This is a completely different Soviet film from what I imagined. I was moved by this director in the third minute. His beautiful long shot. Then look down, the more I think Kalatozov's lens is wonderful. His average length of shots is about 40 seconds, and he prefers sports shots and close-up shots. Of course, I still prefer panoramic composition, but these are not problems. What I want to say is that this is really a wonderful film, and the translation of the name is extremely vivid, which just fits the charm of the film. It is not surprising that such a film was shot in 1957, when the Soviet Union had just thawed and Khrushchev's top 20 secret reports had just been released, which was a short spring in the post-Stalin era. Kalatozov is a representative writer of Soviet poetry and movies. Such a clean film directly inspired Lao Ta's debut novel Ivan's Childhood. Of course, we can look for the source from Du Fu's PeopleSoft, but if we compare the two films, the delicate treatment of light and shadow, the reflection of the water and the image of the forest, we can show the origin of the two films more profoundly.

To say that this film is clean means that it has almost no ideological expression. Except for the final speech, the whole film is a universally applicable story. The woman waiting for her fiance says goodbye, thinking and imagining the "happiness" she deserves. Therefore, a Cannes award is not too much. There are some brands of Soviet Russia in the film, such as collectivism fanaticism in the factory, but the portrayal of characters, including Soviet soldiers, is no different from war films in various countries (except the natural socialist realism system). It shows a universal human nature: Veronica is forced by "betrayal" and "greed" of life, which can be clearly seen in Mark, without the sense of attachment and symbol that is common in socialist realistic movies. This is an important reason why this film has won a wide international reputation.

From the way of symptom reading, what I see is the weakening of war intention. War is only the motivation of all the characters in the film, which is shown by the extremely short battle scenes and the German enemy who never appeared at all. This seems to express Kalatozov's rejection of the function of Soviet movies as an ideological propaganda tool. He does not represent the battlefield, but the people in the rear, which also shows another way to interpret the mainstream narrative of the war of "defending the Soviet regime". A little extension is another attitude towards the war hero Stalin. This is not the intention of the annex. This seemingly "humanitarian" narrative appears in the Soviet film system of 1957, which will not fail to attract our attention.

The scheduling of big scenes in the film is very subtle. So it's not that Kalatozov can't film wars, but that he can't film wars at all. Farewell to the 10 minute drama of the volunteers was extremely impressive. The overlapping shots written in many movie textbooks can be called classics: the spinning sky simulates the fall of soldiers, which is superimposed with the meaning of the stair climbing that previously claimed Boris and Veronica's sweet love, countless flashbacks and the appearance of geese in the sky-a rich and flashing montage, which is the best signature of Soviet movies.

He called her little squirrel and hid his letter in the basket he gave her little squirrel. It was not until many years later that she found out. She saw wild geese in the sky. Is that the wild goose he saw with her? Is that the flock of geese he saw before he fell down? The geese flew quietly over the birch forest. Kalatozov wrote poems in the name of war.