Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Tarkovsky-esque, 12 Feb 2009
Slow starter, setting the mood for the film as a bit of a patience-tester, but the rewards are good. Definite resonance of Tarkovsky with prolonged focus on the elements and equally 'photographic' as it is film. The 'twist' is unusual and you might say feminist - that's the feeling I was left with, anyway. Philosophical, enchanting, mellow and beautifully shot - a film certainly worth the patience to watch it.
|
|
|
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Terrific film, underrated by the critics, 16 April 2009
The critical consensus of The Banishment on its theatrical release was that, while stunningly beautiful and excellently acted, it is unoriginal and narratively confused. In fact, reading the reviews at the time of its belated UK release, it almost seemed as if the reviewers had for some reason clubbed together to ensure that none of them went out on a limb to give it too much praise. There was an excess, we were told, of characters gazing wordlessly into the distance, like a parody of an Antonioni movie; there was too much heavy-handed symbolism; too much music by cult composer Arvo Part; the characterisation was psychologically implausible; above all, the film fell well short of the achievement of The Return, the director`s debut feature. Nearly all the reviewers seemed to have identical opinions.
So I was anxious to see whether a second viewing of this intense family drama would confirm my initial enthusiastic response, and the answer is an emphatic "yes". Again, the 160 minutes, which seemed more like 60, are utterly gripping throughout, though concentration is required. Yes, there are scenes where characters gaze wordlessly into the distance, but far less than the reviewers imply, and it is wholly in keeping with the characters' predicament. Some reviewers complained, for example, about an early scene on a train where husband and wife sit opposite one another not saying a word; it is perfectly obvious that it is because they are very tired, even asleep!
Having got that off my chest, you will want to know what this outstanding film is about. It is based on a little-known story by the American writer William Saroyan, and is set in a vaguely East European environment (filmed, we are told, in Moldova and Belgium). There are two brothers, Alex and Mark, with unspecified criminal connections. Alex, played by the superb Konstantin Lavronenko (the gloomy father from The Return), takes his wife Vera and their two young children to stay at his late father's house in the country. Alex and Vera are strangely uncommunicative, until Vera drops a bombshell which causes Alex to call in Mark to help him. This leads to a tragic turn of events, with an extended flashback near the end which simultaneously helps to explain things and confounds our previous assumptions. It is this flashback, which on first viewing I completely misunderstood, which some reviewers thought was clumsily handled; I would prefer to say that it is introduced in too original and subtle a manner. The Banishment is a film that, like Hitchcock's Vertigo, you have to see a second time in order to concentrate on a particular character, and particularly on the dialogue.
Zviagintsev has, to my mind, established himself as a hugely visionary director, whose debt to Tarkovsky is obvious. He is in a long line of supreme Russian directors of children (see, for example, Tarkovsky's Ivan's Childhood, Klimov's Come And See, and Kravchuk's recent debut feature The Italian). He is a master at creating an ominous, portentous, threatening mood (and this is where Arvo Part's music helps).
If The Banishment had been Zviagintsev's first feature, I suspect that the reviewers of our daily and Sunday newspapers would have hailed it as an out-and-out masterpiece. But they seem afraid of heaping too much praise on the second film of a "difficult" director whose first was such a critical triumph; they prefer the safety of a Batman or Harry Potter movie, entertaining but otherwise pointless.
The only DVD extra of any interest is a 20-minute interview with the director, who emphasises that, though the film is in Russian, it is deliberately not set in any specific country or, indeed, time. I think the newspaper reviewers should give this film another try, and, for anyone who has not seen it, please do so!
|
|
|
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Credit where credit is due., 9 Jan 2009
This film is incredibly shot.
That could well be where my review should stop - because it truly is one of the most thought-over and well composed films I've ever seen.
Even if you were just to absorb the imagery without sound it would not take you long to bring about comparisons to Tarkovski and Kieslowski (among other greats). The camera sweeps though scenes in a beautifully choreographed manner in an attempt to deliver the surroundings to the viewer with as much depth as the story itself.
Sadly this is where it fails.
The story is little more than a guild, leading the camera through these beautiful shots and at no point did I feel the plot took presidence over the camerawork. Because of this the characters and their situation is very hard to relate to, which I think makes pinnacle scenes in the film fail on there impact.
It is a wonderful film that nearly captures the coldness of Tarkovski's "Stalker" but after the (slight) endurance cannot deliver to the extent of "The Sacrifice".
This film is another landmark in world cinema - I just don't believe the story does it any true justice.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|