A Masterpiece!

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

To my mind, it's one of greatest movies in this century. It's about man's tragedy in personal life and death of his country. He asks again and again in the first scene of this film: how this happened? The answer is: each of us influence history (as I understand this) - our actions, even thoughts and desires, Main hero (Poruchik - Martinsh Kalita) is indifferent about all except his individual desire. He can't make the right choice in his love and he can't come round until the moment of his death. It's too late for him, too late for his homeland. Bt film isn't didactic, this movie has exceptional artistic values. Director Nikita Mikhalkov knows enormous number of sophisticated nuances of human soul as professional secrets of cinema. The artistic result is outstanding. The cast is very successful, music is very touching, photography is splendid. Mikhalkov's enemies tries to denigrate him very hard. But it's method of communists and fascists - to assess art in politic terms. Everybody has rights to reject political views of Mikhalkov. But reject the great art of politic isn't democracy, it's totalitarianism. "Sunstroke" contains nothing denying human rights, humanism, etc.

Drags on and on and onnnnn. No reason for this to have been a three hour movie. The storyline of the tragic fate of Menshevik/White Army prisoners during the 1920 Red Terror is diminished by the lead character's recurring, saccharine reminiscences of a one night stand in 1907. That plot line could have been reduced to three short memory flashbacks and been just as effective. The war plot line suffered, as it was not given enough depth; unless you really know your Russian history, the nuances of who the prisoners are, what this mixed group of officers, soldiers and Cossacks represents is otherwise lost on the viewer. A single poignant gesture by one of the Bolshevik characters has no meaning, based on how this story has been told, alone. Three hours. Three hours of predictability. And Sunstroke? Yes, we get it - you did Burnt by the Sun. Bravo. Too bad about this latest effort, Nikita.

This movie is actually two different stories. One is Bunin's short story Sunstroke which is shown in a beautiful and poetic way in the movie. It represents the past, old Russia, the time Bunin never dropped in his mind. The other is taken from his famous anti Bolshevism book Cursed Days. This part is shown in the movie, in a wet and muddy way, about a group of old officers waiting for their destiny after signed their declarations of surrender.It is understandable that the director tried to divide these two stories. Old is good, elegant, beautiful, lovely, honestly. New is chaotic, dirty, brutal, empty. Although one may not fully agree with it, but this is what Ivan Bunin's understanding of Bolshevism Revolution and the opinion is widely accepted after the collapse of Soviet Russia. Nikita Mikhalkov's most famous movies are almost about the same attitude.But the director also used his movie to pay tribute to old Soviet movie traditions. There's an astonishing shot of a baby carriage rolling downsteps, which is obviously something reminding Eisenstein. There's also certain images reminding Bondalchuk. So far there's no problem with the two stories go in parallel. But at the very end the stories tried to reach a point of combination. This became so hard to believe that the climax felt a little bit strange.Still it's a great movie. Despite its length, the storytelling speed is extremely well that one hardly felt the time's gone. It might also be one element the director had in mind. Time went without raising attention, old time went like river never comes back.

While the movie was indeed visually beautiful, almost stunning even, I was left disappointed and annoyed, feeling like I watched 2 movies squeezed into one. I won't give away any plot points: Through the movie we watch the main character's past and present events unfold. However, the past could've been a standalone film, the present as well. The two segments weren't connected by a single detail almost to the very end of the movie, and even then that detail is so minuscule and irrelevant we could've easily gone without it.When it comes out on DVD, I'd watch it again, selectively watching just scenes from the past, then just scenes from the future, treating myself to 2 movies, instead of a forced ONE movie.