Every so often one has the pleasure of discovering a film so unusual that it seems that nothing has influenced it in its creation of a world all its own. One such was David Lynch's "Eraserhead", another, Charles Laughton's "Night of the Hunter" and now to join the august company is Alexsei Balabanov's "Of Freaks and Men". By dressing up a most scurrilous plot in images of extraodinary elegance and beauty the director has created an astonishingly original entertainment. Turn of the century St. Petersburg is hauntingly captured in beautiful sepia visuals of waterways and bridges, classical exteriors and upper class salons. But behind this facade the very devil is at work in the form of a gang of pornographic photographers who insinuate themselves into the lives of two respectable families whom they summarily proceed to corrupt. In due course the daughter of a highly respected engineer is enjoying having her naked buttocks spanked by an old crone in front of the camera, while the blind wife of a doctor in the other household becomes infatuated with another member of the gang who is only there to satisfy his paedophiliac fascination with the adolescent boy Siamese twins she and her husband have adopted. And this only for starters! As things go from bad to worse and goings on become more depraved - although admittedly we see no more than the odd spanking - the visuals become ever more beautiful particularly when the twins travel to the snowbound east and the girl travels west to wander a townscape of blowing autumn leaves. I think Balabanov is trying to say something about the voyeuristic nature of the camera and the progress of photography from still to moving pictures. To probe for deeper meanings wound not be very fruitful from a film whose raison d'etre, I suspect, is simply to intrigue and delight.
34 Reviews
Bleak but refreshingly different and evocative
Koli6 April 2002
In an era in which the video shop shelves and TV schedules are dominated by formula-pap, it is refreshing to find a film that stimulates thought for days afterwards. The question is: what's it all about? Is the film commenting on life in pre-revolutionary Russia, on the exploitation of 'freaks', on the corrupting power of pornography, or perhaps none or all of these? I came away from it thinking that the film was primarily about the ways in which film-making can be misused; that it examined the role of those drawn into 'the pornography industry' whether exploiter, exploited, or idealistic artist more interested in technique than subject matter. In thinking about that interpretation I found myself pondering the role of Putilov, seemingly an idealist; would it not be more accurate to describe him as amoral, as the artist determined to remain aloof from the degradation and humiliation required for completion of his projects?
I think the film raises questions about the extent to which the film-maker can remain untarnished by the moral issues that he purports to examine objectively and from a detached perspective. If Putilov agrees to co-operate in the filming or photography of the naked, frightened Siamese twins or of the whipping of a young woman can he really escape responsibility for their plight? Is he really entitled to walk away with his reputation intact? The immoral Johann is easier to condemn: he is a sadist who will kill at the drop of a hat to preserve his way of life and business. A jury would take much longer to decide its verdict on Putilov.
I think the film raises questions about the extent to which the film-maker can remain untarnished by the moral issues that he purports to examine objectively and from a detached perspective. If Putilov agrees to co-operate in the filming or photography of the naked, frightened Siamese twins or of the whipping of a young woman can he really escape responsibility for their plight? Is he really entitled to walk away with his reputation intact? The immoral Johann is easier to condemn: he is a sadist who will kill at the drop of a hat to preserve his way of life and business. A jury would take much longer to decide its verdict on Putilov.
Fascinating use of colour, breathtaking cinematography
braindead16 December 1999
I've seen this brilliantly directed Russian movie at the 18th Istanbul International Film Festival and I was mesmerized by the beauty of it. It's definitely not a movie for all tastes. It's crammed with sick ideas. But the film is very rewarding, for those who are willing to watch it. The use of colour (sapia) is fascinating and the cinematography is breathtaking. The film also has a unique sense of humor, it's very absurd and sometimes really funny. I think it may gain a cult status in time. This film makes you think, that the movies from the early era could have been nastier or maybe they were not that innocent at all. And of course that the art of movie-making (and also photography for sure) is highly connected with voyeurism. Well at the end I'd like to say: If you are familiar with these themes and if you are a devoted cinema lover then stick with this one, because it is a unique masterpiece and in my personal opinion it's one of the best movies of this decade.
The medium is the message in this intriguing chronicle of the early days of Russian pornography
Jasper-187 December 1999
One of the disadvantages of being an Englishman living in Amsterdam, of course, is that the linguistic barriers impose some pretty severe limitations on ones cinematic diet. However, given that the choice between watching films like this and the likes of the 'The Phantom Menace' would have yielded the same conclusion whatever language it was to be viewed in, I am pleased to say that my embryonic graspings of the Dutch language were sufficient to cope in this particular case. Whether this can be put down to simplistic subtitling, the succinct approach to dialogue of Russian films, or director Alexei Balabanov's grasp of the fact that in the hypothetically visual culture of cinema, actions speak louder than words, is debatable. Whatever; I came, I saw, and I enjoyed.
Director Alexei Balabanov, whose 1997 debut was 'Brother' ('Brat'), has here created a fascinating tale around the subject of pornography in turn of the century St Petersberg. Johann (Sergei Makovetsky), a purveyor of salacious erotic autochromes of staged flagellation scenes, along with assistant Victor, worms his way into the lives of two noble families, drawing adopted Mongolian conjoined twins Kolja and Tolja and the delicately beautiful Lisa (Dinara Drukarova) into his enterprise as subjects for his short erotic films.
From the early blue-tinted scenes detailing the birth and background of the twins, set to a soundtrack all but silent save for the presence of hisses and scratches, to the vivid invocation of a feverish preoccupation with all things sexual welling beneath the austere trappings of the Russian bourgeoisie, Balabanov lyrically invokes the spirit of the times. 'Of Freaks and Men' is nothing if it is not beautiful and evocative, crisply photographed in monochrome by cinematographer Sergei Astakhov. There is dark quirky humour here, and a host of eccentric periphery characters, from the lustily compliant serving maid, to a blind wife, and Johann's snaggle-toothed henchman. Visually the film is consistently rich and fascinating.
The premise, of course, is guaranteed to offend the more conservative of viewers. The numerous whipping scenes as well as the portrayal of Johann's treatment of the twins are sure to prove distasteful to those approaching with a more polically correct viewpoint, though the studied art direction and period stylistic veneer distances the viewer to some extent. This, after all is a film about the origins of pornography, and it is not really pornographic in itself. It also touches on a fear of technology (in this case, the emerging medium of cinema), and how that new technology can either empower or enslave. Despite the rather flaccid denouement, and at times seeming slightly overblown in its characterisation of Johann (whose dominance is more usually manifested by means of a handgun rather than a camera), the intriguingly original premise and stunning sepia-toned cinematography should prove ample reward for the curious viewer. After all, there are not a lot of Russian films getting shown over here at the moment.
Director Alexei Balabanov, whose 1997 debut was 'Brother' ('Brat'), has here created a fascinating tale around the subject of pornography in turn of the century St Petersberg. Johann (Sergei Makovetsky), a purveyor of salacious erotic autochromes of staged flagellation scenes, along with assistant Victor, worms his way into the lives of two noble families, drawing adopted Mongolian conjoined twins Kolja and Tolja and the delicately beautiful Lisa (Dinara Drukarova) into his enterprise as subjects for his short erotic films.
From the early blue-tinted scenes detailing the birth and background of the twins, set to a soundtrack all but silent save for the presence of hisses and scratches, to the vivid invocation of a feverish preoccupation with all things sexual welling beneath the austere trappings of the Russian bourgeoisie, Balabanov lyrically invokes the spirit of the times. 'Of Freaks and Men' is nothing if it is not beautiful and evocative, crisply photographed in monochrome by cinematographer Sergei Astakhov. There is dark quirky humour here, and a host of eccentric periphery characters, from the lustily compliant serving maid, to a blind wife, and Johann's snaggle-toothed henchman. Visually the film is consistently rich and fascinating.
The premise, of course, is guaranteed to offend the more conservative of viewers. The numerous whipping scenes as well as the portrayal of Johann's treatment of the twins are sure to prove distasteful to those approaching with a more polically correct viewpoint, though the studied art direction and period stylistic veneer distances the viewer to some extent. This, after all is a film about the origins of pornography, and it is not really pornographic in itself. It also touches on a fear of technology (in this case, the emerging medium of cinema), and how that new technology can either empower or enslave. Despite the rather flaccid denouement, and at times seeming slightly overblown in its characterisation of Johann (whose dominance is more usually manifested by means of a handgun rather than a camera), the intriguingly original premise and stunning sepia-toned cinematography should prove ample reward for the curious viewer. After all, there are not a lot of Russian films getting shown over here at the moment.
Cynical, dark, beautifully shot
perica-431515 August 2018
This is one rich movie of one of the most respected Russian directors of the turn of the millennium (Cargo 200, Brother 1 and 2), in his most stylistic edition.
The movie has a Dostoevskian feel to it, and is extremely cynical. A psychopathic and art producing pimp and his menacing henchmen, his evil murderous sister, a corrupt girl and adulterous wife meeting their fate, a seemingly innocent but ultimately plagiarizing thief of a youth, a pervert maid and dirty old nanny, an alcoholic perverted kid who has a Siamese brother, perhaps one of the only three moral characters, who are all met or faced with death, all inhabit this fictional universe. Unloved unselfish husband and famous doctor, a good engineer with a weak heart and several other characters die or are offed in most leisurely and fun ways. This bleak but realistic portrayal of the human condition is a reflection of the Yeltsin perverted era in which this masterpiece was produced.
The movie is very reflective and well done. It has a well placed and impeccably paced misanthropy for which the now deceased director is famous, director who despite of his immense talent, probably rots in Hell. Not because he is necessarily evil, but because he is exactly the kind of amusing character Devil would like to have a company of. He feels quite at home there, if indeed there is such a place, observing the inhabitants of doom with the same detached amusement and artistic wit he demonstrated aptly in his cinematic gems.
The movie has a Dostoevskian feel to it, and is extremely cynical. A psychopathic and art producing pimp and his menacing henchmen, his evil murderous sister, a corrupt girl and adulterous wife meeting their fate, a seemingly innocent but ultimately plagiarizing thief of a youth, a pervert maid and dirty old nanny, an alcoholic perverted kid who has a Siamese brother, perhaps one of the only three moral characters, who are all met or faced with death, all inhabit this fictional universe. Unloved unselfish husband and famous doctor, a good engineer with a weak heart and several other characters die or are offed in most leisurely and fun ways. This bleak but realistic portrayal of the human condition is a reflection of the Yeltsin perverted era in which this masterpiece was produced.
The movie is very reflective and well done. It has a well placed and impeccably paced misanthropy for which the now deceased director is famous, director who despite of his immense talent, probably rots in Hell. Not because he is necessarily evil, but because he is exactly the kind of amusing character Devil would like to have a company of. He feels quite at home there, if indeed there is such a place, observing the inhabitants of doom with the same detached amusement and artistic wit he demonstrated aptly in his cinematic gems.
A great feel for the unruly elements of the psyche but very bleak
jaibo19 April 2000
This works on a dreamlike level rather than as a coherent story: the content is contained in the images and the relationships of the characters. Some of the events seem oddly motivated but make sense when seen as part of a tapestry. What is the tapestry depicting? The film is about the appropriation of a certain reality (which I would read as a psychological reality) by certain unruly elements in human nature. Those elements desire pleasure in pain and seek no relationships outside the exploitative. Amongst the central characters are a pair of Siamese twins but the filmmakers have gone out of their way to show that all of the characters are mental and emotional 'freaks'. What is interesting is that none of the characters who are exploited are really victims - they contain the seeds of their involvement in the central pornographic film-making within them from the first. This is even true of the Siamese, one of whom is innately drawn towards debauchery. The film is excellent at giving us the feel of a situation in which anarchic elements of the psyche rule. It is a bleak exercise - the characters who seem to escape to the West cannot escape their perverse desires (which bring them no happiness) and the idealist filmmaker portrayed is finally a sell-out. In that sense I found the film too bleak - there has to be some hope in the world! Maybe the filmmaker is attacking what has gone on in Russia since the fall of Communism: with the country run by gangsters and the people willingly being exploited. This film feels amazing but leaves a bitter taste in the mouth.
A film dreams are made on. (possible spoiler in last paragraph)
alice liddell17 July 2000
Warning: Spoilers
The more great cinematic masterpieces one sees from the past, the more impatient one becomes with the unimaginative compromises of the present. And so one might start dreaming of the perfect film one would like to see made today, with all the invention and flourish once available, but would not now be dared. In my case, it would be a mixture of silent movie, 50s melodrama, and deadpan Bunuellian surrealism. Astonishingly, this is precisely what OF FREAKS AND MEN offers. Ungrateful wretch that I am, I feel a little dissatisfied because it conforms so precisely to my high expectations, but then I remember what I could have been watching in my local multiplex instead, and rejoice.
Like TOM JONES, FREAKS' prologue is filmed in the style of a silent (without even music), as it gives what seems to be a back story, but is just as enigmatic as what follows. But although sound eventually returns, and its devices are crucial to the film's effect, the film, beautifully, retains the same aspects of pre-talkie cinema - the gorgeous sepia monochrome, with blanched actors' faces giving the impression that we are watching a group of dummies partaking in a wry Grand Guignol; the use of intertitles; the use of silent projection speeds, which heightens the actors' movements, making them more abrupt, more singularly removed from reality. The style, as in the silents, is largely static too, so that meaning resides in the remarkably rich compositions and editing, rather than fluidity of camera movements.
This 'staticness' (sic) is thoroughly appropriate to a film set largely indoors, featuring characters who are at first metaphorically and later literally imprisoned. The melodramatic use of framing, as developed by Ophuls, Sirk, Powell, Minnelli and Ray, is utilised here to make tangible this oppressive interiority, so that the Victorian bric-a-brac seems to overwhelm these characters, as they are framed, trapped, in doorways, mirrors, etc. This use of mirrors is audacious and playful, visualising the characters' fragmentation (between duty and desire; public and private; mind and body; bourgeois propriety and underground vice etc. - it is significant that these trapped figures eagerly absorb the products of photography, while the photographers themselves have perfect freedom of movement, can navigate all the realms of the city, including land and sea. It is when the pictures begin to move (cinema), and the photographers limit themselves to the bourgeois apartment, that entropy sets in); but also suggesting a fantastical, magical realm, one of transformation, abrupt and unexpected turns of events and intrusions.
This gives the film its dreamlike momentum, in which these stuffed mannequins act, not to realistic motivation, but to the promptings of desire, a dream logic; or are acted upon as such. The sieving of emotion, the bizarre, unexpected plot twists, and character actions, the turning of events that do not necessarily follow logically, all create this oneiric state, as does the setting, a huge wintry Russian city that seems to have no-one in it besides the main characters, a kind of Eastern ghost town.
The film's movement is circular and repetitive, beginning and ending with a man entering and leaving the city. Scenes are repeated. The film is very reminiscent of contemporary literature, the restrained Gothic of Robert Walser for example - the deadpan horror of the subject matter, the repeated motif of the labyrinth, all speak of an indefinable anguish.
FREAKS' content, a tale of power-shifts in terms of sexualised exploitation; of the bourgeois realm of power and influence being taken over by servants, murderers, sadists and pornographers; of the ruthless degradation of innocence and difference; of the betrayal of cinema, then in its infancy, and full of promise, as an instrument of exploitation, all seem to point to the upcoming Revolution and violent change of social order, which would use cinema as its key disseminator of the 'truth', but the actions of all the characters seem so unwilled and arbitrary, and the horrors are so jaw-droppingly funny as well as ghastly, that such a boring analogy would be diminishing, and deny the 'victims'' own complicit desire.
In this film of walls and ceilings, the scenes that seared my brain are those of a somnolent boat gliding on the river, or the sublime, suicidial ice surf at the close, or the enchanted, Cocteau-like courting of Anna and Putilov through the roof-tops of St. Petersburg, scenes dazzlingly saturated in milky magic.
Like TOM JONES, FREAKS' prologue is filmed in the style of a silent (without even music), as it gives what seems to be a back story, but is just as enigmatic as what follows. But although sound eventually returns, and its devices are crucial to the film's effect, the film, beautifully, retains the same aspects of pre-talkie cinema - the gorgeous sepia monochrome, with blanched actors' faces giving the impression that we are watching a group of dummies partaking in a wry Grand Guignol; the use of intertitles; the use of silent projection speeds, which heightens the actors' movements, making them more abrupt, more singularly removed from reality. The style, as in the silents, is largely static too, so that meaning resides in the remarkably rich compositions and editing, rather than fluidity of camera movements.
This 'staticness' (sic) is thoroughly appropriate to a film set largely indoors, featuring characters who are at first metaphorically and later literally imprisoned. The melodramatic use of framing, as developed by Ophuls, Sirk, Powell, Minnelli and Ray, is utilised here to make tangible this oppressive interiority, so that the Victorian bric-a-brac seems to overwhelm these characters, as they are framed, trapped, in doorways, mirrors, etc. This use of mirrors is audacious and playful, visualising the characters' fragmentation (between duty and desire; public and private; mind and body; bourgeois propriety and underground vice etc. - it is significant that these trapped figures eagerly absorb the products of photography, while the photographers themselves have perfect freedom of movement, can navigate all the realms of the city, including land and sea. It is when the pictures begin to move (cinema), and the photographers limit themselves to the bourgeois apartment, that entropy sets in); but also suggesting a fantastical, magical realm, one of transformation, abrupt and unexpected turns of events and intrusions.
This gives the film its dreamlike momentum, in which these stuffed mannequins act, not to realistic motivation, but to the promptings of desire, a dream logic; or are acted upon as such. The sieving of emotion, the bizarre, unexpected plot twists, and character actions, the turning of events that do not necessarily follow logically, all create this oneiric state, as does the setting, a huge wintry Russian city that seems to have no-one in it besides the main characters, a kind of Eastern ghost town.
The film's movement is circular and repetitive, beginning and ending with a man entering and leaving the city. Scenes are repeated. The film is very reminiscent of contemporary literature, the restrained Gothic of Robert Walser for example - the deadpan horror of the subject matter, the repeated motif of the labyrinth, all speak of an indefinable anguish.
FREAKS' content, a tale of power-shifts in terms of sexualised exploitation; of the bourgeois realm of power and influence being taken over by servants, murderers, sadists and pornographers; of the ruthless degradation of innocence and difference; of the betrayal of cinema, then in its infancy, and full of promise, as an instrument of exploitation, all seem to point to the upcoming Revolution and violent change of social order, which would use cinema as its key disseminator of the 'truth', but the actions of all the characters seem so unwilled and arbitrary, and the horrors are so jaw-droppingly funny as well as ghastly, that such a boring analogy would be diminishing, and deny the 'victims'' own complicit desire.
In this film of walls and ceilings, the scenes that seared my brain are those of a somnolent boat gliding on the river, or the sublime, suicidial ice surf at the close, or the enchanted, Cocteau-like courting of Anna and Putilov through the roof-tops of St. Petersburg, scenes dazzlingly saturated in milky magic.
Of freaks and film
paul2001sw-19 August 2003
Very odd Russian film, with a modern, almost postmodern theme (concerning Siamese twins and pornography), but set in the early years of the twentieth century and shot in a faux-naive style that one might almost believe was that of films from this period, if one was not aware of what they were really like. There's much to enjoy: the beautiful sepia photography (of the Russian winter, and of eyeballs); great facial acting; the downright oddness of plot, scene composition characterisation and movement; the sudden discontinuities, and the semi-random, peculiarly worded captions. Hardly a movie in the traditional sense, but still a work of art.
Freud goes East
jackush31 January 2005
This movie is my first encounter with Balabanov's cinema,and I was really shocked,not so by the movie in itself,but by its rhetoric which is the most opposite one might imagine or expect from a Russian movie. I am deeply in doubt that this movie speaks about the pre-revolutionary pornographic film industry;it's a bleak,tragic,morbid,kinky gaze on the Russian bourgeoisie society in the beginning of the 20th century.Petersburg here has a lot from Schnitzler's or Freud's Vienna-it's a decomposed,moral corrupted and bored society.The way Balabanov films Petersburg is a reflection of this feelings;it remembered me "Death in Venice" by Visconti-the unforgettable travel on Neva,and generally the outdoor scenes seem in the way that another Russian master,Sokurov filmed,in "Father and Son" the city. It's clear that this atmosphere is the same one that Freud encountered in Vienna,the same pathological sexual explorations,which mirror a convulsion and basically corrupted personality.Everything is,in a way,out of joint in the characters, Johann and Vladimir that are a very bekettian couple-remember Colin and Vladimir from "waiting for Godot",or Clov an Hamm from Endgame-they lack logic,and even psychology;Putilov,and his Bakunin-friendly look is a clumsy and impotent man,to say nothing about women,very Russian in their next to pleasure victim role.
This is an uneasy,difficult,but also rewarding movie.If you want to see pornographic stuff,BDSM,or spanking,this is not your movie,sorry.
This is an uneasy,difficult,but also rewarding movie.If you want to see pornographic stuff,BDSM,or spanking,this is not your movie,sorry.
Of Freaks and Men: A Modern Capitalistic Reflection
kril1028 April 2013
Alexei's Balabanov's Of Freaks of Men was a quite strange yet interesting viewing experience. The film mechanics and overall setting seemed to contradict the content that was being portrayed, perhaps to construct a novel "Balabanov" perspective. For instance, the use of pre- Revolutionary Tsarist Russia as a setting, complete with bourgeois colonnade backdrops and 19th century luxuries and proprieties, to display an underground pornography business that slowly takes over the lives of the main characters was quite an unexpected juxtaposition. The use of "brown-screen" (black and white?), intertitles, and classical music further strengthened this divide, almost making it seem like the organized crime of Balabanov's Brother 2 existed and was captured on film in the early days of cinema!
There are several ways one can interpret this artistic leap. One interesting perspective is to view the decline of the doctor's and engineer's Bourgeois families at the hands of the exploiting Johann as yet another example of the failure of Capitalism in the eyes of a Communist. The fathers of the two families made their money in a hog- eat-hog Capitalistic world, and their children (Tolya/Kolya and Liza respectively) ended up being used by a bigger Capitalist hog, Johann the pornographer. An alternative view would be a demonstration of how post- Soviet Russian organized crime was not an artifact of that particular era, and that it existed underground since before even Communism. That would have turned the movie into a nationalistic excuse for the deterioration that occurred in Russia after Gorbachev.
Although other views can be constructed, I feel like this movie was nevertheless a very successful and creative experiment on Balabanov's part. He has captured the new in the style of the very old to create a unique movie.
There are several ways one can interpret this artistic leap. One interesting perspective is to view the decline of the doctor's and engineer's Bourgeois families at the hands of the exploiting Johann as yet another example of the failure of Capitalism in the eyes of a Communist. The fathers of the two families made their money in a hog- eat-hog Capitalistic world, and their children (Tolya/Kolya and Liza respectively) ended up being used by a bigger Capitalist hog, Johann the pornographer. An alternative view would be a demonstration of how post- Soviet Russian organized crime was not an artifact of that particular era, and that it existed underground since before even Communism. That would have turned the movie into a nationalistic excuse for the deterioration that occurred in Russia after Gorbachev.
Although other views can be constructed, I feel like this movie was nevertheless a very successful and creative experiment on Balabanov's part. He has captured the new in the style of the very old to create a unique movie.
When self confidence morphs into self indulgence
Tgrain19 June 2017
This film was made in between the two Brother films, and Balabanov cited it as one of his personal favorites, together with Morphine and Cargo 200.
Unquestionably the film features a talented cast, including veteran Viktor Sukhorukov and would be Brother 2 stars Sergei Makovetskiy and Darya Yurgens (Lesnikova). Unfortunately, while the plot is comprehensible, lovers of traditional narrative will find holes here and there that will annoy. If Balabanov wanted to play it loose, he did not go far enough. As a result, we're in the middle of a traditional story and something bordering on the 'mood and symbolism' zone.
The tone of the story is dark, as is traditional for Balabanov, but unlike some of his other films it doesn't really give you anything to take home that is redeeming - it leaves the viewer with a sense of depression. Even in the darker and more gruesome Cargo 200 this is not exactly the case.
The only reason I give this five stars and not less is that on top of the talented cast Balabanov was blessed to work with, the cinematography and art direction are pretty solid, as is the music. But that alone cannot save a film with a script that is good on characters but weak on the genuineness and commitment of plot.
Unquestionably the film features a talented cast, including veteran Viktor Sukhorukov and would be Brother 2 stars Sergei Makovetskiy and Darya Yurgens (Lesnikova). Unfortunately, while the plot is comprehensible, lovers of traditional narrative will find holes here and there that will annoy. If Balabanov wanted to play it loose, he did not go far enough. As a result, we're in the middle of a traditional story and something bordering on the 'mood and symbolism' zone.
The tone of the story is dark, as is traditional for Balabanov, but unlike some of his other films it doesn't really give you anything to take home that is redeeming - it leaves the viewer with a sense of depression. Even in the darker and more gruesome Cargo 200 this is not exactly the case.
The only reason I give this five stars and not less is that on top of the talented cast Balabanov was blessed to work with, the cinematography and art direction are pretty solid, as is the music. But that alone cannot save a film with a script that is good on characters but weak on the genuineness and commitment of plot.
Geometry of desire
vitaky20019 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Sade. Geometry was the pervert marquis's true passion and so it is for the director of this film. In the pornographic writings of the famous prisoner of Bastille, desire is abstracted into highly complex angular figures composed of pleasure and pain-seeking bodies. Likewise, Balabanov loathes primitive melodramatic triangles and presents the viewer with a decagon. The result is an aesthetic study of that particular blend of suffering and pleasure, of exhibitionism and voyeurism, of evil and good
of freaks and men, that no number of spoilers in this review can compromise the pleasure of watching.
The film starts with a triptych as the viewers are presented with Yohan (a clandestine pornographer in early 20th century St. Petersburg), a little girl Liza who will grow up into his Justine and a pair of Siamese twins adopted by the unhappily married doctor Stasov (they will become pornographers' prey too). Nevertheless, the key to Balabanov's contemplative pleasure is symmetry. His characters form symbolic (and real) pairs that interact with one another. In this symmetrical structure there is hardly a development that does not involve or is not brought about by any given couple of personages.
Engineer Radlov and Doctor Stasov are friends and heads of the two households who will see the end of their happiness and meet their own ends as a result of encounter with the corrupting world of pornography. Both are well-meaning naives: the former dies from heart attack after learning that his shy daughter Liza exposes herself in masochist compositions before camera. The latter is killed never realizing that his unloving wife with the misty unseeing eyes does the same.
The chambermaids of the two houses, Grunya and Daria, serve as a conduit of corruptive influence. The latter is an eager model of the pornographers that seduces the Siamese twins. The latter is a secret mistress of engineer Radlov to whom he bequeaths his property and custody of Liza not knowing that Grunya is in fact Johan's sister.
Yohan has an alter ego in the person of his assistant, an aspiring pornographer Victor Ivanovich. Yohan is a foreigner who features thick hair, an unsmiling countenance and cold autistic eyes warmed only by the masochist spectacle. Victor Ivanovich could not be more Russian in both name and appearance, is absolutely bold and always eerily cheerful. Whereas the object of Yohan's voyeuristic passion is Liza, Victor Ivanovich dreams of the Siamese.
The inseparable brothers are in a way the key element of the entire composition. Most unmistakably twins of all the paired characters, Kolia and Tolia embody the lighter and the darker side of human nature. The latter succumbs to the lure of the chambermaid's bare breast, while the latter indignantly rejects it. Forced to a glass of vodka before the first filming, Tolia eagerly takes to drinking, whereas Kolia remains virtuously sober to the very end. This makes the twins emblematic of that peculiar blend of humanity and freakishness - displayed by nearly each character and face in the film – that provides Balabanov's philosophical bottom-line.
Yohan's old and half-witted nanny who delivers punishment in the masochist mis-en-scenes and the young director of photography Putilov constitute the final pair. They stand at the opposite ends of the camera and facilitate the spectacle in a purely technical way. The former is Liza's whip wielding nemesis, who seems to be unaware of her role; the latter is her self-proclaimed saviour, who defaults on his promise. Having failed to extricate Liza from the squalid net of which he is himself an element, Putilov disappears and immediately thereafter Johan's nanny dies.
The disappearance of this pair announces the implosion of the entire decagon. Yohan collapses in an epileptic fit (a kind of temporary death), whereas Victor Ivanovich meets his real death at the hands of Kolia, who fires a gun picked from Yohan's pocket in an attempt to save Liza, whom he desperately loves. Released from the grip of the geometry of desire, Liza parts with Kolia (and, of course, Tolia). She takes the train to the West (something that she contemplated since the beginning of the film), while they board and eastbound ship in order to realize their intent to find their father.
The train and the ship, or rather the engine and the boat, in fact constitute an additional (non-human) symbolic pair. Periodic appearances of engine on the screen (engineer Radlov's house stands near a railway) announce new episodes in Liza's pornographic career. A steam boat takes Yohan and Viktor Ivanovich to each new accomplishment in their sordid activity. Both the engine and the steamboat represent the antagonistic unity of fire and water, water and metal, metal and fire To be sure, humanity is always chased by its freakish shadow which is suggested by the film's soundtrack. Never reaching the South-East Asia, the Siamese end up on a concert tour around Russia performing the same song about train that they rehearsed before their soon-to-be-corrupted adoptive mother. Tolia drinks himself to death and is bemoaned by Kolia, who is sure to follow his brother in a short time.
In an unidentified "western" town to which the engine takes her, Liza hears the same melody that accompanies the opening scene of the film - the countess's aria from Gretry's Richard the Lion Heart. Popularized in Russia by Tchaikovsky, who included it into his Queen of Spades, the aria expresses the irresistibility of desire. Accordingly, Liza heads for the local red light district where she is seduced by a leather-clad male prostitute with a whip in his hand. Back in St. Petersburg, Yohan steps on the melting ice of the Neva river, after watching for the very last time the film with his nanny whipping Liza's bottom. Masoch
The film starts with a triptych as the viewers are presented with Yohan (a clandestine pornographer in early 20th century St. Petersburg), a little girl Liza who will grow up into his Justine and a pair of Siamese twins adopted by the unhappily married doctor Stasov (they will become pornographers' prey too). Nevertheless, the key to Balabanov's contemplative pleasure is symmetry. His characters form symbolic (and real) pairs that interact with one another. In this symmetrical structure there is hardly a development that does not involve or is not brought about by any given couple of personages.
Engineer Radlov and Doctor Stasov are friends and heads of the two households who will see the end of their happiness and meet their own ends as a result of encounter with the corrupting world of pornography. Both are well-meaning naives: the former dies from heart attack after learning that his shy daughter Liza exposes herself in masochist compositions before camera. The latter is killed never realizing that his unloving wife with the misty unseeing eyes does the same.
The chambermaids of the two houses, Grunya and Daria, serve as a conduit of corruptive influence. The latter is an eager model of the pornographers that seduces the Siamese twins. The latter is a secret mistress of engineer Radlov to whom he bequeaths his property and custody of Liza not knowing that Grunya is in fact Johan's sister.
Yohan has an alter ego in the person of his assistant, an aspiring pornographer Victor Ivanovich. Yohan is a foreigner who features thick hair, an unsmiling countenance and cold autistic eyes warmed only by the masochist spectacle. Victor Ivanovich could not be more Russian in both name and appearance, is absolutely bold and always eerily cheerful. Whereas the object of Yohan's voyeuristic passion is Liza, Victor Ivanovich dreams of the Siamese.
The inseparable brothers are in a way the key element of the entire composition. Most unmistakably twins of all the paired characters, Kolia and Tolia embody the lighter and the darker side of human nature. The latter succumbs to the lure of the chambermaid's bare breast, while the latter indignantly rejects it. Forced to a glass of vodka before the first filming, Tolia eagerly takes to drinking, whereas Kolia remains virtuously sober to the very end. This makes the twins emblematic of that peculiar blend of humanity and freakishness - displayed by nearly each character and face in the film – that provides Balabanov's philosophical bottom-line.
Yohan's old and half-witted nanny who delivers punishment in the masochist mis-en-scenes and the young director of photography Putilov constitute the final pair. They stand at the opposite ends of the camera and facilitate the spectacle in a purely technical way. The former is Liza's whip wielding nemesis, who seems to be unaware of her role; the latter is her self-proclaimed saviour, who defaults on his promise. Having failed to extricate Liza from the squalid net of which he is himself an element, Putilov disappears and immediately thereafter Johan's nanny dies.
The disappearance of this pair announces the implosion of the entire decagon. Yohan collapses in an epileptic fit (a kind of temporary death), whereas Victor Ivanovich meets his real death at the hands of Kolia, who fires a gun picked from Yohan's pocket in an attempt to save Liza, whom he desperately loves. Released from the grip of the geometry of desire, Liza parts with Kolia (and, of course, Tolia). She takes the train to the West (something that she contemplated since the beginning of the film), while they board and eastbound ship in order to realize their intent to find their father.
The train and the ship, or rather the engine and the boat, in fact constitute an additional (non-human) symbolic pair. Periodic appearances of engine on the screen (engineer Radlov's house stands near a railway) announce new episodes in Liza's pornographic career. A steam boat takes Yohan and Viktor Ivanovich to each new accomplishment in their sordid activity. Both the engine and the steamboat represent the antagonistic unity of fire and water, water and metal, metal and fire To be sure, humanity is always chased by its freakish shadow which is suggested by the film's soundtrack. Never reaching the South-East Asia, the Siamese end up on a concert tour around Russia performing the same song about train that they rehearsed before their soon-to-be-corrupted adoptive mother. Tolia drinks himself to death and is bemoaned by Kolia, who is sure to follow his brother in a short time.
In an unidentified "western" town to which the engine takes her, Liza hears the same melody that accompanies the opening scene of the film - the countess's aria from Gretry's Richard the Lion Heart. Popularized in Russia by Tchaikovsky, who included it into his Queen of Spades, the aria expresses the irresistibility of desire. Accordingly, Liza heads for the local red light district where she is seduced by a leather-clad male prostitute with a whip in his hand. Back in St. Petersburg, Yohan steps on the melting ice of the Neva river, after watching for the very last time the film with his nanny whipping Liza's bottom. Masoch
Picturesque little gem of a movie
stian-1130 April 2003
The story is a bit surreal, and may be a bit difficult to get really engaged in - though all the actors do a great job. But the truly magnificent cinematography by Sergei Astakhov is what makes this movie a little gem. It's like watching a moving painting. It's simply marvelous!
A Retroactive Exposé
joemargolies26 April 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Of Freaks and Men is a bizarre but nonetheless fascinating period film set in turn-of-the- century Saint Petersburg. The most immediately noticeable quality of the film is its unique style. Set almost entirely in sepia tone, the film includes dialogue and a full soundtrack wrapped around silent-era title cards. Freaks does not merely comply with the dress and verbiage of late Tsarist Russia–it truly feels old.
The story itself, however, is certainly not the stuff of early Russian film. The morbid tale of Johann, the impossibly cold, seemingly emotionless, and sometimes murderous pornography kingpin, breaking apart and exploiting two families for the production of smutty photographs and videos, is far more representative of contemporary themes in Russian film of the late 1990s. It portrays an outdated "dark reality" as if the cinema of the time had been willing to do, with a morbid twist. Johann's unflinching homicides as a matter of momentary convenience, an old "nanny" beating nude women with a switch, and a maid exposing herself to her Siamese-twin charges behind her employer's back all contribute to the films taboo, yet darkly humorous air.
The humor is not so easily found in the plight of Johann's subjects, who through a series of legal and illicit dealings have been left at his mercy. The innocent young Leeza, so excited to receive new music records at the beginning of the film, is reduced to posing naked for sadist pornography. The talented Siamese twin brothers, nurtured by an enlightened and loving father, perform for crowded theaters as "freaks." None, however, can escape Johann, a state of imprisonment that is reflected in Of Freaks and Men's cinematic style. The dull sepia tone traps the story in shades of brown, a muddy state that traps the palette between the bright hues of color and the crispness of black-and-white. The settings are also largely indoors, and the cautious opening and closing of doors is the focus of several shots, implying that nothing inside is supposed to escape. The film even feels imprisoned in time, as events like Johann's calling for "Nanna" and the arrival and departure of the train that is perpetually refueling outside Leeza's window repeat themselves prominently and seemingly without end.
Unlike many films of the Soviet era, it is difficult to interpret Of Freaks and Men. It is not a story of hope, but its surprisingly light atmosphere and ending render it not quite one of despair either. Nor does it make an obvious judgment on society in pre-Revolutionary Russia. The twisted money-grabbing tendencies of Johann may well be a finger pointed at Russia's new upper class, whose wealth is as dirty as that earned from exploitation and smut. This is not a film for all tastes, but its highly creative style and cinematography, and unique subject matter make it extremely interesting, even for the faint of heart.
The story itself, however, is certainly not the stuff of early Russian film. The morbid tale of Johann, the impossibly cold, seemingly emotionless, and sometimes murderous pornography kingpin, breaking apart and exploiting two families for the production of smutty photographs and videos, is far more representative of contemporary themes in Russian film of the late 1990s. It portrays an outdated "dark reality" as if the cinema of the time had been willing to do, with a morbid twist. Johann's unflinching homicides as a matter of momentary convenience, an old "nanny" beating nude women with a switch, and a maid exposing herself to her Siamese-twin charges behind her employer's back all contribute to the films taboo, yet darkly humorous air.
The humor is not so easily found in the plight of Johann's subjects, who through a series of legal and illicit dealings have been left at his mercy. The innocent young Leeza, so excited to receive new music records at the beginning of the film, is reduced to posing naked for sadist pornography. The talented Siamese twin brothers, nurtured by an enlightened and loving father, perform for crowded theaters as "freaks." None, however, can escape Johann, a state of imprisonment that is reflected in Of Freaks and Men's cinematic style. The dull sepia tone traps the story in shades of brown, a muddy state that traps the palette between the bright hues of color and the crispness of black-and-white. The settings are also largely indoors, and the cautious opening and closing of doors is the focus of several shots, implying that nothing inside is supposed to escape. The film even feels imprisoned in time, as events like Johann's calling for "Nanna" and the arrival and departure of the train that is perpetually refueling outside Leeza's window repeat themselves prominently and seemingly without end.
Unlike many films of the Soviet era, it is difficult to interpret Of Freaks and Men. It is not a story of hope, but its surprisingly light atmosphere and ending render it not quite one of despair either. Nor does it make an obvious judgment on society in pre-Revolutionary Russia. The twisted money-grabbing tendencies of Johann may well be a finger pointed at Russia's new upper class, whose wealth is as dirty as that earned from exploitation and smut. This is not a film for all tastes, but its highly creative style and cinematography, and unique subject matter make it extremely interesting, even for the faint of heart.
A riveting look at the earliest days of underground film making
daneldorado10 December 2004
"Pro urodov i lyudej" (Aleksei Balabanov, 1998) is a dark, quixotic look at the earliest days of underground film making in Russia. One of its most interesting features is that the entire film is shot in sepia tone rather than full color, no doubt to emphasize the dreariness of its subject. There are a few outdoor scenes that show us a blue sky, but aside from that the entire film is rendered in that muted sepia color.
The sad-faced, willowy Dinara Drukarova plays Lisa, a young woman who is imprisoned in her own family home and forced to pose nude for the camera, being whipped on screen for the pleasure of a few depraved male customers. After several months of captivity, Lisa escapes and heads for the big city to make a new life for herself... but discovers that the degrading scenes she has been posing for have become a fixation for her.
The title translates into English as "Of Freaks and Men."The "freaks" part comes in when we are introduced to young Siamese twins, joined at the waist.
But as the film progresses, we perceive that the twins are the least "freaky" characters in the film.
Though the scenario is admittedly somber, there is a richness of tone and a strong storyline driving the film forward. We want to know what ultimately happens to the heroine, Lisa, and to the young conjoined twins. "Of Freaks and Men" is justly celebrated for these compelling virtues.
The sad-faced, willowy Dinara Drukarova plays Lisa, a young woman who is imprisoned in her own family home and forced to pose nude for the camera, being whipped on screen for the pleasure of a few depraved male customers. After several months of captivity, Lisa escapes and heads for the big city to make a new life for herself... but discovers that the degrading scenes she has been posing for have become a fixation for her.
The title translates into English as "Of Freaks and Men."The "freaks" part comes in when we are introduced to young Siamese twins, joined at the waist.
But as the film progresses, we perceive that the twins are the least "freaky" characters in the film.
Though the scenario is admittedly somber, there is a richness of tone and a strong storyline driving the film forward. We want to know what ultimately happens to the heroine, Lisa, and to the young conjoined twins. "Of Freaks and Men" is justly celebrated for these compelling virtues.
Not a drama
Leod12 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
If you think "A drama from Russia", you'll be wrong. This is a very strange satyre of old Russian literacy and melodrama, told with a wit humour and great originality. Just see: there is a blind woman who falls in love at first sight ("Victor Ivanovich!"), a villain who claims for his nurse, a couple of siamese twins (and one of them couches with the girlfriend of the other...and the other don't have a clue!) and much, much more. Everything is filmed as a mute drama, but in fact it's a very intelligent parody. Just try it. It's an excellent film and contains a lot of comments about politics, cinema, literacy and a very good comic approach at the Dostoïevskian tradition in writing. The use of intertitles and black and white photo it's perfect. And in the second half, there is a lot of good laughs.
A freaky, if somewhat repetitive experience
LE02030 September 2002
Of freaks and men is definitely an interesting film. However, it is predictable and repetitive. I guess, the only really interesting thing about it is cinematography. Repetitiveness, meanwhile, shouldn't surprise anyone familiar with the works of Balabanov, undoubtedly the most repetitive director of today.
The freaks overcome the men
blinderben8 June 2000
One of these films probably best enjoyed as a solitary pleasure, seeing that it is so far removed from mainstream cinema. And pleasure is the word.... from the grainy yet warm black and white silent cinematography to the relentless Johann's efforts to infiltrate and degrade two middle-class St Petersburg families into his porn filmaking business. The siamese twins represent a sort of duality - there is the 'pure' one who detests alcohol and abhors the sordidness he has been dragged into and there is the 'corrupted' one who takes to the wine that Johann offers him with relish and seduces the middle-class girl. After Johann dies and his network dissolves, no one can find happiness. The girl goes west and the twins go east - both are isolated and excluded. It is interesting to see how early 20th century Russia took and adapted the trappings of European Victorian social mores.
All characters, including women, are freaks (mental or physical) here
JuguAbraham27 August 2021
A very odd and freaky film with freaky (not just physical freakiness but mental freakiness as well.. ) characters, yet unforgettable for its images. What are they? St Petersburg/Leningrad shots without a soul in sight except for the film's characters. The closing shot of Johann stepping on a sheet of ice as it carries him away to possibly drown as the ice is melting downstream. The director's interest in the evolution of cinematography from still photography (embodied in the odd character Putilov). The images of steam engines that constantly appear outside Lisa's apartment and eventually carries her away (not in a carriage but in the single engine itself). And the evil, toothy smile of Viktor Ivanovich. There is even a tram that works on roads with a steam engine (is that a historical fact or Balabanov's imagination at work?) And the entire film is shot in sepia and black. My first Balabanov film. The political commentary is well-couched in deceptive visual metaphors.
One of Balbanov's most stylish films
snewhous31 March 2009
I saw this film last night, and I must say it completely captivated me. Two bizarre men, Johan and Ivan, who photograph women being whipped, infiltrate their way into two upper-class families.
The photography is fantastic and the sepia tones are captivating. St. Petersburg looks like it has come alive from circa 1910, as do all of the shots of buildings and towns. Parts of the film are shot in "silent film" style, and I wouldn't have minded if it was silent -- visually, it's stunning and completely worth your hour and a half of time just as a silent film. In addition, the acting is great (as someone else said, great facial acting: the camera often lingers on a character's face for a lengthy shot). Each actor seems perfect in their unique role. I don't want to give anything away, but these actors will surprise you with their characters. And of course, the acting hangs on the writing, which is brilliant. The dialogue is incredibly sparse and minimal and yet moves the story along rather quickly. I couldn't ask for more. As for the spanking, there is a lot of it in this movie. The scenes are somewhat erotic, more often they're shocking and funny. if this would disturb you, stay away from this film. If you have a good sense of humor or just enjoy it, then feel free. Lastly, Balbanov is a great director (if you have not seen Grus-200, do so as soon as you can!) and a gifted writer. His stories of Russian life ring with a quality of realism...some tend to see an allegory for soviet life in his work. Perhaps that's true for this film as well...
The photography is fantastic and the sepia tones are captivating. St. Petersburg looks like it has come alive from circa 1910, as do all of the shots of buildings and towns. Parts of the film are shot in "silent film" style, and I wouldn't have minded if it was silent -- visually, it's stunning and completely worth your hour and a half of time just as a silent film. In addition, the acting is great (as someone else said, great facial acting: the camera often lingers on a character's face for a lengthy shot). Each actor seems perfect in their unique role. I don't want to give anything away, but these actors will surprise you with their characters. And of course, the acting hangs on the writing, which is brilliant. The dialogue is incredibly sparse and minimal and yet moves the story along rather quickly. I couldn't ask for more. As for the spanking, there is a lot of it in this movie. The scenes are somewhat erotic, more often they're shocking and funny. if this would disturb you, stay away from this film. If you have a good sense of humor or just enjoy it, then feel free. Lastly, Balbanov is a great director (if you have not seen Grus-200, do so as soon as you can!) and a gifted writer. His stories of Russian life ring with a quality of realism...some tend to see an allegory for soviet life in his work. Perhaps that's true for this film as well...
Of freaks and men
maria_isabee21 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Of Freaks and Men directed by Alexei Balabanov is a Russian 1998 film. The film in the beginning and near the end is initially black and white, but the majority of it is entirely sepia tone. It utilizes text to provide the audience background information that isn't explicitly shown. The film is so original and playful but border line overly crude which makes the film all the more disturbing. The film is set during the start of the 20th century in St. Petersburg centered around a widowed engineer named Radlov who lives with his daughter Liza and maid Grunia whose brother happens to be a pornographer name Johan. The blind woman Ekaterina and her adopted Siamese twins Kolya and Tolya also play a major role in the film, as their maid is a customer of Johan's pornography. Of Freaks and Men basically reveals that everyone is a "freak" not a single character is what you would call "innocent." The maid of the Siamese twins showing the children the pornography and have one of them touch her breast. The widowers daughter who isn't as innocently as he believes, he literally gets a heart attack when discovering the truth. The Siamese twins don't fall behind with one of them becoming an alcoholic and the other exposing his sexual desires to Liza. The connection between these two families is Johan being that the families are destroyed with his evil. You could possibly argue that the characters in this film were originally weak having already bizarre passions, which I would absolutely agree with.
Shockingly Disgusting
topsail331 September 2003
While I agree with the previous post that the cinematography is good, I totally disagree with the rest: This is nothing more than a porno movie disguised as an artsy film. Showing little boys naked is not art and amounts to child porn. Steer clear of this dud. Stupid is what this film is.
The picture show
Cinemaquebecois20 October 1998
At the end of the last century, a small invention changed the world forever. This very fragile engine called the cinematographe became the third eye of the human. In the wonderful "Of freaks and men", we see the new born technology influence on the bad minds of the aristocrat part of Russia. With everlasting images and with a very strong ensemble, this movie stay in your mind well after the screening. The Siamese brothers, the bad bold man and all the other characters bring you memories from your child imagination. And shot in black and white, it's just like waking up from a nice dream on a sunny Sunday morning.
Interesting film
rebe_afaro21 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Set in the early twentieth century Of Freaks and Men makes an indisputable impact with its seemingly controversial intro including pornographic pictures. Following the impact that pornographers, Johan and Victor Ivanovich have on two family's the film raises awareness of the dark industry early in Russia's history. The themes that are explored include sexuality, psychological issues and the decline of lifestyle which may be seen as an allegory to Russia at at the time. These topics are not taboo for popular director Alexei Balabanovs who delves into a myriad of dark subject matters. The film is not made for everyone's taste and it does include sensitive scenes that may be alarming to some. Despite this the film is entertaining and manages to make this satire into something thought provoking and even humorous at times. There is a large amount of irony which goes into the development of the characters such as the Siamese twins and the blind mother Ekaterina. The twins are held as juxtapositions of each other and differ mainly in their actions and reactions with one of them being more corrupt while the other remains untainted for the most part until the very end despite having to experience all of his brother's courses. Liza the main target of the other family is of doubtful virtue to begin with and becomes even more corrupt once she is exposed to the two immoral pornographers. The film is arguably a portrayal of the human condition and the underlying unconscious desires that are there to begin with. Very reminiscent to Freud's psychoanalysis, the film was interesting to watch.
It is sad that some find this film worth watching
lusikny2 July 2005
It is sad that some find this film worth watching. I am Russian, and I am disgusted. There is nothing in this film that deserves praise, except cinematography. However, I am not one of those who find beauty in death or perversion. I think this film is poorly designed and directed. There is nothing more irritating and even enraging than shameless speculation in art (if you can call this garbage art). Balabanov wanted to shock the viewers by pervasive evil, and he succeeded in creating a hopelessly dark film. But the biggest shock is Balabanov's primitive directorial work. I would never advise any of my friends to watch it. Huge disappointment!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
