ShareThis Page
Style wins over originality in Russian ‘House of Fools’ |

Style wins over originality in Russian ‘House of Fools’

| Friday, July 11, 2003 12:00 a.m

The idea seems too simple: a movie about the insanity of war set it in a mental hospital.

Heavy-handed and too obvious, you might think. And you would have a valid point.

The Russian film “House of Fools” overemphasizes its point at times. And it’s not as sharply acted or as bitingly cynical as the superior 2001 “No Man’s Land,” a Bosnian anti-war movie about another conflict few Americans understand.

But under the direction of Andrei Konchalovsky, “House of Fools” manages to shake off the appearance of contrivance and predictability. Just because someone makes an obvious point doesn’t mean he can’t do it with elegance, grace and hopefulness shaded with brutality and despair.

Konchalovsky, who also wrote the film, starts with an introduction to the patients of a ramshackle mental hospital in a region beleaguered by the Chechen War. The main character of the film is Zhanna (Yuliya Vysotskaya) an optimistic young woman who is a permanent resident of the institution. She is a friend to and peacemaker among the other patients, but suffers delusions and hallucinations.

Her delusions center on the Canadian singer Bryan Adams — who appears as himself in several segments of the film — to whom Zhanna believes she is engaged.

The only thing holding them back from being married, she says, is that he’s currently on tour. But he’ll be coming for her soon, she tells the other patients, and she’s faithfully waiting for him until he arrives.

When the Chechen-Russian fighting grows too near, the hospital’s staff leaves to find a bus to evacuate the patients. In the meantime, a band of Chechen soldiers arrives and takes over the hospital as a base of operations. Zhanna mingles with the soldiers, one of whom teases her and says he wants to marry her. Zhanna is shocked and tormented by the “proposal.” Will she cheat on Bryan Adams — actually leave him for this Chechen man•

Russian soldiers also arrive at the hospital, their commander wanting to exchange a dead Chechen for a cash payment. The grunts who actually handle the deal have their own motives — the Chechens swap drugs for ammunition. The Russian and Chechen commanders — now wary adversaries — discover they were once fighting alongside each other in the former Soviet Union’s war in Afghanistan.

Konchalovsky weaves sounds into his storytelling for wonderful effect. During moments of stress, Zhanna’s hallucinates Adams singing his Latin-tinged “Have You Ever Really Loved A Woman?” The song itself — also used in the Johnny Depp starring “Don Juan De Marco” about another delusional young person under psychiatric care — dreamily slides over the realistic clashes among the patients and the soldiers. Zhanna plays the accordion — sometimes for real, sometimes in her imagination — peppering the scene with jaunty polkas. Chechen soldiers spontaneously call haunting and lovely Islamic chants while Zhanna stands by, slightly flustered.

Konchalovsky’s choices in cinematography give all the right visual cues, though some are more standard choices: drab grays and greens for the realistic scenes; brighter colors for Zhanna’s hallucinations.

But the jerky, hand-held camera work is effective for the climactic battle scene — much like the opening beach assault in “Saving Private Ryan.” And a shocking helicopter crash is filmed with an incongruous elegance.

“House of Fools” might not bring any new ideas to the standard cinema depiction of war, but what it lacks in originality, it makes up for in style.

Additional Information:


‘House of Fools’

  • Director: Andrei Konchalovsky.

  • Stars: Yuliya Vysotskaya, Bryan Adams.

  • MPAA rating: R, for violence, language and some nudity.

    Three stars

    Categories: News
  • TribLIVE commenting policy

    You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

    We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

    While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

    We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

    We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

    We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

    We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

    We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.