Une exécution ordinaire

a case. who defines an entire period. a film about Soviet Union under Stalin . and a beautiful introduction to the atmosphere of regime. far to be great, it is one of films who reminds, in correct manner, a great tragedy. ideal for discover the rules, logic and cynicism of Soviet power, for defines a leader who could be hero in some from East Europe regions, for the tension of a fight, for the essence of fear as the most convincing rule, for the image of woman in the heart of dictatorship, for a remarkable portrait of Stalin and for its end who is the definition of an entire process. a film who only suggest the tragedy of Communism. in correct manner, only too cold but useful as point of research about crimes and about high cynicism of a war against yours citizens.

it is a nice film. for its image, acting, intentions of writer/director. but it is a product for Westestn public. that is only sin. it is necessary to present the tragedies of East Europe and the long pain of Soviet space. but , in same measure, it is not easy to create the perfect image of system. the film has not chance to convince. and the cause , I supposed, it is the distance between director and the story. it sounds strange but the team does a good work. an admirable, touching reconstruction of an universe. the basis is a real case. but it is not enough. a special ingredient is missing. maybe, only for Eastern viewer who knows little more than the clear , honest testimony of this movie.

"An ordinary performance" is an example of these fascinating and repellent films at the same time.

Fascinating by its perfectly controlled oppressive atmosphere, the uniqueness of its narrative subject, its sobriety, its conciseness. Fascinating by the historical subject, that is, the terror of the Soviet communist regime in the immediate post-war period and the Stalinist dictatorship of the end of the reign.

Repellent due to the parasites that spoil the scenario (the janitor), the implausibility in certain behaviors (the near absence of the husband's reaction, for example), and especially the very unequal play of the actors.

If André Dussollier plays an excellent and credible Stalin, Marina Hands is quite different, whose theatrical game fails to convince.

All in all, this remains a film worth seeing, historically and philosophically interesting, and captivating.