Polyoty vo sne i nayavu

An excellent illustration of a person's life without spiritual values, the absence of any attachment and interest in anything and obvious degradation .. exclusively masterful director's, artistic, and acting work. This movie is an absolute masterpiece of Soviet cinema. We see all this today at the level of world culture - a civilization cut off from the spiritual and historical roots loses its meaning and rolls into a chaos and oblivion

I can't think of another well-made and realistic depiction of borderline personality disorder in men more convincing than this one. It's like a psychiatry textbook classic case. And while the disorder has been frequently shown in films, it's been almost exclusively a female role.

And who can fit as a male patient of BPD more than the charming Yankovsky. Charismatic, flirtatious, energetic, impulsive, feeling lonely in groups with multiple intense interpersonal relationships, unstable self-image, risk-taking behaviour with potential self harm, episodes of intense mood swings and neediness. Almost all scenes are eloquently illustrative and diagnostic..The typical hysterical peformance when he fell to the ground to avoid being abandoned by his young lover..the moment he held his kid assuring his paternity to himself...All were fabulously performed by Yankovsky. The skillful director together with Yankovsky's superb talent and unmatched acting skills must have been supplemented by observation of multiple examples of the disorder .. Didn't he once say how he watched his cat staring at him and slowly closing his eyes carefully in order to put a similar scene in one of his upcoming films...A good actor ,just like a good doctor, must be a good observer.

Roman Balayan's film is an emotional exploration of a man struggling to find his place in life. The main character is deeply traumatized from childhood, with issues stemming from his mother, leading to complicated relationships with women. He feels a sense of alienation and foreignness in society, and his trauma dictates an escape route through infantilism and flight.

The film features many intriguing details: a sense of artificiality in the decor, reminiscent of desolate cities of memory, and scenes in nature that emphasize his detachment. The main character resembles Don Quixote in a midlife crisis. The sounds of the radio symbolize that the world is in constant motion, showcasing the different vibes of the people around him. His relationships with women are a complex dynamic where his childishness is both alluring and repelling.

The film's ending is touching, returning the hero to his childhood but failing to provide him with a chance for true self-acceptance. It leaves us questioning whether he is ready to take responsibility and become a healthy person, as this acceptance will require facing his problems. As we see in Kira Muratova's "Astenic Syndrome," people remain directionless, but the main issue always lies within.

On the eve of his fortieth anniversary Sergei Makarov (Oleg Yankovsky), looks back at his life and learns that he has achieved nothing. He was not able to be happy and to bring happiness to the closest people in his life, neither to his long-suffering wife nor young mistress nor friends nor work... It is about the men who never grew up and could not find themselves in the time of stagnation: gifted, charming, but infantile and lost, they never were able to realize themselves...

This film became a super-hit in the Soviet Union of the eightieth. The audiences were divided into two camps. Some saw it as a personal insult, others - as a personal victory, as truth about their time and about themselves. When I saw it twenty four years ago, everyone was fascinated by the courage of the movie creators who chose a weak man, an anti-hero as a symbol of his times. When I saw it last night, the main character irritated me most of the time and I simply could not bring myself to sympathize or identify with him. Some of the best Russian actors gave very good performances (Oleg Yankovsky, Oleg Tabakov, Lyudmila Gurchenko and Nikita Mikhalkov in a short but memorable cameo) but the movie belongs to its era and it did not age well...

Some of the reviews here helped me understand this movie better. I was born in 1984 so I only heard the fuss this movie made back then. While watching it now I felt constant despair as if not only the main character was living meaninglessly but the whole town this movie was set in. It is hard to watch indeed, but I can understand how it was perceived by those living in a deeply stagnated country.