TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

2freensel I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

MisterWhiplash One of the films that has received much acclaim recently has been The Revenant, which is about a trapper who is near-fatally injured, left for dead and literally crawls to survive in the harsh Canadian wilderness. Much as been made of how the filmmakers and cast got through the rough conditions and shot in natural light, but for me for all of its technical virtuosity there was some element of heart missing to it, meaning to be about something but about too many things (revenge, love, indigenous people, regret, being one with nature, etc) and/or there was so many virtuoso camera movements that it called attention to itself. I bring this up because decades ago in the Soviet Union, director Mikhail Kalatozov and Sergey Urusevskiy (cinematographer) crafted their own story of people in the middle of the unforgiving/indifferent wilderness, also with many, many moments (70% of the film, give or take a few percents) where the filmmakers went whole-hog for long takes without cuts in said tumultuous conditions. Yet this worked for me much more, despite a lack of bison and fish eaten live on screen and so on.I don't want to spend the whole review comparing to Inarritu's film, but what I can say is that when you watch Kalatozov's Letter Never Sent, the focus is a little more narrow, so it doesn't go all over the place (it shouldn't have to really). It follows four Russians, three men and one woman, on an expedition in the Taiga (also see Herzog's Happy People for the documentary on this region, but I digress). They're searching for diamonds or precious stones of some sort, and spend weeks (maybe it's months) digging in the ground. They find what they're looking for - it's a very jubilant moment, the kind where Kalatozov and his DP follow Tanya and Sergei as they run through the woods with total excitement (and the camera follows so quickly as to seem like a new type of breathless cinematic expression). And then a gigantic fire breaks out one day when they awake and they have to all fend for their lives and find a way out.As one small point against the movie, the acting is not exactly nuanced (there's no Tom Hardy here, to put it another way), though this is not to say that the performers are at all bad or sub-par. Maybe a few moments are played very big, or expressions of happiness or joy get turned on so fast that the director can barely keep up (or maybe he encouraged it, I don't know). But because it's these four characters only - plus one radio voice from the outside world, not a character but rather a spectral presence - and as their numbers dwindle over the course of the story it becomes even more intense with those alive, we have a point of focus, especially with the early scenes. So as much as I might try to nitpick the acting here and there, the actors do fully commit to *being* Tavya and Sergei.One could criticize it for being so indulgent with its movements, but for me that's what made it stand out as such a gorgeous piece of work. It's poetic in how it charts movement on screen, how figures trace along the edge of a landscape, often in darkness or silhouette, against a backdrop of fire and smoke, or the rays of the harsh Siberian sun and clouds. Not all shots necessarily last 4/5 minutes either, and some are wonderful just for staying on faces; when Tanya and Sergei are having one of their few rests, and they recall a pioneer song from their youth, it's real heartache and nostalgia fused together, and the close-ups cut from one face to the other like it's as natural as anything you've ever seen. But when tension has to rise again, the filmmakers know just how to make things reveal themselves in a way that doesn't feel forced, somehow.If you've seen the director's previous films like I Am Cuba or The Cranes are Flying, you may know what you're in for. If you just happen to pick it up off the shelf knowing nothing about it, Letter Never Sent still triumphs as a work of art - a story that digs deep into the human condition, not simply that to try and survive a situation (though of course there is that, constantly), but also to keep love and hope alive, and what happens when love is found and lost while another's lost story is going on (Tanya and Sergei have this, and it's heartbreaking to watch unfold). Throughout their struggles in the majority of the film, the characters have a constant hope that they'll find somebody, unless, as one character does do, it's time to give up, and I couldn't help but feel like there was a complex set of emotions going on. It's not simply about charting a story of human beings pushed to their absolute limits of durability, or watching them suffer for art (like another film I could think of, it was hard not to at times during this).The direction is sophisticated, challenging, daring, and altogether different from what we get in most movies from any era, and yet through all of its visual flourishes - and there are many shots that, you know, you could hang up on a wall to show as still-image photography of the highest artistic sensibility - it's not really too pretentious. Another thing as well is that it's one of the only Russian films from the era, at least on first thought, that have no real politics to it. Letter Never Sent is brutal but also beautiful cinema from master craftsmen and (semi) talented Russians.

Baceseras A parable intended to glorify self-sacrifice in the cause of building the earthly paradise promised by Communism. The geologist hero has proved by theory that immense diamond reserves must lie under a region of barren wilderness - where no trace of the minerals have ever actually been seen. The spectacular hardships he and his companions undergo are supposed to secure … well, more toil and hardship - but then, in some distant future which no one now living will see, the people will be prosperous and happy.The film conceives happiness and prosperity to be one and the same, the simple working out of a material process, and applies the visual rhetoric of sacred art to materialism. Quite effectively applies it: the explorers are Soviet "New Men" (and one woman), and they bubble with enthusiasm for the Radiant Future; while the landscapes are gorgeously stark, a suitable backdrop for sainthood. (The manly tracker who guides the group is so avid for inhospitable spaces he appears demonic even before the plot requires it.) But the striking look of the film and the thrilling dangers can barely conceal a vein of tawdry sentimentality. It will seem convincing to those who are predisposed to be convinced.

Mithil Bhoras In Mikhail Kalatozov's Letter Never Sent, four geologists are searching for diamonds in the wilderness of Siberia. Three men, one woman. Andrei and Tanya are in love. Sergei is in love with Tanya. Sergei is a strong man who had been on such expeditions but had returned with no luck. He is jealous of the nerdy Andrei's and the beautiful Tanya's relationship but never cares to hide that feeling. Sabinine (The Leader of the expedition) often spends his free time writing letters, which he will never send, to the woman he once loved. This is how the film begins: By presenting a set of characters, each having different perspectives but are present in the wild forests of Siberia for one reason. With the hope of serving their country, they are present there hunting for a diamond vein. It's no surprise that the diamond deposit is discovered in the film after days of hard work. Previous expeditions had failed but this one expedition proved that there indeed was a diamond deposit in Siberia. Soon, the four geologists, filled with zeal and satisfaction, find themselves engulfed by a huge forest fire and completely cut of from the civilized world. Will they survive? Before the opening credits, the film pays tribute to the people of the Soviet Union who have given their lives for the benefit of the country, whether it be astronauts seeking answers for the mysteries of space or geologists going in to the wilderness hunting for diamonds. Throughout the entire film, we see the characters suffering in the piercing cold and bleak atmosphere of Siberia. Their goal at this point is to safely deliver the map, on which the whereabouts of the diamond deposit is marked, to Moscow. We see sacrifice. We witness loss. We witness alienation, hunger, despair. This is where I realized that similar to numerous Soviet films, Letter Never Sent contains shards of Propaganda. Adventure? Nope. I look at this one as a miserable survival film filled with some unnecessary moments of melodrama, patriotism and hyperactivity. The fact is that I don't mind patriotism and propaganda. But in this case it's overdone. I just didn't care for any of the characters. Not even the gorgeous Tatiana Somailova whose performance in the 1957 Soviet Classic The Cranes are Flying (Also directed by Mikhail Kalatozov) was spellbinding. It was because of this film that I was intrigued to check out Letter Never Sent.Now the big question: What relation does the film and it's title have? As stated earlier, Sabinine wrote letters to a woman he loved from his past. He wrote them, feeling nostalgic, without the intention of sending them (Of course, the team is already in the middle of nowhere). This relation is explained further in the final moments of the film but it's significance is again directed more towards patriotism, in my opinion. Another disappointing aspect. Unlike the ingenious masterpiece The Cranes are Flying, this film lacks true emotions. I went in with high hopes of seeing another Soviet masterpiece but eventually I was left disappointed. Albeit this film failed to emotionally engross me, Sergei Urusevsky's miraculous cinematography makes the film worth watching. Urusevsky and Kalatozov have collaborated in multiple films and their most well known work is of course The Cranes are Flying, where the film used astonishing camera- work. Though I believe Letter Never Sent takes it to a whole new level by composing unbelievable images. The camera work is well ahead of it's time. It looked like that the camera glided through the wild fire and the horrible blizzards very smoothly. The technical artistry of this film deserves a standing ovation and at times it completely overpowers the dissatisfying screenplay.On the positive side, Letter Never Sent is one of the strongest proofs of how visually powerful cinema can be. If you ever tell me to compile a top 10 list of the most visually stunning films ever crafted, this one will gladly make it to the top 5. Mr. Urusevsky, you rock. (And I will highly recommend The Cranes are Flying in case you haven't seen it yet).filmsmostbeautifulart.blogspot.in

wheeler-benjamin Saw this at Tribeca Film Festival in Spring 2007, and was absolutely floored. I walked out of the theater afterword amazed at what I'd seen and thrilled that such an amazing film existed and had been maintained by a tiny number of appreciators in such excellent quality for so long.The story is not the strong point of the movie. Rather, as with Terence Malick films, the story is just a starting point for the film, which is another beast entirely. What shines and carries the film from scene to scene is the cinematography. I didn't know if this was happened elsewhere at the time, but I didn't expect to see hand-held camera work in a 1959 Russian film, let alone the kind of early spinning, impossibly-filmed shot that appears early in the film. Later, there is a sequence that makes me long to know how they created the opportunity to film in such conditions.If you've read this far, you must track down this movie. My understanding is that Francis Coppola has a California archive maintain the only copy in the Americas, and that it's usually shown just one a year.