Pirosmani

This little known film is quite strange yet well worth watching. Made in 1969, it tells the story of one Nico Pirosmanishvilli or Pirosmani, a primitive Georgian painter, not very well known in the west, who lived at the turn of the last century. The movie shows his paintings (I must admit I was not terribly impressed by them), his proud poverty, his antisocial behavior. A lot of the movie is shot in sparse, mildly surreal tableaux. When he sets up a shop with his brother, for example, it is not located in the city, but in the middle of a plain. There are some fine shots of the old, dilapidated quarters of Tbilissi, where Pirosmani lived since middle age, barely making ends meet by painting in taverns. I don't know if there is a Caucasian school of film-making, but this film suggests a saner, decaffeinated Paradjanov (who, as a matter of fact, did film a short about Pirosmani).

Niko Pirosmani (1862 - 1918) was a painter, who posthumously rose to be considered one of the most important artist figures of his native Georgia. He lacked formal training, and sold his works on cheap prices to bars and restaurants, where they hung and gradually made people more interested about the painter behind them. This is a film biography - "biopic" would fail describe it - about the artist and his work, as well as his home country and the times he lived in. It is the fifth directorial work by fellow Georgian Giorgi Shengelaia, and possibly his internationally most famous one. Shengalaia had actually begun his directorial career with a document about Pirosmani (1961), so coming into this film he already most definitely knew his stuff.

And there is a documentarist touch to this film. Every now and then we, as the audience, are shown a Pirosmani painting, without it having nothing to do with the narrative. "Narrative" may actually be a poor choice of words to use about the contents of this film. It is very freely constructed and lacks discipline, just as the paintings of the artist do. Calling this an artistic mood piece would not be far off, since the scenes we witness form a very loose whole, at best.

But this is also a visual triumph, and a well made film. For myself, Pirosmani's paintings possess a haunting quality. I think it's the way the eyes of the people and the animals gaze at the viewer. The paintings are simultaneously life-like and from a dream. I am obviously not an art historian, but I see a very recognizable touch in his works. The film pursues these visuals and becomes a painting itself. I thought the Georgian locations and people of the film were depicted very much in the spirit of Pirosmani, and a well-constructed narrative probably would not have been the best way to depict his world.

As a film, this is pretty slow and experimental, but a visual experience, it rewards you.

well, is there 100 *s possible on IMDb? no, really, i mean 10 stars would not do justice to this jem of movie masterpiece imo ... had heard about this movie and loved what i had heard about it before even watching it in a theater years later ...

was worried extremely if the movie itself would defy my own expectations of it that i had based on hearing about it alone (as it may so happen with many movies or books we hear about first and then watch or read later ...) surprise! the movie was even better, much better! and luckily, i was in an extremely rare good mood too when entering the salon and taking my seat, which guaranteed one of the finest movie watching experiences to happen to me, ever.

did i say sometimes one's life can be changed by a piece of art ... yes, sure, but in case of this "piece of art" my life did not quite change as it was elevated so highly into a higher level, of not only deeper awareness of certain already familiar aspects in my own life, but also to getting to know i'm not the only one in this world with such abstract visions in my mind ... (but i have to admit that i'm one of those unable to turn those visions into actual visual images on screen although i am into photography and movie making myself!) hail on thee both Pirosmani and Shengelaya ... for being what you are ...

I saw this movie when it played at the New Directors New Films series at the Museum of Modern Art in 1975. It was a wonderfully straightforward consideration of a very simple artist who, rather in the manner of Toulouse-Lautrec, hung out in bars and painted, literally, for his living, for food and drink. The film, I remember, had a style which diminished perspective rather as the artist did himself; I completely admired it, and frequently reflect on the sorry state of things that so fine a work can be just unavailable! I grew up in a world where memory of films was often the best one could hope for -- that world had the advantage of "revival theaters" where some old films might be viewed on a full-sized movie screen -- but now things are quite different and many many movies are available for owning or rental, but here is a clear example of a wonderful film -- sadly one of thousands -- still unavailable.

This touching and lovely little film is like a series of tableaux...A lonely artist in Georgia (Russia) paints rather naif works, but charming, has a difficult time getting them displayed, but he stays with it determined to get some recognition. It's a very unique flick,based on the life of an actual Russian artist... that moved me deeply with this depiction of a man dedicated to his art, believing in it despite all the rejections and lack of support by the world. A classic commentary on the sad fate of a huge majority of artists (even talented ones), some of whom get "discovered" after they die.