- Amazon Originals Now Playing, For Free: Watch hilarious comedies and lovable children's pilots from top creators, featuring stars you love, only at Amazon Instant Video. See all the shows and let us know what you think.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
The plot is simple, but its implication is complex. One who believes in God and the absolute love he represents can see this as a story of miracle. An atheist can see this as all being a hallucination of a repressed old man. Tarkovsky makes the film in a way that you can interpret it in whatever way you want. But in whichever way you see it, the film will lead you to our fundamental question; why we live? What is the meaning of our life? How we can achieve the state in which we can say when we face eternity, "I understood the meaning of my life and I fulfilled it"?
THE SACRIFICE was shot beautifully by cinematographer Sven Nykvist, one of the greatest master in the art of creating filmic images, whose talent is perfectly in match with Tarkovsky's narrative strategy of filling the frame with symbolism that the audience can interpret in what ever way he/her wants.
The disappointment with this rather expensive DVD is that, the transfer fails to catch the richness of Nykvist's work, and in the case of this particular film, it really hurts because it prevent you to create your own interpretation from what the film shows. The nature plays a big role in the story, and already at the very beginning, you cannot feel the richness of the green grass by the sea, the mystery of the trees surrounding the house. Later in the film you miss the richness of the shadows, the complex texture that the lights and shadows create on a simple wall, the subtle reflection on a framed painting (a study of the Madonna by Da Vinci). It actually looks like it was made from a video tape. The yellow subtitles are also build in the images, it's not an optional subtitling and you cannot erase it. I suggest you wait for a few years if you have already seen the film, then maybe KINO will come up with a better DVD. But if you have never seen it, well... it's a must-see film.
This is not to say that the film itself is perfect. I strongly believe that Tarkovsky's last two films, made in Europe (the other was the Italian co-production NOSTALGHIA), are distinctly inferior to his Russian films, especially his masterpieces ANDREI RUBLEV and THE MIRROR. The same stunning imagery is there, and there are a number of truly great moments; THE SACRIFICE has two celebrated l0-minute takes--the tree-planting and house-burning scenes--which push the cinema about as far as it can go. But there is also a certain preachiness and an implicit sense that the film is Great Art, so therefore you must sit quietly and pay attention to everything it has to tell you. Many of Alexander's speeches sound suspiciously like the more didactic moments in Tarkovsky's book-length essay SCULPTING IN TIME.
Since it's Tarkovsky, I'm willing to listen--when I'm in the right mood--but not without a murmur of protest. His contemporary Sergei Paradjanov managed to be playful and profound at the same time, so I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. There is an underlying fundamental lack of vitality here compared to his Russian films. (Yes, I'm aware that Tarkovsky was dying of cancer when he made the film). However, under the right conditions I've found THE SACRIFICE to be a mesmerizing experience. I do urge you to see it.
Several of Tarkovsky's favorite themes are present in SACRIFICE - alienation, an aching emptiness of the spirit, the slighting of nature by mankind. Erland Josephson portrays Alexander, a wealthy, semi-retired writer who lives with his wife, teenage daughter and 'Little Man', his young son, in a lovely house that sits rather isolated on the seaside in Sweden. His young son is obviously his favorite, the center of his soul and existence. We see him with the little boy, planting a tree, telling him a story about devotion to duty involving a young Japanese monk and his master.
Alexander's birthday is at hand, and his family, along with a couple of friends, makes ready to celebrate. As the group awaits dinner to be served, there is a roaring - like a low-flying jet - in the sky, followed by what appears at first to be a mild earthquake. A ceramic milk pitcher vibrates its way off a shelf, shattering on the floor - news broadcasts on the television indicate that World War III has begun. Each of the characters reacts in their own way - Alexander's wife falls to pieces and requires a sedative from their friend Victor, a doctor. Alexander is shaken as well - but he's not sure what to do. He has lost his faith several years before, and yet he finds himself begging God to reverse the horrible events unfolding on the television screen. In one of the film's most poignant moments, we see him drained of strength, falling on his knees, barely able to speak, praying with all his might. He attempts to 'strike a bargain' with God, offering to give up everything - his home, his belongings, his family...even Little Man, his beloved son, if the world can be 'put back like it was before'.
In a conversation with his friend Otto, the postman, Alexander learns of Otto's suspicion that Maria, one of Alexander's servant girls, is a witch - and Otto suggests that if Alexander goes to Maria and sleeps with her, she has the power to reverse the horrible events. In his desperation, Alexander succumbs to Otto's suggestion - he never voices his request to Maria, but she sees the pain in his eyes (and in his actions) and takes him to her bed in an attempt, I think, simply to comfort him. This scene - like lovemaking scenes in all of Tarkovsky's films, when they occur - is photographed beautifully and tastefully. Tarkovsky never stooped to gratuitous or graphic sex or nudity. We see the couple lie down, embrace - and levitate, floating gently into the air, a lovely, tender visual rendition of the healing power of love.
You'll have to see the film in order to find out if Alexander's efforts - in either theatre - are rewarded. I don't want to spoil anything for the potential viewer. Suffice to say that even as the film ends, the viewer is left with as many questions as answers - and that's one of the things I find so stimulating and rewarding about Tarkovsky's work. I can't give anything I've seen by this director less than five stars - and while this might not be quite on the same levels as his other films, it's still head and shoulders above the commercial films coming out of the major studios.