I didn't care for our tour guide of sorts as he ended up much like one of those headsets you get given in museums - instructive perhaps if you can bear the dullness of the things, but also distracting and often replacing fey, mysterious things of beauty with precise but boring facts. At its best though the film constructs a feel of what Russia must have been like for the elite living, serving and celebrating in this glorious building, in a way that is breathtaking, beautiful and captivating.

A somnambulant or spectre's stroll through Russian history in a place where time has folded in upon itself, with the present earning fleeting glimpses of and intruding forcibly onto the rolling and ebbing currents of the past. Still, the film fosters this feeling of historical and cultural divorce, a sense not of loss but of the impossibility of stepping out of our own small moment in time. And it's all ornately beautiful and pulled off with unspeakable craft. Amazing and hypnotic.

Look elsewhere if you want to learn something other than cinematography, or, indeed, be motivated to do so.

Absurdly slow and terrible.

I was insanely impressed with the technical aspect of the film. I'm a sucker for long takes, so the fact that it was done in one with so many actors was absolutely mindblowing. Too bad the guide character was rather annoying and his musings added little to the film. More than half of his dialogue seemed irrelevant, and I would have preferred to get a more involving history lesson. Now, scenes just play out and we're only partly aware of what happened and why it might have been important. Shame.

I'm not enough of an art aficionado to appreciate much of this film (a good half-hour is dedicated to discussing paintings in the Hermitage) but the continuous long-shot, luscious period costumes and jovial critiques of Russian culture from the French governor/companion certainly made it enjoyable enough.

Famous for one continual shot for whole movie with each 'scene' interesting enough without having much of a plot to speak of.

I came into this expecting a spectacular achievement in cinematography, photography, staging and choreography but little else. I was wrong. It is all those things, but also creates a compelling atmosphere, despite a slight aloofness; the dialogue is mumbled and I'm sure I didn't get many of the cultural and historical references, but I actually liked that it didn't strain for accessibility. The one-shot isn't just a gimmick - it's a device essential to the film's rumination about time.

Only worth something considering it technically. Practically, it's absolutely boring.

I was mostly in awe of the technique (the famous single take), rather than whatever the heck this was about, which isn't really supposed to be the point of a film. I guess what I'm saying is that a "Making of Russian Ark" documentary would be more interesting than the actual feature.

You float thru 3oo years of Russian History on a special tour of the Hermitage. Shot in one continuous take. UUnique.

"The film's heady yet far from impenetrable theory suggests that Russians take comfort in their closed-off nationalist reality." - Ed Gonzalez

Boooooriiiiiing to Death

RUSSIAN ARK is, one hand, profoundly gimmicky--a tour of the Hermitage museum in St. Petersburg, encountering figures from the 1700s onwards as they dance, admire art, conduct diplomacy, etc.--all in a single 90-minute shot, done in one 90-minute take. The first half is dull and hollow, and the lack of character (a mysterious "European" and the invisible narrator aside) gets to one, but the second half blossoms and caps things off with a brilliant grand ball. Definitely worth it for the curious.

Sokurov's single shot depicts two centuries of russian history in a poetic museum tour, in which politics and art are almost indistinguishable themes. It seems too distant and flourished, but it's undeniably intelligent in its metaphors and references: the Russian Ark, like Noah's in a world inhabited by bad men, lost its artifacts when communism arrived and started attacking european elite -- at least that's what I think the director wanted to say.

Incredible technical achievement, marred by an intolerably artsy approach to history lessons, passing the point where you know that you don't know what they're talking about - and you know that you don't want to know.

Yes its impressive that the whole thing is done in one shot. Still that is the whole thing it has going for it. Gimmicks only get you so far. Dull and exhausting.

I dare you not to fall asleep

I did not like much of the story since it was jumping in time back and forth, but more deeper to the Hermetage in St. Petersburg we got, more impressed I get. The movie was technically a fine job. And during it you've got a free of charge run through of the museum.

It's a bit of a gimmick but a well thought out one. The setting and first person perspective work well with the single shot concept and it's really well executed with great visuals and an appropriate sense of mystery.

Not a great plot, but fantasticly put together.

Like floating through a dream of the art and history of Russia. Certainly not for everyone, but if the description I gave piques your interest, you will almost certainly love it.