Kino: The Films of Sergei Paradjanov

[MichaelB]

This is what the pre-film text states:

"Due to a fire in the Georgian film archive in Tbilisi, some sections of the original Georgian soundtrack...were lost or destroyed. To replace the missing audio, an internegative was employed, but this element was wedded to a soundtrack that laid a Russian-language voice-over on top of the Georgian.

For this reason, brief sections (4 minutes total) of the original Georgian soundtrack in this presentation...are covered with a Russian voice-over."

Yes, but the earlier Kino release had an entirely Georgian soundtrack if I remember rightly. Which means that it would have been theoretically possible to extract the four minutes from that - although I appreciate there would have been PAL speedup and quality issues.

(And I sympathise if these proved insuperable - I've been trying to sync up the Czech DVD of Valerie and her Week of Wonders with the Valerie Project alternative soundtrack CD. Unfortunately, the latter was intended to accompany a theatrical projection or NTSC DVD, while the Bonton disc has PAL speedup. But I'm not about to buy the drastically inferior Facets version just to get the correct running time!)

[jsteffe]

This is what the pre-film text states:

"Due to a fire in the Georgian film archive in Tbilisi, some sections of the original Georgian soundtrack...were lost or destroyed. To replace the missing audio, an internegative was employed, but this element was wedded to a soundtrack that laid a Russian-language voice-over on top of the Georgian.

For this reason, brief sections (4 minutes total) of the original Georgian soundtrack in this presentation...are covered with a Russian voice-over."

Yes, but the earlier Kino release had an entirely Georgian soundtrack if I remember rightly. Which means that it would have been theoretically possible to extract the four minutes from that - although I appreciate there would have been PAL speedup and quality issues.

It may not have been that simple in this particular case. I can't say what four minutes of the soundtrack were missing, but when I heard about the problem I did a close comparison of the Ruscico and the old Kino transfer. The Kino transfer is taken from a subtitled theatrical release print with OK, but not ideal sound. They probably could have used it. But the Ruscico transfer actually has more frames in at least one shot I was able to identify--the movement doesn't start in exactly the same place. That means that at least for that shot, you would have to cut out frames from the Ruscico transfer or add blank space to the soundtrack to make the two match up, even if you compensated for the projection speed differential. I suspect that some other shots are also have slightly different frame counts.

Still, you are right to point out that 100% lip synchronization is not essential to SURAM. It's not even possible, since Paradjanov post-dubbed all dialogue, as was common practice in the Soviet Union. In addition, he took an unusually free attitude towards synchronization, and at times deliberately made the voices not match lip movements for a "primitive" effect.

I should also point out that the Ruscico transfer of SURAM, even though it has superior color and detail, may not be 100% accurate in terms of exposure & color timing. It has been a while since I saw a theatrical print of the film, but both the Kino DVD and the old BFI videotape (both evidently transferred from different prints) have several scenes clearly presented as "night" shots. The Ruscico transfer renders all those scenes markedly brighter.

All this leads me to say, rather despairingly, that we shall probably never again see the film as it was originally shown in theaters.

[Tommaso]

both the Kino DVD and the old BFI videotape (both evidently transferred from different prints) have several scenes clearly presented as "night" shots. The Ruscico transfer renders all those scenes markedly brighter.

This sounds like the familiar old Ruscico problem that is so prominent in some of their Tarkovsky transfers (I think the colour scheme of "Mirror" makes pure nonsense of Tarkovsky's intentions).

All this leads me to say, rather despairingly, that we shall probably never again see the film as it was originally shown in theaters.

It would all depend on some European companies I guess, and on the rights situation. The FsF discs seem to have been taken from prints in their possession, for instance (don't shoot me if they're not). FsF also has theatrical prints of "Surami" and "Ashik", and both films are also in German archives (as they were shown on TV here a long time ago). In other words: if someone could get the dvd rights from Ruscico WITHOUT being forced to use their transfers, the "Surami" situation could be solved, both colour- and soundwise.

[MichaelB]

The FsF discs seem to have been taken from prints in their possession, for instance (don't shoot me if they're not).

To support this, there's a prominent sound dropout in the FsF Colour of Pomegranates that's not a problem on the (old) Kino. Which is a shame, as the FsF comfortably beats Kino in every other department.

[Tribe]

I'm not certain I'll be springing for the entire box set, but I'm certainly interested in tasting some of the Paradjanov. Which of the four comes most highly recommended for someone unfamiliar with his movies?

Tribe

[miless]

I'm not certain I'll be springing for the entire box set, but I'm certainly interested in tasting some of the Paradjanov. Which of the four comes most highly recommended for someone unfamiliar with his movies?

Shadows and Pomegranates... the other two are great, but Shadows and Pomegranates are Paradjanov's masterpieces.

[jsteffe]

I'm not certain I'll be springing for the entire box set, but I'm certainly interested in tasting some of the Paradjanov. Which of the four comes most highly recommended for someone unfamiliar with his movies?

Shadows and Pomegranates... the other two are great, but Shadows and Pomegranates are Paradjanov's masterpieces.

I concur whole-heartedly. SHADOWS and POMEGRANATES are also different enough--and great enough--that you really should get them both, instead of getting just one.

Only slightly off-topic... out of curiosity I just looked up the Wikipedia entry on the poet Sayat-Nova (whose life and work are the inspiration for the freely poetic THE COLOR OF POMEGRANATES), and I couldn't help laughing out loud. It must have been written by an ardent Armenian nationalist. It states that most of Sayat-Nova's poems are in Georgian and Armenian, which is--to put it gently--a misrepresentation. Charles Dowsett, the author of the sole book on Sayat-Nova in English, cites 128 surviving poems in Azeri Turkish, 63 in Armenian, 35 in Georgian, one in four languages (Azeri, Armenian, Georgian and Persian), and possibly six additional poems in Russian. In fact, the Wikipedia entry fails to mention that Sayat-Nova wrote any poems in Azeri at all, even though that language was arguably the lingua franca of the Caucasus at that particular time, as Dowsett points out. That's precisely why college professors warn students against citing Wikipedia in their papers!

[miless]

maybe you should do the right thing and amend the Wiki page.

[jbeall]

I'm not certain I'll be springing for the entire box set, but I'm certainly interested in tasting some of the Paradjanov. Which of the four comes most highly recommended for someone unfamiliar with his movies?

Kino's website re: Color/Requiem: "Please note, these are not newly remastered". While at least Kino's being honest about it, this is not one of their best efforts. The colors are really washed-out.

Until they improve the quality of their release of Color, I'd suggest that you rent, but don't buy it.

[miless]

can the longer cut of Pomegranates look any better?
If they paired it with the shorter Russian version (remastered from the original 35mm negatives, vs. the 16mm print from Georgia) and it came up washed out... then we might have a problem.

[MichaelB]

can the longer cut of Pomegranates look any better?

Well, the FsF disc looks better than the Kino, but once you've allowed for the Kino's massive windowboxing and hideous overlarge yellow serif subtitles, there's probably not much in it.

It certainly looks conspicuously worse than the Columbia (Japan) disc of the shorter version, which is far and away the best I've seen Pomegranates look.

Conceivably, I suppose it might be possible to do a Wicker Man job and present a version that's mostly Columbia-quality with a few unavoidable FsF-quality inserts...

[jsteffe]

Shadows and Pomegranates... the other two are great, but Shadows and Pomegranates are Paradjanov's masterpieces.

I concur whole-heartedly. SHADOWS and POMEGRANATES are also different enough--and great enough--that you really should get them both, instead of getting just one.

Only slightly off-topic... out of curiosity I just looked up the Wikipedia entry on the poet Sayat-Nova (whose life and work are the inspiration for the freely poetic THE COLOR OF POMEGRANATES), and I couldn't help laughing out loud. It must have been written by an ardent Armenian nationalist. It states that most of Sayat-Nova's poems are in Georgian and Armenian, which is--to put it gently--a misrepresentation. Charles Dowsett, the author of the sole book on Sayat-Nova in English, cites 128 surviving poems in Azeri Turkish, 63 in Armenian, 35 in Georgian, one in four languages (Azeri, Armenian, Georgian and Persian), and possibly six additional poems in Russian. In fact, the Wikipedia entry fails to mention that Sayat-Nova wrote any poems in Azeri at all, even though that language was arguably the lingua franca of the Caucasus at that particular time, as Dowsett points out. That's precisely why college professors warn students against citing Wikipedia in their papers!

maybe you should do the right thing and amend the Wiki page.

You're right--I'll do that. Someone made that same correction in the comments section of the Wikipedia entry, but somehow it never made it into the main Wiki page. I only hope that the page doesn't get "re-corrected," as often happens with Wikipedia. It's especially common with controversial topic such as this. But to be honest, this problem is endemic to Wikipedia and the way it was conceived. The group-correction process of Wikis often doesn't result in better information, but rather the reiteration of commonly accepted but incorrect information. That's why encyclopedia content needs to be edited by experts in the field and should never be contributed anonymously. Sorry, but Wikipedia is a lost cause and all you can do is correct it here and there and hope that the corrections stick.

Because of the ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, especially over Nargorno-Karabagh, there has literally been an erasure of history on both sides. Perhaps the most egregious example of this has been the destruction of an entire medieval cemetery near Julfa/Jugha, Nakhichevan, part of present-day Azerbaijan. It contained literally thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of Armenian khachkars (stone cross carvings) and a large number of distinctive gravestones carved in the shape of rams. Paradjanov wanted to shoot a sequence there for The Color of Pomegranates but was forbidden by no less than the late president Heidar Aliev himself. Since then, the Azerbaijani government has been tearing it down over the decades, the last stage being about two years ago. Azerbaijan has refused to allow any international observers there--it's a "closed" site, they say--but eyewitnesses from across the river in Iran have reported that there is literally not one stone left in that cemetery. Now it's just a huge empty field. Somehow a few gravestones were rescued over the years and are now kept at Echmiadzin in Armenia, but that's all that remains.

Paradjanov was really the last major representative of the cosmopolitan spirit of the Caucasus, which is in the process of being remade into three essentially mono-ethnic states.

Now as for the restoration of The Color of Pomegranates: as MichaelB suggests, theoretically it's possible. But Yutkevich also altered the soundtrack in several places, so at those points you would have recombine the sound from the Armenian release version with the picture elements from the Yutkevich cut. Not only that, but I believe he cut into some shots so they're not the same length. I think it would be worth trying, though, if some distributor had the money to have new transfers made from both prints.

[MichaelB]

You're right--I'll do that. Someone made that same correction in the comments section of the Wikipedia entry, but somehow it never made it into the main Wiki page. I only hope that the page doesn't get "re-corrected," as often happens with Wikipedia. It's especially common with controversial topic such as this. But to be honest, this problem is endemic to Wikipedia and the way it was conceived. The group-correction process of Wikis often doesn't result in better information, but rather the reiteration of commonly accepted but incorrect information.

The problem is, they insist on verification from third-party sources. And while I can quite understand why they do this, it does mean that if an inaccuracy has been widely reported and repeated, they're more likely to take that seriously than much higher-quality but essentially unverifiable sources.

For a very good example, when developing the BFI's Quay Brothers DVD, I tried to correct a number of factual errors in Wikipedia's biography. Virtually all these changes were reverted, on the grounds that I didn't have any references - or rather, my references were personal conversations and private e-mails.

So despite knowing the subjects of the article personally and having worked extensively with them over a period of several months, my sources were less reliable to Wikipedia than pieces that might well have been written by a journalist on the basis of a quick chat and minimal background research (which in any case would doubtless have turned up the same inaccuracies as those peddled by Wikipedia!).

Now as for the restoration of The Color of Pomegranates: as MichaelB suggests, theoretically it's possible. But Yutkevich also altered the soundtrack in several places, so at those points you would have recombine the sound from the Armenian release version with the picture elements from the Yutkevich cut. Not only that, but I believe he cut into some shots so they're not the same length. I think it would be worth trying, though, if some distributor had the money to have new transfers made from both prints.

To be honest, I think the best thing would be for some enterprising distributor to release both the Columbia and FsF transfers in a single package, with optional English subtitles (Columbia's has Japanese only). Given the film's brevity, you could also get away with fitting them both on a single disc without any technical drawbacks.

[HerrSchreck]

I'm not certain I'll be springing for the entire box set, but I'm certainly interested in tasting some of the Paradjanov. Which of the four comes most highly recommended for someone unfamiliar with his movies?

Spring for the entire box set. When ou see Shadows and Pomegranites you'll wanta see the others. The only film I don't rate as highly is Ashik Kerib, and I attribute that to bad casting of the lead (the kid SP took off the streets and stuck in there as the troubador, sort of vaguely reminiscent of Cocteau sticking his boys in his films, but in this case in Ashik he strikes me as entirely out of place in the film (many probably disagree... my mind was a bit tainted by watching the excellent documentary on Paradjanov on the Pomegranites two-fer, and learning about the lead in Ashik prior to watching the film, and I can't help but seeing him as some street kid in funny clothes). This has nothing to do with the fantastic REST of the film, including the scenes in which he appears.

Tribe, there's nothing like Paradjanov. To quote the Pomegranites quote on the back of the kino disc:

Aesthetically the most extreme film ever made in the U.S.S.R., Pomegranates, his hallucinatory epic account of the life of the 18th Century Armenian national poet, Sayat Nova, conveys the glory of what a cinema of high art can be like. Conceived as an extraordinary complex series of painterly tableaux that recall Byzantine mosaics, the film is a dreamlike icon come-to-life of astonishing beauty and rigor. It evokes the poet's childhood and youth, his days as a troubadour at the court of King Heraclius II of Georgia, his retreat to a monastery and his old age and death.

There has never been a film like this magical work. It fully justifies critic Alexei Korotyukov's remark: "Paradjanov made films not about how things are, but how they would have been had he been God."

It might be "aesthetically the most extreme film" made anywhere, at any time, period. (It's also devastatingly, almost traumatically sad, which not many people seem to pick up on or at least mention).

Paradjanov will expand your mind and perceptions/horizons of What Can Constitute A Film... he's one of the very few guys who, once he broke free of his schooling/schooling-state-style, made absolutely 100 percent positively the films he wanted to make without any self-ceonsorship whatsoever (and was jailed for this independence, which-- don't be fooled-- was entirely the reason for his imprisonment... his independence and refusal to hew to the USSR line). And not only was he one of these rare uncensored souls (interesting there is little to no sex-- either as subject for discussion or onscreen visual-- or nudity in his films) who made 100% his own films, but he happened to have the wildest perception/conception not only of 1) what constituted a film, but b) life itself.

Mind you, this isnt radicalism for the sake of itself, where you watch some douchey wacky self indulgent piece of nothing. If you love Tarkovsky, if you love Dovzhenko, Pudovkin, if you love mosaic, if you love eastern art, if you love byzantine painting, if you love still life and tableaux... if you love life and you love death-- you will love Paradjanov. He's all those things and none of those things and ten thousand things more.

Like Dave Kehrs quote about Kino's Griffith Box: "Belongs up there on your shelf next to your Oxford Shakespeare" goes equal for Paradjanov.

Based on your avatar, Tribe, you'll love this stuff. Or at least be glad you have it. if it doesnt neccesarily become an obsession or whatever.

[MichaelB]

I have never, ever forgotten the experience of watching Shadows of our Forgotten Ancestors, with no advance warning whatsoever (other than spotting it in a Paris listings mag and thinking "hmmm, Paradjanov's one of those names I feel I should check out and it's only about 90 minutes or so"), in a brand new print on a large screen. I didn't even know its English title at the time - I just liked the image conveyed by Les Chevaux du Feu ('The Horses of Fire').

Mindblowing really isn't the word - as Schreck says, it completely changes your preconceptions of what can be done with cinema. In fact, possibly because I saw it first and under damn near ideal conditions (even the lack of English subs wasn't a problem - let's face it, you don't watch his films for the dialogue!), it's still my favourite Paradjanov.

The more static tableau-based films are great too, but there's something gloriously wild and untamed about Shadows that's unmatched by any other film I can think of - though Marketa Lazarova has some of its spirit.

[denti alligator]

You guys are making me feellike I need to do anything I can to see these films. Should I go for the FSF editions, or will these DVD presentations not do justice to the films?

[MichaelB]

You guys are making me feellike I need to do anything I can to see these films. Should I go for the FSF editions, or will these DVD presentations not do justice to the films?

I'll be surprised if the Kino significantly improves on the FsF Shadows, which offers a perfectly decent transfer of a surprisingly good print (the colours have faded a tad, but that's to be expected with Soviet colour processes).

As for Pomegranates, the FsF is currently the only way to go if you want a halfway decent copy of Paradjanov's own cut - the current Kino is an abomination. The Japanese Columbia disc looks gorgeous, but the lack of subtitles rules it out for first-timers (quite apart from it being the shorter cut). There's more scope for improvement here, but whether this will ever happen is anybody's guess.

Oh, and here's the opening scene of Shadows, to whet your appetite - and a longer scene from much later on. And here's a brief glimpse of Pomegranates.

[Tommaso]

I'll be surprised if the Kino significantly improves on the FsF Shadows, which offers a perfectly decent transfer of a surprisingly good print (the colours have faded a tad, but that's to be expected with Soviet colour processes).

Yep, and in addition it's free of the usual Ruscico/Kino PAL-NTSC issues. The only real advantage, it seems, are the extras on the Kino (and that the Kino is likely to be much cheaper for US residents). So I'd say wait for a comparison or at least a review of the Kino "Shadows" and decide then. In the meantime, get the FsF "Pomegranates" BY ALL MEANS. As Michael says, the Kino is an abomination (though not quite as bad as their old "Ashik"), and the FsF is the best we will likely ever get of the original Paradjanov cut. You will forget about the remaining image issues after 10 minutes of watching this film, anyway. You won't even worry about not being able to follow the storyline. Apart from "Vampyr", this is the only film that transports me into a mild state of trance even after the umpteenth viewing.

[HerrSchreck]

As for Pomegranates, the current Kino is an abomination.

That is one of the most massive overstatements I've heard on this forum, Mike. This debate has been going on forever, and you're closing it on your own.

Alpha's releases of The Cocaine Fiends or Espers Sex Madness are abominations. Kino's Pomegranites is a print which very closely approximates what a sub-z budget film of this type would have looked like at the time of it's release, versus the digitized transfers based on copies restruck onto modern film stock. This film was made on the fringes of the film industry in a fringe country in the former USSR, where Tarkovsky & Bondarchuk couldnt even get stable film stock. It's the basement of Soviet production, and Paradjanov-- versus the vertiginous camera in Ancestors-- has a klunky little camera on a tripod which never moves once. We've been through the fact that there have been nicer, more broad-spectrum prints encountered in arthouse over the past few years or so but I have my doubts how representative they are of what this thing, which practically had the budget of a Swedish Erotica 8mm loop with Annette Haven & Johnny Keyes, looked like on release.

My point is, rather than an abomination, it's just an old un-digitweaked print of the film. Some claim it's a 16, but 16 or not (plenty of features on dvd have 16's-- and Kino distributes the flick for arthouse and make 35's available from inventory) that would not be the culprit for that kind of color resident.

Not to mention the suublime Paradjanov; A Requiem, which is on the other layer of the disc, along with a bevy of his wildest shorts. A great package of material in my view, which makes me feel like I'm in some cruddy Thalia-type cinema in 1960something in NYC w sticky floors and stale popcorn and terrible coffee, really digging the avant netherworld. The vintage color, like crackles and pops (as mentioned on Vampyr) add to the atmosphere..

[denti alligator]

The cheapest I can find the FSF Pomegranates is alapage.com--and it isn't cheap. Anywhere I else I might try (to ship to NY)?

[MichaelB]

The word "abomination" refers to the grossly excessive windowboxing and the non-removable large yellow electronic subtitles. I'm guessing both originated from a master originally created to supply the VHS market.

Whatever Kino's problems with the source materials (with which I obviously completely sympathise), they could have done a far better job in presenting them.

Sorry, Schreck, I know you'll defend Kino to the death, and most of the time I'd be firmly on your side. But their Pomegranates is comfortably the worst version I've seen of this film.

[HerrSchreck]

Not to the death, but merely to the realm of sense prior to extreme beeverism, where film looks like film and from the era and tone of it's creation!

You don't have to apologize for your opinions, I'm merely suggesting you leave room for genuine abominations since you write for S&S from time to time. And-- truth be told-- this discussion (which you and I and a few others have been having for about a year) always revolved around the colors, not around the windowboxing and the subs.

[jsteffe]

Not to the death, but merely to the realm of sense prior to extreme beeverism, where film looks like film and from the era and tone of it's creation!

You don't have to apologize for your opinions, I'm merely suggesting you leave room for genuine abominations since you write for S&S from time to time. And-- truth be told-- this discussion (which you and I and a few others have been having for about a year) always revolved around the colors, not around the windowboxing and the subs.

But the whole point is that the Armenian release version (so-called "director's cut") survives in 35mm, not just 16mm. Also, it's not Georgian but Armenian. I've seen a print of it, and it looks somewhat faded, but not bad.

It's not fair to compare it to Z-budget films, because it was a major studio production, shot by an extremely talented cinematographer (Suren Shahbazian), who worked miracles with poor quality Soviet film stock. The cinematography is better than that in many higher-profile Soviet productions of its day. Only a couple shots really betray the fact that Paradjanov and Shahbazian were working with defective stock. If you ever see a good 35mm print of the superior-looking Yutkevich version, you can appreciate the care that went into photographing the film. But the Japanese DVD from Sony/Columbia at least gives you some idea how beautiful the film can look.

All Kino did in this case is license the same old transfer that was released on VHS by Connoisseur Video well before Kino bought the rights to it. It was never that good of a transfer to begin with, but at the time it was made, it was reasonably professional compared to what was out there for many foreign films. Actually, the BFI VHS looked quite a bit better, though admitted it was transferred from the Yutkevitch version.

Still, as MichaelB has pointed out, neither the Kino transfer nor the FsF DVDs represent the best the Armenian release version can look on video. I'm actually less happy than most with the FsF DVD, because I find it overly contrast & color boosted, to the extent that it loses detail. On the positive side, the FsF version has less obtrusive subtitles, and it translates some songs that the Kino disc doesn't.

I love the idea, as MichaelB has suggested, of doing a new DVD with both versions, and think it's much more practical than trying to create a composite version. They could both comfortably fit on a dual-layer disc, and even include the marvelous 10-minute short "Hakob Hovnatanian," which was shot around the same time. The Armenian release version's transfer will have to be completely redone by a telecine expert with a good eye, though.

The best color reference for The Color of Pomegranates is probably its stunning color production stills, which are well-preserved and available for purchase from the Paradjanov Museum. Perhaps they could be used as a reference for a new transfer of the Armenian release version, though at best it would be an approximation depending on whatever color is left in the 35mm elements.

MichaelB, could you possibly talk the BFI into releasing this on DVD? I know they released the film on VHS in the past. Tony Rayns even wrote some good notes for the case.

[jsteffe]

It might be "aesthetically the most extreme film" made anywhere, at any time, period. (It's also devastatingly, almost traumatically sad, which not many people seem to pick up on or at least mention).

You're absolutely right, of course. It has a powerfully melancholic undertone. The dream sequence where Sayat-Nova remembers his departed parents still brings tears to my eyes when I see it. And of course Paradjanov is linking the tragic fate of Sayat-Nova to the historical tragedies that have afflicted the peoples of the Caucasus, not least the Armenians. But what makes the film truly great is that this sadness is tempered by the sensual beauty of the world and the art that people create, and by Paradjanov's playfully perverse way of seeing the world.

While style for SHADOWS is markedly different, it shares something of this tragic/sensual/playful worldview. While I now view THE COLOR OF POMEGRANATES as Paradjanov's masterpiece, SHADOWS OF FORGOTTEN ANCESTORS was the first Paradjanov film I saw and, like the rest of you, it completely blew my mind. I decided to study Russian, Ukrainian, Georgian, etc. just so I could write a book on this guy.

P.S.: Make no mistake about it--Paradjanov chose a static camera for THE COLOR OF POMEGRANATES deliberately! He wanted to imitate the style of Armenian and Persian miniature painting. (And Matisse, too, you could argue.) It had absolutely nothing to do with the film's budget.

[Tribe]

Many thanks, guys. Really appreciate it...I'll spring for Shadows and Pomegranates, I'm not adverse to buying things sight unseen. I was concerned about whether or not Pomegranates really was an awful transfer....but the Schrekster cleared that up for me.

Again, thanks.

Tribe