Vozvrashcheniye (2003)

English Title: The Return 

I considered this movie to be of medium accomplishment. Not very good. Not very bad either. 

The script is poor, in my opinion. It was contrived. It sometimes dragged. Well, that's what I thought of it. The cinematography was fine. The acting was fine also. Camerawork, fine. 

The Rest of This Review Contains Spoilers. DO NOT READ IT UNLESS YOU HAVE WATCHED THE MOVIE. 

I have devised a political reading of the movie. It makes the film more interesting, but the previous comment still holds. 

A country that has come out of a unique political experiment, an experiment that is generally considered to have been a spectacular failure. A country that for 7 decades (I am not good at dates, so forgive me if I miscount) lived under a regime that allowed little or no freedom, but that provided the common man with a (perhaps illusory) sense of guidance, of direction. This country is suddenly "thrown into the jungle", immersed in capitalism. No more guidance. No more sense of direction. This country sees the rates of criminality rise to an unprecedented level. The economy, by contrast, has modest growing rates. This country, once the leading part of what was called "The Second World", is drawn pitilessly into the common ground of "The Third World". 

Two boys, one around 14, the other around 12, live with their mother. The younger, more rebellious but also more afraid, one relies on his mother's support. The older one is more mature, more independent, more adjusted. Their father, absent for 12 years, returns. The three of them go on a trip. 

These two boys, whom you can call "The Bourgeoisie" and "The Proletariat", or "The Radical" and "The Moderate", or "Adam" and "Eve", or whatever other political, social or religious dichotomy pleases you most, will have different relationships with their father, whom you can call "The State" or "The Government" or "God". 

They are led to an island (meaning an isolation from the capitalist, US dominated, world?). The father is rude, even cruel at times. The younger boy mocks at the older one's submission to their father. The figure of the father/state is dual; he is both a menace and a hope for these boys. The father is secretive (as any autoritarian regime). He unburies a secret box and places it at the boat. This box is probably the reason of their journey; in it lies perhaps the hope for a better life. It may contain money (the box standing for economic recovery through a planned and controlled economy?). The boys want to go on a boat ride. The father is contrary at first; then he assents, but urges them to be back in one hour. (The people are allowed limited freedom.) The boys return much later than the stipulated time. (Society will not allow to be limited in its freedom.) The father wants to punish the older one, but the younger one revolts and runs. The father wants to protect the younger one, and runs after him. He is killed in the process. 

Both boys see in dismay that he wanted to protect them, and it led him to his death. They led him to his death. Now they are without a father, without a guide, and their childhood is irreversibly over. They are alone in the world. A cruel world this is, and survival is a matter of chance as much as anything else. 

Rating: 55