NOTE IMDb
6,7/10
4,6 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA chronicle of the rise of the advertising industry in Post-Soviet Russia.A chronicle of the rise of the advertising industry in Post-Soviet Russia.A chronicle of the rise of the advertising industry in Post-Soviet Russia.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires et 5 nominations au total
Andrey Vasilev
- Savin
- (as Andrei V. Vasilyev)
Avis à la une
This movie enchants with its honesty and surprises with its ingenuity. It shows an art-house-like alternative reality, which is an illusion. Unlike art house the movie has a clear message and meaning, you just have to look deeper. The alternative reality is also not really alternative, most of it is Russian reality now. Essentially, if you are a fan of seeing things through the glasses of irony and satire, you are not afraid to wonder what is really going on in the world behind the mask of show and propaganda, the movie is for you. I can't say it's about Russia only; it is a certain view of the world illustrated by the example of Russia. What country doesn't know lost generations, brain-washing and power play? Do not expect to be satisfied. The story leaves much room for thought and conclusions. Pelevin fans would be thrilled, those who didn't read the book will enjoy the movie nonetheless. It would be wrong to compare it to the book, because this is the kind of book that is next to impossible to be screened, yet the director managed to do it with flying colors. Besides, I can hardly think of any Russian movie with so much cursing, which makes the presented reality even more real. Whatever your impressions of the movie, it is definitely worth your time.
A good set of actors. It's also good that director didn't modify the original Pelevin's idea.
It might even be better if you haven't read the book, but come in naively as I did and just start watching with no expectations. Although this work of magical realism has a strong Russian flavor, it is as much about western civilization as anything else. Ironically, one of the themes is that Russia produces no products, but the Russian pose has long been that it produces philosophical literature and this Certainly qualifies. It also gives you a big taste of Russia that will inform someone who knows very little. The "cultural references" may be specific, but the context usually gives you an idea of what sort of thing is being referenced. I look forward to forcing my husband to watch it with me, and I wish I had more time to read, because the book must be really good...
Now that I have seen it again, I look forward to reading the book, preferably annotated. A second viewing means that you can catch more foreshadowing and thematic development. I realized I had missed a few plot points, too. The events of 2015 resonate strongly with this film and it looks like 2016 will be more resonant yet. This film is available on Google, and I can't recommend it enough. From prehistory to modern politics it has something to say. It is funny as hell about some serious stuff.
Now that I have seen it again, I look forward to reading the book, preferably annotated. A second viewing means that you can catch more foreshadowing and thematic development. I realized I had missed a few plot points, too. The events of 2015 resonate strongly with this film and it looks like 2016 will be more resonant yet. This film is available on Google, and I can't recommend it enough. From prehistory to modern politics it has something to say. It is funny as hell about some serious stuff.
First of all, I would like to express my admiration. Admiration for the fact that the creators managed to make a good film with a clear plot, excellent acting, pleasant pictures, high-quality and appropriate special effects, with humor and meaning. There is no vulgarity here, the swearing does not spoil the impression - it is appropriate. And this (good cinema) is in itself a huge achievement.
I was afraid that with such an abundance of stars it would simply turn out to be another skit, but no: everyone played their roles well. I would especially like to mention Efremov: I don't even remember him in a role that lasted more than a couple of minutes and without a bottle. Here, he is both a habitual tyrant, an evil genius, and a victim.
And of course the main star of the film is Epifantsev. From the very beginning I didn't like the fact that he would play Babylen, but he is so organic in this role that any objections disappear from the very first scene. He is simply perfect for the role of a young, energetic man who does not believe in anything, trying to survive in a destroyed country during the troubled times.
I was afraid that with such an abundance of stars it would simply turn out to be another skit, but no: everyone played their roles well. I would especially like to mention Efremov: I don't even remember him in a role that lasted more than a couple of minutes and without a bottle. Here, he is both a habitual tyrant, an evil genius, and a victim.
And of course the main star of the film is Epifantsev. From the very beginning I didn't like the fact that he would play Babylen, but he is so organic in this role that any objections disappear from the very first scene. He is simply perfect for the role of a young, energetic man who does not believe in anything, trying to survive in a destroyed country during the troubled times.
Viktor Ginzburg's "Generation P" is a satire on advertising, and the free-for-all that took over Russia after the Soviet collapse. My favorite scene is where the main character imagines Che Guevara showing him how mass consumerism destroys the soul and turns one into a robot watching TV all day (like the characters in Mike Judge's "Idiocracy").
A lot of the movie is filmed so that the audience isn't sure if the action is real or imagined (those mushrooms suggest the latter). And then there's the title. The P could stand for pop, Pepsi, Panasonic, or something else of that ilk. Empty prospects for the generation that saw Boris Yeltsin shell the parliament building that he had previously defended, and then use the constitutional crisis to establish a nearly monarchical government.
I recommend the movie. The main character's immersion in one of the sleaziest worlds of all makes for an intense story. Really good one.
A lot of the movie is filmed so that the audience isn't sure if the action is real or imagined (those mushrooms suggest the latter). And then there's the title. The P could stand for pop, Pepsi, Panasonic, or something else of that ilk. Empty prospects for the generation that saw Boris Yeltsin shell the parliament building that he had previously defended, and then use the constitutional crisis to establish a nearly monarchical government.
I recommend the movie. The main character's immersion in one of the sleaziest worlds of all makes for an intense story. Really good one.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesKonstantin Khabensky turned down the role of Babylen Tatarsky. Than it went with Vladimir Epifantsev.
- GaffesIn the opening scene depicting the late 1980s USSR a street musician is holding a cordless microphone - an incredibly expensive piece of equipment at that time. Even popular Soviet musicians, gathering stadium sized audiences complained they couldn't afford them.
- ConnexionsReferenced in kuji: Lado Kvataniya: The Idea of a Cinema (2024)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Generation P?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 7 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut mondial
- 4 664 538 $US
- Durée
- 1h 52min(112 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant