writing - visual - misc - huh?
after the first few minutes of russian ark you find yourself irritated. something isn't right, you notice. perhaps it is the fact that there hasn't been a single cut in the film?
aleksandr sokurov brings us his unique vision of russian history through the medium of the hermitage museum. his camera follow a one-take (i repeat, one take) arc through a dialogue of russian history and culture.
the camera pursues a stranger through the hermitage on a course that tracks hundreds of years of development in russian history. if you know nothing of russian history this film will likely bore you silly, beyond the pure aesthetics of sokurov's cinematically delicious vision. however, if you can follow the events and characters you will find yourself treated with a commentary on the development of russia through several troubling time periods.
what the non-russophile may find more stimulating is the bonus documentary that traces the development and realisation of the film. for instance, it is impossible not to be astounded by the incomparable (borderline inhuman) steadicam work of tilman büttner. tilman is the kind of cinematographer you can only hope to work with as a filmmaker.
russian ark is a technical feat worthy of admiration, regardless of how much you appreciate russian culture. while you get the feeling that the one-take film is something of a gimmick (i didn't know this was a one-take film until watching the documentary, and thought i saw convenient cut points throughout), sokurov's intent is compelling.
{October 04, 2004 09:03 PM}