A Esposa de Tchaikovsky

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.

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.

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.

It's a story about a woman threatening Tchaikovsky to be her husband, or she would kill herself, and wandering all around hysterically to try to find out where Tchaikovsky was after his escape of their marriage. Because Tchaikovsky was a gay, he would of course not fall in love with a woman, not to even mention marry one! God damn it! The whole process took 2.5 hours, and the movie just seems like it couldn't get a point, like a fly hovering from the east to the west, and the opposite direction again, again and again with no destination. It's just too ridiculous. Even the worst soap opera in my country would never feature something like this. I really feel like I'm fooled around. I think that rating 2 stars is just too enough. I can't rate even higher.

I'm always excited to see a production of sumptuous costume drama. It's notoriously expensive and difficult to pull off, and in the time of cheap shortcuts everywhere, 'Tchaikovsky's Wife' stands out for its consistency and authenticity of its style and production design.

Drama-wise, as the title implies, it's almost all about Antonia, the wife's perspective... and her perspective is extremely simple - her obsession for Tchaikovsky. The 2 and a half hour run is all about her anxious and gradually more manic and bitter obsession, and you can imagine it wouldn't be a very happy and even somewhat exhausting journey.

Tchaikosky as a character largely serves as her object of obsession rather than a full multi-dimesional person. He is definitely portrayed as rather cruel and frivolous (and real Tchaikovsky indeed was when it came to his wife), but he's also not depicted as a simplistic evil - there are fleeting moment of his human depth as in the 2 photo session scenes. And I can understand why they avoided using Tchaikovsky's music much (apart from Antonia playing the melody of the famous letter aria from 'Onegin'). The beautiful and emotional music of Tchaikovsky, the representation of his genius, would have shifted the weight of the film from Antonia to Tchaikovsky.

Despite it being a grueling journey, it didn't feel boring thanks to the sumptuous production design and rather theatrical style. From the very first scene of the dead Tchaikovsky rising to taunt Antonia for daring to come to his funeral, one should understand this was not to be a conservative and realistic depiction of drama. Yet there definitely were some scenes that rather stood out like a sore thumb - Antonia presented with a bunch of muscular young men (or indeed more dramatic reprise of it at the end) or her lover masturbating himself in his blood stained death bed feel the director being overtly ambitious.

Overall I appreciated the film... though I'm not sure if I want to go through it the second time.