Alexandra (Aleksandr Sokurov, 2007)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

Alexandra (Aleksandr Sokurov, 2007)

#1 Post by John Cope » Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:55 pm

Wanted to establish a thread for this one as it deserves some extended consideration. I've seen it three times now and really I just marvel at the pure accomplishment of it. In many respects it's "standard Sokurov" if by that we mean a recognizable aesthetic conception but it's the concentrated intent that makes all the difference; here Sokurov excels and continues to refine his particular form.

What is most remarkable about the film is Sokurov's approach to the basic scenario itself. The fact that Alexandra could be described, more or less accurately, as the story of a grandmother visiting her grandson at an army base belies the great care and precision with which Sokurov presents the material. It also suggests just what kind of a nightmare we might have seen from just about any other director had they adapted it. Certainly, in the States, such a description could barely be made without the assumption that what one was describing was the latest family comedy. That Sokurov's approach is serious, though not unremittingly so, is the first indication of divergence from such standard expectations. Actually, though, this divergence is characteristic of Sokurov and makes Alexandra of a piece with his other work.

There is definitely a strain of absurdist humor at play here but Sokurov is well aware of its existence and turns it to his advantage, making it an agent of great, devastating pathos. There is, of course, nothing "realistic" about this story as presented, at least not in the way we have generally come to understand the term. Sokurov isn't interested in that and he isn't interested in self-contained expressions of whimsy either. The moments of lightness and fragility are always deeply felt, suggestive of larger truths. What he's really after is what can only be accessed through his deceptively simple set-up. It's necessary because he wants to explore the implications of that idea and its ultimate limitations.

Though obviously this is an examination of the disruptive power of female energy within a dominantly male province it's not as simple as that. What we see consistently is a community (the base and surrounding area) made up primarily of young men and much older, even matronly women. In other words this is a very specific type of relationship being considered. The disruption would be different, more predictable and less revelatory if the women were younger and more nubile. Obviously this isn't what interests Sokurov. Rather he focuses on the notion of servitude to an implied, though manifestly absent, paternal state. The soldiers are generally youthful because oblivious enthusiasm can be easily harnessed and channeled. It's also critical to note that Alexandra is not some embodiment of feminine weakness, easily positioned to counter a presumed, hegemonic masculine authority, particularly one prescribed by aggression. Rather she represents a female analogue to that notion of strength and power. She is definable by her fortitude and stalwartness. Her more conventionally feminine characteristics emerge filtered through what ultimately comes across as a capitulation to strength as necessity. This adds immeasurably to the complicated dynamic between her and young men training for war.

Beyond this, and in his own characteristic fashion, Sokurov wants to confront us with the essential qualities of acts of kindness, dignity and delicacy that exist at the center of relationships and drive them. He presents these things in his usual explicit fashion. Alexandra's presence disarms the soldiers who surrender their guard as it were, revealing the core of youthful energy we know exists in many soldiers but which it is the purpose of military discipline to subdue, often for the sake of their own survival (the soldier twirling his gun for Alexandra is one such moment of tenderness and personifies an exhilarating sensitivity to such detail). Her grandson, too, brings her inside one of his tanks and we see that this is done because of his pride in his position and, by extension, his possession. He wants her approval. Later, we see more of this with other soldiers falling under her sway, some finally even making her an elaborate meal. All of this plays as amusing but also remarkably genuine, a revelation of possible hidden depths.

For Sokurov the experience of military servitude can be propelled by the same deep sentiments that sustain family relations, and this is the control mechanism keeping Sokurov's vast sympathies in check. The ecstatic moments are those in which tenderness exceeds the boundaries of normative, prescribed behavior; they admit to a willingness to be carried away by an excess of feeling that may not be "rational" as it is usually understood but does befit the human experience and emerges as a vital, though often under-realized or denied, component element of the human character.

The scene in which Denis carries Alexandra across the base in his arms recalls Mother and Son, though this time the dire circumstances of the protagonists have been replaced by a dire context. There are other such moments: Denis braiding Alexandra's hair and, my favorite, the extraordinary, prolonged farewell in which the grandmother and her grandson spend an infinite moment with their eyes locked upon one another. This consideration of the potential depths of feeling between people in Sokurov's cinema is usually treated fairly brusquely by critics. It's always noted but what is not noted is his profound sophistication; the fact that he understands the limits when his characters do not. Anyone who thinks that Mother and Son for instance does not contain an implied auto-critique is simply not paying attention. And in Father and Son he is also quite cognizant of the way in which love can become a limiting, stultifying oppression rather than a force of liberating energy and joy. In Alexandra it is about the willingness to surrender to vulnerability, the strength it can take to reveal that part of the self when such a revelation does not come easy and is not automatically welcomed or pre-supposed. In this case, of course, there is the additional dimension of the looming issue of mortality, pronounced and in close proximity to both the protagonists. Their connection is made more immediate because of these things but the connection itself is seen as what is most vital to preserve, even in the face of these acknowledgments. Sokurov's respect for deep feeling, genuinely felt and lived, remains alongside that stance of ironic recognition.

I have tried for quite some time to pin down what it is about Sokurov's aesthetic that is so very unique to him. When I watch his films it's more of a feeling of subtle dislocation that makes the central dramatic moments more pronounced. While using Alexandra as my template I think I've gotten closer to pinpointing at least a couple of these elements. For one, there is the constant use of off screen sound, often only vaguely related to what we are watching. The sound mix, however, keeps these sounds prominent and does not subjugate them to the presumed dramatic centerpiece. Having said that, though, what is perhaps more significant is the way in which Sokurov does foreground the privileged moments of drama and intimacy. Peripheral characters often surround the central ones, but at a respectful distance, observing them and their interaction. But respectful of what? Well, I think this is the key: Sokurov's profound moments of intimacy are always presented to us as presentation. That this does not compromise the dramatic impact is significant enough but the reason it doesn't is because Sokurov is not trading in glib, banal self-consciousness. His presentations function as iconography (Angelopoulos also directs in a similar manner, though his characters are rarely allowed the kinds of indulgences Sokurov permits his); they act as a declaration of the necessity of preserving and revering these specific kinds of emotional moments, bonds and relationships--potentialities which are categorically human, though often rendered problematic within certain circumstances or when compromise is inevitable. In other words, these scenes represent an ideal of a sort.

There is an image within the stills section of the Russian DVD which captures Sokurov demonstrating the particularity of a specific embrace to his actors, one in which Denis places Alexandra's hand on his heart. In most cases this would be a failing as it would suggest an excess of control, an unwillingness to accept spontaneity within a scene which should, by most standards, play that way. But instead this image reveals the very heart of Sokurov's technique. His purpose is not some academic challenge to see whether we can still feel the moment despite it being overtly manipulated; rather, he is intent on a different goal: to give proper veneration to a core characteristic of humanity as captured within a posture, within a frame. The fact that such a moment is not "spontaneous" matters far less than that it is valuable and worth maintaining as a core element of human self-conceptualization. Its vitality and legitimacy is evidenced by the fact that these moments ring true and resonate deeply.

Here are a couple of fine pieces on this exceptional film:

One from KinoKultura and the other from Cinema Without Borders.
Last edited by John Cope on Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yoshimori
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:03 am
Location: LA CA

#2 Post by yoshimori » Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:03 pm

This was one of my favorite one or two films at Cannes last May.
Certainly, in the States, such a description could barely be made without the assumption that what one was describing was the latest family comedy. That Sokurov's approach is serious, though not unremittingly so, is the first indication of divergence from such standard expectations. Actually, though, this divergence is characteristic of Sokurov and makes Alexandra of a piece with his other work.

There is definitely a strain of absurdist humor at play here but Sokurov is well aware of its existence and turns it to his advantage, making it an agent of great, devastating pathos.
This points to what for me is a critical first question re Sokurov's latest works, particularly Alexandra, Molokh, and Father and Son. The situations - grandma goes to war, Hitler takes a holiday, and father and son (the latter seemingly only a few years younger than his pop) wrestle half-naked and look longingly into each others' eyes - are so outrageous that it is hard for some to believe Sokurov isn't somehow toying with them. That Sokurov "plays" the situations seriously is, as John Cope points out, something no one I know questions. That Sokurov feels something passionately is probably also not doubted. But the Cannes audience was divided between those viewers who didn't find the film the least bit funny (many of them subsequently ridiculing it) and those viewers, many fewer I'd bet, on whose faces there was a near permanent grin (and who consistently liked it).

I was one of the latter. For me, the tension in the film between absurdity and earnestness is overpowering. But I do fear my reaction to the movie is not in line with Sokurov's intention. This is, by all accounts, a very serious man, Tarkovsky-level serious, and, if the recent Solzhenitsyn doc is any indication, someone who at least presents himself as a man for who humor seems quite foreign.

Most of the rest of JC's analysis (the details of his gender analysis, power relationships analysis, the paternalism of the state, the equation of the military and the family, etc) is frankly beyond me. It's obviously possible to react to the film as John Cope did - because, obviously, he did - but I was simply so mesmerized by the overall movements of the characters and the specific details of each scene that nothing like JC's thoughts were able to penetrate my awareness. Even now, they seem alien to my memory of the film. I experienced, for example, nothing even remotely like this summary:
In Alexandra it is about the willingness to surrender to vulnerability, the strength it can take to reveal that part of the self when such a revelation does not come easy and is not automatically welcomed or pre-supposed.
John Cope's last question is, for me, a very interesting one: what is it that seems so unique in Sokurov's aesthetic? JC's tentative answer aside, I think his pointing to Sokurov's use of sound and especially his direction of his actors in the scene he described is a good place to begin. How such potentially cheesy moments (the placing of a hand on a heart) are integrated, rhythmically, in the overall flow of the film is, I think, important. For me, the rhythm, the visual and aural music of Sokurov's films is overwhelming. And the content, at least the superficial content, seems interestingly at odds with the form.

User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

#3 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:08 am

I saw this at the London Film Festival last year, which was fortunate as I don't think it has a planned UK release just yet (according to IMDB). I don't have much experience of Sokurov's work so wouldn't be able to make a valid comparison to his other films.

What I admired was that though obviously set during a state of war (which we're to assume is the war with Chechnya), Sokurov highlights the emotional bonds between Denis and his grandmother. Even though these men are pitted in a hostile environment, there is still a sense of humanity about them. Denis is no patriot, not proud of his work, constantly thinking of the atrocities he has seen - he is a thoughtful, contemplative man.

Also, you have a Russian army ill-equipped and under-nourished, comprised of inexperienced soldiers barely out of school. How will they cope with the guerilla tactics of Chechen rebels? Does Sokurov think the war is either winnable or right? Is his point political; that Moscow is sending young men off to the death without a chance in life?

Then there's Alexandra herself, co-existing with local people, building relationships with those who are seen as the enemy. And this is the overriding memory of the film; that of bridging divides, of people coming together. And it's very powerfully done.

User avatar
foggy eyes
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:58 am
Location: UK

#4 Post by foggy eyes » Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:26 pm


User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

#5 Post by Barmy » Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Can't believe how this is being simplistically labelled as an "anti-war movie". Alexandra has some refreshing racism, as Hoberman notes. But the most stunning scene is when she is walking back with some Chechnyan lad who says "help us". Alexandra effectively says "give me a break", and launches into a discourse on intelligence--something the Chechnyans clearly haven't focussed on.

User avatar
foggy eyes
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:58 am
Location: UK

#6 Post by foggy eyes » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:56 am

From Bordwell's latest blog entry:
I nearly always like Sokurov. Yes, the films can be a little overbearing, but they have a certain weirdness that keeps them from pretentiousness. Here he gives us another story of family love. An old lady visits her grandson, who’s soldiering in the Caucasus. She rides in a tank, watches men clean their weapons, and putters doggedly about the bivouac. No big emotional climaxes, unless you count her encounters with other old ladies, who have set up a market selling shoes and cigarettes, and the moment when her soldier tenderly braids her hair.

The weirdness comes in the color values–sometimes blinding orange, sometimes bilious green reminiscent of Sovcolor—and in a murmuring soundtrack that blends machine whirs and conversation with barely discernible swoops of orchestral and vocal music. (Since Galina Vishnevskaya plays the old lady, are these fragments from her performances?) Nobody makes soundtracks quite like Sokurov; even an unadorned shot can take on urgency through the drifting whispers our ears struggle to make out.

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

#7 Post by Barmy » Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:37 pm

Just noticed that Mournful Indifference, Sokurov's zaniest film, was released on DVD by Intermedio. This link includes a trailer which is not that representative of the actual film.

User avatar
Don Lope de Aguirre
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: London

#8 Post by Don Lope de Aguirre » Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:42 pm

I saw this at the London Film Festival last year, which was fortunate as I don't think it has a planned UK release just yet (according to IMDB).
I am a big fan of Sokurov and booked a holiday during the LFF in the unfortunate presumption that we would get a release 'soon' afterwards...foolish me. I have been sorely tempted for a few weeks now to buy the Russian DVD

User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

#9 Post by John Cope » Mon Apr 28, 2008 4:54 pm

You should. It's a great transfer.

User avatar
foggy eyes
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:58 am
Location: UK

#10 Post by foggy eyes » Mon Apr 28, 2008 6:22 pm

Don Lope de Aguirre wrote:I am a big fan of Sokurov and booked a holiday during the LFF in the unfortunate presumption that we would get a release 'soon' afterwards...foolish me. I have been sorely tempted for a few weeks now to buy the Russian DVD
I've been wondering what has happened as well - Artificial Eye do have it, but there's no release date on the cards. As The Last Mistress has only just been released and Times and Winds is currently pencilled in for late August, it looks like Alexandra will be the last of AE's films at LFF to open here. No idea why it's been delayed, but it'll probably be along in 2009!

I've refrained from posting about the film so far because I can never quite put my finger on what makes Sokurov's work so special (see yoshimori's post above). But, in short, Alexandra struck me as quintessential Sokurov (whatever that is - Spiritual Voices? Father and Son? Russian Ark?), and pretty fucking great.

User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

#11 Post by kaujot » Tue May 13, 2008 5:56 pm

Any news on a Stateside release?

ptmd
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:12 pm

#12 Post by ptmd » Tue May 13, 2008 7:09 pm

Alexandra received a two-week run at Film Forum that was extended by an extra week due to popular demand. Cinema Guild is handling distribution in this country and I'm sure they'll bring out a DVD in another 6 months to a year through one DVD company or another (they worked with Homevision on A Tout de Suite).

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#13 Post by miless » Tue May 13, 2008 7:23 pm

I thought it was good, but not holdover good. I'm very surprised.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#14 Post by colinr0380 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:55 pm

A very interesting review of the film.

User avatar
Ovader
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:56 am
Location: Canada

Re:

#15 Post by Ovader » Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:04 am

kaujot wrote:Any news on a Stateside release?
According to CD Universe it is to be released on April 7 by New Yorker Video with no extras.

User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

Re: Alexandra (Aleksandr Sokurov, 2007)

#16 Post by kaujot » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:06 pm

New Yorker would get it and put it out with no extras.

Post Reply