Iwans Kindheit

And not just as a feature film debut, but Ivan's Childhood is a truly great film in its own right, and perhaps the most accessible of Tarkovsky's films(being his shortest and briskest). Tarkovsky is not at his absolute best here in the sense that his style was still settling and he went on to even better things(Andrei Rublev gets my vote as the greatest Soviet film ever made). This may sound like a knock but it isn't, even when Tarkovsky is not at his finest he is much better than most other directors when not at their best and Ivan's Childhood is still beautifully directed, up there with one of the better feature film directorial debuts.

Tarkovsky's films are among the most visually beautiful I've ever seen and Ivan's Childhood is not an exception. The cinematography from Vadim Yusov is gorgeous and evokes chills, there is a dream-like quality to it but also a hard-edged realism. The use of landscapes is wonderfully Expressionistic, making the real-life sequences even more hard-hitting. The music score is haunting and the film is written in a thought-provoking way that wrenches the gut and breaks the heart. It isn't a Tarkovsky film without memorable scenes and images and Ivan's Childhood has those certainly, the dream sequences make the film(i.e. Ivan and his sister on the apple cart in the rain) but standing out too are the magical birch forest scene, the emotionally harrowing scene in the dark house and especially one of the most heart-breakingly powerful endings ever. What's remarkable is that while the story sounds simple, there are several characteristic Tarkovsky themes for so early on his career and when it comes to mood Ivan's Childhood works amazingly.

Furthermore the story of Ivan's Childhood is incredibly touching, the childhood scenes are the epitome of innocence in a heartfelt, sometimes entertaining and charming way and in complete contrast(without feeling like two different films) the effect of the war and combat is both grotesque and poetic. The characters are interesting and vibrantly portrayed, although Masha is a little one-note for my tastes, Ivan is a compellingly real character who is easy to identify with from the get go. The acting is very good, outstanding in fact in the case of Nikolai(Kolya) Burlylaev who gives one of the best child performances I've ever seen on film. Overall, for a directorial/feature film debut Ivan's Childhood is incredible and as an overall film it's near-masterpiece quality. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Ivan's Childhood, Andrei Tarkovsky's first substantial feature as director (he previously made a short of the Killers, and a 45 minute student film), is a near-masterpiece of adolescence shredded to pieces in subjective perception. It's set in world war 2, with 12 year old Ivan's family killed by the Nazis and his alliance with the Russian soldiers as a scout able to sneak past into small spaces more to do with vengeance than real patriotism. By the time we see him he's a torn figure, someone who at 12 looks and acts like he's already come of age, by force, and that this deep down has left him in a disparaging state of mind, pushing it away through temper (he won't go to military school, he tells his superiors), and only with the slightest escape through dreams.

But in these dreams he's also tormented by his past, in fragments that hint to the psychological trauma through abstractions, of a splash of water hitting across the dead body of his mother while Ivan is at the bottom of a well, or in the natural and happy surroundings of a truck carrying fruits. One sees in this the only spots of innocence left in Ivan's life, the pinnacle (and one of Tarkovsky's most breathtaking scenes ever filmed) the final dream on the beach with Ivan and his sister running along the sand. In this nature, smiling faces, the filtering of the background of the forest, Ivan's Childhood is starkly incredible.

The 'real' world as depicted, to be sure, is jagged, torn apart, in dark marshes and forests and with trenches dug for a long while and flares and cannon fire always in the air. It seems almost not to be entirely real, or as real as should be 100% truthful to battlefronts. But it's also, for the most part (sometimes it shifts to the adult soldiers like Kholin and Galtzev), through Ivan's point of view, and so this world around him that is ripped to shreds and bullet-strewn and deadened is amplified a little.

There's a curious, evocative scene where Ivan, left alone in a dark floor of a house with a flashlight, goes around looking at the messages scribbled frantically as final notes from partisans, and it veers in-between dream and reality, where it could go either way depending on Ivan's mental state, as fragile as his physical condition. He finally bursts into tears, exhausted. It's this wild meddling with what Ivan sees or experiences or thinks and secretly fears through his would-be tough exterior that makes him so compelling and heartbreaking, as played by Kolya Burlyayev with a sharp level of bravery- not even Jean-Pierre Leaud was this absorbing, albeit on different dramatic terrain.

It's a given that it was not Tarkovsky's project to start with, and, ala Kubrick and Spartacus, came in after a director had been let go to finish the picture. While it is remarkable to see how Tarkovsky does make it his vision, and quite an ambitious one considering how expansive the production design gets and the technical daring taken with his director of photography Vadim Yusov, and how there's a fresh and often original (eg dream scenes, placement of the camera, the scene in the post-war house looking at the records of the departed) perspective that no one else would have given it, there are small parts of the story that could have been dealt with a little better, edited, or cut out altogether.

The character of Masha (played practically with one expression- practically cause of the moment after she is kissed- on her face) is a little unnecessary, or rather more of a means for Tarkovsky to practice some technical ideas in the forest scene, which really leads nowhere, and how her reemergence later in the film also doesn't serve much of a purpose. Maybe there's a point to be made about women in the army at the time, as she's an object of desire less much of an effective nurse, but when seeing her scenes (which aren't bad exactly) one wants to get back to Ivan and the central plot.

But, as mentioned, one has to know that as a Tarkovsky picture what doesn't work doesn't matter so much as what does, and Ivan's Childhood is often staggering in its depiction of the brutality on the mind and consciousness, not just through Ivan but through his adult counterparts, and about how in a time when life can be taken away in an instant, almost without a sound, clinging to a past, however surreal, is all that can matter. There's truths reached about the devastation of war on the young, and those who care for them, that wouldn't be in a more naturalistic setting, and it's Tarkovsky's triumph that he steers it into the realm of a consistent, poetic nightmare narrative.

This film by Tarkovsky depicts the story of Ivan, a child partisan in the eastern front during the second world war. The strength and immersion of the film are quite amazing, although it was made almost forty years ago it has not lost any of it's power and is still absolutely gripping. The dream sequences are especially powerful in the way they show the history and state of mind of the young Ivan.

The acting is very good and so are all the other aspects such as editing and cinematography that is exceptionally good. Overall the film is an example of directorial excellence, from a very simple story Tarkovsky is able to build a larger history with obvious references to christianity. Questions about humanity and the nature of humankind are in the center of this film and there are many reasons why this is one of the best war films that exist.

Ivan's Childhood is a pretty masterful example of editing, cinematography, acting, direction, and pretty much everything else that's right about film. Unfortunately, the drama or suspense is not very gripping.

This is as simple as I can put it. Film buffs will probably love this movie. It's crafted like a work of art. The average moviegoer will probably be bored during the film.

This film kind of defies convention and rating. I thought it was well- made, I just thought it wasn't very engaging.

Tarkovsky's monochrome delight deals with the tragedy of youth lost in war. Its main theme is of childhood innocence lost (becoming accessible to Ivan only in dreams) however the young officers are also vastly aged by the conflict they find themselves in.

The backdrop is nature itself - woodpeckers and cuckoos emulate (or become replaced by) the sounds of machine gun fire and the hoots of the falling flares. It pervades most scenes: the seemingly endless channel of water between the opposing sides, the huge birch trees stretching out as high and as far as the eye can see while also providing bunkers for the Russian forces. But nature's power is continually challenged by the great war going on around it and is ultimately defiled and devastated (like Ivan's, and the other young officers' innocence) - turning from green grasslands to mud and ashen trees.

Reminded me of 'The Thin Red Line' in its use of the natural world war tries to ignore. The shots are honestly stunning. The leads are all fantastic. Enjoy the desolation.