Own the rights?
21 out of 26 people found the following comment useful :- Don't be tricked, 14 January 2005 Author: MikeH111 from United States
Don't be tricked by the rating. This movie is wildly, unforgivably underrated on IMDb. To speak of its beauties would take me volumes. Suffice it to say: find it, if you can (it may be still available in good video stores, on VHS) and be enthralled by one-of-a-kind movie. As opposed to overrated 8+ 9+ c... like American Beauty or the Korean Oldboy and other movies full of either vapid pomposity or of guts and gore and blood and nonsense, Komissar is an extraordinarily beautiful and fluent meditation on human nature, war, religion, childhood, good and evil. Miss it at your own peril.10 out of 10
11 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :- this film shows the beauty and courage of a family caught in the midst of war., 14 May 2004 Author: jlawrenc from clinton, NY
Throughout the movie, `Commissar', the innocence and naivety of the children allows them to be used as a medium through which many emotions can be conveyed. Sheltered from reality by their youth, the actions of children reflect their environment, unhindered as they are by experience, opinions, or understanding. The actions of a child are not filtered by taboos; the actions are pure and unadulterated regurgitations of the world around them.The example that stands out the most in the film is that of the playful pogrom. The actions of the three children, taken against the fourth, are a horrible reflection of the world they live in. However, this is not the only such example. In fact, the same concept, used in the very next scene, shows a beautiful reflection of the strength and courage of a family caught in the maelstrom. As the bombs begin to fall, and the children all begin to wail within the cellar, it falls on Efim to hold everything together. He does this in an incredibly powerful scene, standing up in the middle of his family and beginning to dance. Instinctively the children stand up to join their father in an act they are obviously as familiar with as the pogrom, and are placated by mimicking the ritualistic, soothing moves of their father. Whether or not they understand the significance of the dance, just as they may or may not fully understand the pogrom, is irrelevant to them. All that is important is that it and their father are there to give them comfort.Through the same general device, two very different ends are achieved. Many responses stressed the horrifically moving quality of the pogrom scene, but fail to mention the beauty and hope of a father dancing with his children, while the world rips itself apart around them.
7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :- Masterpiece, forbidden for 20 years, 2 October 2002 Author: eva25at from Vienna, Austria
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
***Possible Spoilers***During the russian civil war the soviets occupy the Ukraine. Sometimes the "whites" move forward, killing and expulsing the population, sometimes the Ukrainians strike back. Destroyed villages, deserted homes, fortified houses where the inhabitants take shelter behind bullet-riddled walls.The soviet commissar Klavdia Vavilova (Nonna Mordyukova) takes a rest and goes to the sauna before consigning a deserter to the firing squad. She is expecting her baby soon, three months in the saddle, and the doctor refused her an abortion - even at pistol-point. She can not go on, and so, the commander of her troup announces to Yefim Mahzannik (Rolan Bykov): "Make room!". Mahzannik, a jewish taylor is none too enthusiastic to welcome a soviet commissar under his roof. His large family is already living in just one room, and he promises his wife: "Don't worry. I'll chase her away".But he doesn't. On the contrary: his family shares their meagre provision with her. Potatoes, bread, tea, even sugar is rationed. She gets her host's slippers, he makes her a dress, and the entire family helps her with the delivery of her baby-son. Proudly she goes on a walk with her new shoes and lets her baby be baptized in the ruins of a former church.She is discovered by her old troup. The "whites" are advancing and they suggest she should join the hospital train. Her hosts know that their enemies are near. They raise barricades to protect their homes and their synagogue ("They will look for a scapegoat. And who is always guilty in this world? I ask you: who?"). They remember the massacre on the Boers and the Armenians ("Who will cry if I'm no longer there?"). Klavdia tries to console them ("One day people will work in peace and harmony"), but in a hellish vision she sees the fate of the jewish people: long rows of fugitives, concentration camps...She gives her son the breast one last time and tells him who his parents were. Then she joins her troup, leaving him behind. Mahzannik finds the abandoned child and wonders: what kind of person was she?Made in 1967, this film was not released at all, but moldered on a shelf for 20 years until mosfilm restored it in the glasnost-era and showed it to a fascinated audience. It won the special prize of the jury and the silver bear at the berlinale 1988. The reason for this ban was obvious: this is a pro-semitic film that shows the occupation of the Ukraine in less than heroic terms.The Soviet Union may have been behind the iron curtain, but it was certainly not behind the moon: Director Alexander Askoldov is not only the heir of an impressive film-history (Eisenstein), but clearly inspired by such contemporaries as Pasolini and Bergman. Helped by his cameraman Valeri Ginsburg he produces enormous set-pieces and unforgettable images: Little boys and girls exercising with guns, sandstorms in the desert, whipped horses, harnessed horses, fleeing without their riders, naked skin, sweat, people making love near a gigantic cannon. There are surreal shots like the one where soldiers "reap" the desert sand with scythes, or the one where thirsty men drink from a river - the camera turns a 180 degrees, and the river "drinks" them...There are scenes from a jewish wedding, where the couple starts a race with their horse-carriage - against another couple, a christian one. When Yefim senses the extermination of his family he starts a macabre "dance of death" as if to defy their destiny. Two scenes are especially shocking: Yefim's children playing "rape" and tying up a frightened little girl on a swing, and a young russian soldier, playfully "shooting" the children with his finger. We fear what will happen when he comes back...All these sequences are genially underscored by Alfred Schnittke's groaning, atonal music.The performances are nothing short of brilliant. Mordyukova - a tall, plump woman dressed like a man, forced to behave like one. When she changes in a dress and holds her baby in her arms, she becomes unbelievably beautiful, like a madonna. Her goodbye to her child ("Your mother was Vavilova") could melt a stone. Rolan Bykov is the ancestor of Topol in "Fiddler on the roof" and Roberto Begnini in "Life is beautiful". Need I say more? This film is thrilling and gripping, a genuine masterpiece.10/10
5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- Contemplative and beautiful., 9 March 2001 Author: dave-39 from Uppsala, Sweden
I saw this film maybe 10 years ago on a fairly large screen in Uppsala, and I've tried to locate on VHS or DVD (not likely) ever since, with no luck so far.As I remember, I was impressed with the contemplative mood of the film. You have the typical Russian feeling of hardship found in many films, but it is overshadowed by a sense of family-warmth which all-in-all gives you a positive experience.There's one particular scene which I will never forget, and consists of a girl on a swing. The scene is beautifully shot at a low angle, and one of the most telling pieces of film art I've ever seen, despite the simple setup.If you have the chance, see it!
6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :- This is cinema, 19 August 2007 Author: hoobits from United States
A film on the same echelon as Kilmov's Come And See, Jancsó's The Red and The White, Shepitko's Ascent and the great Russian silents as well as the vanguard 60s cinema. This is one of those films where image and sound form a perfect marriage committing to screen an onslaught of ingenious, uproarious and emotional imagery marred with wonderful sound design and score, all strung together by ingenious editing. This is cinema.The story is one of a Red Army woman officer during the Russian civil war, who ends up pregnant and is forced to live with a Ukrainian Jewish family, who has been used and abused countless times by the red and the whites. This is a story of humans coming together and setting aside their differences and understanding each other amongst suffering and strife. It is a test of loyalty to one's self, one's family, one's country.Commissar was banned on its initial completion and writer/director Aleksandr Askoldov was kicked out of the Communist party and not allowed to work in the film business in any form again. It wasn't until 1988 that the ban was lifted and the soundtrack remastered/re-done along with a reconstruction of the picture, which was fairly intact. But not until now has it been wildly available so I really would urge anyone who enjoys Kurosawa, Tarkovsky, Tarr or any of the before mentioned films to seek this one out. The US DVD from Kino is probably their best transfer yet; very pristine and sharp with no a lot of dirt or scratches, although it is from a PAL source so there are some ghosting effects on large movements, making the picture look simultaneously in slow mo and normal frame rate
5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :- A period film showing a microcosm of the Russian Revolution, 13 March 1999 Author: cm-4 from Idaho Falls
During the Russian Revolution, the Red army enters an isolated town and leaves behind a female revolutionary, Klavdia, who has become unexpectedly pregnant. Klavdia stays with a Jewish family to have her baby.A remarkable film, but one which was left unfinished. The director, Aleksandr Askoldov, is only credited with one movie, and it as if he put a lifetime of ideas into this single film.
2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :- Reality vs. Fairy tales, 20 September 2008 Author: gentendo from United States
From staunch militant to sensitive mother, Vavilova's search for self-identity is one that creates meaningful stories, both internally and externally. She is a very curious character. With masculinity and devout patriotism as two of her defining qualities, she does not subscribe to the typical female persona (at least in the beginning).Each quality creates a thought provoking dynamic for how she faces internal and external wars. Her internal war is pregnancy. As the child grows within her poses a threat to her masculinity, a subsequent external war is created—that is, the child additionally poses a threat to her patriotic rank as Commissar. Although both wars throw her life into a state of imbalance, they also help develop her in becoming a more volitional and rounded character. In particular, her internal war creates maternity and sensitivity—two qualities that lacked in her previous commanding status.She acquires both qualities after giving birth; this is depicted when singing a lullaby to her sleeping babe as well as when emotionally breast-feeding him (two actions which run contrary to her initially bleak and cold persona). Her external war (i.e. love of country), so too created by the pregnancy, introduces the most difficult challenge she has to face in the film: the choice of whether to marry herself to her country by divorcing from her child, or keeping her child and ridding her patriotism.What draws her to eventually side with her country is a series of haunting flashbacks and clairvoyant visions. In one specific moment while suffering through the birthing process, her mind flashes to a dreary landscape filled with military soldiers, who, like herself, struggle to push a heavy piece of artillery up the side of a steep and sandy hill. This image evokes at least one particular meaning—one which acts like a stepping stone to help Vavilova make her final decision when giving up her child: The collective group pushing the machine uphill is a type of not only the communist ideals that Vavilova stands for, but is also a metaphor for the strenuous birthing process itself. In other words, the birth of a child and the birth of a nation are equally painstaking tasks—both which require exertion (i.e. masculinity) and loyalty (i.e. patriotism).The flashback ends with her waking up in panic, repeating to herself several times: "Stop torturing me." These words speak on multiple levels. In one sense, she is tired of being mentally tortured from the government that oppresses her with stringency. In another sense, she is tired of being physically tortured during the birthing process. Rich is the emotion and meaning of this flashback, and consequently it later leads to an extremely significant clairvoyant vision.During this vision she witnesses the forthcoming holocaust of WWII. She sees herself with child swaddled in arms, shuffling amongst a sheepish group of Jews as they wander to their death chambers. Reluctant to follow what she sees, it's as if she's asking herself while in vision, "Is this my fate?" Her subtexual obstinacy kicks in: "No, it can't be." She is the author of her choices and will not be subject to any deterministic beliefs. She feels she can change this outcome, but she must act now. However, the choice to act is a difficult one given her present circumstance. What choice does she make: raise her child or fight for her country? She cannot do both, for by focusing on one the other is inevitably sacrificed. Where, then, is optimism to be found in her utterly bleak and tortured world? The aesthetics of the film help contribute to this bleakness by the director's choice of shooting the story in black and white. Only in a world like Vavilova's are colors of the rainbow absent. The black and white look is a reflection of the coldness she feels inside, empty of any optimism. Interestingly enough, however, the Jews surrounding her in vision seem to be optimistic—they raise their arms in an almost dance-like ritual, knowing full well that death will soon embrace them all. She steps back nervously. Her body language has spoken. She remembers back on the corrupt youth that exist in her present—the ones who so ignorantly mimic their corrupted elders—and feels an obligation to save the youth, and particularly her own child from such corruption. Although most of this is more or less implied, I strongly believe that this extraction is highly plausible given her final decision.She does not abandon her child, though some may argue so. She leaves her child in the hands of a very nurturing family; ones who she could trust since they too had nurtured her during her period of birth and even rebirth. Holding the confidence that her child will be safely watched after, she returns to her former state of balance by joining the war effort. She has rediscovered her meaning, place and identity in life: she is a warrior. Her life cannot be lived in fairy tales, like Yefim suggested when turning the war into a theatrical play for his children. Her life must be lived in truth and in truth only. That is the film's predominant theme: Despite how ugly the truth of reality is—even during times of war and torture—it must be embraced and dealt with; not thrown to some fantasy that creates false optimism. By living in a fairytale, she potentially falls prey to becoming a victim of the holocaust; by living in truth, she attempts to reverse the effects of such an outcome by fighting the monster of war.
4 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :- Christianity in Komissar, 17 November 2006 Author: eluriajen from Tucson, AZ
The Komissar is successful because it is thought provoking and evokes emotion from the viewer. Interestingly, although this film deals with a Jewish family and various issues of Judaism, the careful observer notices that the film is also full of symbols of Christianity. In fact, there are so many of these examples that it leads the viewer to wonder whether the filmmaker may have intended to make a commentary on the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Although modern Christianity and Judaism are quite different from each other, they have very similar backgrounds. Indeed, prior to the birth of Jesus, they were both one religion, and became separate because Jews refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah, while Christians believed that his life was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.Some of the Christian symbols in the film are less conspicuous than others, and blend into the film seamlessly. For example, there are several scenes in the film that show crosses in the background. At one point the camera focuses on a cemetery that is filled with crosses. There are also crosses on top of churches in many scenes. The connection between Judaism and Christianity is apparent in the fact that in one scene the focus shifts back and forth between a Jewish synagogue and a Christian church, which are both being boarded up.The beginning of the film is marked by the perspective of the two female characters, Klavdia and Maria, regarding pregnancy and childbirth. It is significant that Klavdia was an important military figure, but was forced to give up her command because she was pregnant; this would obviously never happen to a man. Although Maria has six children, she talks openly with Klavdia about the pain of childbirth, stating that it "is not good for the mother, the child, or God." The scene where Klavdia gives birth further emphasizes the pain of childbirth. In both Jewish and Christian history, the pain of childbirth is a consequence that God gave to women in response to Eve's decision to tempt Adam with the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden.There is one scene in the film that is particularly touching because it reveals the depth of the relationship between Yefim and Maria, who do not show such blatant affection at any other point in the film. This is the scene where Yefim washes Maria's feet. As he does so, he looks up lovingly into her eyes, and says, "I love you." This scene is both tender, and also a little shocking because throughout the rest of the film Yefim is portrayed as brusque and a little rough around the edges. This is the one time in the film when the viewer is allowed to see through his exterior. It is interesting that the filmmaker chose to use the washing of feet as the interaction between the two characters during this personal moment. The washing of feet is a symbol that relates directly back to Christianity and the Bible, bringing to mind Christ washing his disciples' feet before he was crucified.The film ends with Klavdia's decision to leave her baby with Yefim and Maria. This seems ironic because their relationship did not start out well – Yefim was outraged that Klavdia was taking a room in their house and did everything that he could to resist. Despite the circumstances, however, a friendship developed between the characters, and they learned to trust, and even to like each other. Klavdia chose to leave in order to protect her child, and also the family that she had come to love. She sacrificed herself in order to protect the other characters. Again, this situation seems to parallel Christianity; Christ sacrificed himself to protect his followers.While the main characters of this film are Jewish, it seems noteworthy that there are so many similarities between different aspects of the film and Christianity. If it were only the crosses that served as symbols of Christianity, that might be dismissed as part of the setting of the film, and irrelevant to the story. There are, however, so many different parallels and religious undertones (particularly Christian) that it appears that they should be significant.
4 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :- One must ask: who will remember Yefim?, 18 February 2006 Author: Lee Eisenberg (eisenberg.lee@gmail.com) from Portland, Oregon, USA
Adapted from Vasiliy Grossman's novel, "Komissar" (called "The Commissar" in English) was banned for twenty years in the Soviet Union; the censorship board considered it "pro-Zionist" due to its sympathetic portrayal of Jews. It portrays pregnant commissar Klavdia Vavilova (Nonna Mordyukova) staying with an impoverished Jewish family during the 1918-21 civil war. This is the sort of movie that shows the lives of forgotten people in the midst of world events; the father Yefim (Rolan Bykov) complains of how things have not really improved for the Jews since the revolution. I would say that that's something that historians should note.As an FYI, the woman who is teaching the Russian cinema class here in Lewis & Clark College was at the premiere of "The Commissar" in Moscow in 1987.
1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :- Great film in the tradition of Russian Cinema, 1 November 2008 Author: edmontdantes from Shenzhen, China
I was surprised to hear that "Komissar" was filmed in 1967, a year when the USSR was already firmly past Kruschev's thaw and entering the repressive Brezhnev era, because there is something very "thawish" about this film. The general criticism of war, the dignity of ordinary people during a time of calamities, and the juxtaposition of battles with moments of civilian life, all hearken back to the ideas expressed in "The Cranes are Flying" (1956). As in all Soviet cinema, many of the central ideas are expressed through symbolism. This makes the film somewhat difficult for viewers who are not used to this style, but most people tend to find it refreshing and psychologically stimulating. It certainly prompts more post-film discussions than current American cinema that simply shoves the director's point of view down the audience's throat.Some of the themes that I found particularly interesting were: the use of the innocence of children to depict the horror of war, the image of saddled horses without riders galloping into battle, and, of course, the father dancing in the midst of a bomb raid. Most of all, I thought that the change in Vavilova - going from a rough, battle hardened Red Army officer to a nurturing mother, is the most poignant aspect of this film. The scene where Vavilova is hunted my soldiers for having a child mimics her own persecution of a man who leaves the army to be with his beloved. The soldiers turn out to be figments of her imagination, but the point is obvious. However, Vavilova's decision in the end of the film (which I will not reveal for fear of getting blacklisted by the IMDb NKVD) is puzzling in light of the changes in her character. I suppose that Askoldov's opinion that a person's nature cannot be changed by one experience is contrary to my own optimism. Still, I find the end to be somewhat unrealistic.
Add another comment
