SYNOPSICS
Sami Sakhli (2009) is a Georgian movie. Zaza Urushadze has directed this movie. Zura Kipshidze,Nato Murvanidze,Tornike Bziava,Janri Lolashvili are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2009. Sami Sakhli (2009) is considered one of the best Drama movie in India and around the world.
Three stories happening in three different centuries, revolve around a mysterious painting entitled "Two Owls". In the 19th century thread, a man living in a big mansion is worried about his brother whose wife died a while ago. The brother however behaves as if she was still alive. A befriended psychiatrist is being called for help in order to examine the phenomenon in long conversations. He has to recognize however that the man's behavior doesn't harm anyone. He actually offers a painting to the doctor which his wife allegedly just finished: it's called "Two Owls". The painting reappears in the midst of World War II. A woman finds it in the apartment of her husband's lover. The general of the Red Army was just found dead there. He died in the arms of his concubine. Torn between ambiguous feelings of grief and anger the widow has to make a decision. She also needs to retain her composure as the military police is already waiting outside. The last story happens in present time. A ...
More
Sami Sakhli (2009) Reviews
Great film - needs to be seen widely
I saw this film yesterday at the Georgian Film Festival at the Riverside Studios in London. It was amazing, especially the 2nd of the three parts. The film really makes great use - especially in this part - of beautifully shot, slow images and an amazing performance of the General's Wife. This film really haunts me. The film plot centres around a painting and the people who own it, or want to own it, over 100 or more years. Much of Georgian film foregrounds the countryside and the folk traditions, in this we get the Chekhovian countryside, a sort of Great Uncle Stalin, and just-modernising Tblisi, with drugs and crime and confusion.
Far away from being great!!!
This movie is far-far away from being great, as one reviewer had suggested. Firstly, great movies these days are so eagerly awaited that discovering them surely won't go unnoticed, especially by majority of film critics. It seems like this film passed through at least one international film festival. If it was even closer to "greatness" many would know, but this certainly is not the case. Why do I think it's less than mediocre picture? To start with, it is a clear demonstration of horrendous acting! Except for an actor who played psychiatrist in first part. He somewhat showed understanding of who he was playing, although he didn't quite deliver in third part of the movie. Third part...don't even ask! This is another reason for a thumb down, but I can't afford to waist any more time.