La légende de la forteresse de Souram

Paradjanov's sequel to THE COLOR OF POMEGRANATES. This is more accessible than COLOR, more narrative driven, with a greater use of outside locations. It is still as obscure, with legends, allegories, characters and symbols all weaving into a culturally specific tapestry. It is not as jaw-droppingly gorgeous or formally astonishing as COLOR, and seems much more pessimistic. It is a story of exiles, poverty, serfdom, murder and the supernatural, with stories within stories, and an almost buoyant ending celebrating resistance and culture.

It's a great film which has scenes like paintings. The music is remarkable. Therefore, both visually and aurally it is a marvelous journey to the Georgian folklore. It also conveys very good messages. The main theme is the suggestion that the patria could only be defended, if some sacrifices their lives for its defense. Blood becomes the cement, in other words. The fortress constitutes a metaphor of the patria, which was vulnerable at that time to the invasions of the two major empires: Ottoman and Safavid. In this context, religion is the main theme of patriotism, which differentiate the majority of the Georgians from the outsiders. There are also so many connections to the folk tales of both Turkish and Iranian culture. One is the character Zurab who rebels against his father because he leaves his patria, thus, his religion. This reminds us the character Zohrab in Shahname of Firdawsi, who fought against his father.

On the other hand, the political context and the director's position in that context is also felt in the choice of making such a movie. The Soviet system was disintegrating and the director is also one of the victims of the Soviet regime long before this movie's production.

Paradjanov made four films for which he is best known: Shadows Of Forgotten Ancestors and Color Of Pomegranates in the sixties; Legend Of Surami Fortress and Ashik Kerib in the eighties. In case you don't already know, between the sixties and the eighties he spent over a decade in a Soviet prison. I find this to be the strongest and most hypnotic one of the bunch, made soon after his release. One should take advantage of any opportunity to see these on the big screen.

Sergei Parajanov has the most personal style of all directors I know of. He firmly established this style with his films "Shadows of our forgotten ancestors" (1965) and "The color of pomegranates" (1969).

The leaders of the Soviet Union didn't like his style. It didn't fit in with their opinions about (the role of) art (in society). Parajanov spend the '70s and early '80s mostly in jail and labor camps convicted on diverse false accusations.

When he was released in the '80s Parajanov started a second phase in his career. "The legend of Suram fortress was the first film in this second phase. In a book about the history of film I read about this second phase "and he made another three films". That is in my opinion too short a summary and does not do justice to "The legend of Suram fortress. It is true however that "The legend of Suram fortress" is not an artistic break from previous films. Parajanov does not break new grounds in the second phase of his career.

Just like in earlier films "The legend of the Suram forttress" is visually hypnotizing. His images are deeply rooted in old mythical and religious stories and icons. This also means that the plot is hard to follow for Western eyes. The film is more a series of "tableaux vivants" than chapters of a story.

In the films of for exampls Sergei Eisenstein you can sometimes guess that underneath his hstorical stories there was criticism on the current situation. "The legend of the Surem fortress" is plotwise too inaccessible to conclude that it contains hidden criticism on the way the Soviet Union had treated Parajanov in the past decade.

From all the "tableaux vivants" in the movie I was charmed most by "The prayer" and "The passage of time". The way Parajanov uses the close up in these tablaeux is really beautiful.

SURAM FORTRESS has a bit more narrative than some of Parajanov's films but, as with the others, I still don't always understand what's going on or why. Still, his very eccentricity, breaking every rule of narrative and filmmaking, inspires me in my own work as a playwright and composer.

His use of striking, associative images -- powerful, even when they don't make literal sense -- recalls the great Tarkovsky, who does something similar in his films, in his own very personal style.

Parajanov, like Bresson -- another director who can fascinate and baffle me at the same time -- does everything differently from the way it's usually done, infuriating viewers expecting believable characters and comprehensible stories. With both directors, the results can be uneven, but at their best, they really inspire, stimulate, and get your creative juices flowing.

Bresson, Tarkovsky, and Parajanov prove you can truly try ANYTHING while following your own artistic vision. But, unlike some overpraised fraudulent directors, they are never pretentiously avant- garde for its own sake, phony, insincere, or "different" just to come across as cool, perverse, or faux-profound.

Parajanov and Bresson's boldly individual styles embolden me to be fresher, more original, and think outside of the box in my own work.