Tchaikovsky's Wife

Alyona Mikhailova is really quite good here as the all-but-obsessed "Antontina"" who takes a shine to the already acclaimed, but not especially wealthy, Russian composer Pyotr Tchaikovsky (Odin Lund Biron). She manages to use her influential friends to get her into his conservatoire but though a competent pianist, struggles to make the grade or to pay the 50 roubles per month fee! Her infatuation encourages her to propose marriage to him. He politely declines, but she perseveres and in the end he opts for a companionship style of relationship. Initially that works, but gradually her love wants to manifest itself in something more physical and that repels him. Repels him to the extent that he leaves her and seeks a divorce. She fights this and with poverty and extreme emotional loneliness looming we follow her life through to it's rather sad conclusion during which, despite having three children with her lawyer lover "Shlykov" (Vladimir Mishukov), she never fails in her love. History tells us a little of the man's peccadilloes, and indeed as the film progresses we soon see that his "preferred" company is of much more importance to him that his marriage. That drama plays out in an uncomfortable to watch series of scenarios that cannot help to elicit a great degree of sympathy for a lady caught up in something that neither can control. The films looks great capturing the imagery, poverty and aspirations of late 19th century Imperial Russia but it's a really slow burn and I am afraid I just didn't really ever quite understand why she was quite to pathologically besotted with a man who, to his credit, was clear from the outset that he didn't want a marriage at all, and that if he did it was unlikely to offer more than a "brotherly" love. I needed to know just a little more of what made her tick and to be honest, I also needed a bit more meat on the bones of his life too. There's also a distinct paucity of his music which rather reduced this to the status of a stylishly photographed melodrama of family discord that really underdelivered on the characterisation front. Mikhailova does well though, her diminishing grasp on sanity and reality being well depicted and in all this is worth a watch. Just a little disappointing.

Ugh ... disappointment of the last few years ... despite some very beautiful cinematographic ideas ... the script is despicable : this movie is a disguised propaganda against homosexuality ... I nearly threw up towards the ending ... I'm still so upset ... They highjacked Tchaikovsky's tragic marriage story and packaged it up as a costume drama ... but clearly to make a picture of the composer and other homosexual men as mean opportunistic vilains ... you don't learn anything about him nor her nor about the historical circumstances etc. .... There's no music either ... It's a pitiful recount how a woman desperately tries to have sex with a man who is clearly not into it AND who told her so from the very beginning: marriage yes but only as a brother!

In the movie they even make allusions that it's not normal if a man doesn't want to shag a woman if he sees her naked .... how on earth did this get selected in Cannes is beyond my comprehension...

Giving this an 7/10 rating

Kirill Serebrennikov, who I know for his last feature 'Petrov's Flu', which was crazy, delivers his visual style and narrative to this tale of the woman's view, just like 'Priscilla' by Sofia Coppola, which is also showing now.

This Russian film film does not hold back, it is bleak in looks and sound, but is also beautiful in both, and plenty of touches of surreal, dream like moments of madness in the most strangest places, that do work well in favour of the story, it's not very uplifting, but still interesting.

Alyona Mikhailova plays the poor suffering wife of Tchaikovsky, and she is nothing short of excellent as she plays love, hate, despair and lust, like no other, and she is super watchable, Odin Lund Biron plays Tchaikovsky like a soft man, and then a rouge, he is just as good. It's a perfect casting as they spar very time on screen.

Serebrennikov's direction plays with our senses and questions what we are witnessing, I have to wonder too, this tale is so unknown to me, but its' based on events so, far enough. Plenty of nudity and sex here, even in the grime of horrible living conditions of the 1800's of Russia, It's a must watch in the biggest screen you can find if you want the best out of it.

This was advertised at my local cinema as a Comedy Drama. Well, there's no comedy in it.

In 1877, Tchaikovsky married Antonia Miliukova. Six weeks later they separated, although they remained legally married until the composer's death. This is the story of that marriage and its aftermath, told from Miliukova's point of view. It's clear from the outset that she's an unreliable narrator of her own life, and we can never be sure how much of what we see is real, and how much is happening in her head. This is made clear in one early scene (probably the best scene in the film) which does at least pack a surprise.

The rest of Miliukova's descent into madness is shown in a way that is intended to shock, rather than surprise. There's a lot of frankly gratuitous nudity depicted in a manner which is (presumably deliberately) as subtle as a brick and as tasteful as a colonoscopy.

The performances of the two leads are good, the cinematography is excellent, the set designs are interesting and the level of surreality is dialled up to the max.

The problem for me was that Miliukova was not in any way portrayed as a sympathetic character, and it's not very easy to warm to Tchaikovsky either. The only really likeable characters are the roguish Bochechkarov, and a gossipy woman whose name I missed, who get all too little screen time.

The sound-track is atmospheric, but features none of Tchaikovsky's music, which was a disappointment.

An interesting film, but not really an entertaining one.

The movie is of very good quality and highly satisfying to watch.

It offers a deep study of the female character and her life, portraying her with a great deal of sympathy. But it also carries a disappointing tone of being an homosexual and its place in society. Being gay is almost depicted as something that prevents one from experiencing the true beauty of a woman. Is this the director's issue as well? He presents Antonina in such a beautifully crafted way-so fragile, yet so broken and sad-because she becomes part of a hostile environment. So much attention goes to her and so emotionally charged scenes depicted that only a deeply feeling person can truly process and bring to the screen. Yet the story is about a waste of all of that beauty filled with sadness and dissatisfaction.

Tchaikovsky used her to protect himself from accusations, and she used him to stay close to his talent, as she admitted it was difficult to be a female musician. There was something deeply sad about the fact that he couldn't satisfy her physical desires and suffered because of it. At the same time, she was too young, naive, and obsessed to accept a life without him.

A personal note: I didn't like seeing modern musicians in the movie. It made it feel less like a true work of art and more like a casual gathering, which ruined the atmosphere.