Burnt by the Sun

In the end, a brilliant indictment of the Stalinist purges in the Soviet army of the late 1930s. At the beginning the film deceives with its body, Michalkov lulls the viewer with a plethora of humorous situations and the depiction of Colonel Kotov's idyllic family life, only to grab them by the throat at the end and strangle them with a demonstration of the practices of NKVD agents. Michalkov and Imbragimbek's film is both kind and terrifying, and the Oscar is in the right hands. And what I would also like to highlight are the performances of all the actors involved, especially Michalkov himself and his real daughter Nadezhda, who is absolutely disarming with her immediacy, as if standing in front of the camera is the easiest thing in the world. (07/31/2006)

Michalkov's adept storytelling art, skillfully used within his capabilities, with a determined ambition to unveil the aura of mystery surrounding one of the many dark actions of Stalin's regime, is unquestionable. The unusually used form of probing into an officer's family compels the viewer to ponder the prevailing situation everywhere. However, the two-and-a-quarter-hour narration through the most tedious possible form, consisting of long dialogue-heavy scenes that (perhaps) lead to "something" progressing the plot, occasionally deviates from its original intention of delivering a certain dose of epicness, which was meant to contrast with the minimalist casting of the family circle. Despite the intentional slow pacing, the film leaves something behind in the viewer after it ends, automatically resonating on a deeper level. And that "something" is not a pleasant thing to think about, even though that was Nikita's point. (10/21/2005)

A film in which the poetics of The Cherry Orchard meet the poetics of socialist realism. The poetics of the old peaceful bourgeois world with a chaotic and bizarre new order of the Stalinist line. In the peaceful setting of the Soviet countryside, in the harmonic rhythm of a traditional Russian family, an inconspicuous, but then absolutely captivating story of revenge and conscience plays out. The story of a man in the meat grinder of history, a man scorched (not tired!) by the sun of revolution. There is no doubt that the intimate story, similarly to Yugoslav cinematography, metaphorically mirrors the world of the Stalinist USSR (a world shaped and dragged by ideology). It mirrors it with almost frightening suggestiveness, yet unforced by the shallow shocking shots. At the same time, Michalkov plays out extraordinarily pure and believable tones of romance, in which the incredibly charismatic performance of the director himself, and especially of his daughter Naděžda, dominate. Their mutual harmony is absolute, beautiful, indescribable. Because of these two things, the drama of a man who believes in the religion of the new order, the utopia of a beautiful tomorrow, but who eventually becomes a victim thereof, is civilly harmonious and drastically dramatic beneath its surface. Oleg Menshikov also gives a fantastic performance - his study of an internally divided man has a legible structure and enormous internal dynamics. Michalkov's feeling for the composition of the image is absolute, and for alternating peaceful scenes of the Old Russian family and even comically conceived intrusions of socialism into people's lives. The leitmotifs of the ball lightning and the wandering mover frame the precise composition, giving it a regular rhythm and a touch of absurdity. The construction of the Stalinist balloon then symbolizes the eternal presence of the leader in everyday joys and sorrows. Not to mention the song that gave the film its name and which, with its melancholy, brings tears to the eyes. Michalkov's statement about the Stalinist regime is therefore so effective and so immediate that it is not in and of itself an accusation, but rather a biased account of people's fates. People whose lives have been burned to ashes by the phantom leader of one-sixth of the world. (10/25/2006)

When I first saw the film 20 years ago, it deeply impressed me and I gave it the highest rating. However, repetition is the mother of wisdom, and today I have different standards, and so I noticed some flaws I missed the first time. The film is overly drawn out and could benefit from more prominent editing. Shortening the film by 20 minutes would definitely not mean depriving the viewer of anything essential, especially in the middle part where the drama really gets drowned in dialogues. Once I thought that Michalkov was playing with the viewer and keeping them in suspense for a very long time, yet now it seems to me that he reveals unnecessarily too much and that the film could have been better treated dramaturgically to deliver a sudden blow, so to speak. Also, Michalkov's fondness for melodrama and sentiment is occasionally excessive, although these are minor flaws in its beauty. Finally, in retrospect, Michalkov's political views are also evident here, which would fit perfectly into the era of perestroika, as a kind of critique of Stalinist excesses, without touching the legendary legacy of the Bolshevik revolution and questioning traditional Russian authoritarianism. On the other hand, the acting trio of Menshikov, Michalkov, and little Nadezhda Mikhalkova constantly keep the film above average. Michalkov also knows how to create beautiful images of the era's society, and in the last third, when the NKVD comes into play, the film gains a truly chilling atmosphere. For Russian society, where Stalin still represents an unquestioned authority and the symbol of the Russian empire, this is a much-needed film with a strong artistic statement about the cruelty of the time, despite my aforementioned reservations. Overall impression: 85%. (11/06/2017)

This film won me over years ago. What I enjoy most about it is the brutal contrast of the relaxed summer idyll with the harsh reality of Stalin's purges, the perfect atmosphere, and the three outstanding performances by Oleg Menshikov, Nikita Mikhalkov, and Nadezhda Mikhalkova. I've said many times how I feel about children in film, but Nadia gave a truly excellent performance as Nadia, albeit mightily supported by her daddy/co-actor/director/screenwriter. (02/26/2018)

Even though the film has a slow pace, you definitely don't feel like nothing is happening. It's as if it's all heading towards something big, and given the peaceful development, you'll get the feeling that that something big won't be very pleasant. It beautifully captures human nature and human qualities, but also landscape and tranquility in contrast to something lurking in the background. (09/08/2017)

When I first saw the film in the 1990s, it had a profound effect on me. Today, however, I am a little disappointed with it. I'm not saying it's a bad movie, but it's not worthy of the adoration I felt at the time. Nevertheless, I think it is one of the key works of Russian cinema, so it is worth paying attention to. In particular, I never cease to be fascinated by the alarming contrast between the carefully drawn rural idyll full of poetry and the final dramatic sequence of events. (85%) (06/21/2020)