Ivan's Childhood (1962)

Director: Andrei Tarkovsky

I have experienced many works of art that depicted the horrors of war and how horrible it all is, so the subject on its own doesn't really do it for me anymore. If a movie about the horrors of war wants to be memorable, it must try to be unique through something else besides just the subject. With Ivan's Childhood Tarkovsky does this, most effectively with some beautiful dream sequences sporadically placed within this tragic film about an orphaned child helping the Russian army in their fight against the Nazi's. The fantasy/dream/nightmare sequences take us inside the head of Ivan and make his childhood experience all the more tragic when we see what exactly he witnessed, what he is now fighting for, and the desire he has to return to a peaceful life with his family.

Those dream sequences give heft to the important, but a bit tired cinematically, subject of the consequences of war. The rest of the movie feels a bit more conventional compared to those great scenes, but Tarkovsky manages to once in a while fill even the more conventional scenes with beauty. It is apparent that this is not a movie Tarkovsky initiated, as the movie is a bit too blunt and straightforward for his more poetic and ambiguous sensibilities, but you can tell that the dream sequences were very much his idea. He shoots those scenes with passion and subtlety, and the camera moves fluidly, it's all much more in line with the Tarkovsky that we know from his later more personal films. His later films are certainly much more impressive than this one, but this one fits well in his oeuvre and takes it's own place in the list of quality movies about the horrors of war and the important consequences it has on the most innocent in society.

Grade: B+

Battleship Potemkin (1925)

Director: Sergei M. Eisenstein

 One of the important thing this film does is make you think about the difference between filmmaking as art and filmmaking as propaganda. Can a film that is obviously propaganda be considered art? Battleship Potemkin gives a lot of credibility to the "yes" side. It's a film that is explicitly revolutionary propaganda recreating a rebellion by a Russian battleship against their Tsarist officers. But it's also a very powerful film that used film editing in a way that was never used before, and those techniques only made the film much more powerful. The film is above all a testament to the power of film as an art form. It's a great example of what film really can do and the extraordinary power it can over those who watch it. Film can inspire and it can excite and Eisenstein was one of the first who really took advantage of this power (Joseph Goebbells also learned this power from this film, reportedly).

While the film is known more for being influential, especially in its editing techniques most famously displayed in the Odessa steps sequence, there are many great things about this film that still stand the test of time. The film is only about 70 minutes long or so, so the film doesn't try to build characters as people, what it does is create symbols within the characters. There is no individual, everyone represents the group, and if everyone rose up together against oppression, freedom can be won. One of things I liked most about the film is its message that soldiers are not just pawns of a government. They are citizens of their country like everyone else, and so they have the ability to rebel against their commanding officers and stand side-by-side with their non-military brethren. Sure the movie is famous more for its influence, but even today, almost 90 years later, it is still a powerful piece of work.

Grade: A-