Tchaikovsky's Wife

Love dream turning into obsessive illusions Extreme blinded talent ignores the other The unknown revealed No one knows about creative paths, only the Artist The others will always be spectators and will be then fulfilled by true art.

What is happiness?

Film Sound is crucial and what touched me most. It punctuates all different and contrasting moments. Decor and photography very good It reminded me the drama of Camille Claudel but the protagonist, Antonina, was not here an artist or her virtue was not having anything.

What is genius, creativity and what what is banality and normality?

Unexplained love.

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.

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.

Tchaikovsky's Wife is a period piece with masterful narrative. First and foremost this is not a pure fiction, based on archival documents on the life of Tchaikovsky in 1870s. The director puts a mere focus on composer's wife whose transformation goes from devoted lover to blind obsession and self destruction. This never-chosen narrative has so many side plots enriching the film enormously. Marriage in its society imposed form can be an unnatural act with disastrous consequences as we put as witnesses. Tchaikovsky's Wife is a rare gem, a true masterpiece. Acting, cinematography, music and period details are exquisite. Must see.

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.