Koktebel

Good cinematography will only take you so far. However, amazing cinematography will carry your film by itself. And that's just the start...Acting is well above average, and the writing, although somewhat resembling the "Russian soul" in its mystique and lack of structure, nevertheless fulfills its duty: to get to the hearts of those who for some unknown reason would not find themselves enchanted by the visuals alone...

A film like this just couldn't be made in America, where action must occur at a slam-bang pace, and children must be either pitifully ignorant of life or else caricatures of evil. Here, there is exquisite attention to detail -- a countryside, a vase of flowers, and long periods with no dialog at all where a mood is simply allowed to develop. The passage of time may not be in equivalent "real time," yet it passes noticeably. And what a skilled performance by Gleb Puskepalis, a boy with, as often seems to be the case, a distinguished acting history in legitimate theater. His character is master of his fate and of the plot, and he himself is master of the camera and the cast. I like this film especially because it is the boy who is rational, determined and self-directed, while the adults, as in reality, are continually made fools by their alcohol, aggression, and just wanting "to f*** each other" all the time. Bravo!

Koktebel' is the film that could impress those who love Russia, Russians and who wants to know more about that country. It could help to understand "mysterious Russian soul". But it is sometimes too slow and detailed. It got the Silver Georgy on the 25th Moscow International Film festival.

Koktebel is a very poor film made by obviously inexperienced directors. It centres on a father and son as they make their way from Moscow to the Crimea. Without money, they have to hitch lifts, get work when they can and rely on others' generosity. The film has enormous potential that is almost completely wasted by the directors. The cinematography (which clearly could make a film like this wonderful) is bad. The directors take the 'banale detail' camera-work to a new level in a clear imitation of better Russian directors (like Tarkovsky or Sokhurov), but carry it off badly, so that it becomes boring and sentimental. This is a real shame, since the Russian landscape is exceptionally beautiful in its sparseness and this is hardly captured at all. The directors are probably trying to show the the point of view of the 11-year-old protagonist, but it results in a pretentious and cloying film. Neither the script nor the acting are so bad, but the directors make unfair demands on the child actor playing the son, spoiling what would have otherwise been a solid performance. There are occasional good scenes, but the narrative lacks continuity and is horribly self-conscious (social stereotypes appear from the wings, making it seem like the directors have a tick-list of emotions they want to convey). The continual use of music (not a bad, but an inappropriate piece by Chick Corea) compounds the sentimentality of the film. Avoid it.

I stumbled upon the DVD version of this film and, being a moderate fan of Russian cinema, made the time investment to watch it.

The film was slow, and some takes were, in my opinion, unnecessarily long. The hand-held, back-and-forth capture of the boy throwing stones at a heap of junk strained my eyes, and I found it annoying and unnecessary.

However, the film also has the typical merits of a low-budget, personal film which does have a story to tell. The acting was fine, the story simple and yet believable, and the shots were visually pleasing.

This is by no means a great film, but I will recommend it to anyone who is fond of Russian cinema, and has the patience and a desire to have glimpses of modern Russia.