 |
The Red and The White by Mikl?s Jancs?
List Price: $29.95Our Price: $18.64You Save: $11.31 (38%)Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Category: DVD See more DVD details
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
DVD detailsActor: Anatoli Yabbarov, Andr?s Koz?k, J?cint Juh?sz, J?zsef Madaras, Tibor Moln?r Director: Mikl?s Jancs? DVD: Region Code 1 Audio: Hungarian (Original Language); Russian (Original Language); English (Subtitled) Format: Black & White, DVD, NTSC, Subtitled, Widescreen Picture Format: 2.35:1 Running Time: 92 minutes DVD Release Date: 2002-01-08 Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated) Studio: Kino Video
DVD Reviews of The Red and The WhiteDVD Review: Non-nurturing and relentless. Summary: 5 StarsThe Red and the White has been listed on some film critics' lists of "hundred greatest films". While it is good to listen to voices of authority, I think many viewers might not see the rationale of such a standing. So I offer this review from the non-expert side of the fence. If you are trying to broaden your horizons by exploring foreign films and have been pleasantly surprised, as I have, at the impressionistic beauty and symbolism of such directors as Bergman, Kurosawa, and Tarkovsky, you may have also been surprised to find many of their films are relatively easy to understand and appreciate. I found The Red and the White, however, not to be one of those films that sings to you and strokes your sensibilities. On the contrary; if you come to this film expecting sensitivity,it is instead likely to be an abrasive experience. I think if you are prepared you can avoid an unpleasant surprise. Probably, most of the discomfort arises because we have been conditioned, especially by American movies, to expect a strong leading player to be featured in every film. This movie displays the antithesis of that notion to about the highest degree of any non-documentary film I've ever seen. Instead, what we see are groups of people in which no individual stands out markedly from the rest, and even those who do achieve a modest screen presence are apt to abruptly be executed without so much as a long sentimental goodbye. So you are continually disconcerted, in watching this film, with having no individual you can latch onto and identify with. To add to this discomfort, the action demands close attention, or you will become hopelessly confused about which side is doing what to whom. You need to get on top of this movie from the start, orient yourself, and pay close attention. Okay, so I'll admit I had to watch it twice to reach this happy state of observation. One thing that has been said about this film is that it is deeply anti-war, and it is. But there is also a bias against the counterrevolutionary White army. Both sides are not portrayed as being equally brutal. The Reds capture some Whites and make them undress. Just when you think they are going to be executed, the commander tells them to go home. The Whites capture some Reds, act as though they are going to give them a chance to go free, then massacre them. The White officers as a group have that arrogant Teutonic Knight look about them. The Cossacks under their command brutalize the civilian population. The Reds are egalitarian and down to earth. The White officers have a frivolous party in the woods where the nurses are made to waltz with one another for their amusement. This movie was commissioned to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the Russian Revolution, so this bias is really no surprise, and was probably obligatory. The power struggle between ideological, national, and ethnic groups is a continual theme, but one which might be missed unless you are able to follow the subtitles closely. It is always of utmost importance for those who hold the upper hand at the moment to establish the affiliation of their captives. Are you Russian? Are you Hungarian? Are you a Red? Are you a landowner? So, the essence of the action is not centered around individuals, but around groups of people who are valued according to their affiliation, not their individuality. Such is the leveling and degrading effect of ideology and warfare, and was probably an intentional message encoded within the historical reenactment of this battle of fifty years before. There are no intimate mood-inducing cinematographic(Whew! Is that really a word?) touches to let you feel you are participating vicariously in an exciting adventure. Much of the action takes place in shots that comprise a panoramic view of the countryside, with the human players looking smaller than life. In one battle scene, the soldiers are so far away, it reminds me of Icarus falling into the sea hardly noticed, in Breughel's famous painting. I think the director Miclos Jancso, while nominally showing the upright cause of the Reds against the corrupt and decadent Whites, found several ways to play a trick on his Soviet sponsors. For instance, a pretty young nurse who has befriended wounded Reds is forced under threat of execution by a White officer who is momentarily the conqueror of that little piece of real estate, to identify the Reds in her care. A moment later, a righteous young Red officer has the comely nurse executed. "There Is No Excuse For Treason!" he cries with zeal. A moment still later, this same officer and his small band of compatriots, singing some kind of Russian "Marseillaise" march against an overwhelming force of Whites and are all slaughtered. You can't help but think that if only this guy had bought it a few minutes earlier, the pretty nurse might still be alive. It must have stuck in the craws of the Soviet censors to see a Communist on film doing all the right ideological things but still looking like a horse's butt. Another device used in the film which seemed subtly subversive to me was that when a position changed hands, as happened numerous times, the new masters of that piece of ground seemed to appear out of thin air to put an end to the current reign. This seemed to emphasize the transitory and relative benefit of being in control, no matter whether you were Red or White. So, for all you prospective watchers, I hope this has been helpful. The first time I watched the film, I found it to be jarring and inaccessible. After thinking about it for a while and then viewing it again, I found it to be quite interesting.
DVD Review: stunning in its understated brutality Summary: 5 StarsMiklos Jancso is unlike any other director ever. Complex movements of the camera and people and things. Random brutality usually not shown graphically overshadows the causes. Seemingly principal characters usually don't last long. Memorable scenes include a birch forest with people flickering in and out of existence and the final battle with its tiny figures falling like dolls. I sampled a few minutes just to make sure the dvd was good and ended up watching the whole thing at 2 am.
DVD Review: Back and forth. Back and forth. Summary: 5 StarsPowerful and provoking elegant film about the futility of war, directed by formalist filmmaker Miklos Jancso. Not for everyone. There is no single narrative-instead, a series of long tracking shots that depict the endless ordering and re-ordering of groups of soldiers and women. Characters come and go--depicted in the odd emotion free acting style typical of director Jancso's ritual filled films.
DVD Review: The Red and the White Summary: 3 StarsIn the 60s Jansco and Forman were 2 of the few windows to the east. I wanted to know what the peoples behind the curtain were like. Were they like us? Were they brainwashed by Communism? Most importantly, did the girls look like (the shot putter) Tamara Press or Zsa Zsa Gabor? Jansco showed us sweeping action across an ageless Volga landscape, centred on a 19th century monastery. The ideologies of Communism and anti Communism clearly meant little to a people who had another priority - real life. As armies advanced and retreated the characters just had to stand still to become heroes or villains. The abiding impression is of total stoicism in the face of random violence by outsiders - which I guess is the inner strength of the peoples living between the ravaged lands from the Baltic to the Bosforus.
DVD Review: The Most Important Hungarian Film Ever! Summary: 4 Stars In a very famous episode of "Seinfeld" Jerry tells Elaine the original title for Tolstoy's "War and Peace" was "War. What is it good for"?
I don't know if there's any truth to that but that could have been the working title for Miklos Jancso's "The Red and the White".
As we watch this film don't be surprised if you have no clue what side the characters are on. Normally that would be a flaw in a film. If we don't understand who the characters are, we can't follow the story. But in this film's case, that's exactly the point. We aren't suppose to know who these characters are. Actually I don't think we ever come to know any of these characters names.
But what makes "The Red and the White" the most important Hungarian film ever made? Much has to do with the time it was made and the film's message.
I don't want to bore you here with a historical and political lecture on the history of Hungary but I suppose some background information is needed.
The film was made in 1967, 11 years after the Hungarian Revolution between the Hungarians and the Soviet Union. If that wasn't enough, the film was shot in the Soviet Union! Try to think about the significance of that. Here is a film that deals with Soviets, Communism and Hungarians! The blood was still fresh on the wall from what happened in '56!
Most people should know the plot behind the film. This is one of the better known Hungarian films and is fairly accessible. Still, I'll give a brief run-down of the plot.
The film takes place in 1919. We are in the middle of a war between the reds (the Bolsheviks') and the whites (Czarists) as the Hungarians have volunteered to aid the Bolsheviks.
As I mentioned earlier we never really know who is on what side. And ultimately that's the message behind the film. War is a senseless confusing act. In Woody Allen's film "Love and Death" Allen's character describes war as the following.."we kill a few Frenchmen, they kill a few Russians and before you know it, it's Easter." Something about war just doesn't seem logical and rational.
But how does Jancso get this point across? It's very interesting what he does with the camera. Pay close attention and you'll notice the camera is never giving us a particular character's POV (point of view).
The camera takes a non-bias stance. It remains on the outside of the action. It is merely an observer, like us. Because of this we can't readily identify with anyone. We never really get close enough to any character or situation long enough to firmly grasp what is really going on.
It must have been a pretty bold statement Miklos Jancso was making at the time. Especially when you put the film in its historical context. I wonder what the reaction was like in Hungary during the film's release. I know just within my own family it stirs strong emotions. I must have seen this film 10 or 15 times (but who's counting anyway). It's my father's favorite movie.
Jancso usually pushed the envelope in his films. They make very bold political statements. In some ways I can see "Hungarian Rhapsody" being played on the same bill as this movie. If you're interested try to make a double feature night for yourself.
Here is a film that is truly unforgettable, bold and powerful. It doesn't back down. For political and social reasons it is the most important Hungarian film ever made (realize though I'm not saying "the best"). And perhaps Miklos Jancso best.
Bottom-line: Powerful anti-war film that is the single most important Hungarian film ever made!
Description of The Red and The WhiteSet in central russia during the cival war of 1918 the story details the murderous entanglements between russias red soldiers and the counter-revolutionary whites in the hills along the volga. The epic conflict moves with skillful speed from a deserted monastery to a riverbank hospital to a massacre. Studio: Kino International Release Date: 01/08/2002 Run time: 92 minutes Rating: Nr Mikl?s Jansc? takes the romance out of Russia's Revolutionary struggle in this simultaneously beautiful and brutal look at the civil war following the Bolshevik coup of 1918. Set in a remote region of Central Russia in 1919, The Red and the White follows the shifting balance of power around an abandoned monastery. The anti-Bolshevik White Army has embarked on a campaign to completely eradicate the area of Red Army soldiers, and scores of Hungarians, former Bolshevik prisoners thrust into battle, are caught in the middle. The graceful camerawork and lush, lovely landscape captured in stunning black-and-white widescreen stand in sharp contrast to the abrupt on-the-spot executions and sadistic cat-and-mouse games of the White Army, hiding behind a mask of politeness and civility as they line up their next row of victims. But Jansc?'s portrayal of the Bolsheviks, while decidedly more heroic, isn't much more sympathetic. The dreamlike poetry of Jansc?'s cinema and the surreal atmosphere of doom carries the film in place of a strong story or a central set of characters, but there is no mistaking his sympathies for the victims of the struggle--peasants and prisoners and civilians caught between collision of two armies, systematically stripped of their dignity and their lives as the battle rages around them like an evocation of hell on Earth. It's a brave stance for a Hungarian filmmaker working on Soviet soil in 1968 and it makes for a powerful film. --Sean Axmaker
|
 |