All Forgotten

The only comment I have read thus far that encapsulated this film was by a Russian woman from Moscow. Everthing in this film evokes Russia in Summer for the period intended. There is a quality of innocence that is captured by the characters and lost in metaphor. The father represents Europe seducing a young capricious Russian female. Her young lover is the true Russian unable to save his love from her fate until in the end he stands as witness to her ruin and death. Turgenev felt very strongly, as do all Russian writers, that Russians must look to themselves for the future and they felt a duty to warn their country of the temptations that would lead to Russia's downfall. Kirsten Dunst does a very good job of portraying Zinaida as a young woman desperate to grow up and at the same time hold onto her past, much like Russia. Her older lover, Valdemar's father (Europe) cannot understand her devotion to him and abandons her to her fate. He doesn't have the endurance her real lover (Valdemar)has - or the patience.

In the film based on an Ivan Turgenev ("First Love"), the college bound (Nick Stahl) is spending the last summer before he goes away to school outside Moscow, in the country. He soon becomes smitten with the neighbors' beautiful daughter, Zinaida (Kirsten Dunst). It's not long, though, before Vladimir realizes that he's just one member of a long line of suitors vying for Zinaida's heart---including his own father.

At first I thought this movie would be something I would enjoy. I've always been a fool for a costume drama. However, the horrible dialogue makes this movie hard to watch. Generally, I love watching both Dunst and Stahl, but not in this movie. I applaud not forcing bad accents, but why did they bring in crusty British accents? I found this movie completely void of any real plot. I rented this movie in hopes of seeing a romance, and through the slow beginning I continued to watch the film in hopes that it would speed up. I found it irritating that the entire movie was narrated. Although, the narrative did provide most of the plot! The acting was OK, but the character's actions were silly to me. In the end, I would not recommend this movie to anyone,

I really liked this movie a lot. The acting was good from Kirsten and Nick. The scenery was beautiful. I enjoyed the whole film. There were a few parts where I was confused, but only a few parts. I know a lot of people didn't like this movie but I didn't see a problem with it. The music was good. I would recommend this movie to anyone loves a good drama movie. Especially on that takes place in the eighteenth century. I recommend this movie to anyone who loves Kirsten Dunst or Nick Stahl.

Maybe the reason why I like this movie is mostly that I like the story "First Love" which the movie is based on. I can understand from another of the user comments that there is a lot of symbolism in the story. This symbolism is wasted on me. I have to see it as just a story. What I see then is a story about youth. Young people who follow their immediate emotions without giving much thought to the future. In the long term perspective we often make stupid choices when we act like that. I myself am not a very impulsive man, but I find myself attracted to people who are, unless they are so in a negative way. Is it not the force in emotions, especially big powerful emotions like love that make life so beautiful?

The main character Vladimir falls in love with Zinaida. She likes him very much, but she doesn't love him. She likes toying with him and her other admirers, and their feelings make them her willing puppets. This is of course not very nice of her, but it seems to me that she doesn't give it much thought and that it is never her intention to hurt anyone, she is just an emotional and impulsive girl. And maybe part of what makes them love her is her impulsive nature. After some time it becomes clear to Vladimir that Zinaida has herself fallen in love. But who is it that she loves? And is her own human nature now taking revenge for her toying with the emotions of her admirers? Will Vladimir and Zinaida mature through their experiences?

For those who thinks this story has no point I will say, that for me the point is simply to study human nature and to allow one self to feel with the characters. We don't always need a great plan to build the societies of the 21st century.

I would like to make a negative comment also. There is a second story in this movie mixed in with the main story. A woman falls in love while her husband is away in the war, and of course this causes trouble. Maybe this story could have a movie of its own (?), but I think it shouldn't have been part of this movie, because the situation of the woman, her husband (if he lives), her child and her lover is far too serious to just pop up for a moment now and then as a side story.

This film is very strange. It looks picturesque. It moves at the pace of a snail. It mimics great Russian epics such as "War and Peace", but no-one will take credit for the screenplay. Who wrote the story? Is it an original screenplay?

Kirsten Dunst is a Russian Princess who collects a crowd of fawning sycophantic admirers who salivate over her every motion and jostle with each other for her favours. Nick Stall is the youngest and fawns the hardest. He discovers that his Dad is the one who is sampling the ladies intimate delights and tragedy looms. There is never any explicit revelation of exactly what everyone is doing and no confrontation or conflict. Consequently there is no excitement and the story struggles to hold the viewers attention.

The period, incidentally, is mid 19th century Russia at the time of the Crimean War and not Britain as stated in the plot outline. Don't blame the British just because the film is slow and boring!

Stahl looks such a twit in his ensign's uniform with a hat that is seven sizes too big.