Some films just manage to avoid my attention. This is not bad, as there is always something good left to be admired. Some of my few friends have mentioned repeatedly how much they like Elena, so I watched it also and I liked it also.
The story of the movie is flowing quietly - maybe too quiet for certain people's taste. We see in the first frame a tree, in the tree a bird (as dummy in the world of animals I cannot be more specific, maybe it's a crow, but it doesn't matter). After some time this bird makes a noise and the camera looks into an apartment. Elena is waking up, goes from one room to the other, from her room to kitchen, from kitchen to living room, goes from living room to her husband's sleeping room and wakes him up, goes back to kitchen and prepares breakfast. Elena walks a lot, while life stands still. Elena is married to Vladimir. She used to be his nurse, but two years ago they married and now she is his house maid and occasional lover.
At the breakfast table they talk about their doings. Vladimir plans to go to the gym, Elena will get her pension and then visit his son.
At this point I thought that the plot was going to be too constructed, too much like written by some student of manuscript teaching class. He has a useless daughter, she has a useless son. One day the scene is shot from Elena's perspective, then from Vladamir's perspective, but this uneasiness with the screen play and the cinematography soon disappeared.
While Vladimir is working out - alone (the absence of friends is striking), Elena cashes her pension, walks to the bus stop, goes by bus, changes to train, walks to the grocer's shop, walks to the flat where her son and his wife live with their two kids. They don't do anything, apart from drinking beer and playing video games. Her grandson Alexander has a little business with pirate CD's and that's it. Alexander wants to enter university, however his characters seem to be far from brilliant. He could get an education in the army, but this is dismissed as an unattractive alternative. He could be admitted to the university, if they paid someone in administration, but from where to take the money?
Vladimir is rich, but unwilling to support Elena's family from a former marriage, who to him are "practically strangers". Much in this script feels like an updated Greek tragedy. The peripeteia would be the heart attack Vladimir suffers from while working out.
Vladimir is now depending on Elena. He is beginning to like his daughter and wants to bequest the flat to her. However, Elena is not ready to be shunt onto a siding. When she discovers Viagra pills in her husband's cupboard, a quick glance in a medical dictionary tells her what to do.
On IMDb someone asked, if she really killed him. This is a surprising question, because even the most superficial viewer can - imho - not fail to catch this detail, even without having the "additional information" they are begging for in that forum.
In the end we see a beautiful mirroring of the beginning: Elena's grandchild is on the bed, trying to get up; the family is watching some rubbish ob TV and the crow still sits outside. Maybe this end is a glimpse kind of hope, indicating that the present and even the next generation are corrupted by Post-Soviet Russia, maybe a new generation will break the cyclical structures? Or should I see it pessimistically? Everything is 'back to start'? As opposite to the socialist realism? Moscow still doesn't believe in tears?
In the classical tragedies we need to have a chorus, commenting on the plot. Here this role is attributed to banality shows on TV, giving trivial advice on anything. And TV seems to be babbling all the time.
Elena is a fascinating look into present-day Russia, however the plot could - mutatis mutandis - happen at any place where Darwinism rules.
.jpg)
The story of the movie is flowing quietly - maybe too quiet for certain people's taste. We see in the first frame a tree, in the tree a bird (as dummy in the world of animals I cannot be more specific, maybe it's a crow, but it doesn't matter). After some time this bird makes a noise and the camera looks into an apartment. Elena is waking up, goes from one room to the other, from her room to kitchen, from kitchen to living room, goes from living room to her husband's sleeping room and wakes him up, goes back to kitchen and prepares breakfast. Elena walks a lot, while life stands still. Elena is married to Vladimir. She used to be his nurse, but two years ago they married and now she is his house maid and occasional lover.
At the breakfast table they talk about their doings. Vladimir plans to go to the gym, Elena will get her pension and then visit his son.
At this point I thought that the plot was going to be too constructed, too much like written by some student of manuscript teaching class. He has a useless daughter, she has a useless son. One day the scene is shot from Elena's perspective, then from Vladamir's perspective, but this uneasiness with the screen play and the cinematography soon disappeared.
While Vladimir is working out - alone (the absence of friends is striking), Elena cashes her pension, walks to the bus stop, goes by bus, changes to train, walks to the grocer's shop, walks to the flat where her son and his wife live with their two kids. They don't do anything, apart from drinking beer and playing video games. Her grandson Alexander has a little business with pirate CD's and that's it. Alexander wants to enter university, however his characters seem to be far from brilliant. He could get an education in the army, but this is dismissed as an unattractive alternative. He could be admitted to the university, if they paid someone in administration, but from where to take the money?
Vladimir is rich, but unwilling to support Elena's family from a former marriage, who to him are "practically strangers". Much in this script feels like an updated Greek tragedy. The peripeteia would be the heart attack Vladimir suffers from while working out.
Vladimir is now depending on Elena. He is beginning to like his daughter and wants to bequest the flat to her. However, Elena is not ready to be shunt onto a siding. When she discovers Viagra pills in her husband's cupboard, a quick glance in a medical dictionary tells her what to do.
On IMDb someone asked, if she really killed him. This is a surprising question, because even the most superficial viewer can - imho - not fail to catch this detail, even without having the "additional information" they are begging for in that forum.
In the end we see a beautiful mirroring of the beginning: Elena's grandchild is on the bed, trying to get up; the family is watching some rubbish ob TV and the crow still sits outside. Maybe this end is a glimpse kind of hope, indicating that the present and even the next generation are corrupted by Post-Soviet Russia, maybe a new generation will break the cyclical structures? Or should I see it pessimistically? Everything is 'back to start'? As opposite to the socialist realism? Moscow still doesn't believe in tears?
In the classical tragedies we need to have a chorus, commenting on the plot. Here this role is attributed to banality shows on TV, giving trivial advice on anything. And TV seems to be babbling all the time.
Elena is a fascinating look into present-day Russia, however the plot could - mutatis mutandis - happen at any place where Darwinism rules.
No comments:
Post a Comment