This was not really a film. It had no real plot. It was a brilliantly conceptualized dream. It moved as a dream from beginning to end. Shot from first person, it had all the pre-dawn, dreamy elements that we all have: a stranger that is our friend, endless travel from room to room, characters that reappear briefly, unexplained shifts of time periods, people who see you and interact, people who don't see or hear you at all, and an ending that is a dreamy vision itself.This film was done to show it could be done. It is the ultimate exercise in planning, direction, and camera work.
Is it truly seamless? Maybe, I spotted two possible places that could have been edited (and one furtive glance at the camera). If it were a mere three takes--it would still be an astounding feat.
As for the French diplomat, he was a necessity. He was the Hermitage's Virgil leading a bewildered Dante through the inferno.
This film is craft. It should be enjoyed as such.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Russian Ark -- the Ultimate Seamless Cinematic Feat - albee33 20:22:49 09/11/03 (7)
- You got it right. Now search for the previous commentaries. nt - clarkjohnsen 11:34:18 09/12/03 (6)
- Have you been to Hermitage? (nt) - Victor Khomenko 12:27:31 09/12/03 (5)
- Regrettably, no. But I *am* a hermit. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:21:05 09/13/03 (0)
- It's on my short list . . . . - albee33 13:23:03 09/12/03 (3)
- "that place must be ENORMOUS" No... it's slightly bigger - Victor Khomenko 14:24:51 09/12/03 (2)
- Just like the museum in Baghdad! nt - clarkjohnsen 07:21:55 09/13/03 (1)
- I understand the Redecoration Committee found the inventory short a few items. n - albee33 09:41:57 09/13/03 (0)