A long unfortunate life

Andrey Zvyagintsev’s drama Leviathan (Russia) has won the film award which is second important after Oscar, the Golden Globe in the category “Best Foreign Film.” In May 2014, Andrey Zvyagintsev and Oleg Negin won an award for the Best Screenplay in Cannes. Russian cinematography is celebrating its triumph; even the officials of the Ministry of Culture which took a dislike of the film long ago (although they allotted the funding), showed a bit of generosity by greeting the authors through clenched teeth; however, the news about the victory was shown as something unimportant on central television channels.

The reason of dislike is clear: Leviathan is about the state that destroys a small man, predictably and without obstruction.

The leading character is a car mechanic Nikolai, whose role is performed by amazing Aleksei Serebryakov, is trying to defend his house located on the seaside from the city’s mayor Vadim Shelevyat (Roman Madyanov), a real gangster and raider. Of course, Nikolai loses the lawsuit and even his friend, a Moscow lawyer (Vladimir Vdovichenkov) is unable to help him. After all, his life is completely ruined.

Zvyagintsev offers an author’s version of Old Testament’s Book of Job: one of the characters, a not self-interested priest, quotes a fragment from there. This is the super task and a problem at the same time.

The film shows, at least such intention can be felt, the truth with two components: social and existential. The truth of the situation and the essence truth of the hero.

Everything is fine with the situation. We can observe how the Leviathan state embodied by a greedy ruler, corrupt prosecutors, judges, and policemen, with the assistance of hypocritical clergy, grinds a man into dust only for the reason that he dares to fight for his rights. This is shown very precisely, both in terms of the plot, and in terms of character development. Everything becomes more complicated when it gets down to deeper motives.

It is common knowledge that Job was a righteous man whose life became the subject of argument between the Heavens and the devil. God allowed terrible woes happen to Job, but returned everything au centuple (on the whole, this is one of the most frightful and inhuman books of the Bible). There are more than enough references to Orthodoxy, to Christianity in Zvyagintsev’s film. Icons, churches, sermons, mentions of God in some way or another, and the clergy. But this is not about the conflict of the faith of the people and faith of the government; rather it is about Job who lost faith.

There is no doubt that Zvyagintsev’s work as a director belongs to the tradition of slow, half-meditative in terms of form and didactic in terms of content cinema, a genius of which was Tarkovsky. It can almost be guaranteed that the combination of such a restrained rhythm and picturesqueness in direct meaning – with allusions to painting and splendid shooting in the open air – the visual imagery plus search of answers to damned questions, with proper talent of the author, will bring festival success.

Zvyagintsev reinforced the social aspect, but the persistent ethic reference remains in the groundwork. The betrayal of Nikolai’s wife Lilia (Elena Liadova) becomes the point of no return. Liadova is a wonderful actress, yet her heroine from the first to the last scene has a permanently sorrowful facial expression, which is not supported by any expressive motivation, like everything connected with Lilia. Why did she betray him, and with a family friend? Later there was sex with him during a picnic almost before everyone’s eyes. Why later she committed suicide after reconciliation with her husband? Only because of problems with her stepson? By the way, why does he hate his stepmother so much? He cannot remember his mother, because he was too young when she died, and Lilia is very nice to him. No scene shows in any way (visual, through the plot or with the help of dialogs) the problems in relationships between Lilia and Nikolai or any serious psychological breakdown of the heroine. There are many dramaturgical mismatches in other moments, because of which the foundation of what is going on, and the choice (lack of faith) that led the leading hero to defeat doesn’t seem so tragic. His phrase that he doesn’t understand anything is one of the many, but not the moment of the truth. The truth of society and the truth of essence collide and the latter is defeated. It is not a universal story or parable that we see, but another hopeless social drama.

So, the story of new Job is unsuccessful. Probably, it could not have been successful, because the old ethic formulas (Dostoevsky, Tolstoy) are inefficient in present-day Russia.

However, it is interesting that Russian cinema already has a film with a similar plot: A long happy life (directed by Boris Khlebnikov), which was released a year before last. It shows as well the corrupt power, which wants to take someone else’s property, a lonely hero betrayed by friends, a seaside house, and the final scenes show in the same way the landscape that will outlive the cruel fuss of people. However, Khlebnikov left for the protagonist the possibility and resoluteness to take revenge. Zvyagintsev deprives Nikolai even of this, which is even better.

Viktoria BONDAR, screenplay writer, Kyiv:

Yesterday I watched Leviathan. I haven’t seen for a long time so carefully executed opportunistic expression. All Russian critics together with the authors are very diligently underlining that this is a ‘universal story.’ God forbid the ‘emperor’ suspects that such thing is possible only in Russia and gets angry.”

Marianna MAKSIMOVSKAYA, TV journalist, Moscow:

“Dmitry Olshansky writes that Leviathan was shot to meet the needs of the Western audience, to blacken Russia. As for me, the film is very realistic, therefore it does not leave any hope at all.

“Behind the turns of simple plot line I saw stories of absolutely concrete people, about whom we have shot TV programs, and who wrote to our TV show, asking for help, because after all nobody was left in Russia for them to complain to. They hoped that maybe television would help.

“Olshansky calls a state official from Leviathan a parody and is surprised at his personal participation in mopping up of the hero. I remember, for example, how the top inspector of the country brought a journalist to the forest and intimidated him personally, just like the official in the film. He was not too lazy to do this.

“I remember my interview with the former president of Ingushetia Zyazikov, who once had the same flight with the opposition leader of the republic, Yevloyev. When the plane landed, Yevloyev was taken to a police car and shot down there. By the way, none of the then leadership has been punished.

“I remember absolutely concrete letters which told that local officials and force structures take away people’s business and land plots. And they were not punished either. And they have no one to complain to.

“I won’t say anything about the church line. I will spare the feelings of believers.

“I don’t know how one should be unwilling to see, not to notice such things. And, what’s more important, be unwilling to change anything.”

Natalia GEVORKYAN, Russian journalist and writer, Paris:

“With a 30-year break Atonement by Abuladze and Leviathan by Zvyagintsev. In the first one: this road doesn’t lead to the church. In the second one: this church doesn’t lead to God.”