Correntes da Primavera

This is an extremely amateurish, ham-handed film, with lousy accents, stilted dialogue, and a waste of the unconvincing Timothy Hutton as a disillusioned Russian nobleman (!!!)

Valeria Golino is beautiful, but her character awfully two dimensional - and nobody could possibly believe Nastassja Kinski's hardboiled seductress. The entire film has that cheesy pan-European soft-focus quality found usually on late-night premium cable channels, but with a little less gratuitous nudity.

However, there is a lovely scene wherein Nastassja and Timothy go to visit a Gypsy camp and dance around with ever-increasing attraction to one another. The music is fabulous, and there isn't much of the aforementioned crappy dialogue. If I could find just that scene on DVD, I'd buy it. Otherwise, give this one a pass.

Stately period piece in the meticulous style of BARRY LYNDON (1975) - down to frequent shooting by candlelight - if done on a more intimate scale; actually the plot, adapted from a novel by Ivan Turgenev, is quite reminiscent of THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (1993). Still, it's not all solemnity and Skolimowski (who even appears, uncredited, in a brief but plum role) manages to insert his trademark irony and the odd visual touch on occasion!

Timothy Hutton and Nastassja Kinski may not look Russian, but they aren't too bad under the circumstances - she being especially radiant as the cold-hearted but irresistible temptress; ingénue Valeria Golino, then, is the final component of the romantic triangle. Despite the obvious Russian setting, the film was mainly shot in Italy (being an Italian/French co-production) - to where it actually relocates for the melancholy finale, which takes place against the colorful backdrop of the Venice Carnival.

The color utilized is generally muted and bathed in warm hues, with great care given to the lighting (most effective during a love scene inside a barn, set at dusk) - making the film's look and its overall period sense feel completely authentic. Though not usually linked with this type of film, Stanley Myers contributes a lovely score.

Turgenev's novel is ripe for cinematic treatment but Jerzy makes one wrong decision after another and sucks the life and drama out of the novel. Though Timothy Hutton is a serviceable lead -- his Russian dance though completely out of character and not in the book is a standout -- Valeria Golino is horribly miscast as is Kinski. The script also takes such liberties with the structure and characterizations that the movie ends up collapsing under its own weight. As the filmmaker never truly establishes Hutton's commitment and love for Gemma we don't care what happens between he and Kinski. Throughout the movie the director takes what were written as character scenes and opens them up into elaborate set pieces -- the fair, the opera, the masked ball -- underscoring his insecurity about our attachment to his characters and their wants and desires. He also has the most annoying directorial tic of starting almost every scene by dollying the camera behind some foreground element; flowers, tree branches, curtains and then finding our characters making their entrance. Miramax should have repo-ed the dolly and track and given him a tripod to stick the camera on.

Turgenev deserves better. Read the book; it's much more cinematic on the page then in this film.

One last question: what is William Forsythe doing in this movie?

This is a gorgeous movie. The photography is stunning. It develops stealthily into an unwilling and conflicted dual romance filled with good intentions, courage and traps. The participants confront their angels, then their equivalent personal demons. Later on, Sanin's (central male character) conflicts are portrayed as a subconscious journey in an eerie dreamland in which he tries to cope with inner conflicts and mysteries, and which, in the end, he is helpless to resolve, finally becoming totally dependent on time to do this for him. He is, despite all his worldly courage and altruism, weak in those things he loves most, paradoxically so, because they mean so much to him.

The romantic scenes are intensely erotic, expanded more so, because of the beautiful photography.... even the sounds amplify the mood. This romantic and heroic Russian classic is a timeless story. Put it on film together with beautiful women, gorgeous photography, a far away place and time, and you have a film I think you will enjoy watching, and which may also have you asking a lot of questions about later.

I'd like to read what women think of this feature. Every review I've seen so far completely misses the point including Roger Ebert's dead-wrong pan. Courage of conviction and lack of it bridge to each other here, though at different levels for different characters for very different reasons. The hues are gorgeous, and the music marries nicely. Experience this one your self. I've known very few people who have made similar choices in there lives and lived with those choices, so I'm not surprised that so many reviewers can't understand these characters. I would have stopped at "...music marries nicely..." but there is a ten line minimum.