Oh dear. I know I took some cold medicine before watching this but I don't think that has really impeded my faculties all that much. Maybe I just don't know enough about Russian history but I really had no clue what was going on for most of this movie. The basic concept is a journey through the Russian State Hermitage Museum. There's an unseen narrator through whose eyes we see the movie and a "Stranger" (as credited) who we see but we don't know where either of these men came from, who they are, why they are in the Hermitage, or what exactly they are doing there. We go through the museum encountering various people, some historical figures (Catherine the Great, Anastasia, etc) and some people dressed in period costume and others dressed in more modern clothes. No on can see or hear the unseen narrator except the Stranger (and he can't always) and some people but not all can see/hear the Stranger. Sometimes we stop to look at a piece of art, sometimes we sort of dizzily go through the gallery. Sometimes we just stare at the piece, sometimes there is a little history given. All of it is sort-of odd. There's no discernible plot although there may be more metaphorical or symbolic meaning than I can gather. And there is certainly no character development.
Technically, it's a fantastic, ingenious, well-constructed movie. It's all one take. All 90+ minutes were taken in one go. The tag line is, "2000 Actors. 300 years of Russian History. 33 Rooms at the Hermitage Museum. 3 Live Orchestras. 1 Single Continuous Shot." While the 300 years of Russian history were a bit over my head, I certainly caught the huge cast, many rooms, orchestras and that all of that was caught in one take with no editing. There are some very noticeable "oh, shit, don't look at the camera" moments as well as some "go completely dead eyed and pretend the camera/cameraman isn't there" moments--but obviously pretending to ignore a camera and cameraman you have to navigate around must have been difficult, I just fine the obvious darting eye-aversions amusing.
For the technical aspects, the movie is well worth watching. Just don't watch it for a plot or characters.
2 comments:
Hah! I bet we're the only two people in the city who have seen TRA! You were much kinder to it than I was. Of course, I saw it in the theatre, where there was no escape, and was bored out of my mind. I grew to hate that little dude, and the way he would cross his arms behind his back.
Had I been confined to a theater, I don't think I would have had the same reaction. In the coziness of my bed, I played on my laptop for at least a third of the movie . . .
If we had some sort of points system for the 1001 movies, we'd have to assign more for "in theater" viewing. That's just way different when it's bad.
Post a Comment