Experiencing Moscow through Film:
A Study of the Contemporary City/Cinema Relationship
A Master’s Thesis for the Degree Master of Arts
(Two Years) in Visual Culture
Daria Berezhkova
Spring semester 2012
Grader:
Supervisor: Ingrid Stigsdotter
Daria Berezhkova
LUND UNIVERSITY
ABSTRACT
DIVISION OF ART HISTORY AND VISUAL STUDIES / FILM STUDIES
MASTER OF ARTS IN VISUAL CULTURE
Experiencing Moscow through Film
A Study of the Contemporary City/Cinema Relationship
by Daria Berezhkova
This thesis explores the roots and theoretical basis of the contemporary city/film
relationship, and examines a case study of six Moscow motion pictures made
between the years 2002-2011. The theoretical part is grounded on the idea that both
city and film are spatial systems, which have mobility as their binding element.
Exploring both of these systems involves movement. Since motion is a physical
ability of our bodies, the experience of the city and film is haptic. Traveling through
the urban space is similar to ‘traveling’ through moving pictures.
The empirical part of my work is based on the research of contemporary
Moscow cinema. The choice of this particular capital is explained by the fact that it
is one of the fastest growing global cities and yet, its rich contemporary cinema
culture has not been explored sufficiently. This thesis focuses on indicative films of
the recent years, derives common themes and analyzes them using theoretical
notions.
The work claims that cinema cannot be perceived only as a reflection, a mere
representation of a city. Instead it is a powerful tool for creating the actual urban
environment. A city is comprised not only of its geographical maps, but also of the
cultural production that surrounds it. At the same time today, the delicate matter of
the city and city film is under risk of being shattered by the homogenizing effect of
globalization.
2
Daria Berezhkova
Table of contents
List of Images .............................................................................................................. 4
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Relevance of the Study ........................................................................................ 5
1.2 Postmodern Cities and Cinema .......................................................................... 6
1.3 Moscow in Film and Film in Moscow ................................................................ 8
1.4 Russian Film Industry Today .............................................................................. 9
1.5 Moscow as a Global City.................................................................................. 10
1.6 Background, Theories and Structure ................................................................ 12
2. The City/Film Relationship ................................................................................. 14
2.1 Film as a Spatial System ................................................................................... 14
2.2 New Experiences of Modernity ......................................................................... 15
2.3 Traveling through Cities ................................................................................... 16
2.4 Getting Lost and Being Found ......................................................................... 17
2.5 The Real Cities.................................................................................................. 18
2.6 The Effects of Globalization ............................................................................. 20
3. The Haptic Realm of Film ................................................................................... 24
3.1 The Haptic in Cinema ...................................................................................... 24
3.2 The Embodied Experience of Film ................................................................... 25
3.3 The ‘Cinesthetic Subject’ .................................................................................. 27
3.4 Haptic Visuality and Haptic Memories ............................................................ 28
3.5 ‘Site-seeing’ ...................................................................................................... 29
4. Moscow in Film..................................................................................................... 32
4.1 Case Study: Six Moscow Films ......................................................................... 32
4.2 A Tourist’s Site: Iconic Locations ................................................................... 34
4.3 A Local’s Site: Inhabited Places ...................................................................... 36
4.4 Ways to Get Around: Vehicles .......................................................................... 39
4.5 Ways to Get Around: Without Vehicles ............................................................ 41
5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 44
6. Bibliography ......................................................................................................... 46
7. Filmography .......................................................................................................... 50
8. Image Appendix.................................................................................................... 52
3
Daria Berezhkova
List of Images
Image 1: ...................................................................................................................... 52
Image 2: ...................................................................................................................... 52
Image 3: ...................................................................................................................... 53
Image 4: ...................................................................................................................... 53
Image 5: ...................................................................................................................... 54
Image 6: ...................................................................................................................... 54
Image 7: ...................................................................................................................... 55
Image 8: ...................................................................................................................... 55
Image 9: ...................................................................................................................... 56
Image 10: .................................................................................................................... 56
4
Daria Berezhkova
Chapter 1
Introduction
This thesis aims to study the contemporary relationship between city and film. The
work’s focus will be on applying theoretical ideas concerning spatial and haptic
qualities of cinema to empirical material: motion pictures about Moscow made in
2002-2011.
1.1 Relevance of the Study
Exploring the different aspects of the city/film interaction is valuable, as cinema is
one of the most important cultural forms and city is an essential type of social
organization. Motion pictures and urban landscapes influence each other and create a
lived social reality.1 Thanks to its technical and narrative qualities, film, like no other
medium, can capture the city in all its dynamic energy. Cinema can help present a
social image of an urban space, but it can also develop, configure and alter it. The
footage of a landscape is a fundamental element of the construction of cities
themselves, as they can be defined not only by their map coordinates, but also by all
the mythology, hearsay, and works of art that surround them.2
The Russian director Sergei Eisenstein in his 1938 work Montage and
Architecture compared a walk around the Athenian Acropolis to the experience of
watching a film.3 According to him, in order to understand and enjoy architecture,
one has to move around and observe it from different angles. In film too, the viewer
is a mobile spectator who takes a journey through space. The architect Le Corbusier
agreed with Eisenstein’s ideas. In his opinion, architecture requires motion, walking
from one object to another, which he calls ‘promenade architecturale’ (architectural
promenade).4 It shows that from early on, directors and architects acknowledged
motion and mobility as important elements that bring together urban space and film.
1
M Shiel, ‘Cinema and the City in History and Theory’, in M Shiel, T Fitzmaurice (eds.), Cinema and
the City. Film and Urban Societies in a Global Context, Oxford, Malden, 2001, p. 1.
2
K Lury, D Massey, ‘Making Connections’, Screen, no. 40(3), 1999, pp. 229-238, retrieved 4 April
2012, <http://screen.oxford.org>.
3
S Eisenstein, ‘Montage and Architecture’, Assemblage, no. 10, 1989, pp. 113-120.
4
Le Corbusier, ‘Villa Savoye a Poissy, 1929-31’, in W Boesiger (ed.), Le Corbusier, P Jeanneret. Oeuvre
complete de 1929-1934, vol. 2, Les éditions d’architecture Zurich, Zurich, 1964, p. 24.
5
Daria Berezhkova
In the thesis I will attempt to disclose the way that Moscow’s urban space and
contemporary film influence each other, paying close attention to the material realm
of the cinema. The word-combination ‘Moscow city film’ used in this work describes
motion pictures that were shot in the capital and that feature the city as one of the key
characters. Today, Moscow is becoming an influential economic and cultural hub in
the international system of cities. Each year brings new films about the capital. Even
though analyses of these motion pictures may help us understand this city’s global
status better, in-depth research on these films has not been published so far. This
absence of material is one of the fundamental triggers behind the research presented
here.
Another reason for the choice of this subject lies in the history of Russian
cinema. Throughout the film era, Moscow has been an important character in
renowned works of cinematic art. Among them are such films as The Cranes are
Flying (Mikhail Kalatozov, 1957), which won a Cannes Film Festival Palme d’Or
award, Moscow Does not Believe in Tears (Vladimir Menshov, 1980), that received
an Oscar for the best foreign language film, and July Rain (Marlen Khutsiyev, 1966),
a forgotten classic of the Soviet New Wave which deserves more attention than it
receives today. Bearing in mind such a rich history of representation (and
presentation) of Moscow, it is thrilling to explore the current state of city film.
Unquestionably, the cinema has inherited some of the values of its predecessors, but
it has also transformed under the influence of the current conditions of the globalized
world.
1.2 Postmodern Cities and Cinema
Since the beginning of the 20th century, the pace of urbanization has been
accelerating in almost geometrical proportions. The world’s urban population grew
from 225 million in 1900 to 3 billion in 2000.5 If in the 1900s 10% of people lived
in cities, then in 2010, the world urban population reached the number of 50.5%.6
5
TW Luke, ‘Codes, Collectives, and Comments. Rethinking Global Cities as Metalogistical Spaces’, in L
Krause, P Petro (eds.), Global Cities. Cinema, Architecture, and Urbanism in a Digital Age, Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London, 2003, p. 160.
6
Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html>.
6
Daria Berezhkova
According to a UN prognosis, by the year 2050, it will increase up to 67%.7 Today,
global cities interconnect and create a complicated worldwide network8. They can be
characterized by the constant flow of people, saturation of media and existence of
iconic locations.9 Cities can be described as centres of production and consumption
that direct global economy. Transnational commerce is concentrated in such capitals
as London, Frankfurt, Tokyo, New York, and others. Contemporary cities embody
the essence of a country in the world imagination even if in fact they only represent a
small part of the state’s lifestyle.10
When speaking of global cities, I will refer to them as “postmodern”.
According to Fredric Jameson, postmodernity emerged with the development of
consumer capitalism and post-industrial society after the end of World War II.11 The
concept of postmodernity describes Western society’s current cultural, economic and
socio-political condition. It is characterized by service-oriented economy, the growth
of hi-tech and entertainment industries, social polarization, fragmentation of urban
habitat, compression of time and space as a result of the information revolution,
multi-ethnicity, loss of barriers between “high” and “low” culture, as defined by Ewa
Mazierska and Laura Rascaroli.12
Researchers usually refer to North America when they discuss postmodern
cities. The ideal city of postmodernity is Los Angeles, the ultimate paradigmatic
space of the 21st century.13 It combines qualities of the first and the third worlds, it is
the centre of cinematic and media production. Nevertheless, other cities all over the
world can also be considered postmodern. The difference is in the proportion,
“concentration” of postmodernity rather than in its substance.14 In fact all cities
develop their own particular postmodern reality. Both in Europe and in the USA,
7
United Nations Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision Population
Database, 2012, retrieved 26 April 2012, <http://esa.un.org/unup/p2k0data.asp>.
8
For more on the term ‘global city’, see S Sassen, The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo,
Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2001.
9
TG Oren, ‘Gobbled Up and Gone. Cultural Preservation and the Global City Marketplace’, in L
Krause, P Petro (eds.), Global Cities. Cinema, Architecture, and Urbanism in a Digital Age, Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London, 2003, p.54.
10
E Mazierska, L Rascaroli, From Moscow to Madrid: Postmodern Cities, European Cinema, I.B. Tauris
& Co Ltd. London, New York, 2003, p.7.
11
F Jameson, ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society’, in F Jameson, The Cultural Turn. Selected
Writings on the Postmodern, 1983-1998, Verso, London, New York, 1998, p. 3.
12
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p.9.
13
Shiel, p. 7.
14
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p.18.
7
Daria Berezhkova
similar post-industrial landscapes can be found: for example, graffiti and commercial
images next to (or covering) historical buildings. In many European cities today
centres are no longer as crucially important as they were before: suburbs start playing
a vital role, just like they do in the United States.15 In general, contemporary city
centres are becoming more and more international, industrial sites are being
renovated and turned into restaurants, clubs or art-galleries. There are new transport
systems being built that join different cities and countries.
This changing reality has been in part documented by film during the past
century. Cinema not only mirrors the current conditions of cities, but also
participates in the process of their development and plays an important role in their
economy. Just like the cities, postmodern film is experiencing the increasing
influence of globalization. Today, moving pictures transcend national boundaries and
become vital elements of the global system. The effects of this can be traced down in
contemporary Moscow film.
1.3 Moscow in Film and Film in Moscow
Moscow took the title of capital from Saint Petersburg in 1918, a year after the
October Revolution. Ever since then it has remained the economic and socio-political
centre of Russia. This event coincided with the development of film. From the silent
era, Russian cinematography was considered the forefront of discoveries in cinematic
art.16 Works of such directors as Sergei Eisenstein, Dziga Vertov, and Lev Kuleshov
became subjects of book-length research. From early on, the capital has been an
important subject in cinema. Films tended to stress the main attitude that ruled at that
time: Moscow was perceived as a place where people from all over the country came
to obtain careers and education, friendship and love. In such motion pictures as Jolly
15
A Fiedler, ‘Poaching on Public Space: Urban Autonomous Zones in French Banlieue Films’, in M
Shiel, T Fitzmaurice (eds.), Cinema and the City. Film and Urban Societies in a Global Context, Oxford,
Malden, 2001, p.271-280.
16
B Beumers, The Cinema of Russia and the Former Soviet Union, Wallflower Press, London, New
York, 2007, p. 1.
8
Daria Berezhkova
Fellows (Grigori Alexandrov, 1934), Moscow was depicted as a spacious, festive
city full of opportunities for everyone.17
Stalin’s reconstruction plan of 1935, with its imperial architecture,
strengthened this attitude. During 1930s-1950s the role of Moscow was emphasized,
as the city played a dominant part of Stalin’s geopolitics.18 People linked their hopes
with the idea of Moscow becoming the future capital of the world. In the
“construction films” of this period, life in the city was shown as more appealing than
life in the country. During the Thaw (mid 1950s – mid 1960s) the attention finally
shifted to the private life, as opposed to the political (I am Twenty, Marlen Hutsiyev,
1965). In contemporary drama of this time, the downsides of Moscow were shown.
Soviet Union cinema was still strictly controlled by the government, but directors
found ways to express themselves and depict reality as it was with the help of the
comedy genre (Beware of the Car, Eldar Ryazanov, 1966).19 In the 1990s Russian
cinema became renowned for its negativity. The city was often depicted as a source
of evil as opposed to the pure life in the village.20 This pessimistic attitude in film
characterised the general climate in post-soviet Russia. The sudden transformation to
the market economy and the seeming availability of Western culture was juxtaposed
to poverty and internal conflicts, which brought a general feeling of despair and
moral disorientation to film.
1.4 Russian Film Industry Today
In the 1990s the Russian film industry experienced a crisis. New conditions of the
free market forced it to compete with Western cinema. On the other hand, the new
economic and political situation brought civil liberties: political censorship was
abolished and the government no longer imposed its ideology on filmmakers, at least
not to the same extent. Both commercial and independent art-house films started
appearing. Towards the middle of the 2000s the industry began to stabilize. Russia
17
S Yurlova, ‘Mythology of Moscow’, Izvestia Uralskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, no. 55 (15),
2008, pp. 64-70, retrieved 20 May 2012, <http://proceedings.usu.ru/?base=mag/0055%2801_152008%29&xsln=showArticle.xslt&id=a07&doc=../content.jsp>.
18
S Bodrov Sr, ‘Introduction’, in B Beumers (ed.), The Cinema of Russia and the Former Soviet Union,
Wallflower Press, London, New York, 2007, p. 1., p. 8.
19
Bodrov, p. xiii
20
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p.137.
9
Daria Berezhkova
became the sixth-highest grossing cinema market, which made it an important player
in the distribution network for foreign films.21 Some domestic pictures enjoyed
international release. Night Watch (Timur Bekmambetov, 2004), a blockbuster set in
Moscow, was in the top twenty of the international box office grosses.22 Today, the
number of movie theaters is growing and there is an increase of revenues from film
distribution23. A remaining problem is the small amount of national motion pictures
and their failure to compete with Hollywood cinema. In fact, in 2011 the share of
national films reached its lowest value since 2004; among the 308 films shown in
theatres, only 19% (59 films) were domestic.24
In Russia, the state still plays an important role in supporting national film,
covering about 60% of the film budget.25 The business plans are conservative, as it is
believed that the smaller the budget the faster the invested resources are returned.
Though some pictures today manage to break even, Russian film industry is still
considered financially unprofitable. The government plans to take protectionist
measures to help develop this business. One of the projects is to introduce quotas on
imported film, which will oblige cinemas to show more domestic products. This
raises concern that such measures will make Russian film less competitive.26 In the
present day, when globalization is affecting economic, political and cultural spheres
of life, it is the improvement of the film’s quality that can ensure its position on the
international market.
1.5 Moscow as a Global City
According to Fredric Jameson, globalization is one of the distinctive features of the
current time.27 Along with other postmodern cities, Moscow experiences its dramatic
effects. At the same time the capital plays a crucial part in the contemporary global
system itself. Due to the changes of the 1990s, Moscow’s position within the
international hierarchy of cities has also changed. The capital is integrating into
21
Beumers, p. 5.
Beumers, p. 6.
23
Beumers, pp. 4-6.
24
A Matveeva, ‘Cinema is Slowing Down’ (my translation), Gazeta.ru, 2012, retrieved 16 April 2012,
<http://www.gazeta.ru/business/2012/01/30/3979365.shtml>.
25
Matveeva.
26
Y Yarosh, P Belavin, S Sobolev, ‘Russian Cinema’s Distribution will be Expanded’ (my translation),
Kommersant, #43, 2012, retrieved 16 April 2012, <http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1891176>.
27
Jameson, p. 162-163.
22
10
Daria Berezhkova
international economic structures, taking on the role of a bridge between Western
Europe, the rest of Russia and Asia. Contemporary Moscow can be described by the
growing separation from the national urban system and by the increase of the
international orientation. The growing number of films about Moscow bears witness
to the transformations of the past years.
A report written in 2012 by A.T. Kearney Global Cities Index shows that
Moscow has the most progress on globalization since 2010.28 The Global Cities
Index measures the level of global engagement of the world’s most prominent cities
based on such dimensions as business activity, human capital, information exchange,
cultural experience, and political engagement. Rising six spots since the last survey,
Moscow is ranked number 19 on a list topped by New York, London, Paris, Tokyo
and Hong Kong.
Although Moscow, with its almost 15 million population, is becoming more
global with every year, it still lacks a stable attractive image that would raise
international interest.29 According to the results of a survey made at the Moscow
Urban Forum held in 2011, experts agree that it is time for the capital to develop a
promotional infrastructure to manage its reputation.30 Participants of the The Young
PRofy Day 2012 forum at the Moscow State University, which was dedicated to city
brands, arrived at the same conclusion.31 Russia’s capital is known primarily for Red
Square, Putin, cold weather, extreme poverty and extreme wealth. In other words,
there is a lack of a positive, contemporary and constructive image, which would help
secure Moscow’s place in the global city network.
The head of the Department of Tourism in Moscow, Igor Kozlov,
acknowledges this problem and states that the government is planning to introduce a
new city brand.32 In March 2012, an invitation to tender was put out by Moscow
officials to create a logotype for the city. According to Kozlov, the capital’s image in
the West is rather poor because it was constructed in the 1990s when there was a
28
‘Moscow 19th on list of global cities’ (my translation), The Voice of Russia Radio, 2012, retrieved
16 April 2012, <http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_04_04/70569903/>.
29
E Kachkaeva, ‘Moscow Brand’ (my translation), Bolshoj Gorod, 2012, retrieved 20 April 2012,
<http://www.bg.ru/stories/10670>.
30
‘Do actions speak louder than logos?’ Global Cities Blog, 2011,
<http://www.globalcities.eu/blog/do-actions-speak-louder-than-logos>.
31
Kachkaeva.
32
Kachkaeva.
11
Daria Berezhkova
surge of interest in the USSR. The image of Moscow as the capital of communism
and later the home of ‘new Russians’ is hard to shatter. Russian films, though rarely
seen by an international audience, contribute to the construction of this stereotype.
Promotional images that exist today mostly portray the Bolshoi Theater ballet, but
this classical image of Moscow is no longer as appealing.33 There are some efforts to
make Moscow a more open, international city. For example, a magazine called
Bolshoi Gorod and the Department of Cultural Heritage of Moscow are planning to
hang up signs on famous historical buildings. More and more companies are
appearing that base their business on selling new types of souvenirs featuring a
Moscow logotype (image 1).34 Although these projects are still very few, a positive
tendency can be seen already.
Moscow is becoming a more appealing place if not yet for tourists, then for
investors. For example, the Universal Parks & Resorts Company is planning to open
a Universal Studios theme park in the Russian capital by 2018.35 Moscow will be the
first European location of the Universal. President of the company, Michael Silver,
stresses that Russia is an attractive market with great potential for entertainment
business that, as he notes, speaks a global language.36 The project of building a
Universal Studios theme park indicates the level at which Moscow is being taken
over by globalization. It also underlines the growing interest of the Russian people
towards the American lifestyle and Hollywood. These aspects of contemporary
Russian life are evident in motion pictures and especially in Moscow film.
1.6 Background, Theories and Structure
The nature of the cinema/city relationship determines the large number of
interdisciplinary works dedicated to different aspects of the problem.37 Film is a
powerful analytical tool in the urban discourse, and a city, in turn, plays an important
33
Kachkaeva.
For more on souvenirs, see Heart of Moscow website <http://heartofmoscow.ru>.
35
E Gerashenko, K Aminov, E Khvostik, ‘American Culture Park’ (my translation), Kommersant, #66,
2012, retrieved 16 April 2012, <http://www.kommersant.ru/doc-y/1914164>.
36
Gerashenko, Aminov, Khvostik.
37
See Charney & Schwartz, 1996, McQuire, 1997 for modernity in film; Coates, 2000, Prakash, 2010
for utopian and dystopian cities, Brunsdon, 2007 for cinematic portraits, Gardies, 1993, Pallasmaa,
2001 for semiotic approaches, etc.
34
12
Daria Berezhkova
role in the cinematic theory.38 In recent years a number of volumes have been
dedicated to the way that cinema and cities interact. Different approaches are used,
but the dominant idea is that film provides an accurate representation of the urban
landscape. For example, in Ewa Mazierska and Laura Rascaroli’s work, From
Moscow to Madrid. Postmodern Cities, European Cinema, the main emphasis is on
the city-text: on the many ways that space is mirrored by the moving image.39 In
contrast to this, my primary focus will be not on the language of film, but on the
theories that surround the haptic quality of film and the embodied cinematic
experience.
In the next chapter I will study the ways that a changing city landscape
influences filmic space and vice versa. Here I will use the works of Sergei
Eisenstein, Walter Benjamin, Fraçois Penz and Andong Lu, Linda Krause and
Patrice Petro, Fredric Jameson, Giuliana Bruno that deal with different aspects of the
city/film relationship both in modern and in postmodern time.
The third chapter will be dedicated to the theory of the embodied cinematic
experience. I will focus on the haptic terrain of film and its influence on the
consciousness of the viewer. Here I will analyze Vivian Sobchack’s, Laura U.
Marks’, and Giuliana Bruno’s ideas on the tactile exploration of the filmic space.
In the final chapter I will apply the theory from the previous sections to the
empirical material: Russian films about Moscow made between 2002 and 2011. The
result of the work will be the overview of the current condition of the Moscow and
film relationship.
38
N AlSayyad, Cinematic Urbanism. A history of the Modern from Reel to Real, Routledge, New York,
London, 2006, p.3.
39
Mazierska, Rascaroli, pp.1-3.
13
Daria Berezhkova
Chapter 2
The City/Film Relationship
In this chapter I will explore the theoretical questions of the city and film interaction.
In the focus of attention are the spatial characteristics of motion pictures and urban
space. An important accent is on the current cultural and economic conditions of the
global system of cities.
2.1 Film as a Spatial System
The tie between cinema and cities is usually explored from the standpoint of
language. Moving images are seen as signifying systems, a reflection of society. 40
The reason lies in the fact that initially, film borrowed key ideas from literary
studies. In this sense, existing literature on motion pictures and the city does not
demonstrate a deep engagement with the urban space.41 Physical, social and cultural
aspects of cinema should be studied closer in order to help us understand film’s role
in the development of cities.
It cannot be denied that moving pictures takes part in the production of urban
space and have to be perceived as spatial systems rather than textual.42 In the words
of Maria Hellström Reimer, both cinema and film refer to movement, time and
technology.43 Moving images capture speed and rhythm, which are characteristic of
the urban environment. Film can express the multi-dimensional space as it deals with
the actual physical landscape. Motion pictures, according to Shiel, can convey the
complexity and diversity of the city.44 That is why cinema and the city have had a
strong bond ever since the beginning of the 20th century, the age of modernity.
40
Shiel, p.3.
AlSayyad, p.3.
42
Shiel, p.6.
43
M Hellström Reimer, ‘Urban Anagram: A Bio-political Reflection on Cinema and City Life’, in F Penz,
A Lu (eds.), Urban Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image,
Intellect Ltd, Bristol, Chicago, 2011, p. 223.
44
Shiel, p. 1.
41
14
Daria Berezhkova
2.2 New Experiences of Modernity
Charles Baudelaire was among the first to capture a new mode of experience and link
it to the city as the arena of social interaction and economic exchange.45 In his essays
the poet described a city dweller, a passionate spectator of the urban space. A
‘flâneur’ is somebody who feels at home anywhere in the city, who likes to see the
world and to be in the centre of it.46 The flâneur enjoys the new city of modernity
and ‘marvels at the eternal beauty and the amazing harmony of life in the capital
cities...’47 Walter Benjamin’s descriptions of urban modernity are to a large extent
based on Baudelaire’s accounts of encounters in Paris in the middle of the 19th
century.48
At the beginning of the 20th century theoreticians were concerned with the
novel experiences that growing cities brought. New means of transportation and
communication, new technologies were bound to have their effects. Some
sociologists, philosophers and artists were optimistic about the modern metropolis.
Benjamin recognized the connection between mass society, manufacturing,
mechanical reproduction and cinema.49 He believed that technology trained and
prepared the human sensorium for the arrival of film, which satisfied a need for new
‘stimuli’.50 Siegfried Kracauer, Bernard von Bretano, and Bela Bálazs tied their
aspirations with the new city. But there were others like the sociologist Georg
Simmel who saw a danger for the human psyche in the cold, anonymous, impersonal
metropolis.51
The end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century was a fertile time for the
development of filmmaking. A key feature of modern inventions such as arcades,
railways, department stores, and exhibition halls was their mobility. 52 Before motion
45
AlSayyad, p.1.
C Baudelaire, ‘The Painter of Modern Life’, in J Mayne (tarnsl., ed.), The Painter of Modern Life and
Other Essays, Phaidon Press Limited, London, 1995, p. 9.
47
Baudelaire, p. 10.
48
See W Benjamin, The Writer of Modern Life, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, London, 2006.
49
Shiel, p. 1.
50
W Benjamin, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’, in H Arendt (ed.), H Zohn
(transl.), Illuminations, Fontana, London, 1973, p. 177.
51
H Weihsmann, ‘Ciné-City Strolls: Imagery, Form, Language and Meaning of the City film’, in F Penz,
A Lu (eds.), Urban Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image,
Intellect Ltd, Bristol, Chicago, 2011, p. 25-26.
52
G Bruno, Atlas of Emotion. Journeys in Art, Architecture, and Film, Verso, New York, 2002, p. 17.
46
15
Daria Berezhkova
pictures, the desire to stroll and observe was realized through mapping and
architecture, which had certain ‘protofilmic’ qualities.53 With the advent of cinema,
this ambition was transferred from real life onto the screen. Thus ‘…film viewing
became an imaginary form of flânerie…’54 Moving images brought back the act of
wandering around the city, as viewers became the new type of flâneurs.
2.3 Traveling through Cities
The traveling culture blossomed in the early 20th century. It is no surprise that
voyages became one of the most popular subjects in early film. ‘Panoramic view’
pictures and travelogues were a widespread genre from the start. Films like
Panorama from Times Building, New York (Wallace McCutcheon, 1905) became a
simulation of the traveling experience.55 In a way, film has been to the 20th century
what the diorama had been in the 18th or panoramic wallpaper in the 19th century.
Film allowed the viewer to travel without leaving the room, to be still and to roam
around at the same time.
One of the most popular subjects in early film was the city. Motion pictures
represented primarily urban space and addressed urban audiences. Evidence of this is
the screening of Cordeliers Square, Lyons (Louis Lumière, 1895). By the 1920s a
genre known today as the ‘city symphonies’ appeared.56 Directors were enthusiastic
about filming the spectacle of a city, its rhythm and fast movements. Among these
cinematic portraits was, for example, Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (Walter
Ruttmann, 1927).57 The city became a subject, a character and not just a setting in the
film. ‘Symphonies’ not only represented cities, but they also invented them,
unravelling the unknown hidden parts to the viewer.58 This is especially evident in
the film essay Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929) where an image of a
new Moscow is shown to be created on an editing table. Another classic city film is
Moscow (Mikhail Kaufman, Ilya Kopalin, 1927). Here the directors combined the
53
Bruno, p.185.
Bruno., p.17.
55
Bruno, p.107.
56
Weihsmann, p. 25.
57
F Penz, A Lu, ‘Introduction: What is Urban Cinematics?’,in F Penz, A Lu (eds.), Urban Cinematics.
Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image, Intellect Ltd, Bristol, Chicago, 2011,
p. 10.
58
Penz, Lu.
54
16
Daria Berezhkova
use of actual physical space with the fictional metaphorical space to express the aura
of a city.59
From the very beginning tourism influenced film and transferred some of its
own features on it. Today voyaging and cinema to a large extent are leisure activities
that are meant to please the spectator. The ‘tourist gaze’,60 sight-seeing, and
movement through space are common to both film and tourism. Although in motion
pictures the act of traveling is only imagined, it functions according to similar
principles. Another similar feature is the limited time range: the viewer-traveler visits
a certain space only for a short period and is expected to return to reality at some
point.61 Both of these cultural phenomena involve new experiences, unusual
situations, and exploration of unknown cultures.
2.4 Getting Lost and Being Found
Undeniably, an inherent part of the traveling experience is getting lost. Walter
Benjamin wrote about this pleasant sensation as being typical for modernity and
flânerie. According to him, not finding a way can be boring, but to lose oneself in a
city, like in a forest, is a different experience.62 Getting lost requires special skills,
another type of interaction with the city: street signs, passer-by, and roofs begin to
matter. Later on, this idea was reinterpreted by the French Situationist International
group which proposed the term ‘psychogeography’ for a study concerned with the
experience of the urban environment and its effect on the human emotions.63
Psychogeography is not concerned with concrete coordinates and maps. It studies the
mood, atmosphere, smell of a place and different aspects that influence the
experience like time or direction.
Vivian Sobchack pointed out that there are many ways of getting lost, for
example ‘wandering away from home’, ‘not knowing where you are’, and ‘not
59
Weihsmann, p. 28.
Bruno, p.82.
61
Bruno, p. 82.
62
W Benjamin, A Berlin Chronicle, in M W Jennings, H Eiland (eds.), W Benjamin, Selected Writings,
transl. R Livingstone, vol. 2, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, London, 1999,
p. 598.
63
P Shöberg, ‘I am Here, or, the Art of Getting Lost: Patrick Keiller and the New City Symphony’, in F
Penz, A Lu (eds.), Urban Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image,
Intellect Ltd, Bristol, Chicago, 2011, p. 47.
60
17
Daria Berezhkova
knowing how to get where you want to go’.64 Getting lost and finding one’s way has
little to do with Euclidean geometry that scientific navigation is based on.65 The
condition of being lost cannot be explained by cartography. When spatial
disorientation takes place, it is the lived body that is taken into account; thus the
body becomes the center of the world.66 The act of getting lost can cause frustration
and emotional stress, but it can also open up new opportunities and bring new
sensations.
Andrew Otway discusses the term ‘wayfinding’ as a part of the experience of
getting lost. The history of navigation has been based on prioritizing the visual mapmaking.67 But people do not have cognitive maps in their heads; instead, they
navigate using memory and “history” of places.68 For example, in order to
understand where one is, he or she has to position him or herself according to the last
movement. Wayfinding as a form of knowledge is similar to storytelling, and yet it is
more efficient than navigation. The space around us is constantly changing and it is
up to the wayfinder to search, to feel his or her way through space using all the
senses. Wayfinding can involve different means of transportation. For example in
Night on Earth (Jim Jarmusch, 1991) protagonists-wayfinders explore cities in a car.
In Otway’s opinion the car and walking by foot are two means of traveling that are in
closest connection to the surrounding environment.69 Airplane and railroad distances
the traveler from the outside world. In Moscow films discussed in the fourth chapter
a variety of vehicles are used for wayfinding in the ‘real’ city.
2.5 The Real Cities
Moscow films that I will analyze in this work were shot in the real urban
environment. A tradition to make motion pictures on location goes back to the
beginning of the 20th century when decorations were quite expensive and
64
V Sobchack, Carnal Thoughts. Embodiment and Moving Image Culture, University of California
Press, Berkley, Los Angeles, London, 2004, pp. 26-35.
65
Sobchack, p. 16.
66
Sobchack, p. 20.
67
A Otway, ‘Night on Earth, Urban Wayfinding and Everyday Life’, in F Penz, A Lu (eds.), Urban
Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image, Intellect Ltd, Bristol,
Chicago, 2011, p. 169.
68
Otway, p. 170.
69
Otway, p. 170.
18
Daria Berezhkova
inconvenient. Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1927) popularized the use of sets in film.70
Italian neorealist pictures of the late 1940s brought back the fashion on location
shooting, as they showed environments that were destroyed by war. Authentic spaces
created unique conditions for the characters. This attitude to location shooting
influenced the French New Wave and gave a start to a new era of street filming.
Today many city films are shot in studios or created by special effects.
Directors of city films are in better control of the process of film shooting (Blade
Runner, Ridley Scott, 1982).71 In countries like the USA, where labour is expensive
and where good facilities are located, it is cheaper to make motion pictures in a
studio.72 In some cases, cities are used to portray other spaces. This is called ‘licenseplating’.73 For example in a Moscow film Heart’s Boomerang (Nikolay Khomeriki,
2011), the scenes in the subway were shot in Saint Petersburg, as Moscow subway
charges a very high price for providing space.
Nevertheless, to some directors, location shooting remains essential in the
production of a city film. In the age of globalization there is a tendency for urban
space to look homogeneous as if already produced by computer graphics. This
explains the directors’ turn to the ‘real’ cities. Helmut Weihsmann insists that the
beauty of such motion pictures as Zazie dans le Métro (Louis Malle, 1960) is in the
careful, almost documentary detailed Paris, which creates an effect of an authentic
cityscape.74 Films can help recreate a feeling of a city and its history. They are able
to document a changing topography.
In the words of Francois Penz and Andong Lu every simple, banal, and
almost invisible space can be turned into a visible significant place.75 The act of
conscious recording makes the most anonymous part of a city expressive. It is film’s
ability to capture every movement or a trivial moment of life, the ability to depict
street crowds or whirls of leaves in the wind that makes cinema inimitable.76 One of
the most remarkable descriptions of film and its power to show the real, material
70
G Nowell-Smith, ‘Cities: Real and Imagined’, in M Shiel, T Fitzmaurice (eds.), Cinema and the City.
Film and Urban Societies in a Global Context, Oxford, Malden, 2001, p. 99.
71
Nowell-Smith, p. 100.
72
Nowell-Smith, p. 102.
73
Nowell-Smith.
74
Weihsmann, p. 39.
75
Penz, Lu, p. 9.
76
Hellström Reimer, p. 223.
19
Daria Berezhkova
world, was given by Benjamin. In his opinion cinema frees us from ‘our offices and
furnished rooms, our railroad stations and our factories’ by close-ups of the things
around, by slow motion, space expands, by the focus on hidden details, by exploring
familiar objects and milieus. Film bursts the prison and we can adventurously go on a
journey.77 A different nature opens itself to the camera than to the naked eye of the
spectator.78 Although the real, ‘exorbitant’ city cannot be grasped and represented
fully, the film gives the viewer a chance to travel and explore the cinematic reality of
an urban space. 79
2.6 The Effects of Globalization
According to Mark Shiel, film can be called one of the first truly globalized
industries.80 The effect of globalization on the urban environment is tremendous. As
a result, cultures today demonstrate more ‘sameness’ than difference. Primarily they
appear to be more and more American.81 Real cities represented once in films
disappear and are replaced by generic ones. Before the film era, writers, journalists,
painters, and street photographers described and captured the images of London,
Paris, and Rome in their creative works. New York’s Greenwich Village and Fifth
Avenue were recognizable even to those who had never been there, but were familiar
with contemporary art.82 Today the tendency is that films feature uniform,
homogeneous ‘generic cities’, as architect Rem Koolhaas calls them.83
It was in the 1960s that cities in films started to become more anonymous,
unrecognizable or were reduced to clichés. At this time there was a growing
disappointment in the urban renewal that brought demolition of traditional parts of
cities. Jane Jacobs was among the first to see the destructive effects of the renewal.84
77
W Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of its Technological Reproducibility and Other Writings on
Media, transl. H. Eiland, E. Jephcott, R. Livingstone & others, The Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, London, 2008, p.37.
78
Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of its Technological Reproducibility, p. 37.
79
A Abbas, ‘Cinema, the City, and the Cinematic’, in L Krause, P Petro (eds.), Global Cities. Cinema,
Architecture, and Urbanism in a Digital Age, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey,
London, 2003, p. 145.
80
Shiel, p. 10.
81
Sheil, p.11.
82
M Shiel, p. 7.
83
R Koolhaas, The Generic City, Sikkiens Foundation, Sassenheim, 1995, pp. 3-29.
84
J Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Vintage Books, New York, 1992.
20
Daria Berezhkova
Old buildings were being replaced with faceless blocks of public housing. Before, in
the age of modernity, cities could be viewed as a panorama, but now they resembled
a collection of fragmented images.85 Films such as Mon Oncle (Jacques Tati, 1958)
depicted these homogenized, standardized spaces.
Some researchers use Gilles Deleuze’s term ‘espace quelconque’ (‘any-spacewhatever’) to describe this phenomena.86 Deleuzian disconnected any-spacewhatever appears after World War II, during ‘the rise of situations to which one can
no longer react, of environments with which there are now only chance relations’,
and replaces ‘qualified’ space.87 The period after the war brought empty and yet
inhabited locations, such as waste grounds, warehouses, demolished and
reconstructed cities.88 Even though the French philosopher in his work Cinema 2
does not openly connect any-space-whatever with globalization and postmodernity,
scholars like Laura U. Marks and Mark Shiel see a certain bond between these
phenomena. Marks writes about the any-space-whatever of post-war film, which she
believes to be characteristic of postmodernity and postcolonialism in general.89 Shiel
views any-space-whatever as an indicator for globalization.90 Shopping malls, movie
theatres, and highways are spaces of ubiquity that are ruled by the intangible power
of global capitalism.
Another effect of globalization is the fact that today, for most people cinema
is synonymous with Hollywood. The debate about the possibility for a country to
have a homegrown cinema, national film, came between the end of colonialism in
1960s and full globalization in the 1980s.91 ‘National cinema’ was seen as a possible
opposition to Hollywood’s monopoly on the moving picture culture. Today the
debate on ‘national cinema’ has extinguished itself and only some film scholars, such
as Mark Shiel, assert that domestic production can to a certain extent resist the
homogenizing process.92 Another author, Jenniffer Jordan, in her article ‘Collective
Memory and Locality in Global Cities’ argues that though globalization is
85
N AlSayyad, Cinematic Urbanism. A history of the Modern from Reel to Real, Routledge, New York,
London, 2006, p.9.
86
Deleuze, Shiel, p.11.
87
Deleuze Cinema 2, p. 272.
88
Deleuze Cinema 2, p. xi.
89
Marks XXX
90
Shiel, p. 11.
91
M Shiel, Cinema and the City in History and Theory, in M Shiel, Fitzmaurice T, ed, Cinema and the
City. Film and Urban Societies in a Global Context, Oxford, Malden, 2001, p.12.
92
Shiel, p. 12.
21
Daria Berezhkova
omnipresent, it is also dynamic and flexible.93 She mentions Berlin as an example of
a city where local traditions and landmarks are preserved and co-exist with such
evidence of globalization, as shopping malls, new office buildings and outdoor
advertisement.
Sometimes film, instead of expressing the negative attitude towards the
effects of globalization and Americanization, replaces it with the feeling of nostalgia
for the old days. Sometimes nostalgic motion pictures hide the director’s inability to
understand the past and history.94 For Fredric Jameson, ‘nostalgia films’ are
symptomatic for the postmodern style. In this age it feels like cinema is unable to
focus on the present, but instead turns to the past. Jameson sees in this an alarming
pathology of not being able to deal with history.95 The writer divides this type of
motion pictures into films that are about the past, films that reinvent the past, and
films that are set in the present, but evoke the past.96 The latter is an especially
interesting phenomenon. These motion pictures are technically not about the past, but
they express a certain ‘archaic feel’.97 Here Jameson gives an example of Body Heat
(Lawrence Kasdan, 1981). It is in such films that the postmodern tendency of the
nostalgic mood is most evident. Much like the any-space-whatever, in these films we
witness an ‘any-time-whatever’. Even if motion pictures are shot on location and
describe contemporary events, the time is sometimes blurred and it becomes
impossible to say when exactly the film was made. Cinema today can be described
by obliteration of historical space, by the dissolution of the boundaries of time and
place.98
Key-words for postmodern films are self-reflexivity and intertextuality. An
experimental approach to the narrative is characteristic not only to the modern but
also to the postmodern cinema. According to Jameson, in addition to the nostalgia
theme, another important phenomenon is pastiche, or ‘blank irony’, which is an
imitation of some style that has a neutral tone.99 Absence of the individual is also
93
J Jordan, ‘Collective Memory and Locality in Global Cities’, in L Krause, P Petro (eds.), Global Cities.
Cinema, Architecture, and Urbanism in a Digital Age, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New
Jersey, London, 2003, p.31-46.
94
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p.9.
95
Jameson, p. 10.
96
Jameson, pp. 7-10.
97
Jameson, pp. 9.
98
Mazierska, Rascaroli L, p.9-10.
99
Jameson, pp. 5
22
Daria Berezhkova
typical for postmodern cinema. Today stylistic innovations are no longer possible, as
everything unique has already been thought of.100 So artists instead are forced to use
what has been created by somebody else.
Contemporary cinema has its roots in the travelling culture of the modern
times. This explains why the themes of ‘wayfinding’ and getting lost are common in
motion pictures today. The journey through the ‘real’, authentic global city allows us
to witness how it has been affected by globalization. Postmodern film participates in
the construction of urban space and influences our perception of it. The theoretical
base of the contemporary city/film relationship will be applied to particular case
studies: motion pictures about Moscow made in 2002-2011. But first I would like to
take a closer look at the haptic terrain of film. The attention to the surface and the
material side is another common feature of postmodern cinema.
100
Jameson, pp. 5-7.
23
Daria Berezhkova
Chapter 3
The Haptic Realm of Film
Western culture traditionally privileged sight and put tactile sensation in the bottom
of the hierarchy of senses.101 In this chapter I will argue that the haptic experience of
film is also crucially important in the process of understanding cinema and the city.
3.1 The Haptic in Cinema
Ever since the famous Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat (Lumière brothers, 1896) was
first shown, cinema began to rouse senses. In early film theory there has been a
certain interest in exploring the role of physical sensations in connection to the
cinematic experience.102 Different attempts were made to understand the relationship
between motion pictures and the spectator’s body. Walter Benjamin, Bela Balasz,
Dziga Vertov, Sergei Eisenstein, and Siegfried Kracauer were intrigued by this
subject.103
According to Vivian Sobchack, although scholars have been concerned with
this topic in the past, no strong theoretical basis has been created yet. Towards the
middle of the 20th century the focus shifted from the different sensory dimensions of
film to its symbolic meaning; scholars studied the visual aspect, ‘figural’
connotation, the language, and signs of cinema. Preoccupied with semiotics,
structuralism, psychoanalysis, researchers of the 1960s and 1970s on the whole
privileged the act of seeing.104 Up until recently film theory has ignored the cinema’s
sensual address and the viewer’s corporeal-material being.105
Contemporary film theoreticians such as Giuliana Bruno, Vivian Sobchack
and Laura U. Marks recognize the role of the embodiment of the film watching
experience, and the importance of the ‘haptic’ in cinema. Bruno notes that film
emerged at the same time as the concept of the ‘haptic’ was developed by an art
historian and a curator of textiles Alois Riegl.106 His ideas in turn influenced Walter
101
Bruno, p. 251.
Sobchack, p.54.
103
Marks, p. 171.
104
Sobchack, p.59.
105
Sobchack, p. 56.
106
Bruno p. 247.
102
24
Daria Berezhkova
Benjamin’s, who stressed the importance of the haptic realm. According to him,
tactile reception was shaped by architecture but is now characteristic of other forms
of art like film.107 The haptic is usually defined as a combination of tactile and
kinesthetic functions, and by the way touch is experienced on the surface and inside
the body.108 Though vision remains a unique and privileged sense, cinema uses it in
order to ‘speak’ to the other senses. The contemporary film theory discussed in this
chapter implies that spectators can touch and be touched by texture of images, can
experience “visual aroma” of film.109 Just like sound possesses tactile and haptic
qualities because it is related to waves and movement, the rest of the senses too are
grounded in the materiality of our bodies.110
3.2 The Embodied Experience of Film
Carnal, fleshy, and objective foundations of our consciousness are in the focus of
phenomenology, a philosophical tendency that emphasizes an interpretation of
human experience that concerns perception and bodily activity.111 The human body
is a part of a social realm as it uses all its senses to explore and interact with the
outside world. Maurice Merleau-Ponty asserted that the field of perception is
constantly filled with ‘a play of colours, noises and fleeting tactile sensations’.112
Thus the lived experience is embodied and based on practice, as it involves looking,
listening, touching, smelling and tasting. Experience is dependent on the context, and
so the surrounding atmosphere is important for perception. The body is involved in
the world on an everyday basis. Everyone and everything that we see stir certain
feelings and cause our reactions.113
107
W Benjamin, The Work of Art, p. 40
LU Marks, The Skin of the Film. Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses, Duke
University Press, Durhan, London, 2000, p. 162.
109
Sobchack, p. 65.
110
T Elsaesser, M Hagener, Film Theory. An Introduction Through the Senses, Routledge, New York,
London, 2010, p. 137.
111
D Ihde, Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth, Indiana University Press,
Indianapolis, 1990, p. 21.
112
M Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, transl. C Smith, Routledge, London, New York,
1995, p. x.
113
Merleau-Ponty, p. 55.
108
25
Daria Berezhkova
According to Merleau-Ponty we are all made of ‘flesh’, which exceeds the
body in its regular sense.114 ‘Flesh’ crosses the boundaries of what is the outside and
what is the inside, what is visible and what is invisible. ‘Flesh’ can be considered
both a part of the body and a part of the thought. It is something that joins the self
and the world together. This results in us experiencing our body as subject and object
simultaneously.115 We can see and be seen at the same time, we can touch and be
touched. We feel our weight, gravity, and the relation of our bodies to the physical
environment. Because of this, the body becomes a background for all knowledge,
thoughts, emotions, and actions.116
Vivian Sobchack has developed her own cinematic theory based on the ideas
of Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology. To her, the sensory embodiment of the
film experience is crucial. Sobchack argues that it is bodily sensations that trigger
thought and are responsible for conscious sense when we are in the cinema.117 Carnal
knowledge comes previous to actual thought and this is why sometimes even before
realizing with our minds what we see on the screen, we understand it with our
bodies. There is a cultural assumption that cinema is constituted by two-dimensional
geometry, and its function is objective symbolic representation.118 But film can be
perceived as multidimensional, thanks to the sensorial spectrum of the spectator’s
body.119 This allows us to see and understand film not only with our eyes, but
experience it from head to toe.
When a spectator is watching a film, all senses are mobilized.120 The viewer
experiences not only the motion picture, but also his or her own lived body. Thus the
spectator is both ‘outside’ and ‘inside’ the film and this interaction with the image
makes the border between objectivity and subjectivity fade away.121 In this
communication between the spectator’s body and the moving image arises meaning.
114
M Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, transl. A Lingis, Northwestern University Press,
Evanston, 1968, p. 84.
115
S Biernoff, ‘Carnal Relations: Embodied Sight in Merleau-Ponty, Roger Bacon and St Francis’,
Journal of Visual Culture, vol. 4:39, pp. 39-52, 2005, p.48.
116
Biernoff, p.49.
117
Sobchack, p. 1.
118
Sobchack, p. 59.
119
Sobchack, p. 60.
120
Sobchack, p. 80.
121
Sobchack, p. 67.
26
Daria Berezhkova
3.3 The ‘Cinesthetic Subject’
In order to explain the nature of the body in the film watching experience Sobchack
introduces the term ‘cinesthetic subject’.122 The cinesthetic subject is a lived body
and the film viewer at the same time. This neologism is comprised of two notions:
synaesthesia and coenaesthesia. The first term describes an experience in which the
stimulation of one sense causes a perception in another. As a result an involuntary
transfer of feeling between senses occurs.123 The second concept describes how equal
senses are set in a hierarchy depending on history and culture. Sobchack claims that
all people are in nature more or less synaesthetes. In the cinema senses trigger one
another and exchange their roles.124 The going back and forth from sense to sense
happens subconsciously. For example, if we see a juicy pear on the screen we can
sometimes feel our mouth watering, not even acknowledging it.
Though in the film watching experience all of the senses are mobilized, they
do not work the same way as during the actual process of touching or smelling. The
cinema experience is a different sort of sensual fulfillment, or, more specifically, unfulfillment. There are two kinds of experiences in the cinema: the ‘real’ (or literal)
and the ‘as if real’ (or figural).125 One of them has to do with the actual body of the
spectator and the other with his or her conscious sense. In this case, a certain
reversibility between body and consciousness occurs.126 The spectator cannot
actually touch what is shown on screen so he or she compensates the lack of the
sensation by projecting the experience on him or herself.127
During the film watching experience the sensory hierarchy is sometimes
rearranged, leaving the optic function behind. The fact that in cinema the sensual
fulfillment is partial only enhances the experience. It is intensified by the constant
‘rebound’ of senses from the screen to the body. 128 The spectator can see what is
happening on the screen, and at the same time feels his or her own body reacting to
the images.
122
Sobchack, p. 67.
Sobchack, p. 68.
124
Sobchack, p. 67.
125
Sobchack, p. 58.
126
Sobchack, p. 74.
127
Sobchack, p. 76.
128
Sobchack, p. 76.
123
27
Daria Berezhkova
3.4 Haptic Visuality and Haptic Memories
To Laura U. Marks as well as to Giuliana Bruno and Vivian Sobchack, cinema is not
just a source of signs. The scholar elaborates the term ‘haptic visuality’ which is
based on the idea that eyes can function like organs of touch.129 If the optical
perception privileges the representational quality of the image, the haptic perception
privileges the material presence. Marks compares the act of brushing against
somebody else’s skin to the act of touching “against the skin of a film”, and she
stresses on cinema’s multisensory experience.130 In film the tactile image forces the
viewer to indulge in itself and not in the narrative.131 The spectator interacts with the
haptic cinema with the intelligence of the whole perceiving body.132
Marks perceives haptic visuality literally. Tactile images are representations
of objects that cannot be distinguished and recognized. In such cases the viewer does
not see a particular object, but instead the screen as a whole. 133 Filmmakers can use
many techniques to achieve a haptic character of the visuals. A change in focus,
grainy pictures, under- and overexposure helps to obtain this effect. Not only the
visuals, but even the sound can be haptic, given that the spectator-listener cannot
distinguish the source of it. This attention to the surface of an image, which does not
necessarily contribute to the narration, is characteristic of postmodern film, as it has
been discussed in the previous chapter.
Marks also focuses on cinema’s ability to evoke memories. Some of them are
encoded audio-visually, but others are hidden from the sight and can only be
delivered by the haptic ability of film. Thanks to the camera’s technological
qualities, motion pictures become witnesses of certain objects and can transfer their
presence to the viewer. Using a Deleuzian term ‘recollection-image’ as a starting
point, Marks calls them ‘recollection-objects’.134 They are full of condensed history
129
Marks, p. 162.
Marks, p. xii.
131
Marks, p. 163.
132
Marks, p. 190.
133
Marks, p. 172.
134
G Deleuze, Cinema 2. The Time-image, trans. H. Tomlinson & R. Galeta, University of Minnesota
Press, Minneapolis, 1989, pp. 47-50.
130
28
Daria Berezhkova
which can remind the spectators of their own past experiences.135 As Marcel Proust
put it in his Swann’s Way:
The past is hidden somewhere outside the realm, beyond the reach of
intellect, in some material object (in the sensation which that material object
will give us) which we do not suspect. And as for that object, it depends on
chance whether we come upon it or not before we ourselves must die.136
By carrying a trace of the material object, film allows the viewer to access the
materiality of the original scene. Marks characterizes the act of watching a film as a
mimetic experience: when we see a bodily similarity with the images on screen, we
can relate to them and experience similar sensations. What allows this identification
is again our memory. Memories are ‘trapped’ in the body and later activated by
sensations triggered by film.137 We do not actually smell or touch the image on
screen, as Sobchack also pointed out. In cinema a synaesthetic experience occurs:
images evoke memories, and they in turn evoke bodily senses. Due to the fact that
previous experiences of all the spectators are not the same, each of them enjoys a
different level of interaction with the film. The more one can engage with the
sensuous memories called upon by cinema, the more synaesthetic and intense the
experience becomes.138
3.5 ‘Site-Seeing’
Discussing the haptic experience of film brings us back to the ideas of traversing
space. The spectator follows the characters on screen and along with them becomes a
traveler. Giuliana Bruno criticizes some of the previous scholarly writings that focus
mainly on the ‘filmic gaze’ neglecting the haptic capacity of the moving image. 139 In
Bruno’s opinion most research that deals with the optic qualities of film is connected
to the Lacanian, ‘male’ gaze. According to these theories the spectator is a mere
135
Marks, pp. 81-84.
M Proust, Swann’s Way, vol. 1 of Remembrance of Things Past, transl. C K Scott Moncrieff, The
University of Adelaide, Adelaide, 2010, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/p/proust/marcel/p96s/index.html>.
137
Marks, p. 26.
138
Marks, p. 213.
139
Bruno, p.15.
136
29
Daria Berezhkova
voyeur. To challenge this position Bruno introduces the term ‘voyageur’.140
According to her, film simulates the traveling experience, which in turn is stimulated
by bodily sensations.141
Unlike the voyeur, the voyageur acquires knowledge by the means of
traveling and not only by observing. The moving image can be perceived as an act of
physical appropriation and discovery of a certain space, an act of getting to know a
place.142 The viewer’s activity is ‘site-seeing’ as opposed to sight-seeing.143 In this
sense cinema’s key tools are motion and texture. The spectator apprehends and
inhabits sites through them. The voyageur explores filmic space by crossing the
haptic terrain and wandering around in the spatio-corporeal dimension of the moving
image.144 This requires a full-body involvement and the use of all senses. The
spectator is a visitor, a tourist in film. He or she follows the protagonist on a haptic
journey. The images seen become a part of the viewer and can touch his or her life.
Bruno sees motion, voyaging and dwelling in time and in multi-dimensional space as
the origins of emotion in the film watching experience.145
According to Bruno, contact, exploration and communication are haptic
activities. They involve the knowledge of surface, geometry, material, and
location.146 In turn, surface, geometry, material, and location are the dimensions of
cinema. Bruno stresses that film puts physical bodies to motion and therefore is
corporeal.147 In her opinion, haptic space of cinema is primarily habitable, a place for
dwelling. Different locations presented in film are there for the viewer to discover
and explore.148
According to Giuliana Bruno the experience of watching a film is close to the
feeling that one experienced while walking through gardens in the 18th and the 19th
centuries. Picturesque aesthetics influenced not only fine art and literature but also
motion pictures. The specificity of these French and Italian gardens was the fact that
140
Bruno, p.16.
G Bruno, p.107.
142
J Lake, ‘Red Road (2006) and Emerging Narratives of “Sub-veillance”’, Continuum, 24:2, 2004,
retrieved 29 November 2011, < http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10304310903294721>, p. 237.
143
Bruno, p.15.
144
Bruno, p.16.
145
Bruno, p. 207.
146
Bruno, p. 254.
147
Bruno, p.148.
148
Bruno, p.65.
141
30
Daria Berezhkova
they were made for the spectator to enjoy. Strolling through the garden, observing
others, resting in the alcoves brought aesthetic pleasure.149 This picturesque vision
was haptic: eyes could almost touch the landscape. The eye became ‘epidermic’, like
skin, and sight became like a sense of touch.150
When the spectator explores space in film, he or she feels it tangibly. The
process of inhabiting a place involves not only seeing, but also touching it. With the
arrival of cinema images became even more haptic. Ever since then, motion pictures
have been giving both sensual and intellectual pleasure.151 Traveling by means of
watching film is a form of knowledge that is different from, for example, knowledge
gained by reading books. Voyaging requires the ‘student’ to be present, to experience
places hands-on, with all senses.152 This is the foundation for the haptic bond
between film and traveling.
The analyses of the haptic theories bring us to a conclusion that cinema is not
only an image, a sign, but also a lived space. The materiality of the city, its vibration
and tempo can be expressed in film. The motion picture is perceived with the whole
body and the spectator becomes a ‘voyageur’ who can traverse space and even time
after experiencing a ‘haptic memory’. Taking the theoretical basis of this chapter into
account, I move on to the next section. Here I will explore the different journeys
through Moscow that await the spectator. The city/cinema relationship will be
studied from the point of view of the current postmodern reality. The focus will be
on the material surface and the haptic visuality of the case studies.
149
Bruno, p.201.
Bruno, p.201.
151
Bruno, p.173.
152
Bruno, p.191.
150
31
Daria Berezhkova
Chapter 4
Moscow in Film
The six motion pictures that I will discuss in this chapter were made between the
years 2002 and 2011 in Moscow. These films are very different and show many
facets of the city life. Some of them were made by renowned filmmakers, others by
young directors. Selected motion pictures range from those that were successful on
the international market, to those that were shown only in a few theatres in Russia.
Among them are romantic comedies as well as dramas, mainstream blockbusters as
well as low-budget independent pictures. Nevertheless, all these films have one
common character: Moscow. The city becomes a protagonist that influences the
course of events, determines the narrative vector and creates a unique filmic city
space. The selected works are in one way or another characteristic of contemporary
Russian cinema. The diversity of the analyzed films will hopefully give an
interesting overlook on the current city/film relationship in Moscow. Carrying on
some of the traditions of the Soviet cinematography, the selected motion pictures
take part in the construction of the contemporary postmodern global city.
4.1 Case Study: Six Moscow Films
In the analyses below I will use the following films to analyze certain aspects of
contemporary Moscow film. One of them is Moscow, I Love You! (various directors,
2010). It is a collection of short films about the city. This work was made to
resemble such popular motion pictures as Paris, je t’aime (various directors, 2006)
and New York, I Love You (various directors, 2009). Such works are sometimes
called ‘anthology’153 or ‘omnibus’154 films. These terms describe short motion
pictures compiled in a single feature-length film, made by several directors sharing
153
S Deshpande, ‘Anthology Film. The Future is Now: Film Producer as Creative Director’, Wide
Screen, vol. 2, Issue 2, 2010, pp. 1-3, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://widescreenjournal.org/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/86/131>.
154
M Betz, ‘Film History, Film Genre, and Their Discontents: The Case of the Omnibus Film’, The
Moving Image: Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists, 2001, pp. 56-87.
32
Daria Berezhkova
one theme.155 The organizer of the Russian anthology Egor Konchalovsky calls it an
‘auteur’ project aimed to show the directors’ personal attitude to the capital156. A
motion picture called Tycoon (Pavel Lungin, 2002) was an heir to the cinematic
tradition of the 1990s, when one of the most popular subjects in cinema was the the
life of mobsters and businessmen157. Pavel Lungin’s motion pictures are
characterized by Ewa Mazierska and Laura Rascaroli as ‘models of postcommunist
Russian cinematic production’ and as typical city films, where many urban problems
are disclosed.158
Another Sky (Dmitri Mamulia, 2010) is a motion picture that was seen only
by about 400 people in Russia. The revenue of the film amounted to just over 1000
dollars.159 Nevertheless, this motion picture was shown at the Stockholm Film
Festival. Another example of a low-budget film is More zhelanij (Shota Gamisonia,
2010). It is a short motion picture by a young director, which reflects his
autobiographical attitude towards the city. Lovey-Dovey (Alexandr Strizhenov, 2007)
is a romantic comedy that earned more than 11 million dollars and was seen by over
2 million Russians. The film was so successful that later two sequels were made.
Another comedy, Lucky Trouble (Levan Gabriadze, 2011), starring Milla Jovovich,
was one of the most successful pictures of 2011. It managed to break even, which is
considered to be a positive outcome for a Russian film. This work received
international recognition, as it was shown in some countries in Africa, Eastern
Europe, the Middle East, and in North America.160 The producer Timur
Bekmambetov has commented that Lucky Trouble is the first film in Russian history
with a major Hollywood star as a protagonist161.
By analyzing different aspects of these motion pictures, I wish to determine
some tendencies in Moscow’s contemporary city/film relationship. I am interested in
particular qualities of the haptic experience of traveling through cinematic urban
155
Deshpande, p. 2.
A Yakubovskaya, ‘Egor Konchalovsky on the almanac ‘Moscow, I love you’’, 2008, retrieved 19
May 2012, <http://www.rudata.ru>.
157
See other films by Pavel Lungin, such as Taksi-Blyuz (1990), Luna Park (1992).
158
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p.137-159.
159
Kinopoisk Database, Drugoe nebo, 2010, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://www.kinopoisk.ru/level/1/film/468288>.
160
‘Russian Film in Berlin and Cannes’, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://lostfilm.info/filmnews/1656853>.
161
A Real Summer Comedy, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012, <http://www.rudata.ru>.
156
33
Daria Berezhkova
environment. The focus will be on the exploration of landmarks, personal and public
space, on the purposes of vehicles in film.
4.2 A Tourist’s Site: Iconic Locations
Like many other postmodern global cities, Moscow is recognizable in film primarily
as a result of its famous landmarks. Even those who have never been to this capital
will probably recognize it when they see images of the Red Square in cinema.
Giuliana Bruno uses a notion ‘tourist gaze’ to describe the film watching
experience.162 This term is especially appropriate in the discussion of iconic locations
in city films. The spectator, like a tourist, is invited to explore Moscow’s famous
monuments, squares and buildings. For those who have been to the capital these
landmarks can become ‘recollection-objects’163, which will stir different memories
and evoke feelings.
Famous Moscow landmarks have been featured in some early film. For
example, the Bolshoi theatre was shown in the 1929 motion picture Man with a
Movie Camera (image 2). Many significant city locations are depicted in the
anthology Moscow, I Love You! This film is composed of 18 five-minute novellas
about the city. One of them, Object #1 (Murat Ibragimbekov), shows two industrial
climbers cleaning famous Soviet and contemporary Russian landmarks. They start
with the Gagarin monument and finish with the Kremlin towers. While they are
working, the viewer is able to observe these monuments closely, from different
angles. In the final scene, made with the help of computer graphics, we witness how
one of the climbers opens and walks through a door, placed in a star of the Kremlin
tower (image 3). Thus the characters of this city film discover new aspects of iconic
locations and can even enter them.
Among other landmarks used in film are the seven Stalin’s Sisters
skyscrapers. The apartments in these prestigious, sought-after houses are expensive,
but for the successful (or simply lucky protagonists) of Moscow, I Love You! the
dream of an average Muscovite becomes reality. The male character in The
Skyscraper (Georgy Paradzhanov) has just been abandoned by his wife. To occupy
162
163
Bruno, p. 82.
Marks, pp. 81-84.
34
Daria Berezhkova
himself, he buys a telescope and starts peeking into the windows of the house
opposite to his, which happens to be one of the Stalin’s Sisters. The protagonist spots
a man in one of the apartments that is trying to commit suicide and eventually saves
his life. In this film, thanks to the powers of the telescope, the luxurious interior
suddenly becomes available to the character’s (and the viewer’s) eye.
Many city films capture another landmark, the Moscow subway, in one way
or another. In an iconic film of the Thaw era, Walking the Streets of Moscow (Georgy
Daneliya, 1964), the subway becomes almost a dwelling place for the characters.
Contemporary Russian cinema carries on the Soviet tradition. The letter ‘M’ in the
Moscow, I Love You! title has a similar font as the logotype of the metro itself. The
subway in the capital, unlike the locations mentioned above, is accessible by millions
of people every day. The only time it is closed to the public is at night. The episode
Study in Light Colors (Vasily Chiginsky) from Moscow, I Love You! allows the
spectator to experience the night time metro. This film is about a subway worker who
cleans the stations in the after-hours. This unusual side of Moscow is open to the
protagonist, but at the same time she is deprived of the most customary daytime city
landscapes. To make up for it, the cleaner draws pictures of sunlit Moscow streets.
The viewer is able to travel through night-time metro and to observe the works of the
protagonist.
In contemporary Russian film the spectator has a chance to see new angles
and close-ups of familiar landmarks. In an episode from Moscow, I Love You! called
Valerik (Georgy Paradzhanov), the monument to Yuri Dolgorukij (the founder of
Moscow) is shown in detail (image 4). We can see the veins on Dolgorukij’s raised
hand. Such zoomed in views give a different, more haptic experience of the
cinematic image. As Sergei Eisenstein said:
…with the help of the close-up (the enlarged detail), the spectator plunges
into the most intimate matters on the screen: a flinching eye-lash, a trembling
hand, fingertips touching the lace at a wrist.164
It can be added that film allows the viewer to ‘plunge into’ not only the details of
human bodies, but also into the details of buildings, monuments, sculptures and other
164
S Eisenstein, ‘A Close-Up View’, in J Leyda (ed.), Film Essays with a Lecture, Dobson Books Ltd.,
London, 1968, p. 150.
35
Daria Berezhkova
parts of the city landscape. In the words of Laura U. Marks, it is ‘haptic visuality’
that comes into play when the material side of the image is in the focus of attention.
Private, previously unexplored corners and angles become available and can be
experienced haptically in film. This helps provide for a closer interaction between the
viewer and the city.
Some landmarks of the urban environment are inaccessible because of their
size and geographic position (the Yuri Dolgorukij monument), some are available to
a small amount of residents (Stalin’s Sisters), and others can be traversed only during
the day (Moscow metro). But film breaks down these barriers and allows the
spectator to see what is hidden in real life. Iconic locations can become nostalgic
‘recollection-objects’ as they are connected with Moscow’s history and the past of its
inhabitants. The viewer like a meticulous tourist travels through the city’s
unapproachable, most intimate parts, exploring small physical details. The spectator
can visit not only the objects of cultural heritage, but also the private and public lived
spaces.
4.3 A Local’s Site: Inhabited Places
For most Muscovites, much like for the inhabitants of other global cities, iconic
locations such as the Red Square play a secondary role. Instead they inhabit and visit
diverse public and private spaces like offices, hospitals, cinemas, and apartments.
The houses where they dwell can be spacious lofts in central Moscow, or crammed
worker’s barracks on the outskirts. Sometimes films give a realistic presentation of a
Muscovite’s life, sometimes they embody their aspirations. For example, the
episodes with famous skyscrapers in Moscow, I Love You express the desires of the
inhabitants, rather than reality. To the majority of Muscovites, Stalin’s Sisters are
mythological touristic locations and not home.
Some films allow their protagonists and spectators to approach the more
‘presentable’ and impressive parts of Moscow, such as the city centre. As Mazierska
and Rascaroli assert, the historical centre has always played an important part in
European cities.165 In postmodern conditions, it becomes a place of fragmentation.
165
Mazierska, Rascaroli, p. 18.
36
Daria Berezhkova
The center turns into a cosmopolitan area where more and more immigrants
assemble, while the locals tend to move into the suburbs. All this can be said about
Moscow. And yet the city centre still remains in focus of most films. In many cases it
is a dwelling place of successful businessmen (in Tycoon), well-connected middle
class (in Lovey-Dovey), or “native” Muscovites that have inherited family apartments
(Valerik). Their apartments might not always be properly renovated, but they still
provide the luxury of living in the center.
Both in real life and in film, there is a certain ‘landscape hierarchy’ when it
comes to living in the city. Those who have recently come to Moscow, or who
cannot afford to live centrally, dwell in the residential areas of the city and the slums
(Another Sky). Those who are better off occupy skyscrapers and historical houses.
Another tendency for successful Muscovites is to move to the prestigious cottages
outside of Moscow on the Rublev highway (where current president Vladimir Putin
also resides).
We can track the change in dwelling preferences of a character, Platon
Makovsky, in Tycoon. This film is about the protagonist’s ascent from a regular
research associate to a businessman-multimillionaire. He builds his career on
schemes and frauds, but gradually becomes one of the most influential people in the
country. Every step of Makovsky’s way up is reflected in his household and his
office. In the beginning he lives in a humble small apartment, later he moves to ever
more spacious flats, and finally he acquires his own mansion in the centre of
Moscow. Some of his business is located in a contemporary skyscraper, and some is
taken care of in Kremlin’s cabinets. At one point Makovsky purchases a luxurious
mansion outside of the capital (these episodes were shot in Arkhangelskoe, a 19th
century mansion, now a museum). Owning several flats in central Moscow and a
house near-by is a clear sign of wealth and status. During one of the parties at the
mansion, the guests are entertained by gypsy singers and elephants, which were the
exotic and necessary elements of noble parties of the 19th century. Most of
Makovsky’s leisure activities take place in the same spaces that were used by 19th
century noble gentlemen: Sandunovskie bani baths, Moscow racetrack, steam boats
on the Moscow-Volga channel. Thus, as shown by film, the highest peak of success
for a contemporary businessman is to have the same lifestyle and to live in the same
houses as the nobles did a hundred years ago.
37
Daria Berezhkova
Some contemporary city films depict people who come to Moscow from
other towns or countries. The capital becomes a traveling destination, a goal of their
pursuit. Usually films about the life of immigrants and migrants show a different side
of Moscow, a city’s backstage. In the film Another Sky, the protagonist Ali, a peasant
from Central Asia, comes to Moscow with his son in search of his run-away wife.
Here the capital is portrayed as a hostile environment for those who are less
privileged. Ali spends his time roaming around the city without any results. He and
his young son are forced to take up different jobs to earn money. The son is
eventually killed on the timber-work plant. Soon after the tragedy, Ali finds his wife.
The spaces shown in Another Sky are different from those in Tycoon, though
both of the films are partially set in central Moscow. In Another Sky there are almost
no skyscrapers or historical mansions. Ali travels through faceless, half empty, grey
spaces: hospitals, police stations, homeless shelters, morgues, and barracks of illegal
immigrants (image 5). Ali’s Moscow is a typical any-space-whatever, a ‘shanty
town’.166 In fact, if not for the opening scene where Moscow’s train station is shown,
it would probably be impossible to say where exactly the events take place. Chinese
prostitutes occupy a brothel that Ali visits, immigrants from Central Asia work in the
parlour where he finds his wife. The capital has become a cosmopolitan space where
different nationalities and languages mix. In Another Sky, local attributes of Moscow
that distinguish it from other cities are erased.
Another type of any-space-whatever is shown in the comedy Lovey-Dovey.
This motion picture is about a married couple that decides to go to a psychiatrist after
yet another family quarrel. The doctor turns out to be a magician, who puts a spell on
the two. The husband and wife exchange bodies and eventually learn to understand
each other better, which saves their relationship. The protagonists of this film are
successful middle class people in their 30s: the wife is a curator at the Center for
Contemporary Art, the husband is a lawyer at the Moscow City Court. Both of these
places exist in real life as the film was partly shot on location. But the rest of the
daily life of the two characters happens in an ambiguous any-space-whatever:
shopping centers, karate clubs, and spa salons. The office of a lawyer in this film has
white walls, a bulky leather couch, a large wooden table and mini golf equipment
166
D Martin-Jones, Deleuze and World Cinemas, Continuum International Publishing Group, London,
New York, 2011, p. 143.
38
Daria Berezhkova
(image 6). There are no extra details or decorations that would give away the fact
that this office is situated in Moscow. This might have been a work place of an
American businessman in a Hollywood film. Many locations in Lovey-Dove look
like they could exist in other global cities. Such any-space-whatever are spots that
recur across all over, but aren’t specific to any certain nation.167
As Walter Benjamin said:
…film is the prism in which the spaces of the immediate environment – the
spaces in which people live, pursue their avocations, and enjoy their leisure –
are laid open before their eyes in a comprehensible, meaningful, and
passionate way.168
Moscow film allows the viewer to be a local of the city and to take a journey through
the secret passages and rooms of public and private spaces. The viewer can go ‘siteseeing’169 through the different unexplored levels of city life, from historical
mansions to the slums, from standardized offices to the Kremlin cabinets. In
contemporary film, Moscow becomes a space of fragmentation and cosmopolitism.
The contrasts of the postmodern urban life can be expressed in city films due to the
all pervading ability of the camera.
4.4 Ways to Get Around: Vehicles
In most city films, at one point or another, characters undertake journeys through
Moscow. As Andrew Otway pointed out, an efficient way of finding oneself in town
is by walking or driving as opposed to using a map.170 In Moscow cinema, the
automobile becomes the necessary vehicle for almost anyone in the city. In
contemporary Moscow film, vehicles are mostly used as tools for ‘wayfinding’.171
For example, in Another Sky, Ali searches for his wife while driving a car at night.
167
Martin-Jones.
Bruno, p. 329.
169
Bruno, p.15.
170
A Otway, ‘Night on Earth, Urban Wayfinding and Everyday Life’, in F Penz, A Lu (eds.), Urban
Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the Moving Image, Intellect Ltd, Bristol,
Chicago, 2011, p. 169.
171
Otway.
168
39
Daria Berezhkova
Besides its wayfinding capabilities, vehicles can become a part of a
character’s city life. In the short film The Queen (Alla Surikova) in Moscow, I Love
you! the protagonist drives around the city in a small blue car. A whole life takes
place within that vehicle: she drinks a morning coffee, argues with the drivers of
passing cars, drops off her son, bribes a policeman, puts on makeup and gets dressed
(image 7). The woman uses the red light and traffic jams as an opportunity to take
care of herself. The protagonist manages to adjust her life to the rhythm of the city
and its roads. The vehicle becomes a place of her habitat. Sometimes, the means of
transportation can play a crucial role in the life of the characters. For example, a car
or motorcycle accident can bring two people together. In a film from the anthology
Moscow, I Love You! called Letter To Grandmother (Georgy Natanson), the
protagonist, a South Korean girl gets hit by a man on a motorcycle. After the
accident the couple falls in love and spends time driving around the city. The Russian
man shows the immigrant girl famous locations, starting from the Red Square and
eventually taking her to the sightseeing platform on Vorobyovy mountains, a famous
gathering place of the Moscow motorcyclists in the summer.
In the film Lucky Trouble, a car is also used as a tool for sightseeing. This is a
story about Nadia, a rich woman from Moscow (played by Milla Jovovich), who falls
in love with Slava Kolotilov, a school teacher from a small town. They also meet
after an accident (Nadia hits Slava on her BMW). Their relationship develops as they
drive around the city. Only this time it is the rich woman’s turn to show Moscow to
the out-of-towner. The couple travels alongside some of the famous landmarks.
Notably, they pass numerous amounts of commercial posters and neon signs, which
promote different goods (for example, home appliances). Apart from being mere
product placements, these advertisements are integrated into the narrative and
acquire a new meaning. Each of the commercial images is transformed by some sign,
a picture, or graffiti. This way Slava uses the advertisements to confess his love to
Nadia. Thus the vehicle in this film is used as a means to see the city views that are
comprised of landmarks, commercial images and graffiti: typical components of a
postmodern city.
Finally, transport in film plays an important role in determining a social
position of the characters. They become objects of status just like apartments and
mansions. Jean Baudrillard asserted that objects in society are ‘profoundly
40
Daria Berezhkova
hierarchical’.172 The pursuit of a social standing is built on the differences of objects
and Moscow film proves this point. Successful people are often portrayed driving
expensive black cars (Lucky Trouble). Those who come to Moscow for work are
shown using public transportation. Usually people in search of a better life arrive in
Moscow by train (Another Sky). They also leave by train if they fail to achieve what
they wanted (Tycoon).
Unlike cars and motorcycles, public vehicles, such as trams, trolleys and mini
busses, are actually used as a means of transportation, ‘wayfinding’, and not as
instruments for sight-seeing. This breaks with the tradition of the Soviet cinema,
where public transport like trackless trolleys was romanticized (image 8). In those
days such vehicles could be used for exploring the city. Thus in Moscow film, some
vehicles can be used to transport people from one place to another, while others serve
as a flâneur’s tool for observation.
Ways to Get Around: Without Vehicles
Like a panorama of the 19th century, film gives the viewer an opportunity to explore
the urban landscape. Different landmarks, personal and public spaces can be
investigated by the characters and the spectators of the film. Some city journeys can
be taken with the help of vehicles, while others do not require movement at all. Films
provide a guided city tour experience where the spectator is a tourist and the
protagonist is a guide. In Moscow, I Love you! an actual Moscow map is used to help
the viewer navigate through its 18 short films. Before each new episode begins, a
map with a certain landmark is shown to indicate the part of the city where the events
will take place.
Observing panoramic vistas of the capital is one type of a city tour that a
spectator can take without having to move. Much like in real life, the urban
landscape can unravel itself in front of the viewer’s eyes by itself. The Oscarwinning Moscow Does not Believe in Tears starts and ends with a bird’s eye view on
Moscow (image 9). Some of the films in the Moscow, I Love you! anthology repeat
this stylistic technique. One of the places where a panorama of Moscow can be best
172
J Baudrillard, The Consumer Society. Myths and Structures, transl. C Turner, Sage Publications,
London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, 2004, p. 90.
41
Daria Berezhkova
observed from is the Vorobyovy mountains’ sight-seeing platform (image 10).173
Viewing Moscow landscape from the Vorobyovy mountains is a universal,
democratic method of exploring the city both for the spectator and the characters.
This view can be enjoyed by almost anyone, regardless of their background or social
position, during the day and during the night.
Another type of a city tour can be seen in More zhelanij. Observing the city
views is the main preoccupation of the two young men in this work. The protagonists
linger in the street corners of the city, which are miraculously turned into a resort
town. They make plans to go down to the sea, but instead continue looking at the
passing people and drinking wine. In this motion picture, Moscow space is created
based on the actual childhood memories and experiences of the director. Using
Fredric Jameson’s terms, this film can be called nostalgic.174 More specifically, this
is the type of a nostalgic picture that is set in the present but evokes memories of the
past.175 It is ambiguous when the events take place; the time here can be called ‘anytime-whatever’. In More Zhelanij the city itself becomes a ‘recollection-object’.
Here, the memory of Moscow is combined with the memory of the Black sea
that so many people who grew up in the Soviet Union share. The film was for the
most part shot on a few blocks in the Kitaj-gorod area in central Moscow. In the
motion picture there is no traffic and no people on the narrow, winding streets with
old houses. The people who do appear are friendly to each other. Anyone who has
been to Moscow perhaps knows that this district is almost always very busy with
traffic. Thus the urban space in the film is far from the real Moscow; it is a memory
of a city, or a vision of how it should be.176
In one scene, when the protagonists enjoy Moscow’s panoramic view from
the Vorobyovy mountains, two haptic memories are combined (image 10). The
skyscrapers and famous landmarks can be seen from afar and at the same time the
sound of the breaking waves and the seagulls can be heard. The tall light green grass
resembles sedge grass that grows by the sea. The city tour that becomes available in
this film is a journey through the dream-like Moscow constructed from the memory
173
Tycoon, Moscow I Love You!, and More zhelanij are among fims that feature this view.
F Jameson, pp 123-135.
175
Jameson, pp. 7-10.
176
‘Home Theatre: Sea of Desire’ (my translation), Royal cheese, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://www.royalcheese.ru/city/94-domashnij-kinoteatr-more-zhelanij.html>.
174
42
Daria Berezhkova
of the director and possibly the memories of those who have had a similar experience
of the city. This tour is more significant to those who can identify with the characters
and their feelings.
The protagonists of More zhelanij know the way to the sea, but simply do not
wish to follow it. They have already found what they were looking for in Moscow
and have no desire to walk further. Characters in the short film In the Center of
GUM, Near the Fountain (Ekaterina Dvigubskaya) from the Moscow, I Love You!
anthology have also reached their destination. This novella takes place in Moscow’s
most popular historical shopping mall GUM (State Department Store), which is
located on the Red Square. The film begins with the mall’s radio announcing that all
those who are lost should meet each other in the centre of the store, near the fountain.
In the course of the film two couples reunite at the there. All we know about the
couples is that one of them had lost the sight of each other in a far away town. The
other, an older couple, was also separated a long time ago. The loved ones finally
reunite, overcoming time and distance. All this is possible in the centre of GUM,
situated in the center of Moscow, which in turn can be considered the ‘center’ of
Russia. Thus, Moscow is shown as a hub where those who are lost can literally and
figuratively be found. In many of the discussed films the idea of Moscow as a
meeting place, a final stop of the travelers’ journey prevails. When the protagonists
arrive to this destination, they have no need to explore and move about.
In Moscow city film some tours around the city can be arranged using
different vehicles. At other times the character and the spectator does not need to be
in motion in order to make a journey: the views of the city can unravel themselves
from a bird’s eye view. Films are also able to evoke haptic memories. In these cases
the spectator is invited to travel not only through space, but also through time.
The case studies examined above show that Moscow cinema provides a
unique experience of voyaging through urban space. The spectator can visit the most
inaccessible ‘exotic’ locations, see the ordinary inhabited places of the Muscovites
and even take a trip down to their past. These motion pictures help understand the
contemporary city/film relationship in Moscow. On the one hand cinema represents
the texture of an urban space realistically, and on the other hand, creates a feeling of
a fragile, ethereal, dream-like city.
43
Daria Berezhkova
Conclusion
This thesis asserts that motion pictures take part in constructing cities, creating a
certain atmosphere, a ‘feeling’ of urban space, which cannot be tracked down and put
on a map. As the discussion in the paper has shown, film is a spatial reality rather
than a textual. Cinema borrows its key principles from architecture and the travelling
culture. This is why there is a tight connection and an interaction between film and
the city. Today the spectator is considered to be a contemporary flâneur, a
‘voyageur’, that engages in city journeys such as ‘site-seeing’ and ‘wayfinding’.
One of the important qualities of postmodern film highlighted in this thesis is
the physical, tactile side of the moving image. As our perception of the motion
picture is embodied, the literal, concrete meaning of film becomes crucial. The
‘cinesthetic subject’ can experience cinema’s ‘haptic visuality’ with the entire
spectrum of senses. This is why it is important to pay attention to the material fabric
of film: the small details, the colours, the textures. Motion pictures can depict
‘recollection-objects’ that may evoke ‘haptic memories’ in some of the viewers.
The spectator of the contemporary Moscow film participates in a haptic
journey. Due to its historical and economic specificities Moscow cinema is a unique
type of city film. After the changes in the political system in the 1990s, Russian
cinema was affected by the Western cultural and economic values on the one side,
and by the homogenizing effects of globalization on the other. Today motion pictures
set in Moscow show a cosmopolitan and fragmentized space that is saturated with
advertisements and graffiti. More and more films depict the lives not only of the
‘native’ Muscovites, but also of the migrants. The environment of the urban dwellers
is becoming ‘generic’. It is the ‘any-space-whatever’ typical for a global city.
As a reaction to the consequences of globalization, films turn to the
‘nostalgic’ theme. In the new circumstances of the free market economy some of the
traditions of Soviet cinematography, accumulated in the past 100 years, still remain.
A yearning for the nostalgic past can be felt in those city films that refuse to portray
the present conditions. As a result, the time described in such works is an ambiguous
‘any-time-whatever’. Most of the motion pictures still focus on portraying the life of
the centre with its historical buildings and iconic locations. Films do not yet
44
Daria Berezhkova
acknowledge the important role of the suburbs in contemporary city life. Instead,
most Moscow moving pictures feature the mythological landmarks that are believed
to preserve the aura, the spirit of the city. Another tradition is kept by the Moscow
cinematograph: the tradition of depicting the capital as the centre of the country,
where one goes in search of love and success. This way Moscow city film preserves
some of the local flavour while being heavily influenced by the processes of
globalization.
The experience of watching Moscow film resembles the experience of going
on a tour, guided by a local. The spectator can follow the protagonist and explore
iconic locations as well as the inhabited private and public spaces. City film allows
the viewer not only to discover new unexplored sites, but also to get a close-up look
and see unusual angles of familiar places. The most intimate locations which are
inaccessible in real life become available to the protagonist and the spectator.
Prestigious neighbourhoods in the historical parts of the city, slums in the outskirts,
offices in the business districts can be easily traversed in film.
The contemporary city space can be explored with the help of different
vehicles. The most common means of transportation is a car. The automobile has
become an inherent part of the city experience. The car is a tool for ‘wayfinding’,
‘site-seeing’, it can even become a space of dwelling. But driving is not the only way
of travelling through a city. It is possible to accomplish a journey through space
without making a move, simply by observing panoramic views. City journeys can
involve traversing not only space, but also time. Haptic memories that are evoked by
‘recollection-objects’ can provide the viewer with an experience of the past. Thus
film can help the spectator to discover unknown locations, unattainable corners of
familiar spots and to re-live forgotten sensations.
Cinema can be used for exploring the ‘authentic’ urban environment. Besides
that moving pictures take part in the creation of the contemporary postmodern space.
Not only do they mirror the ‘real’ places, they can also help construct the
mythological, ephemeral, dream-like city, woven from the memories, hopes and
aspirations of the city dwellers.
45
Daria Berezhkova
Bibliography
Books
AlSayyad, N, Cinematic Urbanism. A history of the Modern from Reel to Real,
Routledge, New York, London, 2006.
Baudelaire, C, The Painter of Modern Life and Other Essays, transl. J. Mayne, 2nd
edn, Phaidon Press Limited, London, 1995.
Baudrillard, J, The Consumer Society. Myths and Structures, transl. C Turner, Sage
Publications, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, 2004.
Benjamin, W, A Berlin Chronicle, in M W Jennings, H Eiland (eds.), W Benjamin,
Selected Writings, transl. R Livingstone, vol. 2, The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, London, 1999.
Benjamin, W, Charles Baudelaire: a Lyrical Poet in the Era of High Capitalism,
transl. H. Zohn, NLB, London, 1973.
Benjamin, W, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’, in H
Arendt (ed.), H Zohn (transl.), Illuminations, Fontana, London, 1973.
Benjamin, W, The Work of Art in the Age of its Technological Reproducibility and
Other Writings on Media, transl. H. Eiland, E. Jephcott, R. Livingstone & others,
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, London, 2008.
Benjamin, W, The Writer of Modern Life. Essays on Charles Baudelaire, trans. H
Eiland, E Jephcott, R Livingstone & H Zohn, The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, London, 2006.
Betz, M, ‘Film History, Film Genre, and Their Discontents: The Case of the
Omnibus Film’, The Moving Image: Journal of the Association of Moving Image
Archivists, 2001.
Beumers, B, The Cinema of Russia and the Former Soviet Union, Wallflower Press,
London, New York, 2007.
Biernoff, S, ‘Carnal Relations: Embodied Sight in Merleau-Ponty, Roger Bacon and
St Francis’, Journal of Visual Culture, vol. 4:39, pp. 39-52, 2005.
Bogue, R, Deleuze on Cinema, Routledge, New York, London, 2003.
Bruno, G, Atlas of Emotion. Journeys in Art, Architecture, and Film, Verso, New
York, 2002.
Deleuze, G, Cinema 2. The Time-image, trans. H. Tomlinson & R. Galeta, University
of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1989.
Eisenstein, S, ‘A Close-Up View’, in J Leyda (ed.), Film Essays with a Lecture,
Dobson Books Ltd., London, 1968.
Eisenstein, S, ‘Montage and Architecture’, Assemblage, no. 10, 1989.
46
Daria Berezhkova
Elsaesser, T, M Hagener, Film Theory. An Introduction Through the Senses,
Routledge, New York, London, 2010.
Flaxman, G, The Brain is the Screen. Deleuze and the Philosophy of Cinema,
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, London, 2000.
Friedberg, A, Window Shopping. Cinema and the Postmodern, University of
California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1994.
Ihde, D, Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth, Indiana University
Press, Indianapolis, 1990.
Jameson, F, The Cultural Turn. Selected Writings on the Postmodern, 1983-1998,
Verso, London, New York, 1998.
Koolhaas, R, The Generic City, Sikkiens Foundation, Sassenheim, 1995.
Krause, L, P Petro, Global Cities. Cinema, Architecture, and Urbanism in a Digital
Age, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey, London, 2003.
Le Corbusier, ‘Villa Savoye a Poissy, 1929-31’, in W Boesiger (ed.), Le Corbusier,
P Jeanneret. Oeuvre complete de 1929-1934, vol. 2, Les éditions d’architecture
Zurich, Zurich, 1964.
Marks, LU, The Skin of the Film. Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses,
Duke University Press, Durhan, London, 2000.
Martin-Jones, D, Deleuze and World Cinemas, Continuum International Publishing
Group, London, New York, 2011.
Mazierska, E, L Rascaroli, From Moscow to Madrid: Postmodern Cities, European
Cinema, I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd. London, New York, 2003.
Merleau-Ponty, M, Phenomenology of Perception, transl. C. Smith, Routledge,
London, New York, 1995.
Penz, F, A Lu, Urban Cinematics. Understanding Urban Phenomena through the
Moving Image, Intellect Ltd, Bristol, Chicago, 2011.
Sassen, S, The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, 2001.
Shiel, M, T Fitzmaurice, Cinema and the City. Film and Urban Societies in a Global
Context, Oxford, Malden, 2001.
Sobchack, V, Carnal Thoughts. Embodiment and Moving Image Culture, University
of California Press, Berkley, Los Angeles, London, 2004.
Sobchack, V, The Address of the Eye. A Phenomenology of Film Experience,
Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992.
47
Daria Berezhkova
Internet resources
Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html>.
Deshpande S, ‘Anthology Film. The Future is Now: Film Producer as Creative
Director’, Wide Screen, vol. 2, Issue 2, 2010, pp. 1-3, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://widescreenjournal.org/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/86/131>.
‘Do actions speak louder than logos?’ Global Cities Blog, 2011,
<http://www.globalcities.eu/blog/do-actions-speak-louder-than-logos>.
Heart of Moscow website, retrieved 16 April 2012, <http://heartofmoscow.ru>.
E Gerashenko, K Aminov, E Khvostik, ‘American Culture Park’ (my translation),
Kommersant, #66, 2012, retrieved 16 April 2012, <http://www.kommersant.ru/docy/1914164>.
‘Home Theatre: Sea of Desire’ (my translation), Royal cheese, 2012, retrieved 19
May 2012, <http://www.royalcheese.ru/city/94-domashnij-kinoteatr-morezhelanij.html>.
Kachkaeva, E, ‘Moscow Brand’ (my translation), Bolshoj Gorod, 2012, retrieved 20
April 2012, <http://www.bg.ru/stories/10670>.
Kinopoisk Database, Drugoe nebo, 2010, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://www.kinopoisk.ru/level/1/film/468288>.
Lake, J, ‘Red Road (2006) and Emerging Narratives of “Sub-veillance”’, Continuum,
24:2, 2004, retrieved 29 November 2011,
< http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10304310903294721>.
Lury, K, D Massey, ‘Making Connections’, Screen, no. 40(3), 1999, pp. 229-238,
retrieved 4 April 2012, <http://screen.oxford.org>.
Matveeva, A, ‘Cinema is Slowing Down’ (my translation), Gazeta.ru, 30.01.2012,
retrieved 16 April 2012,
<http://www.gazeta.ru/business/2012/01/30/3979365.shtml>.
‘Moscow 19th on list of global cities’ (my translation), The Voice of Russia Radio,
04.08.2012, retrieved 16 April 2012,
<http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_04_04/70569903/>.
Proust, M, Swann’s Way, vol. 1 of Remembrance of Things Past, transl. C K Scott
Moncrieff, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, 2010, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/p/proust/marcel/p96s/index.html>.
‘Real Summer Comedy’, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012, <http://www.rudata.ru>.
‘Russian Film in Berlin and Cannes’, 2012, retrieved 19 May 2012,
<http://lostfilm.info/filmnews/1656853>.
United Nations Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007
Revision Population Database, retrieved 26 April 2012,
<http://esa.un.org/unup/p2k0data.asp>.
48
Daria Berezhkova
Yakubovskaya, A, ‘Egor Konchalovsky on the almanac ‘Moscow, I love you’’,
2008, retrieved 19 May 2012, <http://www.rudata.ru>.
Yarosh, Y, P Belavin & S Sobolev, S‘Russian Cinema’s Distribution will be
Expanded’ (my translation), Kommersant, #43, 2012, retrieved 16 April 2012,
<http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1891176>.
Yurlova, S, ‘Mythology of Moscow’, Izvestia Uralskogo Gosudarstvennogo
Universiteta, no. 55 (15), 2008, pp. 64-70, retrieved 20 May 2012,
<http://proceedings.usu.ru/?base=mag/0055%2801_15>.
49
Daria Berezhkova
Filmography
Another Sky (Drugoe nebo). Dir. Dmitri Mamulia. Russia. 2010.
Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat (L'arrivée d'un train à La Ciotat). Dir. Lumière
brothers. France. 1896.
Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (Berlin: Die Sinfonie der Grosstadt). Dir. Walter
Ruttmann. Germany. 1927.
Beware of the Car (Beregis avtomobilia). Dir. Eldar Ryazanov. Soviet Union. 1966.
Blade Runner. Dir. Ridley Scott. USA/Hong Kong. 1982.
Body Heat. Dir. Lawrence Kasdan. USA. 1981.
Cordeliers Square, Lyons (Place des Cordeliers à Lyons). Dir. Louis Lumière.
France. 1895.
Cranes are Flying, The (Letyat zhuravli). Dir. Mikhail Kalatozov. Soviet Union.
1957.
Heart’s Boomerang (Serdca bumerang). Dir. Nikolay Khomeriki. Russia. 2011.
I am Twenty (Mne dvadcat’ let), Dir. Marlen Hutsiev. Soviet Union. 1965.
Jolly Fellows (Vesyolye Rebyata). Dir. Grigori Alexandrov. Soviet Union. 1934.
July Rain (Iyulskiy dozhd). Dir. Marlen Khutsiyev. Soviet Union. 1966.
Lovey-Dovey (Lyubov-morkov). Dir. Alexandr Strizhenov. Russia. 2007.
Lucky Trouble (Vykrutasy). Dir. Levan Gabriadze. Russia. 2011.
Man with a Movie Camera (Chelovek s kino-apparatom). Dir. Dziga Vertov. Soviet
Union. 1929.
Metropolis. Dir. Fritz Lang. Geramny. 1927.
Mon Oncle. Dir. Jacques Tati. France/Italy. 1958.
More zhelanij. Dir. Shota Gamisonia. Russia. 2010.
Moscow (Moskva). Dir. Mikhail Kaufman, Ilya Kopalin. Soviet Union. 1927.
Moscow Does not Believe in Tears (Moskva slezam ne verit). Dir. Vladimir
Menshov. Soviet Union. 1980.
Moscow, I Love You! (Moskva, ya lyublyu tebya!). Dir. Nana Dzhordzhadze, Oleg
Fomin, Artyom Mikhalkov, Georgi Natanson, Ivan Okhlobystin, Georgi
Paradzhanov, Andrei Razenkov, Vera Storozheva, Elina Suni, Alla Surikova. Russia.
2010.
Night on Earth. Dir. Jim Jarmusch. France/UK/Germany/USA/Japan. 1991.
50
Daria Berezhkova
Night Watch (Nochnoj dozor). Dir. Timur Bekmambetov. Russia. 2004.
New York, I Love You. Dir. Fatih Akin, Yvan Attal, Randall Balsmeyer, Allen
Hughes, Shunji Iwai, Wen Jiang, Shekhar Kapur, Joshua Marston, Mira Nair,
Natalie Portman, Brett Ratner. USA. 2009.
Panorama from Times Building, New York. Dir. Wallace McCutcheon. USA. 1905.
Paris, je t’aime. Dir. Olivier Assayas, Frédéric Auburtin, Emmanuel Benbihy,
Gurinder Chadha, Sylvain Chomet, Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, Isabel Coixet, Wes
Craven, Alfonso Cuarón, Gérard Depardieu, Christopher Doyle, Richard
LaGravenese, Vincenzo Natali, Alexander Payne, Bruno Podalydès, Walter Salles,
Oliver Schmitz, Nobuhiro Suwa, Daniela Thomas, Tom Tykwer, Gus Van Sant.
France/Liechtenstein/Switzerland/Germany. 2006.
Tycoon (Oligarkh). Russia/France/Germany. Dir. Pavel Lungin. Russia. 2002.
Walking the Streets of Moscow (Ya shagayu po Moskve). Dir. Georgy Daneliya.
Soviet Union. 1964.
Zazie dans le Métro. Dir. Louis Malle. France/Italy. 1960.
51
Daria Berezhkova
Image Appendix
Image 1: A Moscow souvenir from an online store Heart of Moscow
<http://heartofmoscow.ru>.
Image 2: The Bolshoi Theatre in Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929).
52
Daria Berezhkova
Image 3: The Kremlin star in Object #1 (Moscow, I Love You! Murat Ibragimbekov,
2010)
Image 4: Zoom-in of the Yuri Dolgorukij monument in Valerik (Moscow, I Love
You! Georgy Paradzhanov, 2010).
53
Daria Berezhkova
Image 5: Any-space-whatever, in Another Sky (Dmitri Mamulia, 2010).
Image 6: Office mini-golf in Lovey-Dovey (Alexandr Strizhenov, 2007).
54
Daria Berezhkova
Image 7: Getting dressed in a car, The Queen (Moscow, I Love You! Alla Surikova,
2010).
Image 8: Romantic trolleys in July Rain (Marlen Khutsiyev, 1966).
55
Daria Berezhkova
Image 9: Typical panorama view as the opening scene of Moscow Does not Believe
in Tears (Vladimir Menshov, 1980).
Image 10: Vorobyovy mountains’ panoramic vista of Moscow in More Zhelanij
(Shota Gamisonia, 2010).
56