Press on the Russian Film Symposium

Empire's State
Films from post-Soviet Russia

Bill O'Driscoll, 2002

Olga, Masha and Irina are three sisters whose names, at least, are literally straight out of Chekhov. But while in Chekhov's century-old play the three were provincials who yearned for the big city, in Aleksandr Zel'dovich's novelistic 2000 film Moscow, they are already there.

Olga is a doll-like, emotionally unstable young nightclub singer. Masha is a student engaged to a gangster who aspires to bankroll the rebirth of Russian ballet. Irina, the eldest, is in debt and in a long-term commitment-less relationship with a man, much of it spent drunkenly reminiscing about their youth as writers' children in the black-market 1970s.

Moscow – occasionally baggy but more often provocative, and bracingly cinematic – opens with aerial shots of the lush, verdant countryside, perhaps evoking the Chekhovian past; it ends with rhyming scans of unlovely modern Moscow rooftops. In between it probes the contemporary bourgeoisie, seemingly free to live but apparently with little to live for. It's only the most recent look at Russia's uncertain soul in a Carnegie Museum film series titled "Imperial Fatigue."

Alone among the old European empires, in the 20th century monarchial Russia didn't become a nation-state: It was supplanted by a different kind of empire, a socialist one. Broadly, the four films in the series give four views of Russia belatedly trying to achieve nation-statehood at a time when that term is increasingly difficult to define.

"What we're interested in is the ways in which [in the films] you can see the whole imperial structure become fatigued," says Nancy Condee of the University of Pittsburgh, who organized the series with her husband, Pitt associate professor of Slavic languages and literature Vladimir Padunov. "You can see the country begin to pull apart."

The series also includes:

Pittsburgh City Paper