| Credited cast: | |||
| Boris Plotnikov | ... |
Sotnikov
|
|
| Vladimir Gostyukhin | ... |
Rybak
|
|
|
|
Sergey Yakovlev | ... |
Village elder
|
|
|
Lyudmila Polyakova | ... |
Demchikha
|
|
|
Viktoriya Goldentul | ... |
Basya
|
| Anatoliy Solonitsyn | ... |
Portnov, the Nazi interrogator
|
|
|
|
Mariya Vinogradova | ... |
Village elder's wife
|
|
|
Nikolai Sektimenko | ... |
Stas'
|
| Rest of cast listed alphabetically: | |||
| Sergei Kanishchev | ... |
Boy wearing Budenovka
(as Serezha Kanishchev)
|
|
In a freezing cold World War II winter, two pro-Soviet partisans - Sotnikov and Rybak - head off to find food for themselves and their compatriots. They find a goat at the home of a German Headman but their return to camp is interrupted when they are arrested by a Nazi patrol. Taken prisoner, Sotnikov stands true to his beliefs and refuses to answer any questions despite physical abuse and torture. Rybak on the other hand argues that since they know nothing, they should simply tell them all that they know and do whatever they can to stay alive. One of them will live, but at a very heavy cost. Written by garykmcd
Fantastic Russian WWII movie. Like most Russian WWII movies, The Ascent is incredibly harrowing. It's also dense in its symbolism. The story follows two partisans, Sotnikov and Rybak (Boris Plotnikov and Vladimir Gostyukhin), who go on a mission to search for food. On their trip, they are spotted by German soldiers, who wound Sotnikov. Sotnikov, in turn, kills one of the Germans, which leads to trouble for the two partisans and everyone else they later run into. The greatest success of the film is its vivid sense of place. Russia is frozen and snowy, and it's hard not to feel that cold go straight to your own bones. Shepitko keeps her shot close to the characters, examining every crag of their faces. It was probably not the choice, but the film is framed 1.33:1, which gives the film a sense of claustrophobia. While the entire film is quite an achievement, I did feel that the first half was stronger than the second. My main complaint about the movie is that it develops into a very unsubtle Christian allegory by its climax. I just don't think the symbolism adds much to the proceedings, especially when I was already intrigued by the debate between the two partisans. It's not quite fair. I was weighing the pros and cons of their argument. I began to lean toward the point of view of a certain character, and then the director pops up and tells me that he's Judas! Despite some heavy-handedness, this is still a must-see.