kiarash-choobchian

The film focuses more on showing a glimpse of his passive life than delving deeper into his mind and emotions. Perhaps Mikhalkov was more interested in accurately reconstructing the atmosphere of the story than in the psychology of the character.

In some scenes, the film resembles teletheater

Overall, the film seems to appeal more to fans of the novel and those who are comfortable with a slow, classical style than to viewers looking for a more engaging cinematic narrative.

As for the music, I think one of the film's weaknesses is the combination of the film's slow rhythm with music that, instead of enhancing the atmosphere, sometimes takes it out of its effective state.

In some sequences, the music is more of a distraction than a help in understanding Oblomov's emotions. This is especially noticeable in long scenes where the rhythm of the film is very slow.

The film's music was composed by Eduard Artemyev. Artemyev is one of the leading Russian composers, especially known for his collaboration with Andrei Tarkovsky on films such as Solaris and Mirror. He composed both original music and classical pieces in this film.

In general, the film's music is a combination of new compositions and classical pieces, which sometimes does not seem coherent.

On the other hand, I think the weakness in the narrative and characterization and the emphasis and intention on the complete narration of the novel, has led to the use of the narrator to narrate the events.

Instead of conveying the feelings and thoughts of the character Oblomov through acting, dialogues or illustrations, the film relies more on direct narration. This excessive use of the narrator has made us merely listen to the story instead of identifying with the character.

When the narrator speaks instead of the images, the film feels more like a radio play or teletheater. This theatricality is especially enjoyable when combined with static scenes and classical music.

It could be said that Mikhalkov resorted to using a narrator out of excessive loyalty to the novel and fear of losing detail. This choice may be understandable for a literary adaptation, but for a film, especially one with such a long running time, it is a poor decision. If the narrative had been more creatively combined with the visual elements and games, the film could have been much more impressive.

In the explanation for watching this movie, it should be stated that: the prerequisite for watching this movie is to read the book Mrs. Dolloway and to be familiar with Virginia Wolf and her perspective due to her bipolar disease.

It is a confusing and boring movie, and the question that arises is: Is this movie as deep as it looks complicated or not?

My answer: No In my opinion, the femininity score of this movie is 8/10 A film with 10/10 femininity, it relies and emphasizes more on the emotions and the type of female look, and if I were to name a film with those characteristics, maybe it would be Portrait of Lady on Fire.