zachary-03373 The filmography of director Aleksandr Askoldov lists a single film, Commissar. After a single viewing of the film it is easy to assess why no further works exist from Askoldov. Commissar is an ambitious, gutsy, and subversive film. Askoldov had to have been cognizant of the imminent danger it posed against his young career. This (likely) awareness of the inevitability of personal ruin seemingly emboldened Askoldov to move far beyond apoliticism, which was relatively acceptable, to the unthinkable, open hostility. When trivially compared to Chapaev, the pinnacle of socialist realism thirty years prior, it is apparent just how indifferent and even spiteful Commissar is towards certain parts of Soviet society. Both films share the backdrop of the Russian Civil War; that is where the similarities end. Commissar not only avoids socialist realism in a time period supposedly ripe for the projection of Soviet heroism, it turns the idea on its head. While Chapaev embraces the breadth of the Soviet cause against the Whites, Commissar narrowly focuses on Klavdia Vavilova and the Jewish family that hosts her during her pregnancy. The fronts of each film are portrayed very differently. Chapaev embraces revolutionary romanticism. Impassioned speeches are given and camaraderie is instilled in the troops from the legendary figure himself. The only scene where Klavdia is shown with her unit, she essentially condemns a man to death. She is moody, heavy set, and emotionally withdrawn from her comrades. The defining difference, the one that provokes the comparison to begin with, is Commissar's complete inversion of socialist realism's journey of the hero. Instead of the spontaneous good-hearted hero being politically educated by a Communist figure, here the Communist figure undergoes a form of social education by simple, good-hearted peasants. Though Vavilova verbally recites the dogma of Communism throughout the film, we see how the tenderness Yefim and Maria introduce create intense internal conflict for Vavilova. The film suggests that war and the ideologies guiding them strip individuals of their inherit humanity. The family setting is an attempt at rehabilitation. Vavilova starts off talking about abortion and how she perceives her child as a parasite growing within her. Much later, after living among a loving family, she delivers her baby. In one of the most touching sequences of the film Vavilova paces around her room (as Maria puts, "…like a caged animal") carrying her baby and singing a lullaby. The duality of her character here, the callous (dutiful) commissar and the loving mother, is perfectly illustrated by Nonna Mordyukova's nuanced, complex performance. If the enlightenment of Communism is social construction, the film attempts to deconstruct, to reduce life to a simpler, more sincere form.

Holdenboy86 After watching a movie, "Tsirk", that featured Jewish actors executed, it was nice to see a more positive spirit towards the chosen people. The movie, which features a Red soldier go into hiding during Civil War to have a child, is noticeable for the sympathetic depiction of the Jewish family that takes her into their home. Likewise the female officer is at once a tough, professional, militant figure who naturally takes on maternal duties when she feels her child's life is in danger.Of all the scenes in the movie the one featuring the daughter on the swing stood out. We see these children being so cruel to her as she calls out for an absent mother, and we in the audience understand helplessness. The fact that it is drawn out so long only makes us want to comfort her more.A very real, painful movie that features an ending so shocking that I did not believe that it was really over.

eluriajen The Komissar is successful because it is thought provoking and evokes emotion from the viewer. Interestingly, although this film deals with a Jewish family and various issues of Judaism, the careful observer notices that the film is also full of symbols of Christianity. In fact, there are so many of these examples that it leads the viewer to wonder whether the filmmaker may have intended to make a commentary on the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Although modern Christianity and Judaism are quite different from each other, they have very similar backgrounds. Indeed, prior to the birth of Jesus, they were both one religion, and became separate because Jews refused to accept Jesus as the Messiah, while Christians believed that his life was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.Some of the Christian symbols in the film are less conspicuous than others, and blend into the film seamlessly. For example, there are several scenes in the film that show crosses in the background. At one point the camera focuses on a cemetery that is filled with crosses. There are also crosses on top of churches in many scenes. The connection between Judaism and Christianity is apparent in the fact that in one scene the focus shifts back and forth between a Jewish synagogue and a Christian church, which are both being boarded up.The beginning of the film is marked by the perspective of the two female characters, Klavdia and Maria, regarding pregnancy and childbirth. It is significant that Klavdia was an important military figure, but was forced to give up her command because she was pregnant; this would obviously never happen to a man. Although Maria has six children, she talks openly with Klavdia about the pain of childbirth, stating that it "is not good for the mother, the child, or God." The scene where Klavdia gives birth further emphasizes the pain of childbirth. In both Jewish and Christian history, the pain of childbirth is a consequence that God gave to women in response to Eve's decision to tempt Adam with the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden.There is one scene in the film that is particularly touching because it reveals the depth of the relationship between Yefim and Maria, who do not show such blatant affection at any other point in the film. This is the scene where Yefim washes Maria's feet. As he does so, he looks up lovingly into her eyes, and says, "I love you." This scene is both tender, and also a little shocking because throughout the rest of the film Yefim is portrayed as brusque and a little rough around the edges. This is the one time in the film when the viewer is allowed to see through his exterior. It is interesting that the filmmaker chose to use the washing of feet as the interaction between the two characters during this personal moment. The washing of feet is a symbol that relates directly back to Christianity and the Bible, bringing to mind Christ washing his disciples' feet before he was crucified.The film ends with Klavdia's decision to leave her baby with Yefim and Maria. This seems ironic because their relationship did not start out well – Yefim was outraged that Klavdia was taking a room in their house and did everything that he could to resist. Despite the circumstances, however, a friendship developed between the characters, and they learned to trust, and even to like each other. Klavdia chose to leave in order to protect her child, and also the family that she had come to love. She sacrificed herself in order to protect the other characters. Again, this situation seems to parallel Christianity; Christ sacrificed himself to protect his followers.While the main characters of this film are Jewish, it seems noteworthy that there are so many similarities between different aspects of the film and Christianity. If it were only the crosses that served as symbols of Christianity, that might be dismissed as part of the setting of the film, and irrelevant to the story. There are, however, so many different parallels and religious undertones (particularly Christian) that it appears that they should be significant.

cm-4 During the Russian Revolution, the Red army enters an isolated town and leaves behind a female revolutionary, Klavdia, who has become unexpectedly pregnant. Klavdia stays with a Jewish family to have her baby.A remarkable film, but one which was left unfinished. The director, Aleksandr Askoldov, is only credited with one movie, and it as if he put a lifetime of ideas into this single film.