Screenwriters: Karen Shakhnazarov, Aleksandr Borodyanskiy
Music: Eduard Artemev
Cinematography: Nikolay Nemolyaev
Editing: Lidiya Milioti
Cast:
Leonid Filatov
Oleg Basilashvili
Vladimir Menshov
Armen Dzhigarkhanyan
Yuriy Sherstnyov
Evgeniy Evstigneev
Pyotr Shcherbakov
Aleksey Zharkov
Tatyana Khvostikova
Lena Zhanik
Aleksandr Bespalyy
Rating: 7.7/10
Eventuated before the eventual disintegration of the Soviet Union, Karen Shakhnazarov’s ZEROGRAD, his fifth feature, is a biting, if none too gripping allegory of a great nation’s impending about-turn from totalitarian statism to Western-influenced democracy.
Marooned in this Zerograd (“zero city”) is an engineer from Moscow, Alexey Varakin (Filatov), the film starts with him disembarking from a train, little does he know, he has descended into a rabbit hole. Alexey is an awfully nice soft touch, the straight arrow type that serves as audience’s proxy, and in the city, what he encounters is a bureaucratic, bizarre, authoritarian clutter of confusion and frustration, things are compounded after he becomes a key witness of a suicide (or is it? conspiracy theory is floated but unresolved), he is officially instructed not to skip town, and even condones the advice from the prosecutor that he should assume the identity of the dead man’s son (what’s the logic here?), so that he can be brought firsthand to see the declaration of a new epoch, and he might run but will he escape? All is foretold by an angelic young boy he meets before.
Shakhnazarov is political in quite an equivocal way, the old guard is represented by the prosecutor (Menshov, strenuously emoting conviction and later, humiliation with propriety), who holds forth on the lofty grail of communism (which is utterly intelligible and persuasive), but has no sway in front of the head of the city council (Shcherbakov) and the celebrated writer (Basilashvili), even his heroic suicidal act is a flameout, the Procrustean wind of change is irrefragable.
But is Shakhnazarov an ardent advocate of democracy? Judging solely from this film, it is safe to say that he retains a leery eye, he might have a liberal mind, but liberty isn’t something that can be pursued in its purest form, the Soviet Union is creaky and buckles under misrule, however, it has an immemorial spirit, an inherent statehood that its boogie-woogie children shall never forget.
If Shakhnazarov isn’t a supernal filmmaker of visual finesse and most members of its male-dominant cast is far too grim and starchy by simply performing in rote, whereas their opposite sex is dismallyreduced to peripheral ciphers, namely, a nude secretary, a glamorous woman functions merely as a chauffeur, or a voiceless matron whose sincere request of a dance is interrupted by the male intrusion, ZEROGRAD still remains a marvel to watch, not merely validated by Shakhnazarov’s sensible political concerns and his homegrown compassion, but also, more impressively, by the astonishing tableaux vivants which crop up in the midstream and near the coda (offering ironic, anachronistic remarks to further muddy the waters), credited to its production designer Lyudmila Kusakova. It takes some time for viewers to discern that those museum exhibitions are actually actors in heterogeneous costumes and under maquillage, betrayed by tiny movements that are almost imperceptible, what billows out is that strange aroma of “magical surrealism” that is ever so fertile in the Eastern European cinema edifice.
referential entries: Pavel Jurácek’s CASE FOR A ROOKIE HANGMAN (1970, 8.0/10); Emil Loteanu’s THE SHOOTING PARTY (1978, 6.4/10).
English Title: Zerograd
Original Title: Gorod Zero
Year: 1988
Country: Soviet Union
Language: Russian
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Mystery
Director: Karen Shakhnazarov
Screenwriters: Karen Shakhnazarov, Aleksandr Borodyanskiy
Music: Eduard Artemev
Cinematography: Nikolay Nemolyaev
Editing: Lidiya Milioti
Cast:
Leonid Filatov
Oleg Basilashvili
Vladimir Menshov
Armen Dzhigarkhanyan
Yuriy Sherstnyov
Evgeniy Evstigneev
Pyotr Shcherbakov
Aleksey Zharkov
Tatyana Khvostikova
Lena Zhanik
Aleksandr Bespalyy
Rating: 7.7/10
Eventuated before the eventual disintegration of the Soviet Union, Karen Shakhnazarov’s ZEROGRAD, his fifth feature, is a biting, if none too gripping allegory of a great nation’s impending about-turn from totalitarian statism to Western-influenced democracy.
Marooned in this Zerograd (“zero city”) is an engineer from Moscow, Alexey Varakin (Filatov), the film starts with him disembarking from a train, little does he know, he has descended into a rabbit hole. Alexey is an awfully nice soft touch, the straight arrow type that serves as audience’s proxy, and in the city, what he encounters is a bureaucratic, bizarre, authoritarian clutter of confusion and frustration, things are compounded after he becomes a key witness of a suicide (or is it? conspiracy theory is floated but unresolved), he is officially instructed not to skip town, and even condones the advice from the prosecutor that he should assume the identity of the dead man’s son (what’s the logic here?), so that he can be brought firsthand to see the declaration of a new epoch, and he might run but will he escape? All is foretold by an angelic young boy he meets before.
Shakhnazarov is political in quite an equivocal way, the old guard is represented by the prosecutor (Menshov, strenuously emoting conviction and later, humiliation with propriety), who holds forth on the lofty grail of communism (which is utterly intelligible and persuasive), but has no sway in front of the head of the city council (Shcherbakov) and the celebrated writer (Basilashvili), even his heroic suicidal act is a flameout, the Procrustean wind of change is irrefragable.
But is Shakhnazarov an ardent advocate of democracy? Judging solely from this film, it is safe to say that he retains a leery eye, he might have a liberal mind, but liberty isn’t something that can be pursued in its purest form, the Soviet Union is creaky and buckles under misrule, however, it has an immemorial spirit, an inherent statehood that its boogie-woogie children shall never forget.
If Shakhnazarov isn’t a supernal filmmaker of visual finesse and most members of its male-dominant cast is far too grim and starchy by simply performing in rote, whereas their opposite sex is dismallyreduced to peripheral ciphers, namely, a nude secretary, a glamorous woman functions merely as a chauffeur, or a voiceless matron whose sincere request of a dance is interrupted by the male intrusion, ZEROGRAD still remains a marvel to watch, not merely validated by Shakhnazarov’s sensible political concerns and his homegrown compassion, but also, more impressively, by the astonishing tableaux vivants which crop up in the midstream and near the coda (offering ironic, anachronistic remarks to further muddy the waters), credited to its production designer Lyudmila Kusakova. It takes some time for viewers to discern that those museum exhibitions are actually actors in heterogeneous costumes and under maquillage, betrayed by tiny movements that are almost imperceptible, what billows out is that strange aroma of “magical surrealism” that is ever so fertile in the Eastern European cinema edifice.
referential entries: Pavel Jurácek’s CASE FOR A ROOKIE HANGMAN (1970, 8.0/10); Emil Loteanu’s THE SHOOTING PARTY (1978, 6.4/10).
通常的影片常常伴隨著火車的駛入而進入故事。相反的，本片隨著火車的駛出而進入了一個密閉的城市，代表著被"遺棄"。
男主在過境時身份即被否定:他沒有入境許可。
緊接著發生了一切戈多式的事情:男主此行來的目的:換空調零件被否定了。而他要找的人根本不知道這件事，對接的工程師再八個月之前就溺水而亡。
博物館中深埋在地下28米處的歷史是被扭曲而掩蓋的。男主在這裡真正被顛覆了對"真實"概念。他得知了一些被所謂"歷史研究者"所認證的歷史，這些歷史是他從來不曾聽說的。而不難發現，在導演的選擇下，這些歷史都逃不開大背景下人的反抗，鎮壓，與犧牲。
零城在影片中被符号化为整个苏联末期的境况，历史的掩盖与扭曲，人们身份的缺失，文化与人欲的被镇压，促成了社会的荒诞现状。而則人们渴望着通過"弑父"而达成新一轮的进化。影片真正開始進入異端的時刻，便是在他弒父的時刻，男主在餐廳里因拒絕食用做成他樣子的蛋糕，而造成廚師的開槍自殺，在影片的後半段我們才得知這是男主的父親，而他的父親是第一個在這個城市里跳搖滾舞的人。當然這一切都是別人告訴他的，於是從自我本身又印證了身份和真實的喪失。警察局上方高掛著斯大林的畫像也許就是他們想要弒的那個人吧。
孩子的預言則更加明顯的指向影片的俄狄浦斯色彩，孩子預言他將永遠離不開零城，並聲稱他已看到他的墳墓，上面寫著死於2015年。宿命感讓影片更蒙上一層絕望，搭配上影片的陰雨灰色的基調，以及某些令人恐懼的元素，渾然天成。
有意思的是，導演的父親，曾是赫魯曉夫身邊的親信。蘇連的種種不堪境況，生長在政治環境下的沙赫納扎羅夫也許更有發言權。
導演還曾拍過音樂片《生為爵士狂》，講述了幾個熱愛爵士樂的青年在政治壓迫下追求夢想的故事，基調較為歡快，但同樣呈現出一种虛無縹緲的哀傷。
結尾橡樹的倒塌預示著男主精神的坍塌，而蘇聯也在兩年后解體，電影的本身又成為了一種預言，與影片中的預言情節相呼應而成就了一部電影神話。而我也很快的聯想到同階級屬性的南斯拉夫電影《地下》，也許是零散的敘事模式和過多的符號設置而沒能使影片同《地下》一樣被大眾所認知，但私以為，著真的是一部很棒的電影，這種荒誕的表現形式，我真的好喜歡啊。
前苏联的一部充满了荒诞、超现实主义的作品，最后代表权力的橡树倒塌并被众人随意分解预示着苏联解体的危机，大量的细节隐喻使之看起来晦涩无比，被压抑的情感一如全片乌云压顶的画面一样让人喘不上气，以致于在期待着高潮到来的这种心情就变成了，“还没开始吗？”“已经结束了。”
个人主义和国家利益的挣扎是主角的矛盾根源，开放的前进与保守的拒绝是整个小镇荒唐古怪的罪魁祸首，不能并存的情感和理智让小镇里的检察官都坦诚“其实自己很羡慕罪犯可以犯罪”，这样的小镇，不用外来力量去摧毁，自己走两步就散了。
影片摄影很有特色，前半段始终沉浸在“黑云压城城欲摧”的气氛里，除了一出场便惊艳四方的美女裸体之外几乎无明亮的色调，直到回忆的潮水蔓延到了怪镇上的第一个跳摇滚舞的人，浅灰色系像复活了一般被不知名的天才泼上了色彩，眼睛终于不再窒息：穿着花裙子涂着腮红的少女和年轻英俊的中尉在老实的人群中大跳摇滚舞。然后两人双双被开除，中尉被杀，少女哑巴，此后经年，再无瓜葛。见证过这一切的少男少女们终于为夫为妇，再次聚集到一家以中尉名字为名的摇滚乐舞厅里，穿上了当年不敢想象的奇装艳服，大跳摇滚舞。时代真是一幅扭曲的油画啊。
电影里许多片段都令人印象深刻：办公室外全裸的秘书；主角眼睁睁看着以自己脸为原型的蛋糕被切成一块块的；因为客人不吃自己的蛋糕而自杀（或被杀）的厨子；想尽办法也离不开的小镇；全部使用真人当蜡像的博物馆（主角应该没有发现，不知道是资金问题还是导演有意为之）；最最最最最让人难忘的是史上最难堪的自杀：曾经以伤风败俗开除掉两个跳摇滚舞的年轻人的检察官，面对新开张的摇滚舞厅，想着被杀死的第一个跳摇滚舞的人，愤怒的走上台去，关上摇滚乐，在众目睽睽之下开枪自杀......当然，他没成功......再多按几下......还特么没成功......检查检查枪，没毛病啊......看看下面的观众，都在沉默的瞪着他，狠狠心又开了几枪......就是不成功......然后哭着跑掉了......这是个什么残酷的世道啊，连死都不从人愿！
http://www.wyzxsx.com/Article/Class14/201012/202446.html
《零城》的意义
1996年俄罗斯国家杜马安全委员会举办了一个为期半年的讲习班，“专门研究破坏社会‘文化核心’的技巧。”参加者包括了不同意识形态和政治立场的专家。讲习班在最后的几次会议中，重点地讨论了卡伦·沙赫纳扎罗夫（其父格·霍·沙赫纳扎罗夫曾是戈尔巴乔夫的心腹助手之一）的影片《零城》（1988年）。与会的专家一致认为《零城》准确地预见到了苏联社会“文化核心”被破坏的过程。
《零城》讲述了莫斯科的工程师拉瓦金在“零城”出差时遭遇到的怪异和恐怖经历：拉瓦金刚到“零城”时，前往一家工厂找厂长，结果竟然“见到女秘书在接待室全裸地坐着。人们进进出出，把紧急要打字的材料交给她，但对怪诞却视若无睹......出门的时候他病了。那些习以为常的秩序的标志物——列宁像呀、社会主义劳动竞赛榜呀——再也抵御不住迷乱的局面了。”只有裸女或者只有列宁像的社会都是一个——意识形态意义上的——“秩序的社会”。而当裸女和列宁像在同一个时空中并存，甚至裸女和列宁像被奇妙地拼接在一起，难分彼此的时候，则标志着“秩序的社会”开始走向混乱和崩溃之路。
在《零城》的尾声部分，“零城”的“整个匪帮——官员们、地下企业家们、作家，还有好多浪荡女人——纷纷扑向一颗象征政权的‘俄罗斯国家树’，开始摧毁它，撕掳它的枝叶。”（卡拉—穆尔扎上引书，P720）
停靠在站台上的绿皮列车里，走下一个身材中等、瘦削的中年男人。随着他离开，列车也伴着汽笛呜鸣驶入迷雾中。荒凉的车站、寒冷的空气，2分45秒的长镜头简洁而含蓄地交代了剧情的走向，《零城》就此拉开序幕……相比较苏联电影的文学性叙事和诗意色彩，这部电影是一部彻头彻尾的荒诞作品。反电影，或者说反苏联传统电影的手法极为强。而在这种极端的电源创作手法之下，导演拍摄本片的意图也呼之欲出：对于苏联政治体制的批判。
影片诞生于1989年，正是苏联解体前10年最动荡的时期。像在呼应当时的社会情绪，《零城》里充满了焦躁、恐惧和迷茫。导演在光怪陆离又无序的情节里填满了散布不安情绪、制造惶恐气氛的元素，如赤裸全身却被忽略的女秘书、下至地下28米才能见到的腐臭的真相，预言瓦拉金将死于他乡的孩童等等细节，使之在相互独立又彼此关联的6段剧情里点点渗透、层层增强，最终爆发于结尾，让观众剥洋葱一般层层拨开这些乱象之后，震惊于开放的结局带来的臆想，那比给出答案的结局更让人害怕。
与这部继承了苏联电影厚重而浪漫的文学性和诗意的作品不同，卡伦•沙赫纳扎罗夫摈弃“讲故事”的叙事结构，用密集的暗示性符号和瓦拉金的变化制造恐慌情绪，并痛斥当局专制的集体主义观念及对个性抹杀的残酷性，激发观众共鸣。
影片前半部分有段经典情节，瓦拉金去餐厅吃饭，厨师赠予一枚与他头颅完全一样的蛋糕。惊恐无措的他拒绝品尝，厨师自杀。导演给了瓦拉金和为他送来蛋糕的服务生一组意味深长的特写，这恰与影片中段检察官所说“强大的国家，是经历磨难的俄罗斯人的理想，他们愿意接受一切困难，甚至奉献出自己的生命。这是一种丧失理智的理想，跟欧洲极端个人实用主义不一样。这是俄罗斯精神的内涵，统治着、分解着我们的个人思想……”呼应，这里导演带有恶意地引入苏联文化中特有的“弑父”秉性，讽刺了当局一面强迫人民服从一面欺骗群众的虚伪姿态。
卡伦·沙赫纳扎罗夫对当局最无情的鞭挞被搁置在影片的后半段，被迫承认自己是厨师儿子的瓦拉金以向导的身份，带领观众见识了西方文化进入苏联后对当局造成的恐慌，以及当局者是如何残害文化传播者的。最后导演用一棵橡树的轰然倒下预示着所谓苏联精神和秩序的崩塌，那个顺利逃走却无处可去的瓦拉金就像奔入迷雾的列车，亦与塔科夫斯基的《乡愁》结尾有着相似的惆怅。这段的叙事较之前半段更加无序，过去与现在彼此交织，色彩也从灰暗压抑的色调变得明快活泼，节奏也更为紧凑，观众可以明显感受到导演对于政体的愤怒和望其消失的强烈渴望。
《零城》用瓦拉金串联起几处没有逻辑上的因果关系却深刻反映苏联现状的情节，那些相互间难以产生交集的，不同程度受到政治迫害、影响的人也因为他被联系在一起，彼此影响、互相渗透。这种非线性叙事方式，更自由、充分地揭露了瓦解苏联政体的“种种罪行”。这样的艺术表达方式看上去似曾相识。塔科夫斯基另一部作品，《镜子》的非线性叙事结构与之有着异曲同工之妙。两个时间层面，不同的人与事彼此关联，构建了塔科夫斯基的40年人生及苏联历经的伤痕。相同的人，不同的角色，来自真实却看上去不真实情节，都让影片充满了力量和信念，是塔科夫斯基一种情感的表达。比较《镜子》的感性，卡伦·沙赫纳扎罗夫更愿意用镜头陈述自己的观点，隐去了他身为一名苏联公民的全部情感。
表面看《零城》是一部用符号拼贴出来的荒诞不经的电影，常人无法经历瓦拉金所经历的一切。但是表象之下有把利刃直戳苏联民众正在经受苦难这一现实的痛点。感受的真实性赋予了虚构情节更强大的说服力，这正是经历过那个时代的观众，看过本片后发出“这不是电影，这就是苏联真实写照”的感慨的原因。
处于后苏联电影时期的卡伦·沙赫纳扎罗夫如海绵一般吸纳了意大利先锋电影、法国新浪潮电影的诸多元素，并大量运用在自己的作品中。《零城》是他为数不多的10部影片中最为独特的一部，虽然它与卡伦的另外几部战争、政治题材一样，透着荒诞的孤独感，却如同加缪对荒诞的理解，把抗争作为打破荒诞孤独感的工具，在绝望中制造一线生机。更值得称道的是，导演把拍摄这部电影的行为升华为反抗体制的艺术，无论形式还是内容，电影本身就是对苏联政体的讽刺和批判。
或许是巧合，又或许是导演的前瞻性洞察，影片上映10年后苏联解体，这棵一度茂密、庞大的橡树果真倒塌了。预言成真，《零城》受到政治机构重视，1996年国家杜马安全委员会办的一个为期半年的讲习班上，这部电影被作为案例学习，用以专门研究破坏社会“文化核心”的技巧。如今又是20年过去，苏联早已灰飞烟灭，苏联电影也随之一蹶不振，但是《零城》完美演绎一个政体如何瓦解的威力还在，即使现在看它仍是一部触目惊心的电影。
本文首发于巴塞电影APP内