Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews2
vtverb's rating
Plac Zbawiciela is about a contemporary Polish small child family. Bartek and Beata and the children are supposed to move into their dream house - but the developer runs bankrupt and they are forced to move into the flat of Barteks mother - Teresa. It soon goes downwards - Beata is unable to fit into the new life situation, find a job after her continuous studying and cut down on her luxurious expenses on behalf of the family. Her more practical husband is not afraid to express his annoyance, neither his mother, who has got the daughter in law she never could stand inside her doorstep.
The film is a tragedy. This we know from the very first scene, when Teresa receives a telephone regarding her daughter in law and grandchildren, and then breaks down in torment and tears. It is the basso continuo through the whole film, the destiny that we see reveal itself, but we try to fight together with main character - Beata.
Because Beata is a kind of social victim - full of vices, without doubt, even cruel to the only ones she can control - her own children, but with her open heart and faithful feelings she is a contrast and unable to fit into the practical world of everybody else. The film is packed with literary speaking calculating women - young capitalists working in the field of economy. And as the queen of this universe is the steady working Teresa of the older generation, who is an accountant.
And on and on again we see Plac Zbawiciela, Saviours square. But there is no such thing, the square does not exist in Poland, and what we see is the cold (but beautiful, though)naked square of Nowa Huta, Krakow. No monument to be seen, no fundament to rely on.
There is a certain critique of the contemporary lack of social security in the film. If the law had protected the house buyers better, things might have turn out different. A financial situation forcing families to take on to living conditions that are destructive to them is undoubtedly an important theme. But in this film I find such a critique rather shallow and unfit. The description of how the bankruptcy of the developer leads to the families financial crisis is caricated and leads to a lot of unanswered questions. But it doesn't matter. The film is not about that.
The film is about what capitalism does with the human soul. The torment is to see how indifferent and not open to dialog everybody in the film are. Bartek mainly doesn't talk about any problem. Its heartbreaking, how he a couple of times turns down his own children on their bed, obviously expressing a burden on heart. Teresa openly express her dismays and contempt from her matriarcatic position. Most ironic is the moment when Beata finally and heartfelt apologize after a quarrel where her mother of law has attacked her in the cruelest manner. Teresa then "forgives" her - saying "Yes, such you are to learn in life". The other characters are giving disturbing unemphatic answers like "You want me to say it will be better?" or "You want me to say Im sorry?".
No salvation found. But there is something to contemplate upon; Teresa's agony in the first scene compared with her jeremiads over her lost money in the building project. A smile, a kiss, laughter is still for free. They still have two well born children and do not starve. So why is no salvation found? When the tragedy is fulfilled, we see sun shines on gigantic stone monument of the Virgin and Saviour, then a picture of a mother taking care of her child in a wagon. And the films twisted end bears a kind of beautiful salvation, revealing step by step, but not without sorrow, loss and contemplation.
The film is a tragedy. This we know from the very first scene, when Teresa receives a telephone regarding her daughter in law and grandchildren, and then breaks down in torment and tears. It is the basso continuo through the whole film, the destiny that we see reveal itself, but we try to fight together with main character - Beata.
Because Beata is a kind of social victim - full of vices, without doubt, even cruel to the only ones she can control - her own children, but with her open heart and faithful feelings she is a contrast and unable to fit into the practical world of everybody else. The film is packed with literary speaking calculating women - young capitalists working in the field of economy. And as the queen of this universe is the steady working Teresa of the older generation, who is an accountant.
And on and on again we see Plac Zbawiciela, Saviours square. But there is no such thing, the square does not exist in Poland, and what we see is the cold (but beautiful, though)naked square of Nowa Huta, Krakow. No monument to be seen, no fundament to rely on.
There is a certain critique of the contemporary lack of social security in the film. If the law had protected the house buyers better, things might have turn out different. A financial situation forcing families to take on to living conditions that are destructive to them is undoubtedly an important theme. But in this film I find such a critique rather shallow and unfit. The description of how the bankruptcy of the developer leads to the families financial crisis is caricated and leads to a lot of unanswered questions. But it doesn't matter. The film is not about that.
The film is about what capitalism does with the human soul. The torment is to see how indifferent and not open to dialog everybody in the film are. Bartek mainly doesn't talk about any problem. Its heartbreaking, how he a couple of times turns down his own children on their bed, obviously expressing a burden on heart. Teresa openly express her dismays and contempt from her matriarcatic position. Most ironic is the moment when Beata finally and heartfelt apologize after a quarrel where her mother of law has attacked her in the cruelest manner. Teresa then "forgives" her - saying "Yes, such you are to learn in life". The other characters are giving disturbing unemphatic answers like "You want me to say it will be better?" or "You want me to say Im sorry?".
No salvation found. But there is something to contemplate upon; Teresa's agony in the first scene compared with her jeremiads over her lost money in the building project. A smile, a kiss, laughter is still for free. They still have two well born children and do not starve. So why is no salvation found? When the tragedy is fulfilled, we see sun shines on gigantic stone monument of the Virgin and Saviour, then a picture of a mother taking care of her child in a wagon. And the films twisted end bears a kind of beautiful salvation, revealing step by step, but not without sorrow, loss and contemplation.
"Landscape after a battle" opens with escaping prisoners over a snowy field full of fences - in rather funny movements accompanied by Vivaldis Four Seasons. A touching opening. But we soon enough learn to know these prisoners as a mob, and when they (also treated humouristic) burry a man alive, the protagonist stops for a moment, but is soon more engaged in finding books from the turndowned camp than caring about his neighbour.
The rest of the film is set in an American camp from where the prisoners are not released, in some kind of semi freedom, semi camp. A perfect set for a study of war criminality, American camps, Polish nationalism, Catholisism, grief and human misery in general.
Film makes an important turn. In comes women, and with them film changes light, colour and temper. At the same time it turns out that these prisoners were slaves in Holocaust. I think a main underlying political theme of the film must mankind's treatments of Jews under and after the world war, and not only the Nazi exterminations, but mankind letting it happen - and even forcing them out of Europe after the war. On an emotional level the film is about grief and the problem with letting grief come, how environment makes grief difficult, and how difficult it can be to share grief for people with different experiences.
But the film is a carpet of underlying contradictions,humour, irony and sudden beauty. A couple of times during the film a gypsy prisoner plays on an harp, an emotional tune brutally rejected (filmatically speaking) by the protagonist. That example picks up an important essence of the film's style and theme. When it comes to humour its very comic how the protagonist constantly looses and finds back his glasses, in crowds, in hay stacks etc.
Its not hard to understand Spielberg's respect of Wajda when you see this film. The great treatment of light can be compared with Spielberg on his best. The Grunwald intermezzo speaks for itself. Narrativly it only brings the film out of the camp, but filmatically it brings the film to dream and eternity with profound beauty. Anyhow, there is also another scene I can't let go without comment. Its the Christian Supper. Undoubtly ironical, but simultaneously deeply religious we see the transsubstantiation moment, everybody falling on their knees, while the protagonist is saved from isolation by the priest to serve as a comic altar boy. His bells are mocking the scene, but also gives it emotion and love. When Nina gets her bread, sun light falls upon her and bells ring spheric, its the peak moment of the film.
Main actors are excellent in their roles. Olbrychski as the perfect Wajda protagonist - the doubting reflecting mind, unable to put all the aspects of his mind and emotion into life. Beautiful Celinska is with great body acting debuting in a character unable to express all her inner in her proud movements.
Those who try to describe everything, often are unable to take nothing in consideration. This is what Wajda manages. His films are either very moving, deep or beautifully shot, but pays attention to life's and society's particularity. A moment of joy for one, is the moment of irony for a second, the moment of grief for the third, a moment of nothing for the fourth.
There is at least two reasons to pay attention to Wajdas films of this period. First is the remarkable free expression of deep political impact. This country was the first to overthrow communism twenty years later. Second is the development of a filmatic and narrative language that Kusturica has rose to grandeur.
The rest of the film is set in an American camp from where the prisoners are not released, in some kind of semi freedom, semi camp. A perfect set for a study of war criminality, American camps, Polish nationalism, Catholisism, grief and human misery in general.
Film makes an important turn. In comes women, and with them film changes light, colour and temper. At the same time it turns out that these prisoners were slaves in Holocaust. I think a main underlying political theme of the film must mankind's treatments of Jews under and after the world war, and not only the Nazi exterminations, but mankind letting it happen - and even forcing them out of Europe after the war. On an emotional level the film is about grief and the problem with letting grief come, how environment makes grief difficult, and how difficult it can be to share grief for people with different experiences.
But the film is a carpet of underlying contradictions,humour, irony and sudden beauty. A couple of times during the film a gypsy prisoner plays on an harp, an emotional tune brutally rejected (filmatically speaking) by the protagonist. That example picks up an important essence of the film's style and theme. When it comes to humour its very comic how the protagonist constantly looses and finds back his glasses, in crowds, in hay stacks etc.
Its not hard to understand Spielberg's respect of Wajda when you see this film. The great treatment of light can be compared with Spielberg on his best. The Grunwald intermezzo speaks for itself. Narrativly it only brings the film out of the camp, but filmatically it brings the film to dream and eternity with profound beauty. Anyhow, there is also another scene I can't let go without comment. Its the Christian Supper. Undoubtly ironical, but simultaneously deeply religious we see the transsubstantiation moment, everybody falling on their knees, while the protagonist is saved from isolation by the priest to serve as a comic altar boy. His bells are mocking the scene, but also gives it emotion and love. When Nina gets her bread, sun light falls upon her and bells ring spheric, its the peak moment of the film.
Main actors are excellent in their roles. Olbrychski as the perfect Wajda protagonist - the doubting reflecting mind, unable to put all the aspects of his mind and emotion into life. Beautiful Celinska is with great body acting debuting in a character unable to express all her inner in her proud movements.
Those who try to describe everything, often are unable to take nothing in consideration. This is what Wajda manages. His films are either very moving, deep or beautifully shot, but pays attention to life's and society's particularity. A moment of joy for one, is the moment of irony for a second, the moment of grief for the third, a moment of nothing for the fourth.
There is at least two reasons to pay attention to Wajdas films of this period. First is the remarkable free expression of deep political impact. This country was the first to overthrow communism twenty years later. Second is the development of a filmatic and narrative language that Kusturica has rose to grandeur.