Progulka

The Stroll is a new Russian adventure in the world of film-making- the adventure that recalls Battleship Potemkin, The Russian Ark and other magical and/or unrepeatable Russian films.

The Stroll has simple plot though it is interesting and the details that frill it are very deep. It is not a typical road movie although 80 per cent of it was shot on streets; the real streets of contemporary St Petersburg. The story takes place in few hours of one day of Olga and her 2 fellows and we get the feeling that the whole film was shot in one day. It is for sure was shot in short time—which I reckon was main part of the entire experimental nature of the film. However, it was obvious that preparing to shoot the film and practicing shooting and acting took very long time before (real) production has started. The crazy use of mobile camera that followed those 3 guys crossing crowded and dangerous streets made me think how lucky was the cameraperson that he/she did not get killed in a car accident. Did he/she? Hope not.

The film style is new. There is that unusual mix of applying new play-acting method to cinema. It is a result of Peter Fomenko's stage-acting method and workshops. Adapting stage-acting styles into films resulted historically in handful of amazing films including Marcel Carne's Children of Paradise and John Cassavetes' Opening Night. From this perspective The Stroll is amazing film.

A guy meets a girl, calls his friend and they go for a walk together on the streets of St. Peterburg doing nothing, speaking, flirting, playing fools. In 90 minutes of a real-time film they live a hole life together. They love and hate each other, they laugh and cry, they FEEL the way you can feel only when you're 20 and the whole world belongs to you. But it seems like a girl has a strange secret. It comes out at the very end of the stroll and turns everything into a real tragedy...

But now the young people are passing by the streets of St. Peterburg - the best city in the world, with its beautiful houses, crowded streets and a bit crazy inhabitants. This St. Peterburg we have never seen in movies before, but always new from real life. I love this film because of its wonderful image of the city and the perfect work of actors. And because this film is about us - or about us some years ago, our desire to live, feel and to do.

I like this film. Most of all I like the idea about people, they think they know you. This two boys get to know her better than her husband. so It is not important for how many time u know somebody to know him. Aliosha is very sweet. Is he famous in Russia. That is not important but just asking. : )The film is similar to ' Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN' and to 'ARIZONA DREAM' too. It is about growing up and such a things. The music in the beginning and in the end is very good. Do somebody knows something about it? it made me cry. a little. It made me feel a little nostalgic. The music contrast withe dynamic actions through the film. maybe it is because this meeting even though it is for some hours is more important than the rest of the every days.

Alexey Uchitel's Progulka is probably the best mainstream film about today's Russia. Shot almost in real-time manner with a hand camera, it depictures Olga, a woman in early twenties strolling the downtown streets of modern Saint Petersburg accompanied by two young men.

Her first companion is Alexey, a typical modern Russian youth, easy-going, talkative and romantic, a modern variant of SaintPete intellectuals, who meets her on the street at the very beginning of the movie and takes a walk through the city with her.

Pyotr, his best friend, has lots more of man as compared to Alexey, joins the couple later in the movie to take the day-long with them as they walk near the Isaak's Cathedral of the Russia's North capital .

The scenery is perfect, as the three of them visit the very tourist places of SaintPete, though without paying much attention to monuments and cathedrals, just enjoying life and fooling around. The guys compete for Olga's attention, they walk, see the football fans, they take the tram, Alexey get his wallet stolen by gypsies, they laugh and quarrel.

In the end, it is an easy, amazing and definitely a worth seeing movie. Apart from most of the modern Russian film-making (with a few exceptions), it shows Russia can be an enjoyful place to live . It doesn't focus social problems, terrorism, police violence, and gangsters - it just steals a glance at a day in young mens' life, shows their optimism and happiness.

Maybe a bit sour at the end - well, Uchitel and Dunya Smirnova, the scriptwriter, had to invent something to end the trip somewhere (no one dies though, so life goes on and there is no need to shed a tear) - the movie is just a perfect example of what Russian traditionally low budget mainstream cinema (as compared to US standards) can do without advertising-like special effects, mafia shootings, and superheroes.

9 out of 10 to leave some space for further improvements.

In this film, during one very long walk, we get to look deeply into three distinct, young characters, and we get extremely brief but telling glimpses of others as well: Sewer workers, two guys yelling over a minor car accident, a band of gypsies, workers on top of Saint Isaac's, young folks dressed in historic costumes (a gimmick that has become a tacky part of too many historic places). And we also learn much in just a few seconds about many other characters of everyday life in a big and bustling city. This guy can tell a whole story about extremely minor characters in fewer than thirty seconds.

Other reviewers have said that it paints beautiful pictures of Saint Petersburg for foreigners and tourists. Well, I'm a foreigner and I've been to the city about 20 times, sometimes as a tourist, and I don't agree at all. Where are the "touristy" shots? I see a focus on chunks of everyday life, and it's not always pleasant. I see a heck of a lot of the grit that you can find in any big city. I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone who hasn't been there because there are so many pretty, filmic representations elsewhere. They need to look at them, not this.

I know that great monuments and palaces and squares and astonishing bridges lurk in the background, but attention is never drawn to them. I see a whole lot of dirt and ugliness, the prosaic details of life, unpleasing details that could be observed in any city in the world.

To me, the city often looks more like the bad end of Chicago, but with a couple of dazzling edifices and statues thrown in to negate the naive, highly-superficial, romanticized view of that beautiful city. We see parts of it only as we are dashing through it rapidly, passing by scenes so fast and often with many obstructions.

This film doesn't pause to show off anything. The city is background, unfocused and surely not showing off its best parts. I believe that we learn the very same things about each of the three main characters.

What masters, all who worked on this film! Did the cameramen manage to avoid getting smashed by trucks or cars? And this is astounding: How did they get to film this movie on crowded Nevsky and other places just jammed with people, without them staring into the camera, like I probably would.

Mr. Uchitel is a true master at selecting the most telling details, and so this short, seemingly simple movie tells much. I feel that I know those three people better than I know Dmitri and Ivan and Alyosha Karamazov, after reading "The Brothers Karamazov" too many times to count, watching the ten-hour series of "The Brothers Karamazov" far more times than once.

I think I love this movie as much for the cinematic techniques as for the characters and their truly quirky story. If I was in Russia now, I would try to hunt down Mr. Uchitel and those three actors and all others who worked on the film and ask each of them if I might bow in awe in front of them.

This movie is astonishing, in story, character, plot, and execution. I've been watching movies since 1950. This one is towards the top of my list of films that have affected me deeply.