Ecnerwal

'Farewell, America' is the last film Alexander Dovzhenko worked on as director. Production was stopped by the government half-way through (like many films under Stalin's regime) and the footage that had been shot was stored away somewhere in Moscow. Only recently (in the 1990s?) was it rediscovered. The version I saw (and probably the only version 'available' to the public) is a reconstruction in which the scenes that were shot have been interspersed with some Russian man, with the help of Dovzhenko's original script (including some sketches he'd drawn), describing the scenes that are missing.

The basic plot concerns an American woman, Anna, who goes to work at the American embassy in Moscow just as World War Two is ending. There she finds that everyone has an extreme irrational hatred of the Russians, bordering on fascism, and they all want to start a new war against Russia. She and one man are more sympathetic towards the Russians, and even are friends with a Russian family, much to the disapproval of the embassy. She goes on an assignment to Ukraine to investigate collective farming and show how unhappy the masses are with it, but finds only kind and happy farmers. Not satisfied with this report, the embassy orders her to change it, before she is sent back to America. Here she finds the same bias and hatred, and when she returns to Russia she does not return to the embassy, but becomes a citizen of the Soviet nation. It must be noted that this for the large part, is a comedy, poking fun at Americans.

The only scenes that were shot were those taking place in the American embassy and a few of those set in America. This is a great shame, since from the evidence of his earlier films, and from a few seconds of footage of Dovzhenko walking through fields (included in this reconstruction), the scenes set in rural Ukraine would have undoubtedly been the most beautiful. As it is, the remaining scenes are heavily studio-bound, which makes it incredibly difficult for Dovzhenko to display his skill and beauty and as a director. Nevertheless, to a certain extent he does succeed.

His use of colour, which for obvious reasons is not seen in his earlier films, is very good, much better than most colour films this early. He has a powerful sense of shade, often tinting the whole scene with a subtle red. Also good are his close-ups, particularly of Anna. But Dovzhenko's real success is as writer. Given an extremely unsubtle and obvious propaganda piece, he has turned it into a clever and often very amusing comedy, much in the style of American comedies of the late 30s. Of particular note is a hilarious scene depicting a completely absurd American band, each man making a different sound to create a tune. Most of the jokes make fun of the Americans, but obviously that was necessary for Dovzhenko to have any chance to be allowed to make the film.

The reason for the abandonment of the film seems a mystery to me. This is by far the most anti-American, pro-Russia film I have ever seen. Perhaps Dovzhenko's attempts once more to focus on Ukraine, his homeland (about which he had been previously reprimanded) angered the government. Or perhaps comedy was just not acceptable - they wanted obvious to-the-point propaganda. Either way this film remains a sad reminder of the unjust fate of yet another great director - Dovzhenko himself once said it saddened him how few films he completed during his lifetime. Even after stooping to a film so unsuited to his style - he was desperate for any job he could get behind the camera - he once more had the project snatched away from him.

This is basically the sequel to Dovzhenko's earlier film 'Battle for Soviet Ukraine'/'Ukraine in Flames'. It is not as powerful as its predecessor, with fewer of the beautiful and disturbing images, but it has its moments.

The film describes the Russian attack against the Germans, which drove them away from the Dneiper river, and finally out of Ukraine. The film tends to explain the events in excessive detail, listing the towns and cities as they are recaptured, and far too much screen-time is taken up by a map with arrows moving around it. Having said that, there is one amusing moment on the map, where the arrows, representing the Russian attacks, stab a Nazi swastika, representing the German forces, and the swastika writhes a little before blood pours out and it disintegrates, with only one of its arms escaping.

In spite of its boring narrative style, there are some beautiful scenes, notably of Ukrainian soldiers coming home to their families and rebuilding their lives and their homes. And again there are some wonderful images of nature, in particular some shots of the moon and sun against the horizon. We also see some more disturbing depictions of the brutality of the Germans - more bodies of soldiers, women and children. However, what is slightly odd is that we are shown similar images of dead germans, but yet are supposed to feel proud and happy at these images. I suppose only when you have been through what the Ukrainians had could you feel such hatred towards the Germans. 8/10

This is a simply wonderful documentary about the fighting in Ukraine during the Second World War. First of all, we see the Germans invading, driving the Ukrainians out of their land. Then the Ukrainians, with the help of the Red Army counter-attack driving the Germans slowly backwards. The film centres on the battle for Kharkov. It ends with the Germans being driven back across the river Dneiper.

The narration of events in this film is not particularly interesting. What makes this film wonderful are the images Dovzhenko uses. Near the beginning of the film we have beautiful images of the Ukrainian countryside and the people working and living in it - huge fields of wheat and sunflowers, swaying in the wind; orchards in blossom; reflections of the landscape in the clear river; people working the land in happiness. This strongly contrasts with the destruction we see when the germans invade - cities in ruins, villages destroyed, people fleeing the homes. One powerful image is of a woman lighting her stove, when that is all that is left of her house. At one point we see footage of german soldiers laughing as they march intercut with shots of destruction and death.

The battle scenes themselves are understandably a little confused and not particularly involving, although Dovzhenko does use some good shots of the smoke around the cannons, and his rapid editing is very effective. Some of the most powerful scenes come after the recapture of Kharkov, which lies in ruins. Various inhabitants are interviewed, telling of the cruelty of the germans, and we see truly disturbing shots of charred corpses, murdered children, and bodies heaped in ditches.

The whole film is narrated in voice-over, which understandably seems to be excessively keen on killing germans and a bit over the top in praise of the motherland. The subtitles, at least on the version I saw, were terrible: some scenes were not translated at all, and the english throughout was ungrammatical and badly spelt.

'Victory on the Right Bank Ukraine (1945)', also by Dovzhenko, follows straight on from where this film left off, but its imagery is not generally as powerful. 9/10

This is a brilliant satirical comedy, made by John Cleese, Michael Palin and Graham Chapman before Monty Python, and it is a lot funnier. It is not too bizarre, the material is very original and the characterisations are far stronger.

It basically consists of John Cleese talking about ways to irritate people, and showing sketches as examples. The sketches are hilarious, and nearly every character can be linked to someone you know. Particularly good are the annoying 'pepperpots' who sit behind you in the cinema, talking and commenting, the mother who uses emotional blackmail to persuade you to spend more time with her, the dodgy car salesman, who refuses to admit there is a fault with the car, and the job interviewer, who gets you to perform absurd tasks.

All in all it is one of the funniest collection of sketches ever made.

This is easily the funniest comedy ever made.The characters are very strong - Mackay the harsh scottish guard with his neck 'twitch', Barrowclough the well-meaning and gullible guard, bumbling around pathetically, Godber the innocent and naive prisoner, and of course Norman Stanley Fletcher. Ronnie Barker's acting is superb - his expressions and timing are perfect.

The script by Dick Clement and Ian Le Frenais is one of the wittiest and sharpest ever written. For example:

(A prison inspector has just entered Fletcher's cell, and Fletcher has just made spoken to him.) Inspector: He's very articulate Mackay: Yes, like a lorry