This is another film I watched before, but didn't remember that well and felt it deserved a rewatch (I try to have one of these films each round). I got a whole lot more out of it this time around and while I have some little quibbles with it here and there, I'd say it's a solid science fiction film which is fairly underseen and should be discussed more.
Most people in this film had a generally nihilistic view on life and doubted that there was any hope for humanity. This seemed to be the prevailing attitude amongst most of the survivors we saw in the film except for the main character, Larsen, who believed that other surviving humans existed outside the central bunker and the town he lived in and that their species wasn't doomed. While much of his arc consisted of him trying to convince the people he encountered of his theories to no avail (which made for a number of compelling exchanges, like when a man referenced how Jesus called humanity doomed when he saved them), another handful of scenes featured several intimate moments which detailed his mental state, delivered by the way of the letters he wrote to his son. While the biting knowledge that his son might never read them lingered over these scenes, I found the overall execution of them to be a mixed bag. The monologue of how an operator was unable to make it to a computer in time to prevent the first missile strike since he was slowed down by a cup of coffee in his hands stuck out as a brilliant slice of dark humor. Larsen needing to recite a story of how seeing a cow run over by a locomotive when he was little gave him recurring nightmares of a black locomotive just to describe the distance he had and the insecurities he felt for his son, on the other hand, felt overwritten by comparison. The point of that scene would've still been made without the fluffy bits.
Ultimately, Larsen's emotional conflict came to a compelling culmination. Allowing the children in the orphanage to be admitted into the central bunker would help pave way for humans to live on, as he believed they still could. They're young and, when they get older, they'll be able to produce more offspring. They represent the next generation of humans. Since the central bunker rejected them from entering and since the kids Larsen saw inside the Children's Department of the central bunker were all sick and injured though (I don't think his reaction upon seeing them was as much a response to his son Eric as I initially thought as much as it had to do with his fears of the potential outcome of the children in the area), this made it likely that an entire generation of people could be lost, potentially dooming humanity in the process. However, by caring for them in the final act, they were eventually healthy enough to venture out into the landscape to potentially find the surviving humans which Larsen fervently believed in, making this the only significant impact he had on the town. I'm not holding my breath that their journey is going to lead to anything (I'm not so sure that ambiguity was the best choice of an ending), but regardless of whether they live or die, Larsen still gave them a chance at finding somewhere else to live, a chance they surely wouldn't have had at the central bunker or if they had remained in the town.
Lopushansky is often thought of as a protégé of Tarkovsky. I see these influences in the style of this film, like some of the long takes, or the ethereal beauty to be found in certain devastated landscapes. The most significant influence is with the sepia filter which permeates throughout most of the film. This was reminiscent of Tarkovsky's "Stalker", which also had undertones of a nuclear disaster. Overall, I found this choice of filter to be a great touch, albeit one which was occasionally undermined by the decision to shoot a few scenes in a bluish/purple filter. The filter in those scenes were distracting with how they clashed poorly with the sepia filter and didn't seem to add much to the film. I could've done without that. Beyond the sepia filter though, beauty could be found in several other shots in the film, like an early tracking shot which followed Larsen out of the museum and eventually revealed the full extent to the destruction and immensity of it, a hypnotic shot of an emotionally defeated Larsen as a trickle of water ran down his head and body, and the climactic shots in the library where the camera pulled back and revealed the massive scope of the room. The film's style was packed with several types of greatness and, though certain decisions undermined its look, it stuck out as one of the film's main strengths.
Overall, while I'm not quite an ardent supporter of this film, I liked it quite a lot and I'll definitely recommend it to other people on this site. Being my first Lopushansky film, I'll be sure to keep an eye out for his other films.
Most people in this film had a generally nihilistic view on life and doubted that there was any hope for humanity. This seemed to be the prevailing attitude amongst most of the survivors we saw in the film except for the main character, Larsen, who believed that other surviving humans existed outside the central bunker and the town he lived in and that their species wasn't doomed. While much of his arc consisted of him trying to convince the people he encountered of his theories to no avail (which made for a number of compelling exchanges, like when a man referenced how Jesus called humanity doomed when he saved them), another handful of scenes featured several intimate moments which detailed his mental state, delivered by the way of the letters he wrote to his son. While the biting knowledge that his son might never read them lingered over these scenes, I found the overall execution of them to be a mixed bag. The monologue of how an operator was unable to make it to a computer in time to prevent the first missile strike since he was slowed down by a cup of coffee in his hands stuck out as a brilliant slice of dark humor. Larsen needing to recite a story of how seeing a cow run over by a locomotive when he was little gave him recurring nightmares of a black locomotive just to describe the distance he had and the insecurities he felt for his son, on the other hand, felt overwritten by comparison. The point of that scene would've still been made without the fluffy bits.
Ultimately, Larsen's emotional conflict came to a compelling culmination. Allowing the children in the orphanage to be admitted into the central bunker would help pave way for humans to live on, as he believed they still could. They're young and, when they get older, they'll be able to produce more offspring. They represent the next generation of humans. Since the central bunker rejected them from entering and since the kids Larsen saw inside the Children's Department of the central bunker were all sick and injured though (I don't think his reaction upon seeing them was as much a response to his son Eric as I initially thought as much as it had to do with his fears of the potential outcome of the children in the area), this made it likely that an entire generation of people could be lost, potentially dooming humanity in the process. However, by caring for them in the final act, they were eventually healthy enough to venture out into the landscape to potentially find the surviving humans which Larsen fervently believed in, making this the only significant impact he had on the town. I'm not holding my breath that their journey is going to lead to anything (I'm not so sure that ambiguity was the best choice of an ending), but regardless of whether they live or die, Larsen still gave them a chance at finding somewhere else to live, a chance they surely wouldn't have had at the central bunker or if they had remained in the town.
Lopushansky is often thought of as a protégé of Tarkovsky. I see these influences in the style of this film, like some of the long takes, or the ethereal beauty to be found in certain devastated landscapes. The most significant influence is with the sepia filter which permeates throughout most of the film. This was reminiscent of Tarkovsky's "Stalker", which also had undertones of a nuclear disaster. Overall, I found this choice of filter to be a great touch, albeit one which was occasionally undermined by the decision to shoot a few scenes in a bluish/purple filter. The filter in those scenes were distracting with how they clashed poorly with the sepia filter and didn't seem to add much to the film. I could've done without that. Beyond the sepia filter though, beauty could be found in several other shots in the film, like an early tracking shot which followed Larsen out of the museum and eventually revealed the full extent to the destruction and immensity of it, a hypnotic shot of an emotionally defeated Larsen as a trickle of water ran down his head and body, and the climactic shots in the library where the camera pulled back and revealed the massive scope of the room. The film's style was packed with several types of greatness and, though certain decisions undermined its look, it stuck out as one of the film's main strengths.
Overall, while I'm not quite an ardent supporter of this film, I liked it quite a lot and I'll definitely recommend it to other people on this site. Being my first Lopushansky film, I'll be sure to keep an eye out for his other films.