Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Tockinit not horrible nor great

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

TeenzTen An action-packed slog

bosejiu Maybe it is flawed at the core as someone mentioned - perhaps too erotic, too reckless when it comes to human relations (one would like to see a caring mother, a loyal husband etc.). But then there is the extensive imaginary of steppes, the ever-still nature indifferent to any human affairs. The force far greater than the convention. The long scenes are poetic, the music, the scarcity of dialogue - all together make an unforgettable experience. It's an astonishing spectacle of human passions.I see all the striving of the main characters as a way to break free from the slow death served by these idyllic landscapes. A way to show that human passions conquer everything: including nature, customs or any terrestrial rationality. Just like in the scene where Vera escapes her husband to the lover, escapes rooting away with the person she doesn't love to something uncertain, yet powerful enough to abandon what is certain. I think this film never really wanted to deal with morality and doesn't claim that infidelity is accepted, it rather shows two antagonistic powers: one of the stillness, and one of the passion. In the place where stillness reigns, passions burn one's soul, to burst when the time comes. For Vera and for Pavel the time has come. Once they break the flow of stillness, they are lost - lying on the grass completely aghast, muttering words that no longer have meanings, nor sound. Finally they are punished for breaking the flow, for their rebellion and courage. And that is what seems to beyond Vera's understanding, as if life didn't want to grant permission for that extraordinary happiness, as if it opposed their love. Or maybe it's not any metaphysical force but "merely" human passions - conflicting human passions in the flow of life that is beyond comprehension, just like a ride on a motorbike, arranged by someone else for you.

arsoys The three things the creators of this horror wanted to do were: (1) Photograph lots of beautiful scenery, treating the big screen as a monstrous canvas for near-still photography merging into visual art;(2) Set it all to avant-garde classical music performed with electronic instruments;(3) Show the mindless brutality and degeneration that they believe to be the Russian psyche.(1) and (2) are self-evident at first glance. They're also quite secondary.And (3)? Well, how else to characterize a movie the plot of which is as follows: semi-degenerate-looking man goes crazy, then tries to seduce a cheaply country-erotic woman; fully degenerate husband of country-erotic woman cuts off finger of girl bitten by dog; neighbors take girl away; woman runs off with man, has wild sex in fresh air; husband burns empty house down to the ground, takes shotgun, shoots cow, shoots man and woman.Oh yes, and in between somewhere for no reason other than (3) otherwise apparent is a scene of a few degenerates partying away that ends with a woman stabbing someone in the chest with a fork.And let's not forget the degenerate-looking mental subnormal that drools as he rides his motorcycle, in scene after scene.Hell, perhaps there's more to the movie than (3).What it is, I don't know.But whatever it is, it is stinkily obscene.

dromasca I have seen very little of the Russian cinema made in the years since the Soviet Union does not exist, and for me it's kind of a discovery similar to seeing new cinema schools from unknown places. Yet, Russian cinema is also the successor of an important film school, with major directors and an film industry that was part of the propaganda machine during Communist rule, but also succeeded to make major films and launched important directors.'Eyforiya' is a beautiful and unusual film. It is a love story set in the Russian steppes, in a place where civilization seems to be in retreat. Primary instincts and dreams seem to rule the actions of the characters. The story of the forbidden love of the farmer's wife and of the goat-keeper who sees and falls for her at a wedding party is doomed to end in tragedy, not only for them but for almost everybody around, yet none of the characters seems to be in control of his life or actions. As the fool at the beginning and end of the film who is stuck by the mob to his motorcycle and starts to run wildly to nowhere, so do the characters seem to be under the control of a destiny that is hostile to them for reasons unknown. Nature plays the lead role in the film, with a landscape suggesting desolation, infinity, with forces that dwarf human will, and with a balance and harmony that seem to broke at the moment the couple makes an attempt to fulfill some kind of personal happiness. All is beautifully filmed, colors and composition are beautiful by themselves and they become part of the experience of seeing this film. At scarcely 70 minutes of screening the film is the right size for us to accept and feel this beauty before the simplicity of the story becoming too evident to bother. Beautiful poems are never too long.

vvol3 "Euphoria" is definitely a mix of two directing styles - theatrical and cinematographic. Or you might say two outlooks on life, two points of view on the world. And this mix is extremely rare and thus so extremely thoughtful and pleasant... Each sequence in the movie somehow reminds us of the theater stage - sometimes this stage is physically limited by some objects (posts, walls, buildings) or totally unlimited with endless plains and sky serving as the theater scenery. And sometimes what we see on the screen looks just like some photos or pictures, still art... But despite this movie's advantages from the professional point of view the best part of it is the emotional impact it's creating and definitely the ideas it's delivering. Actually, the whole movie's main idea is summarized by the director Vyripaev himself (who is in fact theater director, actor and playwright) in the first several minutes or even seconds of the film. I'm talking about the 'Disabled-guy- riding-a-bike' scene. It is some kind of the metaphor or allegory expressing director's look at the life itself. That intellectually challenged person is - who would you think? - the personification of any human in general. Just like him we don't have any idea who (or Who) put us on that bike (equal life) and what for. Just like him we can't figure out at first what we are doing in here and where are we heading to. We're confused but keep on moving because it's harder to get off that bike than staying on it. That's why we keep on looking ahead curious - what's going to happen. Later something terribly wonderful happens and we start loving that ride despite the fact that we've already turned away from the road. We start feeling filled with life - that's what is called Euphoria. We are still confused...but happy! Because we just don't care where is the right road and that we've already in the open steppe, plains. We keep on riding, "changing lanes", crossing somebody's lives flowing in the stream of the "mystic river" of the life, looking at the "vanilla sky" of this world...and having good time. This is Euphoria. Through this scene, and actually through the main plot, and through the side plots Vyripaev shows what such a fullness of life and love can lead to - death, happiness, sorrow, birth... Euphoria overall!