Recently, the Polish cinema has become public again, so I decided not to wait for the issue in another form, personally, in the cinema, to check my feelings in the case of Agnieszka Holland's Green Border and the fresh version of DK Welchman's “Boys”.
We dedicated Holland to the movie on the Chrobry way Col channel. Kamila Klimczak's separate program, so in 1 conviction I will only say that this is simply a propaganda work with a clear anarchistism, but in no case did he deserve an extreme, hysterical reaction in the performance of the PiS with an appetizer of the Neo-Youth of All Poland, with lawsuits, threats, pathos and grotesque mention to the German business (only pigs sitting in the cinema).
However, let's decision on to the fresh version of “Guys” Władysław Reymont. I called this movie an experimentation in the title, due to the fact that the expression of an animated movie created by painting on the basis of a ‘living’ acting movie is inactive new, and the film's author (in a broad sense, as she is liable for directing, scripting, editing and production), DK Welchman, or Dorota Kobiela-Welchman (privately wife Hugh Welchman, who is besides the movie maker, Oscar winner for the 2006 short animated movie “Peter and the Wolf”, plays the function of both a precursor and a pioneer. It was her earlier movie "Your Vincent" that was the first made of this technique, although it was derived from the previously known rotoscopic method (the most celebrated full-length movie made by this method was the 1978 movie "Lord of the Rings").
So we are dealing with an acting movie that – to simplify – was then painted, cage by frame. The effect is sensational in my sense. The characters and faces of the actors in the rooms are only very small different from the actual physiology of the living, along with the devotion of emotion, grimaces, etc. There are moments erstwhile it is almost hard to announcement this effect on the faces of actors. A somewhat more "painting" effect occurs in scenes occurring in free space. On the another hand, landscapes, larger plans, animals, or simply surviving nature and the inanimate planet have a definite look of painted animation, powerfully pastel, especially in the depiction of the vibrant and flourishing planet of spring and summers. Perfectly adapted in the movie variations about images Józef Chełmonski – ‘Baby summer’, ‘Bocians’, ‘Zurawi’ and ‘Burza’. Despite the powerfully stressed presence of scenes full of colors, most of the movie is in the dark tone, which does not take distant at least the colours, but gives and gives the atmosphere of increasing conflicts, primarily focusing around Jagna and Antka Borina. The painting is accompanied by excellent music, stylized into folk, but an expression of contemporary music by bands playing modern folk music or alleged cultural folk music. It should be stressed that it fits perfectly into the movie and co-creates its atmosphere.
A word of comment is due to actors and their creations. Filming a fresh version of “Guys” with a painting method was a concept most hit, avoiding comparisons straight to the canonical in all respect of the work Jan Rybkowski 1972 (serial and film). In particular, the series “Guys” is and is likely to stay an outstanding work. 13 episodes and countless hosts of excellent actors of that era allowed Rybkowski to approach Reymont's work very widely. And he did it. “Boys” is an unparalleled work, alongside another serial adaptations of the Polish literature classics of the 1970s, specified as “Doll”, “Nights and Days”, “Połaniecki’s Family”, “The Promised Land”, or a decade later “Over Germany”. The strength of things, lasting 102 minutes, the movie DK Welchman had to quit a series of themes of the fresh and the series, but thanks to the applied painting method, as I said, is not just another adaptation, but a work simply different, and thus released in a large number of aspects from comparisons with Rybkowski's creation. Of course, it is impossible to avoid comparisons of the most crucial characters present here and there, but remember that 50 years have passed and many acting generations have passed distant in the meantime.
Roli Boryn has made an excellent Mirosław Bakawhose name itself is already a advice and an assurance that it will lift the challenge. It is hard to face the function he played Władysław Hańcza, endowed by nature with aparity and a voice that made the function perfect. And yet from good times Polish acting Bak creates a large creation. What is worth emphasizing is the faithful creation of the novel, about which next. In the scene of death, beginning with the emergence from bed of the fatally sick Maciej – if I was not mistaken by my eyesight – the creators surely performed a deliberate procedure to match Mirosław Baki's face to Władysław Hańczy in the analogous scene in Rybkowski. This is simply a bow to the large predecessor and his role. Boryn Baka is bossy, ruthless, full aware of his value and power, and uses it while at the same time being able to revise his hard views in any situations. So as you can see, the creators of nothing here, a bad example of many fresh adaptations of the classical planet literature, did not change.
Playing Lamb of the Pacheia Kamila Urządowska It's a completely different story. It's fundamentally different from Emilia Krakowska first of all visually – the delicate beauty of the actor gains even more under the influence of the method used. Gentleness besides translates into character. Jagna Krakowska was naturalistic, and it seems that it was much easier for the viewer to realize and even justify the court of the village over it. Jagna Urzędowska, is inactive a dreamy girl whose sharper behavior, as the situation unfolds, towards men curious only in her body, or greed in the conflict for wealth, is not so expressive. In Krakowska we see that Jagna uses his sex and aggressively fights for his rights. Here Jagna is simply a gentle girl who pose only for the conquering lustful men and fighting for her. That's at least how I got the impression. It is the transformation of Jagna from a frightened, forced to marry Borina's wife into a girl who does not skimp her charms, which in the fresh movie is mostly told by dialogues led by the characters of the second plan, that is the least convincing.
That's great. Robert Gulaczyk (formerly Van Gogh in ‘Your Vincent’) as Antek Boryn. On this occasion, 1 can consider changing the character of acting from 50 years ago and the position of an actor in society. erstwhile Ignacy Gogolewski Antka was already a legend after only 41 years. Robert Gulaczyk at the age of 40 is most likely an anonymous character for most cinematographers. That's a shame, due to the fact that he played his part perfectly. Both the unbridled desire for the Jag and the hatred and conflict with the father. The same can be said of the best possible supporting function of the male – Matthew Dove – performed Matthew Rusin, so far associated barely with the barely memorable series. besides Andrzej Konopka (dowt), Cezary Lukaszevich (smith, son-in-law of Borin) and Maciej had to (Jaś, the boy of an organist, a cleric) are great. It just shows that we don't miss good actors. There are no good films in which they could show the fullness and scale of their talent, which frequently leaks through their fingers in hopeless contemporary belt productions.
So much for men. It was about Jag, but there are more crucial and expressive female characters in the film. It's very good to see how different from Chojnacka Jadwiga, in the function of Dominique, the parent of Jagna, Ms Eva Kasprzyk. Dorota Stalinska's Jagustine proves how much we lost as cinematographers due to her long absence in serious, good productions. I pay attention to the best names as usual. Sonia Bohosiewicz (div) and little convincing Małgorzata Kożuchowska (wife of the organist). But the star of the cast of the female movie is for me next to the authoritative Kamila, Sonia Mietielica, an actor of Russian origin, in the function of Hanka Borynova, who perfectly played the function of betrayed and stifled at the bottom of Antka's wife, who by her own effort earns designation and heart of old Borin, and becomes an effective defender of household interests and her strongest typical in the absence of Antka arrested. A very credible role.
Finally, the most crucial issue. The fidelity of the movie to the fresh and its wording. It must be said that the fidelity of the fresh is high. Personally, I haven't read it in a long time, to be honest, since school times (this is the reason for considering the role, besides educational, as excellent adaptations of literature as the Rybkowski series), so everything that seemed "suspected" to me during the screening was checked in the text. And it turned out, although it was just my opinion based on a partial confrontation with Reymont's text that the movie is very faithful. Of course, remembering the limitations mentioned, the threads that are not in the film.
The conflict with the heir is barely mentioned, although of course the fight for the forest takes place, as crucial to the content of the scene. As with the heir, he is with the fight of the women of July for the release of the arrested husbands. But the most apparent thing is the almost complete omission of the figure of the benefactor priest, who performs only in the function of giving the wedding to Boryna and Jagnie, and on the occasion of Christmas as a celebrity. There is no character of him as a causative force, as a individual who has a crucial place and importance for the village community. It is not absent, but its presence is marginal, although according to the fresh the villagers talk then a language full of references to the Christian tradition and traditions of agrarian superstitions. Rybkowski was sometimes accused of showing the priest's character ambivalently, but it seems that most people forgot about Reymont's book due to the power of movie adaptation. Let us remind you that Reymont realistically describes the reality of the village alternatively than values. Reymont is simply a man of times of positivism and it is in national terms (it is influenced by relationship with Dmowski) and social Darwinism. This is very evident and in the promised Land. Thus, erstwhile in the fresh the crowd making judgement over Jagna intends to enter the church area and execute there, according to the agrarian tradition, whipping Jagna with rod, finds the contained gate and Jambrogo threatening them with a shotgun. The priest doesn't show. So it is Reymont who gives us a image of a priest who does not interfere in conflict and yet washes his hands, not just allowing the Church to engage on 1 side...
The scale of the misunderstanding in the reception of the movie is evidenced by specified entry by 1 of the bloggers reviewing the cinema:
"Final scenes with images of Polish society in the countryside may hurt. This hatred, this aversion to another human being, is the full evil that overcrowds those people, and on the screen, it resounds virtually and frighteningly. Can specified a image of our country, although incarcerated in the past, confirm an inexperienced abroad recipient, about our vasculature and our hatred?"
I don't agree with that.. I'm already forgetting that the scene of the Jagna court on the show was besides cruel, but the thing is, it's absolutely consistent with the novel. Let Reymont speak:
“They lifted up the boards of the cart, and along with the part of crap like this, they cast like a dirtbag, and the ground under it groaned, and the badge fell, and it didn’t even move.
She got her runner-up and kicked her leg and yelled:
– And you will return to the village, and we will hunt you down with dogs! – she picked up a lump or a stone and thundered at it with all her strength – for the harm of my selves!
– For the shame of the full village! – she was beaten by another.
– To die forever!
– For the holy ground to throw you out!
– To die of hunger and thirst!
There were voices, lumps of land, stones, and heaps of sand, and she was lying with a log, only in trees decomposed over her.”
The narrator of the fresh says about Jagna definitely not in a condemning tone:
“The Jag in the sides, on the dung, cast into the blood, in the torn clothing, shamed forever, hurt above man's knowing and miserable above all, lay as if no longer proceeding or feeling what is going on around, only the surviving tears proceed to flow in her bruised face, and sometimes the breast rose like in this fossil cry.”
The scene after the scene is all in the film. The fact is, however, a deviation from the fresh in the last scene. DK Welchman utilized here an old and widely known symbol of rain as a cleansing force. In the novel, the storm besides follows, but it is the component that interrupts the Jagna court and its participants are frightened to flee. However, from the end of the novel, we learn that Jagna is sick at her mother's and that she has lost her senses, while in the movie she is virtually and figuratively cleansed by the rain and lifts herself from her knees. Dorota Kobiela, in an interview with “The Weekly of the Common” is gaining ideology for this scene, but alternatively in soft version:
"In my version of "Guys" it is crucial that in the final the rain washes her body dirty with manure. He gets up from his knees on his own despite being humiliated. There's quite a few hope in there. possibly this is the girl power?”
Maybe that's what he truly thinks, or possibly present he seems to the filmmakers, especially women, that he does? I don't know. But even if he thinks so, it does not change in any fundamental way the sound of the movie in relation to the novel, where Jagna is simply a loser, but over which destiny – in the final scene – and over the "stupid, evil and unjust" anger of the full nation (the inhabitants of July), complains Matthew Gołąb.
I respect the movie as beautifully realized, very well played and constructed. I was afraid that the creators would succumb to the temptation to modernize, change, strenuous didactics of 21st century progressives, but that was not the case. It is almost perfectly faithful adaptation of the crucial threads of Reymont's novel. What, in the wake of the film's premiere and the decision to present it to the Academy as a Polish candidate for Oscar, will say these or another people, is simply a sign of our times. However, the life of the movie exceeds the framework not only of the current discussion, but besides of the life of generations of actors and viewers. And as a work by nature timeless movie serves different people, with different views and attitudes.
Instrumental treatment of the movie has happened and happens, but good movie specified treatment will survive. “Boys” DK Welchman is simply a very good film. Fortunately, it reflects the planet described by Reymont. A planet that's gone. It was surely a circumstantial agrarian form of the patriarchal world, in which women had powerful assets, mainly due to the naturalism of this planet – the function of men by awakening desire, gossip, talk and envy. This agrarian planet of 120 years ago is much little different from ours, than the patriarchal planet of Western Europe known from the then literature with women of higher spheres, actually incapacitated by their own families and without any rights, and the anticipation of changing their situation.
The fresh adaptation of “Guys” is simply a movie profoundly embedded in the reality of the novel, as the fresh itself was embedded in the realities of the era in which it was created. As such, he deserves to be recognized, following the novel, as a "place of remembrance" in which according to the French historian Pierre Nora national heritage crystallized. Roman Dmowski in his review of Reymont's “Year 1794,” (Reymont's historical novel, “Gazeta Warszawska” 19 April 1914), 1 of the paragraphs devoted to “Guys”:
“What makes “Guys” a place among the treasures of our literature?... There are excellent descriptions, but above all there is no request to lift up the psyche of the agrarian cluster, this collective “great man”, in work, in play, in combat, in love and hatred, in the rage of passion and in spiritual life – devoted with specified power, with specified truth, with specified a unusual poesy in this realization as no literature can show."
The words of Dmowski correspond in my opinion with the fact that Reymont's novels can besides be attributed to the position of the alleged cultural text (term described by Aleida Assmann In Between past and Memory, Warsaw 2013, German anthropologist of culture and literature), i.e. a carrier of a surviving common tradition of a supragenerational nature, active memory that defines and supports cultural identity. This is without uncertainty besides actual of the series and the movie by Jan Rybkowski. Will it be akin to Dorota Kobieli-Welchman? He's got a good chance of that.
Rating of the movie 5/6.
Adam Laughter
photo. movie web.pl
Auxiliary literature:
Jan Wasiewicz, The function of Władysław Reymont's peasants in shaping Polish national memory, [in:] To resurrect a moment: Władysław Reymont's conflict with thought and form, UAM technological Publishing House, Poznań 2017.
![Nie współpracowała podczas kontroli i gwałtownie pożałowała. Policjantki wybiły szybę samochodu i wyciągnęły ją siłą [WIDEO]](http://www.radiowroclaw.pl/img/articles/152377/Ge7xpiv1Wc.jpg)