character.
The turkey thought and thought, but got into the soup
The young gypsy Perhan lives with his grandmother, sister Dacea and his closest friend, a thinking turkey, in a village on the outskirts of Sarajevo. After his beloved bird is killed, Perhan is given the magical ability to move objects and perform miracles. But the need to earn money for a wedding in order to marry his beloved Azra forces him to travel to Milan with Roma Baron Ahmet. In addition, Ahmet promises Perhan to put Datsa in a hospital where she can be relieved of lameness.
I remember the July 1989 Moscow. Second perestroika festival. Stars are still in abundance, although less than in 1987, but, most importantly, movies. All the best in world cinema for the year: “Sky over Berlin”, “Short film about love”, “Landscape in the fog”, “Pelle – the conqueror”, “Reader”... July 9, the third day of the festival, in the “Horizon” evening session (of two tapes) for film clubs: “Deadly bound” by Cronenberg and “House to hang” Kusturica. After the film Kusturica it becomes clear that the festival for me personally took place. Everything else will be under his sign.
For the sake of this one film was worth flying across half the country: still, 25 years later, before my eyes is a wedding scene on the river, flooded with magical golden light and music Bregovic. At such moments, neophytes go to the cinema to never get off this needle again. Purely cinematic initiation... But why only neophytes? Fans of Tarkovsky, and in our country then every second sinophile was brought up on his films, could not but catch the roll call with “Andrey Rublev”, at least with the same novel about the pagan holiday. But there was a completely different Tarkovsky. If you like, multiplied by Fellini. But with his magic.
In fact, with this film, Kusturica began, in which fiction and realities formed his unique poetic style. It was here that he first derived the formula of his unique language, here began his journey into the dream world, which will become decisive for subsequent paintings. Epic lyricism, unearthly and unborrowed visual images, ethnographic poetics, when the mentality is determined not by nationality, but exclusively by the state of the soul. All elements embodying corporate identity are present in this ballad about Serbian Roma.
The inseparable combination of comic and tragic, deceptively improvisational and uninhibited poetics of the director, not for the first time inspired by the uncomfortably gypsy life, all this anticipated the international success of the film, in which Kusturica was assisted by the brilliant operator Wilko Filac. And the accordion melody of Maurice Jobert from Atalanta was supplemented here by the music of Goran Bregovic, who processed kitschy and eclectic, but always exciting gypsy motifs, which will then pass from film to film.
Kusturica himself, meanwhile, in that hot July summer was in Moscow, easily met with the audience, not feeling like a canonized classic, although he already had one “Golden Palm” in his wallet. And two months before the Moscow premiere in the Cannes competition, he almost repeated his success four years ago, “limited to” the prize for best Director. But the main merit of “Time of the Gypsies” (this is the international title of the film), the author himself believes that in his native Yugoslavia (which is no longer on the map) the film was watched by more than a million people.
The film came out in a purely author’s style, which manages to do without the usual surrealism, but at the same time combine a rather sublime philosophy, comedic farce and believable “lifetime”.
I’m not sure exactly what Kusturica wanted to explain, but for me, the film is about the difference between his and his . And in almost universal meaning, but shown rather "blurred" (in a good sense).
The hero’s initial dream about the river, in which he approaches his beloved girl and they go to the boat, shows something like a dream that he loses in the course of the film.
Some footage later reminds of her, but their content is already perverted. And the “perversion” begins from the moment when the characters are trying to find ways to “break through” through metabolic processes. If we speak in a working way, then from the fact that the grandmother wanted to use the gift given to her above, to receive for the healing of the son of the baron as a payment for the treatment of her granddaughter. I do not undertake to prove from a moral point of view the incorrectness of her actions and the correctness of her thoughts, since Kusturica did not try to do this in the film, for which the film is plus, by the way.
Then the events unfold so that the main character, who went with his sister, changes greatly, for which life punishes him. By facilitating the sale of other people’s children, he thinks he is getting “into the people.” And really "knocks out": starting minutes from the twentieth film, he looks decent, his slowly begin to respect others. But just the only really bright event in his life remained in the first minutes: when he, frankly far from the image of a sex symbol, even by the standards of his village, unreasonably and unselfishly fell in love with a girl.
The short phrase of one of the third-planned heroes of the film - that if the main character lends him money, and he dies, then who will repay the debt - hints that if I messed up with the search for the meaning of the film, it is not too.
Returning to the plot of the film, I assume that the further loss of everything that the hero was about to begin to cherish is associated not only with the impact of the surrounding conditions, but also with the hero himself. Then he writes in letters to his grandmother that he stopped trusting himself and at that moment stopped trusting others, that he stopped dreaming, that his dreams turned to dust.
Although if you dig the film from the opposite, you can see that the beginning of everything was the mother of the girl, who actually sold her daughter, wanting to marry a rich man.
9 out of 10
Multifaceted, but brilliantly understandable movie.
To begin with, this is one of those movies that is very difficult to talk about. You have to watch them. It seems that the film said almost everything about the previous authors. Nevertheless, I want to contribute to the support of the brilliant film.
The film opens with a story about a small gypsy village. We are introduced to the family: the main character is Perhan, who for the first half an hour of the film walks in such bizarre glasses with glued glass. He also knows how to move small metal products with his eyes; his sister Danira, an older brother - a loser player and grandmother. Perhan is engaged in mining and burning lime and then the family sells it. He is friends with a girl Azra from a fairly well-to-do family, with whom Perhan has no relationship. The girl's mother believes that her daughter deserves a better suitor. Meanwhile, Perhan’s brother, once again losing everything to a penny, breaks down the house in despair. Perhan decides to go to Italy with his acquaintance Roma Ahmet, on the way to the hospital his disabled sister, for the treatment of which requires a large amount of money. Ahmet promised to help build a new home. In Italy, Perhan steals and sells children and begins to save money. Returning to his home with a large sum of money, he further upsets his grandmother. Perhan learns that Azra is pregnant, but he doesn’t believe the baby is his. And soon he learned that Ahmet had deceived him - he took Danira from the hospital on the second day and forced him to collect alms in Rome, and he did not intend to build any house. Perhan, after finding his sister in Italy, returns home, but is driven by a thirst for revenge on Ahmet, whom he believed as his own father.
The film is brilliant among many other things, in particular its unique aroma. That most noisy, in something reckless, in something fun, very special, gypsy atmosphere. The first part of the film, when we are shown the village and introduced to the family of the main character, looks even in something very comical. Gradually, this comic and very idle mood of the film disappears. We see Perhan transforming from a simple, hard-working young man into a rather serious, very cynical man. This cynicism was very clearly shown in the scene when Azra tells Perhan that she is pregnant with him. He does not believe and says that this child should be sold to her immediately, and then they will make their own.
In my opinion, the movie is very original. Very clear and understandable to every more or less adult. If someone thinks that something too “serious” (in terms of perception) will be shown here, then this is not true. We see the story of a young man who first appears to us as an absolute positive character who falls in love with a wonderful girl. He plays harmonica to his grandmother and is very attached to his homemade turkey. And then we see how the person begins to change and by the end of the film he is no longer seen as an absolutely positive hero.
It would seem that we have already seen stories about how a person was corrupted by money, bad company, criminal connections, etc. But I don’t think I’ve ever had a mixed sense of the hero. Closer to the finale of the film, we understand that Perhan himself was cruelly deceived and used in fact as a “pawn”.
The canonical title of the film, in my opinion, was chosen more successfully. The Hanging House sounds like a horror movie. True, of course, and “Time of the gypsies” sounds a bit pathetic. Technically, the film is not at the highest level. The unique music of Bregovic, hearing which sometime later, you will instantly begin to scroll through the scenes of this wonderful film in your head. My personal opinion is that this is the best film of Kusturica. It is both complex and multifaceted, but so brilliantly understandable.
10 out of 10
The great film of the great master. Although I am not a big fan of this, of course, talented director, but after watching this film (and I watched literally on a laptop on my lap) I will look at all his works that I have not yet had time to appreciate.
The plot captures if not from the first minutes, then after 15 for sure. Very well revealed the image of the main character, the whole film did not leave a dual relationship to Perhan. On the one hand, you worry about him and want only the best, on the other you understand where he is going in his career and what it promises him. It is interesting to observe the growth and changes of Perhan, his inner struggle. Although outwardly he became more and more courageous, cynical and detached criminal, inside he remained the same naive young man who had only recently learned to kiss. It begins to change for the better, as it often happens, too late.
The selection of actors is perfect, everyone fits into their roles as well as possible, the overall picture looks very natural and organic. What is the image of Ahmed, the leader of a gypsy group of thieves and binders, his character has a powerful negative message, personifies meanness and betrayal, such a person will not disdain anything, for the sake of achieving his own goals. Towards the end of the film, this becomes obvious, especially after the main character visits his hometown. Also remembered a colorful grandmother-healer. A strong woman who takes care of her slacker son and two grandchildren, she carries goodness, humility and prudence, although not without eccentricity.
The game is also at a very good level, the dramatic scenes really touch. Sometimes there are excesses, but in the films of Kusturica I see it all the time, so it’s a feature, not a bug.
I was waiting for the theme of the gift of the main character and his family to be revealed, unfortunately, this did not happen. Even proper application for the whole film did not follow, except for the final scene (ops, I hope not spoiler).
Of course, it was not without animals. It turns out that turkeys are no worse than dogs can be loyal and even save a person’s life. One of the most tragic moments of the film, at least for me, was about her.
In general, the impressions of the film are very strong, despite the specificity of the director,
9.5 out of 10