Burnt by the Sun (1994) User Reviews

A masterpiece of theatrical tragedy unfolding in one summer day.

[ericmarseille · 8/10 · 29 December 2013]

This masterpiece of a psychological drama done in the immediate post-soviet Russia is very hard to review, for fear of saying too much.

First let's say that the author clearly wants to give stalinist Russia its due. But there's much more depth to it than that ; this film is first and foremost about destiny, how fate can ruin even the most well-meaning and virtuous lives. It is also about guilt and remorse, in a very subtle way.

In 1936, in Soviet Russia's countryside, a Red Army Colonel, loving husband and father of a little daughter, a dignified and proud man, receives a visit from an eccentric, playful and handsome man, to the great joy of the other residents of the house, who know him well, for he had lived in the place many years ago.

Through the eyes of the little girl, in the span of one summer day, a drama will unfold...But who is the real culprit? The mysterious man (Oleg Menshikov, who gives a memorable performance!)? The stalinist system? And what about the immaculate Colonel (impeccably played by the Director, Nikita Mikhalkov)? Is he so really virtuous after all? Doesn't he have, he also, a dirty little secret which changes everything?

Once again, to say too much would be counter-productive...Just for the immense performance, of Oleg Menshikov, up to its heart-wrenching conclusion, this film is worth watching...A must-see.

A masterpiece out of Russia.

[=G= · 9/10 · 25 April 2001]

"Burnt by the Sun" glides effortlessly, seamlessly though the genres as it tells of a handful of Russian characters who collectively constitute a family of sorts with great humor and drama, poignant and sweetly sentimental moments, and excellence both technically and artistically. What is more, the film's story is interesting, unpredictable, and well told with depth and thoroughly developed characters.

The much which has been written about the politics of the our time, the Oscar award and the bravura with which it was accepted, etc. is much ado about nothing. This is a movie. This is art and entertainment. And, when taken for what it is, "Burnt by the Sun" is truly a masterpiece.

History determines your fate & you can't prevent the tragedy

[serge-fenenko · 9/10 · 29 October 2004]

This movie is about the most desperate and tragic situation in the human life. This is when our life is determined by external forces. Even the most basic form of happiness - being with you family, enjoying your child - were impossible in the Russia of Stalin.

Sometimes I think about people who were borne 20 years before World War II in Germany, Poland or Russia. I wonder whether they had a feeling that the life was extremely unfair to them. The feeling that your fate was determined by the time you were borne in, and that you couldn't do anything at all to somehow change it. If Mitya, Kotov and Marusya would not die then, they would have to wait for 50 years to be able to truly understand what happened to them and who was to blame for it.

I was puzzled why Mitya picked up the phone and agreed to arrest Kotov. Why didn't he stop his suffering immediately, as he knew that he had no other option than ruining lives of the people he loved. Was it his hatred towards Kotov and the opportunity to take revenge for being expelled for 10 years? Was it the last hope that his love to Marusya would reverse her marriage?

After watched the film again & again I decided that he knew from the offset there was no way out. Mitya went to his old home because he wanted just one thing - to say farewell to his dream that the old times would ever return. The dream that made him betray his comrades in the 20th, and come back from France in the 30th.

I'm so happy that we live in freedom and that the iron curtain fell.

Magnificent film

[Ed-90 · 10/10 · 26 June 2004]

Beautiful film, full of humanity and honest in ways sometimes jarring, but always right on target. A westerner gets a sense of the depth of love for mother Russia, as well as the difficulty many faced during the 1930's Stalinist years. The film is a winner, and worth seeing more than once. The performance by the little girl is incredible; I was taken by her talent and smarts. One of the best films I've seen this year. Thumbs up. Two thumbs up.

Ochin Horosho.

[Prozacc · 10/10 · 9 December 1998]

Just saw this film as the closing class in my first term Russian language class. It's one of the ten best films I've ever seen. Our professor grew up in the Soviet Union and at the end (no spoilers, I promise) she had to leave because it was too familiar. I wasn't informed until afterwards that it was based on a true story, but it didn't matter. As I watched it I actually forgot that it was subtitled, and my memory of it now is as though it was in English. My point by saying that is that it was so real, so powerfully directed and acted, that the language barrier didn't matter one bit. Stunning film.

A heartwarming look at tragic times

[perica-43151 · 10/10 · 20 July 2018]

Despite its dark subject matter, this is a very positive and heart warming movie. It shows Stalinism without the Western propaganda, through the lens of great Soviet people that made everything good even under Stalin possible. An ode of love to the great Russian and Soviet nation. Definitely recommended.

Maladetz! Bravo!

[Caledonia Twin #1 · 10/10 · 31 January 2001]

Having read all of the negative commentaries on this film, I would first like to point out that severely criticising the period of Soviet history in which Utoml'ennye Solntsem takes place, and in that effort, condemning the people of that era such as are portrayed in this film as being entirely culpable for their actions, is all very well and good to do from hindsight, and from the safety of a soft computer chair in the modern-day West. Because of course, no one is tortured today in the West for a casual remark against the reigning despot; nor do we live under the threat that our families may be sent off to Siberia as one of the consequences of our actions, great or trivial. I myself can't say what I would have been willing to do under the circumstances that existed during the time of the Soviet purges, whom I would have betrayed just to survive, or if I would have the courage to make some kind of moral, social, or political stand, and if I think I could have? Well,if we all admit it to ourselves, we know that torture will break any man eventually... In watching this film, I think that we should keep in mind that we are not necessarily here to judge but to take the director's journey to another time and place: and yet we should still be able to remember and respect the fact that what we are seeing here is a piece of the history that lies beneath the modern day Russia. This history is a shadow that has cast its pall over the lives of every Soviet citizen since then, including Mikhalkov. The fear of the purges that swept over the Soviet Union during the 1930's and 40's is a kind of fear that will fade, but never die away entirely. So, what can be the point in overly criticising Mikhalkov or any one in the former USSR for surviving under the system as it was before glasnost, knowing what they knew of the state and the full extent of what it could do and had already done (Stalin's purges may even have claimed 20-40 million lives)? If Utoml'ennye Solntsem is Mikhalkov's attempt to exonerate his "cooperation" with the Soviet system within his own time, what has he really got to vindicate or to feel guilty about? That being said, and despite the fact that numerous films, books, and media have copiously used this subject to tell a story, it is not a subject which can be exhausted but a rich treasure of unusual human experiences. And, as some have pointed out, this film is far more than just a story of revolutionary politics or a tale of betrayal: it IS a love story, between men and women, and between men and their motherland. Moreover, I was sincerely moved by the love triangle between Marussya, Mitya, and Kotov. Utoml'ennye Solntsem is not, however, a film that will make you laugh often, and would not at all were it not for the undeniable charm of the bold little Nadya. Utoml'ennye Solntsem will make those who appreciate the tragic element within history, and in particular, this era of political turmoil, shed more than a few tears. Because the truth lingers behind this tale, the truth of a time which was a nightmare few of us can imagine... or would want to. In my opinion, the great thing about this film is that it throws us back for a while into that era and portrays what was good about it, what remains good, despite all obstacles; the film is a tale of love that survives the most extreme of human conditions. It is fascinating and compelling, brave and tender, horrifying, and real. Not for everyone, but certainly a masterpiece within its genre.

Powerful yet Subtle and Original Look at Totalitarianism

[trpdean · 15 October 2001]

I just watched and loved this movie.

It originally portrays the contrast in character, personality, viewpoint, and the relative consequences of the Revolution upon two people -

a) Mitya, a handsome, charming, romantic, poetic, musical, child-loving man who before the movie began, lived in rural Russia, grew up with a girl who was 7 when he was conscripted into World War I, and deeply loved her parents, cousins, aunts, uncles and the household servants, and

b) Kotov, an older man, military, probably more courageous and less intelligent, bluff and physical, sentimental and less artistic, stronger but simpler, equally child-loving, from a poorer background.

Enemies in the Revolution, their behavior toward each other begins with cruelty by Kotov toward Mitya, Mitya's forced cruelty to others, and a changed and cruel man now (and knowing it) Mitya's cruelty to Kotov. And yes, a woman is also in the mix. The story is told as much through Kotov's eyes as through Mitya's.

And guess what? With all this cruelty, Kotov and Mitya are both people you'd love to spend the day with.

It's beautifully photographed - the same wonderful languor as watching say, Turgenev's A Month in the Country, the child is enchanting, the story is absolutely fascinating - far more original than such other "political" movies as The Conformist or The Garden of the Finzi-Continis. The movie is about social class, temperament, and how freely people make decisions in their lives, about love for the opposite sex, children, and country. It's compelling - you will truly always remember this movie.

Accurate portrayal of totalitarianism

[bouncingoffwall · 6/10 · 27 October 2003]

Having lived in a Communist country as a child, this movie was not easy for me to watch. The presence of the ruling party is everywhere in this story. It's in the hearts of some, the minds of others; even casting its shadow on the innocence of childhood. It is in the air as people communicate in measured tones.

Nikita Mikhalkov, and his daughter, Nadezhda, turn in great performances, as does Oleg Menshikov as Mitya. For comic relief, Vladimir Ilyin's portrayal of a very amusing Kirik is impressive. Art direction, score, and cinematography round out a good production.

Not all the Russians think the same

[lolita-19 · 10/10 · 24 April 2000]

You know, here, in Moscow, the critics do their best to show that Nikita Mikhalkov makes popular pictures which aren't to be considered serious. To hear that "The Barber of Siberia" is a stupid sentimental movie is quite common nowadays.

But the more time passes from his next in turn production, the more a "strange" effect seems to take place: his films at last are rated according to their true value and not to somebody's opinion about them. It is always hard to say that something new is really good, but some time later...

"Utoml'ennye Solntsem" is not a very emotional movie. I don't suppose you'd cry when watching it. But my opinion is that it's a brilliant one. It is historically authentic (I've studied that period of time quite carefully so I think I have a right to say so). And no-one on this site seems to notice the love story in the film, which actually brought about the whole tragedy (remember, Kotov made Mitya work for NKVD). It was marvellously played by Oleg Men'shikov (my favourite actor) and Ingeborga Dapkunaite, a remarkable Lithuanian actress. And Mikhalkov himself, of course - "Kot" means "cat", by the way. Many people endow him with the characteristics of Kotov which only shows that he played his role well. A good actor is always attributed his character's traits.

But still, for me the main feature of the film is the world of Mitya's soul created by Men'shikov. A young, talented boy with brilliant prospects is what Mitya was. He gets involved in the war, goes through many ordeals, then comes home and falls in love with the girl he knew from her very birth, Marousya. But their happiness is too short. He is given a choice: to work for NKVD or...to commit suicide. He's only 24, and he wants to live. But hope for future slowly disappears as life goes on, cruel and senseless. When Mitya appears on the dacha of Marousya's parents, his soul is almost a wreck. But the last chance is killed when he sees that, after a suicide attempt, after months of despair, Marousya has married Kotov and doesn't want to go through everything again. Therefore Mitya begins to fulfill his revenge.

A touching film

[gbill-74877 · 7/10 · 12 June 2020]

There's something pretty touching about a film made three years after the fall of the Soviet Union, and looking back at one of its most harrowing periods, the Great Purge of the Stalin era. It was a time when an informer could get others sent away or killed because of something they had said casually in the past, or just as often, because the informer himself was being tortured or had a vendetta. It seems to be a film about a country trying to come to terms with that, and I can see why it resonated.

The man at the center of the film is a revered local leader and hero from the revolution, and seems to be an idealization of the perfect Russian man. Early on he runs out of his banya, jumps on a horse bareback, and rides out to help farmers whose crops are threatened by military maneuvers. He affectionately plays with his daughter, is amorous with his wife, and reacts to an old lover of hers turning up with hospitality and grace. He then shows incredible bravery and calmness when he's told he's been informed on, and we're 100% certain the accusations are baseless.

Complicating things is a love triangle, and it's almost as if the wife is a commodity representing the soul of the country - caught between a Bolshevik and a White Russian during the time of the Revolution, and between an upstanding comrade and a sneaky informant twenty years later.

The film has some beautiful scenes, such as the ones along the river or in a birch forest, and it evokes the gaiety of family life in their country dacha. It's a blessing to see these images because they run counter to those often portrayed of Soviet life in the 1930's, but to me that strength becomes a bit of weakness as well. The film runs too long for its story, and tonally it seemed a little off - the acting hammy, the characters a little too cute or buffoonish, and the light bubble special effect a bit cheesy. There's also a middle-aged servant who is regularly referred to as a virgin, has her butt swatted, and has her breasts groped, which is off-putting as well. Maybe the tone was necessary because the reality for this period was so brutal and heartbreaking, or maybe these characterizations are played up to evoke an idealized world which is then crushed by Stalin, whose image appears ominously even out in the lovely countryside. Regardless, for me it's worth seeing, but falls a little short of being great.

A palpable feeling of Russian genius

[francheval · 10/10 · 13 February 2006]

"Burnt by the Sun" is a powerful example of what a genuinely Russian movie can be when it uses the good sides of western film-making : a coherent plot, professional camera work, and freedom of expression, all things that were rare for the cinema of Soviet times. Of course, it is not surprising that it was made by Nikita Mikhalkov, one of the few Russian directors who achieved lasting world success during communism, and therefore he had the right contacts abroad to get a decent budget. Though, "Burnt by the Sun" is way better than Mikhalkov's pompous "Barber of Siberia", which was alloted more money than any other film in the history of Russian cinema.

In "Burnt by the Sun", Mikhalkov was able to give us a palpable feeling of the beauty and genius of Russia. The lighting is magnificent all the way through, and the ripe and wide wheat fields shine like gold. The action takes place in a cozy dacha among the birch trees, a house which seems to be the nest of a bunch of gentle and carefree eccentrics, all in an atmosphere that reminds pleasantly of Tchekov.

Yet, you can tell from the start that "Burnt by the Sun" is not going to be just a comedy, as the first scene opens on a man cutting his veins in a bathtub while the telephone is ringing. However, this first forewarning soon gets forgotten throughout most of the film, which keeps a warm, light-hearted, slightly nostalgic tone almost all the time. It is only towards the middle you realize that it starts looming slowly towards predictable tragedy, and this only gets obvious in the very last moments.

It turns out that the characters we see are all members of an old aristocratic family who were spared the horrors of the revolution because the younger daughter, Marusia, married a Red Army colonel, much older than she is. Thus, they keep on living as they ever did, playing cards, drinking tea from samovars, making private jokes in French. They even have a maid and a parrot. They seem totally oblivious of the reality around them. Except for innocent looking balloons with Stalin's face on them and a few parading pioneers, the communist regime is visible almost only through the presence of colonel Kotov, brilliantly played here by Nikita Mikhalkov himself.

Colonel Kotov impersonates a character very familiar to the Russian mentality : he is tall, strong, authoritarian, but at the same time protective, warm-hearted, charming and prone to jokes. He is about just as sympathetic as the gruff milkman with a heart of gold in "Fiddler on the Roof". Although he is a military, he is not the kind of guy you think as having blood on his hands. But of course Lenin and Stalin's aura over Russian people was also partly due to the fact that they represented strong and protective father figures.

The story takes a sudden turn with the arrival of an enigmatic character disguised as a Santa Claus in the middle of summer. He turns out to be known by everyone in the house, as he is the adoptive child of the late grandfather. In fact, he was Marusia's childhood companion, and her lover in the first place, but was evicted by Kotov, who protected henceforth the whole family from repression. It soon becomes clear that the man, called Mitya, has come to take revenge for his shattered life.

All performances here are good, even though Nikita Mikhalkov, as an actor, still manages to steal the show. But one will not either forget the performance of his then six-year old daughter Nadya , who also plays his daughter in the movie. A charming, energetic and witty child performance which impersonates the innocence of the family about to be lost.

The French title for the movie was "Deceitful Sun", and I find it more appropriate. Although the film bathes in quiet sunlight, it deals with one of the darkest eras of Russian/Soviet history : Stalinism. In the early 1930's, Stalin decided to eliminate much of the newly arisen communist elite whom he did not trust anymore, and hired former enemies of communism, or half-criminals, to eradicate his own official allies. Thus, colonel Kotov remains self-righteous and sure of himself almost until the end because he simply cannot believe that Stalin will not protect him.

Needless to say that "Burnt by the Sun" is one of the first Russian movies that deals so openly with the subject. A subject which still remains quite sensitive since millions of people had their lives shattered by those events. Unlike what happened for Nazism, it was not until the end of the communist regime that it was possible to discuss it openly, even though Stalin's deeds had already been condemned officially a long time before. Therefore, this superb drama is also the symbol of a historical breakthrough.

Never mind the politics, watch this for the exceptional father daughter relationship.

[ASuiGeneris · 6/10 · 26 September 2017]

I must preface this review by explaining that I am not really a history person, I do not take that much interest in politics, I certainly do not claim to know very much about Russia, and I know even less about Stalin as a man. I do, however, have an affinity to heartfelt emotional scenes and character centered stories.

That being said, "Burnt by the Sun" was a rather slow, but not entirely unlikeable film. Until the last approximately thirty minutes, where I felt it really shined. Pun intended.

Nikita Mikhalkov was not only the director of this film, but also the writer and lead actor. He played Colonel Kostov, a lovable man from start to finish. Kostov's daughter is named Nadia, played by none other than the aforementioned director's real life daughter Nadia. This, of course, explains the phenomenal chemistry between on screen father and daughter. Upon learning this, rather than being disappointed that the performances were not so based solely on their own merit, I felt even more appreciation for the film. Somehow, the fact that they were really father and daughter; that Mikhalov says that he "decided to play this role for the unique reason of helping the performance of my daughter... Nadia revealed herself to be an amazing acting partner"

(http://www.sonyclassics.com/burntbysun/misc/interview.html); that he held her on his shoulders as he accepted his Academy Award, had me wishing I could grade this film based solely on the relationship between father and daughter, both on and off screen, especially as shown in choice scenes.

One memorable scene is father talking innocently about what he wants for his daughter on a seemingly ordinary boat ride. Another shows young Nadia fixing her hair and face in the black car's hood before approaching the men who will be responsible for her father's end with heart wrenching kindness, asking them how they are and offering them cakes. I wanted to shake some sense into her. Another shows Kostov raising his daughter into the air and swinging his wife around as those same men watch nearby, posed and ready to chase him, but slightly guiltily stepping back when they realize it is only a gesture of his love rather than an escape attempt.

The symbolism here is, in many cases, overly overt and obvious. The random fireballs across the sky that symbolize Stalin's sudden and arbitrary violence (incongruous to the film's flow in my opinion), the forever lost truck driver that reappears throughout the film to represent the Russian peasant who has lost his way (supposed to be funny, but feels more distracting and unnecessary), the perfectly timed oversized poster of Stalin's face rising into the air, held by a beautiful hot air balloon and bordered in a bright red (coinciding with the execution of Kostov and expected patriotic soundtrack).

At least there feels like there is some fairness by the film's end. Sadly, this is only in written epilogue film. I would not even call it a good one, only a realistic one. From what I have read, more historically realistic than the rest of the film.

A long and slow political allegory that drags and drags...

[amerh · 4/10 · 6 November 2005]

This film should have been half as long. The first section, in particular, meanders for no reason. Mikhalkov is trying for a Checkovian mood, but all we get is a tired romantic triangle with a very obvious resolution. The second section, more political, is stronger, but occurs way too late in the film. The end is again very obvious and expected. To the last minute I hoped to be surprised, and was thoroughly disappointed. One can guess the events in this film literally 15 minutes before they happen.

I usually enjoy certain films with slow or deliberate rhythm, if they have artistic meaning, great style or emotional storyline. Burnt By The Sun is beautifully photographed, in that Eastern European "idyllic" style. Otherwise, it seemed to me empty like the hot air balloon with Stalin's image that features at the end. Full of obvious symbolism senseless parables, with characters drawn too broadly to keep us interested. Many reviewers have remarked on the touching scenes between Mikhalov and his daughter. These are strong scenes, but unfortunately they are the only touching scenes in this very long film. You wish the movie could have focused more on this relationship and less on the extended family and the political parable.

This must have been a labor of love for Mikhalkov, who acted, wrote, directed and featured his own child in the movie. When Pulp Fiction received the Palm D'Or at the Cannes Film Festival, instead of Burnt By The Sun, Mikhalkov was incensed, and commented about Masterpieces being overlooked. I am sorry to report that this movie is no Masterpiece. It is a boring, slow paced, uninteresting film that goes on too long. At least for this viewer.

infinite sadness of the Russian soul

[ssto · 10/10 · 16 September 2007]

i remember seeing this incredibly strong, heartbreaking movie three times in three consecutive days. i couldn't get enough of the pure beauty of the scenery, the warmth of the characters, the pain you feel when you know what doom awaits them around the corner.

i understand that for political or other issues many Russians don't like this movie, but i think it is a very honest, revelation story by Nikita Mikhalkov, who after this movie I came to respect as a genius artist. probably forever in my mind will live so many beautiful scenes from this movie: the burning, yet mild sun by the lake, the forgotten secrets of two ex-lovers, the infinite 'ruskoe pole', the happy people at the beach, living happily unsuspecting of the terror machine of the dictatorship 'for the people'

outstanding movie, one of my forever favorites

20/10

One of the all-time great Russian films

[gray4 · 10/10 · 15 January 2004]

A beautiful film. It amazingly combines the gentle, romantic tragi-comedy of Chekhov or Turgenev with one of the most effective exposes seen on screen of the corruption and underlying evil of the Stalinist era - the film takes place at the height of the Stalinist purges.

Each of the complex characters is portrayed in detail and with affection by director Mikhalkov. The Red Army hero, Kotov, starts the film as a braggart, chasing away Soviet tanks from his local village. We then see him as a loving husband and a devoted father, living a pre-revolutionary rustic life in his dacha. But further less appealing character facets emerge as the film develops. His wife, her family and their six-year old daughter Nadia (a triumphant performance) reveal their hopes and fears, and come over as a very real family, with foibles and a past which shapes their present. The intrusion of Dmitri after ten years away at first adds to this rural idyll, until the dark truth slowly is revealed - although the opening sequence, when he is seen playing Russian roulette, hints that all is not as well as the glowing landscapes and happy peasants might imply.

The end is shocking, but at the same time almost comic, as Stalin and Stalinism intrude brutally into the peaceful countryside. But there is a sense of completion and of a tale well told as the final credits indicate the fate of the main characters. Mikhalkov is a master story-teller, and this is one of the great films of the 1990s, and a Russian masterpiece.

Stalinism Exposed for all its Horrors

[l_rawjalaurence · 8/10 · 3 December 2013]

This is an interestingly broken-backed film. Set during the Stalinist era during one idyllic summer, it begins by contrasting the lives of Dmitriy (Oleg Menshikov) and Sergey (Nikita Mikhailkov) - the one a dilettante musician and pianist, the other a colonel in the Russian army and favorite of the premier. They both have a claim on Marusya (Ingeborg Dapkunaite): Srgey is married to her, and Dmitriy was a former lover of hers. It seems that the film's moral scheme is relatively straightforward: Dmitriy is talented but feckless, while Sergey seems virtually untouchable - not only does he have a great career, but he is happily married as well. However director Mikhailkov turns the tables on our expectations and thereby transforms BURNT BY THE SUN into a penetrating analysis of how dictatorships corrupt everyone around them. Concepts of 'good' and 'evil# no longer prevail: everyone simply does what it takes in order to survive. The ending is both shocking yet predictable. Visually speaking, the film contrasts the idyllic surroundings of Dmitriy's dacha with the behavior of the protagonists - it seems that no one can actively enjoy the delights of glorious summer weather, for fear of being discovered. Life at that time must have been precarious, with no one actually being sure as to what would happen to them next. BURNT BY THE SUN is slow-moving, but Mikhailkov's camera has an eye for telling detail and significant gestures. Definitely worth watching.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

[monimm18 · 10/10 · 10 September 2006]

On the surface, Colonel Serghei Petrovich Kotov seems quite a likable guy: gregarious, kind, dignified, a war hero, an affectionate father, a devoted husband, he loves people, hard work, his family, his country. He believes he is participating to the building of a great new Russia, by actively supporting a new regime: communism. Like many of the original idealists who believed communism was the answer to a society plagued by severe income disparity, a large impoverished population, and a decaying aristocracy, he turned a blind eye when injustice and cruelty became the tools for building the great motherland, and people were abused and killed in the name of The People. In his blind credulity, he thinks he has achieved the position and power he holds through good, honest work, and he actually believes the patriotic slogans and mantras used by Stalin's regime to pummel the population into communist indoctrination. Since his life is good, he has no reason to think the regime is wrong.

Enter Dimitri, a self-loathing informer. His work gets other people killed, or destroys their lives. He does it to avoid death, life in a Siberian gulag, or some other horrible fate. What he does goes against everything he stands for, but, as we learn, he believed that by cooperating he would redeem himself in the eyes of the authorities (as an aristocrat he was automatically considered an enemy, guilty of existing) and would be allowed to go back to his life and the woman he loved. Once he realizes there is no way out, and that his sweetheart (Marusia) abandoned him by marrying Kotov, the man whom he holds responsible for his miserable fate, he loses hope. His psychological death complete, all he has left is to commit his physical one. Yet, there's one more thing keeping Dimitri alive: his quest for revenge. He wanted to show Marusia how wrong she was to give up on him, and to destroy Kotov and force him to face himself and the monstrous world he helped build. Dimitri's position as a highly regarded informer provided him with the chance of giving Kotov (a man who once was friends with Stalin himself and unaware that he was now quickly falling out of grace with the fickle leader) the final blow. Dimitri's quest for revenge allows him no scruples about what his actions would do to others, like little Nadya, or her mother Marusia whom he loved and who was only a victim of Kotov's deceit. In the end, Dimitri's suffering turned him from victim into monster: this time he doesn't do the job only because he has to, but because he wants to do it, and, in the process, he is willing to hurt innocent people.

Besides the artistic excellence of this film, what is amazing is its capability of presenting the multifaceted aspects of human nature, good and bad intertwined with all the gray areas, and how blind faith and deep suffering can destroy someone and ruin a world. Among many other things, this film is a great character study; it depicts two "could have been decent" men who became monsters, one blinded by his beliefs, the other tortured into it. They are both victims of the world they were a part of, both "burnt by the sun of the revolution".

As the conflict between Kotov, Dimitri and Marusia develops, we watch it intertwined with regular life - people working, loving, playing, believing in ethics, morals, truth, the future. I think this is a film that talks about how a totalitarian regime is built not only through lies, terror and coercion, but also by silence, half truths, compromise and complacency. It is a memento for any society, communist or otherwise.

There is a moment in the film, after Kotov is arrested by the NKVD, as a result of Dimitri's informing, when Kotov is convinced that once his detainers realize who he was they would release him with apologies, but he soon discovers how wrong he was. As he endures the humiliation and beating in the car, he slowly understands the reality of the world he helped building. He begins to weep, then sob, and one can almost see what goes through his mind: shock, regret, shame, despair.

My comments only scratch the surface of this piece of great cinema. It would take many pages to do this film justice. The screenplay, the acting, the incredible cinematography, the masterful directing of every frame, all crafted this film into a masterpiece.

As A Russian, I find the film nothing special.

[Yuri-8 · 22 July 1999]

As one reviewer had pointed out, the value of the movie is metaphorical. Viewed in that sense, the acting and cinamatography are excellent (especially compared to sound- and special-effects-based crap Hollywood is serving upon us), but the subject matter is quite trivial.

To explain my attitude, I must add that unfortunately I (as well as many other Russians) have been through so many books/plays/movies dealing with the tragedies of the late 30s, that the movie is not as 'revealing' to me as it might be to a Western audience. I think Mikhalkov could have done better! Rating 6/10 from me.

Interesting, and beautiful to watch. But nothing more.

[tomb_92 · 6/10 · 29 October 2010]

I'd never actually seen an Academy Award Best Foreign Language winner until I saw this and my hopes were pretty high. I have to say I was a little disappointed. Firstly, the film was beautiful to watch. The locations really showed off the sheer beauty of Russia (I presume it was shot in Russia, and secondly the whole thing really did feel like a piece of art- carefully crafted and lovingly put together. I applaud the making of. However, the acting quality was inconsistent. Mikhalkov was very good at the lovable "uncle Jo" figure. Every moment he was on screen his presence felt commanding despite the kind jolly figure he played. I think that Oleg Menshikov stole the show. His portrayal of a bitter, vengeful man started off very subtle until he built it into something of a madman at the end, was brilliant. Mikhalkova was also wonderful to watch as the young girl, innocent and sweet, yet curious and smart. I do feel that some of the supporting cast were a little pointless, a few of them need not have been there perhaps, it added to the confusion of the film. Next, the story was really gripping, once it got going. I have no problem with a film starting slow and moving and a slow pace but this film of just over 2 hours felt like well over 2 and a half. I did thing the story was really interesting and once I got into it I really did feel the terror of Stalin's brutal regime. It was also an interesting film morally, I constantly felt myself drawn between the two main characters, not sure who to root for, which I felt was wrong because it was kind of obvious, I felt, who was supposed to be the villain. The ending also felt a little odd. With all of the build up that finally got going I felt that the ending was too underwhelming. I felt a little let down, I kind of got the message about Stalin but I felt that after all the build up it kind of didn't go anywhere. It was still a really good film and well worth watching for the performance of the leads and the scenery.

Truly wonderful and sad

[teo-g-georgiev · 9/10 · 27 April 2013]

Burnt by the Sun is a fantastically made film, focusing on the injustices of Stalin. It details the arrest of a Russian Civil War veteran, Sergei Petrovich Kotov.

At 135 minutes, some will say that the movie runs long but I disagree. While the plot does not really begin until the second half, the extra time is not wasted on viewers. We see much of Kotov, his family, and are made that much more sad when his fate is revealed.

The characters are all incredibly interesting and well-developed. We learn much about Kotov, Nadya, and Mitya. The latter is especially interesting. We can see immediately that there is something wrong with Mitya and do not trust him. Then, when he and Kotov pretend to be friends around Nadya, we begin to feel he is not that bad of a character, and that the movie might end well (I did, at least). But finally, when he kills the lost farmer and salutes the image of Stalin (one of my favorite moments), we realize Mitya is gone.

However, given everything that the film does to show cruelty, I was surprised by how tame it made certain scenes. The lost farmer is shot off screen, as is Kotov death. At first glance, this seems unnecessary. Why not show their deaths in full force? In the end though, I think the director made the right decision. There are some scenes that, no matter how powerful they are, will not live up to people's expectations. It was better to leave these moments off-screen so that the audience can imagine them as they see fit. It seems like these scenes are only revealed to the viewer when there was no other choice (like the balloon carrying the image of Stalin). This way, the movie tells as much of the story as it has to and leaves the rest to the audience. I enjoyed it.

The Oscar for best foreign language movie was a bit too much honor

[frankde-jong · 6/10 · 9 February 2020]

The story of "Burnt by the sun" is easily told. Two men (Colonel Kotov played by Nikita Mikhalkov himself and Dimitri played by Oleg Menshikov) are in love with the same woman (Marusya played by Ingeborga Dapkunaite). They use their position in the army to fight their romantic war. First Colonel Kotov (the older one) sends his rival in love and his subordinate in the army on a far away mission. Later (when Colonel Kotov and Marusya are already married) Dimitri returns. At that moment he is an agent of the secret police and gets Colonel Kotov arrested.

In the center of the love triangle is daughter Nadya (played by the real daugter of Nikita Mikhalkov). During the movie one gets more and more the impression that she is not the biological daughter of Colonel Kotov, but of Dimitri.

Symbol of the arrest of Colonel Kotov is a black limousine. Despite the fact that the film is rather predictable, the scene in which the limousine rides in front of the house to pick up Colonel Kotov is nevertheless tense. Officially it is a business trip, but everybody (with the exception of Nadya) knows that this is a one way trip. For the sake of Nadya they are keeping up appearances.

In "Burnt by the sun" Mikhalkov tries to contrast:

The geniality of a summer on the countryside in the family datsja. The ruthlessnes of the manipulations in the top of the army where nobody, thanks to Stalins fickleness, can feel entirely safe. In the beginning of the movie Colonel Kotov thinks, thanks to his status of war hero in the Russian civil war (1917 - 1922), that he is immune. He is mistaken.

"Burnt by the sun" won the Oscar for best foreign language movie in 1994. Given the obvious weaknesses I think this is a bit to much honor.

The film is rather slow. The first hour is mainly attributed to the summer on the countryside. This is interspersed with some rather silly humor. The film is rather predictable. The relation between Kotov and Dimitri passes through three stages. (1) Dimitri arrives as an old friend (2) One suspects that there is an unfinished history between Kotov and Dimitri (3) The final showdown. Between the stages there expires a lot of time and (too) many hints are given.

A traditional film about the end of tradition.

[alice liddell · 8/10 · 26 April 2000]

Like most film lovers I prize invention, originality and formal daring. BURNT BY THE SUN is a very conservative historical epic, full of sweeping scenes paralelling intimate domestic exchanges; theatrical framings and acting with lots of dialogue; Jarre-esque sugary Romantic music; a fetishisation of nature.

Nevertheless, I loved this film to bits, for all these reasons. it was as rich as a novel (although it is an original), yet full of the vibrancy, life, violence, anger, and comedy absent from most literary adaptations. There is also a sense of using a cliched mode to attack its assumptions, as Chekhovian comedy turns into a denunciation of totalitarianism, and a more absurdist register.

Mikhalkov's filming of a superficially ugly Russia is lyrical and emotionally charged, and his own performance is like watching an oak tree being systematically hacked, sublime in its reach. Packed with memorable, searing set-pieces, but the filming of Marusya's confusion on Mitya's return, or his story to Nadya, shot with Nicholas Ray's feel for decor, stand out for me.

Maybe it's just me

[TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews · 7/10 · 25 April 2011]

When an old friend shows up at a family in Russia in 1936, at the very beginning of the great terror of the people by the Communist regime, it costs them their happiness. Eventually. Really, almost all of this is just steeped in that glee. A solid hour of this passes with nothing at all happening. And not much does take place after that. I have no problem with character development, but this has far too many roles for us to remember even half of them, and it doesn't seem like it's important, other than to emphasize that they are, well, all there, and all in a good mood. And this has a lot of "noise", with singing, cheering and in general, you can hear something much of the time. This is filmed well, and the acting tends to be convincing. It shows what it was like back then, if it is a tad, well, covered in a sugary glaze considering what it's about. Charm? Sure. This does have occasional compelling imagery, as well. I suppose that this is like other movies from France, but I know that they can look straight in the eye of something negative, also, and I think it would have fit better to do so here, as well. There is sexuality, language and bloody, disturbing violence(mostly not shown) in this. I recommend this to, well, fans of this kind of thing. 7/10

100% conjuncture

[koluka2 · 1/10 · 13 July 2008]

The events shown in the movie are true. Those who are not Russian i.e. do not live in Russia and do not know the subject well, may rate this movie highly. Let them do this, it's not their fault. They do not know the subject well and anything about the movie director and the environment he was brought up in. They do not know anything of the family that he was born in and brought up as well. All his "masterpieces" created after the Perestroika are 100% show off and conjuncture and considered for the European/American audience; however this fact is clear to mostly Russian audience only. Hopefully, this will be recognized by everybody in the world one day.