Hard to Be a God (2013)

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

The movie provided excellent visuals of stripping away a society and categorize individuals into two compartments: Survivor and Weak. It appears most of the people did not know much of anything other than the muddy domain where they reside. The movie reminded me that my reality could consist of this lifestyle, but as of today I'm living in a society with borders. As the Roman Empire collapsed, no laws or borders protected the people that took safety for granted. Power can be transparent in the American society, normally gauged by money or government ranks. "Hard to be a God" provides a story with very little plot, which would be a society that collapsed. The daily routine would be wake up, find food, try not to die.

Don't believe those who compare it to Tarkovsky's "Andrei Rublev". The only thing common between the two is black and white film and long 3 hour duration. This one is just a depiction of a (mainly) studio set full of mud and ... This has nothing to do with the book, has no meaningful plot or character development. If you are in for serious cinema avoid this "production". If you want to see something revolting, boring and repetitive go for it. The only thing this film shows is that a director who in past produced strong films like "Trial on the Road" can completely disintegrate at the end of his carrier. A sad story. This failure spoils the good impression of German's previous films as well as is a shame for the excellent novel who's title and popularity it tries to exploit.

"Hard to be a God", is a production with quite an interesting back story. We'll get to that in a second, for now here is all you need to know should you want to endeavour its lengthy 3 hour running time. It is a hypnotising spectacle in terms of visuals and camera techniques, but the glaring absence of a decent plot structure will certainly be the big turn off for most people. Again as I found myself thoroughly absorbed with what I saw, lord knows how many times I came out of that trance when words were spoken, actions were taking place and very little consequences came from those results. It is a science fiction tale of no grand revelations, just brutal depictions of a violent time.The story comes from famed Sci-Fi authors Arkady and Boris Strugatsky (Whose 1971 short story "Roadside Picnic", became the basis for Andrei Tarkovsky's 1979 classic "Stalker"). Published in 1964, a group of scientists from earth in the future have travelled to a planet also inhabited by humans who have not progressed beyond the Middle Ages. Forbidden to interfere with the particularly bloody progress of the time, all Anton (Our main character) can do is bare witness to the state of horrors around him and hopefully not lose his values and reason in the process. Though the film adaptation is very well acted and every extra grabs your attention, unfortunately there is nothing of a stand out performance and no character has any depth whatsoever.While some of this remains in the adaptation, it is stretched extremely thin throughout all its 3 hours. I could easily say half the time is spent on the mannerisms of townsfolk, extreme depictions of violence, torture and thank god this film is in black and white because the amount of dirt, feces, organs, blood and unidentifiable sludge's make for one hell of a grizzly depiction. Unfortunately it is to be last for director Aleksei German, who passed in 2013. With the filming starting back in 2000 and embracing a lengthy on-off production, German's Wife and Son had to finish the final cuts a few months before the movies late 2013 premiere date (It has only just had an international release in 2015). I now wish to seek the previous work of the director, as the creative and lengthy shots in this movie are so well crafted. Picture the camera gliding through doorways, broken walls, dungeons, rain and mud soaked landscapes. It is reminiscent of any old Werner Herzog movie, and no way would you ever see any of this from a Hollywood production.Final Verdict: It is a very hit and miss work and guaranteed to divide people's opinions. I've heard readers of the novel have been less favourable towards it, and others have praised it rightly so as this rare breed, all most lost kind of film-making. I've been eager to see it, and it has satisfied my curiosity more than I thought and set in stone my ambition to read the book (Hopefully the narrative is way more forward). At three hours however, I would preferably recommend Andrei Tarkovsky's "Andrei Rublev" (1966) for a strong depiction of 15th century Russia. Extremely rude of me to suggest another work in my final summary of a movie I'm critiquing, but do see this film as the effort is too jaw dropping to slip away and go unnoticed. 8/10. A stunning final work.

So this is not a film you will watch to turn your brain off nor is in the traditional Hollywood format (epic storytelling). It must be seen without those prejudices otherwise will be a waste of time as some reviews already pointed out.The subtle irony of being an hyper-realistic medieval film, however been prevented that is fiction; also the technical aspects perfectly worked and used to represent a gross medieval space were amazing.The other aspect to prevent you is about the book which is the film based on. This is not the book, it is a film; so do not expect the same outcome. As with Raoul Ruiz 'adaptations' (Klimt or 'Proust') you may find a 'surrealistic' approach to the story, where the story itself may not be what matters the most.In my humble opinion is an awesome film, specially for those that study in some cinema-related field.