User reviews

Andrei Tarkovsky's school graduation project, the short film Katok i Skripka or Steamroller and the Violin (1960), by the words of Russian critic Maya Turovskaya, the first rate film, is promise of the things that would come so powerfully in his later films. The most important part of the little film was the joy of showing the beauty and poetry of the ordinary familiar things. The whole world of the film is saturated in colors, filled by myriads of playful solar spots, mirror reflections (yes, mirror - one of the favorite Tarkovsky's images is already presented here), patches of light on water, all living, pulsing, sparkling. Tarkovsky's camera man, the famous cinematographer Vadim Yusov recalls that the idea of the film came to young director after watching the French short film "Red Balloon" (1956) by Albert Lamorisse that ran successfully in the theaters at the time. "Red Balloon" defined the color palette of Tarkovsky's movie. The dominant color for Katok i Skripka was red mixed with yellow and compared to blue in the sky above and in the clothing of two main characters, the young boy playing violin and the grown up man, the driver of a steamroller, who had became his friend, even if for a short time.

I'd say that the first Tarkovsky's work is perhaps his most accessible, light, sweet, and warm - the terms we don't usually associate with the master of serious metaphysical, deeply philosophical, even cosmic films that lack conventional dramatic structure. I think it would be a good starting point for anyone interested in Tarkovsky's work. It is interesting to compare Katok i Skripka to Tarkovsky's next work, his first feature, astounding Ivanovo Detstvo (Ivan's Childhood), another film about a boy but completely different from Steamroller and the Violin.

For his diploma project, Andrei Tarkovsky won the first prize at the New York Student Film Festival in 1961.

• but we all have our parts to play.

this is a very fine piece of Soviet culture (communist belief), produced as a children's movie, but definitely for adults too.

The symbolic imagery is abundant - the boy violinist trying to impress little girl violinist outside the music rehearsal studio, the girl first refusing the apple he gave her, but when she heard him play, she ate it; the boy being impressed with the mechanics of the steamroller; the steamroller driver longing for the pleasure of music to lighten up his monotonous day, which the boy can provide; the woman steamroller driver longing for the male steamroller driver; the envious street brats teasing the boy violinist; the boy violinist being taught to stand up for a smaller boy by the steamroller driver; the shining new Moscow building appearing behind the old being torn down; the adult, who has lived through the 2nd world war, helping the child over the puddle of water in the street; the adult worker chiding the child for not acknowledging his talents as musician; the well educated mother chiding the child for forgetting his initial promise for the evening and in stead on a whim having promised to meet the steamroller driver for a movie; the steamroller driver being stood up by the boy at the movie theater and the next day he will have to go work somewhere else and never see the boy again; the woman steamroller driver "accidentally" bumping into the male driver at the theater and he reluctantly goes with her and "leaves the music behind"...

a very moral story, but with the twist that everybody must do, what they are good at, at any given moment. If the society recognizes a need for musicians, we MUST have musicians, and if we need workers, we MUST have workers. But we can dream, we can always dream, of being someone else - and it is this longing that gives us the desire to do and be. Eg. when the boy is in the practice studio, he is chided for having too much imagination, i.e. he should just fulfill his part, which is interpreting the music to the best of his abilities. But the reason for his lack of concentration is that he is thinking of the girl outside the room, whom he gave the apple. Later, he plays to the musician, and now he is good, now he is concentrated - because in this instant he recognizes the differences between him and the steamroller - he recognizes that he has a responsibility to perform to the best of his abilities, and he does so with knowledge and humility.

I don't care for what communism became or was, but there is a valuable lesson learned in this gem of a movie: We must do, what we do best, and do it to the best of our abilities. And, yes, we dream - but we will always dream - of something else, BECAUSE NO ONE CAN DO EVERYTHING THAT HE HIMSELF NEEDS. Thus - in spite of the frame of reference - it becomes a film of how a society is structured.

8/10

A foreshadow of things to come, which in its own right is a little-known jewel of Russian and world cinema...I would advise any beginning Tarkosvskologist to view this film twice: before and after viewing his masterpieces. Then, they'll understand...

Strongly recommended. Tarkovsky initial work showing multiple glimpses of his genius. This short film has great depth and detail. Personally it is was the only Tarkovsky film that I had not seen, and now that I have I rate it very highly. In retrospect to his ouvre it may be strong to use the term "masterpiece", but regardless it is so. It is also probably the most accessible for viewers not familiar with his work and could prove as a perfect introduction. I urge you to see it.

I consider myself fortunate that this was my first venture into Soviet cinema. The fact that this was director Tarkovsky's graduate student film makes it all the more remarkable.

With a minimalist approach to dialog, Tarkovsky relies on imagery to communicate emotions and feelings, and he does so well. It's still a period piece, with obvious salutes to the "Worker's Paradise" but this is not propaganda. Rather, it is a beautiful tale of a brief friendship. Two people from different worlds are borough together, and are torn apart due to circumstances beyond their control, but you get the impression that they'll be wealthier for the experience. Highly recommended! 10/10

A gentle tale of a boy-violinist who is taunted by his peers and misunderstood by the predominantly female figures in his life (mother, music teacher, little girl-violinist), but introduced to the world of "manliness" by a chance encounter with a member of the working class. Both boy and man are enriched by the interchange, which crosses lines of class and age.

For fans of Tarkovsky, it is more revealing as a foretaste of visual images in the filmmaker's later work than of thematic development. But as a study of human psychology and an image of life in the former Soviet Union, it is a source of much to contemplate. Since the story line has certain gaps in it (the editing seems more image- than plot-oriented), however, it bears watching through twice (at 43 minutes, this is not a cumbersome task!)

Roots are sometimes dirty.

This student film from Russia's greatest film genius does a lot with it's short running time. This should mostly be seen for no other reason than it is the roots of genius. There is no epic story telling just a well told two story of two Russians from different worlds who for one day are able to be the friends they are looking for.

The camera work is interesting…albeit sometimes overly arty. However in a short student film that is kinda the point huh? I was lucky to get this at the library and I would say this is worth a rental not purchase unless you're a diehard fan.

This is one of the earliest films by the famed Russian writer/director Andrey Tarkovskiy. Unlike some of his later films that tend to be very slow, long and deep (such as "Andrei Rublev" or the original "Solaris"), "The Steamroller and the Violin" is much more approachable--more a film for the average person.

This is either a short movie or a long short film depending on your perspective. It's a sweet little story about an adorable little boy who is being forced to learn the violin (as he clearly is gifted) but the other kids tend to make fun of him and pick on him. But, when he meets a nice man who runs the steamroller, the boy has a bit of an adventure and quickly bonds with the guy. There is some nice symbolism but mostly it's just a nice little slice of life of a film.

Very nice acting, deft direction and pretty vivid color for 1961 make this worth a look. Not great...but very nice. And, a lot easier to get into than some of Takovskiy's other films.

My Rating : 7/10

Decent first film from one of the greatest film directors of all time.

While it isn't representative of Tarkovsky's philosophy of sculpting in time which he developed later on it's a very Soviet film culturally.

Sweet, ordinary and very accessible unlike the metaphysical, slow arthouse oeuvre to follow later from the great Russian maestro.

Tarkovsky from the outset was out of this world. Hard to believe this was a student film. Stunning work. The scene where Sasha finally plays his violin in front of Sergei contains one of my absolutely favorite shots ever. Sergei's face bathed in the moving shadows of light as he listens to this innocent and pure child channeling humanity's wonderful capacity for simple, pure beauty.

"The Steamroller and the Violin" (1961) as the final project as a film student by Andrei Tarkovsky, channeling a simple plot with the use of beautiful technical merits.

It is all ready a parent that a mastermind is behind the camera, with beautiful cinematography and planning shots.

I was not touched by the film but it certainly was interesting to see hos first film being so clearly marked by his artistic vision and style.

Recommended for Tarkovsky fans as an accesible entry before delving into his later filmography.

STEAMROLLER AND VIOLIN represents the conclusion of my long search to see every one of Andrei Tarkovsky's accessible films of his sparse catalogue. Does the movie hold up to all the other films that Tarkovsky has done? Well, not quite. Nevertheless, the film does highlight the use of several techniques typical of Russian film: split screens, montage, and experimentation of sound. It's also a foretaste of things to come, highlighting Tarkovsky's unique style starting with his first, full-length movie, IVAN'S CHILDHOOD. Overall, an interesting achievement.

At the time of reviewing this I have not seen Ivan's Childhood or Andrei Rublev, but I have seen all of Tarkovsky's other films.

The issue I have always had with Tarkovsky was the inability to have truly engaging characters who I was invested in. The cinematography and "art" qualities to his films has always been great (even if sometimes pretentious), but I can never really enjoy the people on screen. All of the characters tend to spout philosophical debates out of left field and it never feels natural.

However, The Steamroller and the Violin tells a coherent narrative with characters who are interesting, have some depth, and are enjoyable to see on screen while the cinematography is never too crazy or unconventional like later films by the director. This also makes The Steamroller and the Violin the most mainstream of the Tarkovsky films I've seen, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

While watching this I genuinely cared about the characters their relationship as new friends. The unfortunate aspect of this film is that it is only 40 minutes long and the ending feels a little bit rushed. This could've easily have been 70 minutes long or longer based on the good on-screen chemistry. The ending is very abrupt and a little unsatisfying, but I enjoyed everything else in it.

Definitely worth a watch and I find it a little depressing that the most enjoyable Tarkovsky film I have watched is also his earliest one. I'm all for art films and experimenting with film language, but don't do it at the expense of the characters and the narrative.

this isn't his best one, but it's also his first. and since most of his tend to be around 160 minutes...you have to understand that within the 45 minutes of this thesis film project, there is a lot content. those images of a "brand new" building represent a building that was never realized: it was the image of Stalin's design to replace Christ the Savior of Russia (Church) with a Palace of Soviets. and don't worry, the Church was still destroyed. this movie is latent with such imagery...it is the bourgeois vs. the worker and the worker is glorified (images of the the destruction are magnificent, out of this world, and everyone stands around to see this holy act). it's interesting, because Tarkovsky is definitely a religious man; but in this movie, he seems to be saying that god is in the worker/work. this movie is also interesting to look at in comparison with his other pieces...instead of long shots to associate memory (and its imagination), Tarkovsky uses fragmented images and shots to show the immediate (as well as a more abstract memory- that of war, and still imagination)...and it still evokes the same feeling from the viewer: tension. he's really good at that.

One of my favorite movies and one of my favorite directors. Tarkovsky used a lot of mirror shot and reflection as metaphors in this movie to create a world between reality and ideal, which also indicates how will the friendship between two social classes develop. The experience of watching the whole movie feels like looking through a kaleidoscope.

The most surprising aspect of Andrei Tarkovsky's graduate project from the Moscow Film Institute is that a director who would later be known for his dense, opaque meditations on more than one difficult theme could begin his career with a story of such benign, uncomplicated innocence. Using warm pastel colors and a (mostly) adolescent cast, Tarkovsky follows a small boy, a budding musician at the mercy of his less sensitive peers, to his daily violin lesson, where he silently flirts with another young music student, and later finds a new friend in the operator of a steamroller at work outside his apartment. The traditional Soviet preoccupation with heroic workers and heavy machinery does nothing to disrupt the lyrical charm of the scenario, and the spare elegance of Tarkovsky's direction (the film is only 46-minutes long) is distinctly refreshing compared to the protracted artistic angst of his later masterpieces.

For a student film this is above and beyond a lot of feature films of today. The use of colour, the camera work, the directing, you can see this is no ordinary student. But there are clearly communist views in this that are displayed metaphorically.

The dichotomy between the worker and the artist is clearly on display. The balance between the two, the relationship, the struggle between the betterment of the country and citizens and his desire to feed the soul is indeed not just a communist value but in this setting is something very political that Tarkovsky wanted to show.

Even so, his cinematic language is undeniable and his potential on full display.

Tarkovsky-lite: contains his stylistic and philosophical hallmarks without the typically grand scope. For a student film, this certainly shows preternatural confidence in direction, and a mastery over the camera which would prevail throughout all his work - simple conversations are framed and lit in creative ways to hold viewer's attention, and the streets of Moscow are beautifully captured through shots of puddles, broken glass, and dilapidated buildings. As for the screenplay, this is a simple tale of an unlikely friendship, performed naturally and with dialogue that never gets too weighty despite its subject matter. Essentially a filmed portrayal of the "boots or Pushkin" debate; interesting that the title refers to the tools of both characters rather than the wielders themselves, as if that were what defines them. Hardly digs deep into ideas around class divisions and the value of art, though it achieves more than enough in a mere 46 minutes. A wonderful ending signifies only the beginning of an illustrious filmography.

True shocker, commonly known as Andrei Tarkovsky's debut, but Letterbox shows three more earlier? NVM

It does seem a bit hardcore to go into Tarkovsky from The Mirror, and finally get a taste of Tarkovsky's charms in this one, with its excellent level of color composition that is surprising for a director just starting out. I really like the music in this one, it's moving enough to be jarring.

The attributes of working class storytelling that belonged to Soviet filmmakers are also thoroughly discussed here, and what could be less dramatically tense than a date between a petty violin kid and a worker? It's a different kind of realism, that of creating that subject that reality has yet to discuss, more realistic than reality.

Tower's experimentation comes into its own in this one.

There's nothing spectacular or great in this movie, just a simple story about friendship primarly, for its short 45 minutes run, however I think is good enough and worth a watching, specially if you plan to watch the Tarkovsky filmography, this is his most colorful movie and by a lot.

The acting is good, specially from a child actor and the message I got is good too, because I think this film shows that friendship trascends over a minor desception, so, again good for its duration, worth watching.

There are a lot of dreamy scenes in the movie. Beautiful.

I liked this short film because of the reason that from the middle till the end, it is absolute perfection. The story is about a kid who is a music student and who befriends a Man who rides a Roller. The part worth concentrating is the developing of friendship between the two.

PROS:

The kid looked apt in his part. The way that he starts to take interest in the work of the man and which led to the development of their friendship is good. The story also ends properly. The introduction of some characters in the starting was also good. They helped in moving forward the film and made the base for the character of the kid.

MESSAGE: "Friendship is a beautiful aspect of life."

VERDICT: "A recommended watch."