Πορτρέτο

V. Lepistö

Getting behind Loznitsa might seem like a challenge in many ways, sometimes we are not sure if the simplicity is what it is, sometimes we are not even sure how can such things categorize, they look almost too easy. But Portrait reminded me of the great pleasures I have in life and the flip side I'm usually unable to see; this is a film about unknown transition and these people are likely to be forgotten rather than remembered even if Loznitsa captures them on film. As much as I believe in the power of still photography, there is still something much more powerful in filming or perhaps it is better to say, for Portrait, filming is more accurate and crucial tool in finding their structure. Not only because everything moves but them but because their time is indeed limited and these limitations can be felt within moving image. One could suggest a slideshow but suddenly the sounds would disappear, the movement would disappear altogether. And something must move in the hypothesis Loznitsa is creating. Photographers say I'm underrating them, movement can be composed to image. These kind of films always raise the questions whether it could have been done in another format and they always give me headache for my understanding of film theory is far from where I'd like it to be. But still, in this kind of documentary that requires authenticity and to some extent, objectivity (nothing is objective), cinema is much more honest way to present such a view than artificial slideshow with sound-effects and whatever. Moving image is always subjective, it is always manipulated but it needs faith and therefore in a way has a bigger ability to enchant. In a way, these moments are already carved in time, aftertreatment, once the structure has been found, is useless. Loznitsa doesn't struggle against time but the fascination towards it, the form of art and social change seems to keep him going. He never feels powerless even if he knows that he can't dictate the future or the past. And there we sit in the dark, becoming one with this flow.

Graham Williamson2.0

Better than The Settlement, in that the sound mix is every bit as good and it's less than half as long. But still far too long for what it is; whatever point Loznitsy was trying to make with these staged tableaus of villagers, it's descended into complete banality by the fifteen-minute mark. It feels made for film festivals, since its only real mystique is the mystique outsiders feel when looking at that old riddle-wrapped-in-an-enigma that is Russia. If you did this in Chelmsford, it would just look like one of those new BBC One idents.

TajLV3.0

Short Documentary - Ukrainian filmmaker Sergey Loznitsa takes us to the Russian countryside for this B&W study of ordinary people that is anything but ordinary. Low-hanging clouds, snowy landscapes, barren trees, stands of pine, a rail yard.... these are the backdrops for portraits of rural life. A woman with a sled, woodcutters, people in large boots with scarfs or leather caps covering their heads. These subjects stand or sit completely still, as if posing for a photographs instead of facing a motion picture camera.Dogs bark in the distance, the wind howls constantly, a bell sounds, birds chirp. The camera pans a snow shrouded village, a river, a farm field. There's a man with a bicycle, a middle-aged couple sitting on a huge tractor tire, a woman holding a rake, three elderly women who could easily be sisters, a man in a rowboat.Most of these people appear to be peasants. None of them smile. No children are seen or heard, or are evident in any way. Then, cattle face a rising mist, barren fields appear, and there's a night sky. Again, this is a hard production to evaluate, but the subjects here are stoically fascinating, and a few minor prizes won at festivals give testament to Loznitsa's quirky creativity. Not terrible at all.