Review of Russian Ark (2002) by Eric J — 08 Aug 2006

[size=2] "Russian Ark" is a heavily unique film. It is:

-All done in one take. As in, the entire 93-minute duration is one big, long shot that moves around, with no cutting whatsoever.

-With a cast of hundreds.

-Everyone is kept in order, and the actors all do a good job of not noticing the camera, except the one character who is supposed to know the narrator is there.

-Even the children are orderly.

-Filled with fantastic architecture and paintings in a museum.

-With a live orchestra playing, along with ballroom dancing.

-An accurate cinematic representation of a dream.

-...did we mention this was all done in ONE TAKE, with a cast of HUNDREDS?

Now that we've covered all the positive features of "Russian Ark", let's talk about the rest of it.

You know those amusement park rides, which are really nothing more than moving along and seeing a lot of robotic mannequins? That's what "Russian Ark" feels like. You know that midpoint where you realize it was a really stupid decision to get on that ride, as now you're just filled with boredom?

That's what "Russian Ark" feels like.

Indeed, it has no problems trying to put you to sleep. Do not resist that urge- the dream you have during that sleep will probably be far more fascinating and exciting... and if you're lucky, that dream might also have a cast of hundreds and contain no intercutting. This is probably the best cure for insomnia since Scorsese's "New York, New York".

Well, there are only two groups of people likely to stay awake:

Intellectual, artistic types who give any painting an "A" grade simply for effort and originality (not if it's interesting, or in the case of a movie, entertaining), or the more likely second group:

The more cynical viewers who keep on watching just to make sure the whole "one take" element wasn't a big hoax. I'd say "take my word for it", but, being myself a VERY cynical person, I know better than to expect you to trust what a person says. You'll most likely want to give this a viewing for yourself just to see if it really is one take.

It is, but you won't in the least bit care. The longer the film progresses (read: drags on), the more you'll realize how important a certain element called "editing" really is. A challenge could be to make a one-take film that's actually interesting. As in, one that, if shot conventionally, would be nearly as interesting because the material used is actually good- but would just be more impressive in that it was shot all at once.

Perhaps the most infuriating part of the film is the ending. Once the narrator says "it's over" (after a long ballroom sequence that just dares you to scream, "PLEASE. END!"), then we finally leave this dreadfully boring trip at the museum. ...well, of course, there's always the crowd to get through, because all the other people are exiting.

You remember those times when you were a little kid, and your parents took you to all of these boring places? Remember when they would say "Okay, let's go", only to have a 45-minute conversation with someone they bump into at the door?

Well, it wasn't that long, and there's no conversation, but it's just that same feeling. We have to watch everyone else leave... and then it backtracks to emit a very loud groan... then finally going ahead of the crowd and off to some window. I don't know.

What is evident with "Russian Ark" is that, as much as it'll make you appreciate editing, if you ever doubted its existence before, you will fall in love with the fade-out.

[this review was all done in one sitting][/size].