toxicpilgrim I think I get it... I think... Hard to Be a God is like a nightmare of living in a world of idiots. It has a feeling like drowning in mud. Of having a permanent hangover, or a sore back. Where thoughts come into your head but you're too irritated to try to communicate them. The feeling of being completely misunderstood when you're clear as day. It's really a beautiful movie to look at, and disgusting to listen to. Endless depth and texture and movement; like stirring through a stew pot looking for morsels, but finding mostly gristle, and sinew, and slime, but you're going to keep looking anyway because you're hungry.

Mklangelo Scientists are sent to an earth like planet where they discover a medieval society which did not have the benefit of a Renaissance and certainly no Enlightenment. The Intelligentsia of this society are hunted down and executed. Some flee to a safer part of their world in hopes of surviving. Ignorance and filth are the lot of these miserable people. I must admit the premise of this movie grabbed me. Sci-Fi with social implications? Are you kidding? Deal me in!After the first 30 minutes I turned it off. A movie has 30 minutes to bring me in and hold me. That's it. Now you have to remember this movie is made by Russian director Alexei German. He's highly acclaimed by sophisticated, artsy types. Apparently this film took a decade to complete and bring to the screen. But the similarities between this film and most Russian Literature were too striking for me. I've heard Russian Literature described thus: 5 people stand around talking for three hours and then someone's aunt dies. Be still my beating heart.In this film, all the characters walk around covered in mud and human feces. They drown in feces and smear it on their faces while smiling.There is one particularly captivating scene where the local duke wakes up in his squalid castle, picks a cockroach out of a glass of wine from the night before, flicks the roach onto the ground and spits into the wine. But wait. That's not all. The tension builds as he walks around followed by servants who swat bugs for him while playing some sort of clarinet for about 5 minutes. The same 4 notes with very slight variation. 5 minutes. At this point my heart nearly burst from my heaving chest. I must though give credit where credit is due. The Director and Producers have succeeded in creating an utterly convincing world here. It completely breaks down the 4th wall. You feel as if you're there and it's thoroughly depressing as a result. Russians are a different sort of people I guess. I suppose that's what the artsy types are conveying when they gush over this film. I will offer praise on that but it must be said that filming in black and white does half of that job for you. Like Paul Simon said, "Everything looks worse in black and white."But apparently I'm not sophisticated enough to watch people roll around in mud and their own fecal matter for 3 hours. Yes. It's a 3 hour movie.

Alessandro Vincinni Don't believe those who compare it to Tarkovsky's "Andrei Rublev". The only thing common between the two is black and white film and long 3 hour duration. This one is just a depiction of a (mainly) studio set full of mud and ... This has nothing to do with the book, has no meaningful plot or character development. If you are in for serious cinema avoid this "production". If you want to see something revolting, boring and repetitive go for it. The only thing this film shows is that a director who in past produced strong films like "Trial on the Road" can completely disintegrate at the end of his carrier. A sad story. This failure spoils the good impression of German's previous films as well as is a shame for the excellent novel who's title and popularity it tries to exploit.

hou-3 ...and precious little to enjoy in this movie. Well, it's black and white, subtitled and almost three hours long, there is minimal plot and a good deal of fooling around in the mud. I thought maybe the best way to approach it would be as Monty Python on the Don, but that's only good for ten minutes or so. Likewise the central conceit which is interesting but undeveloped. Ponderous, tedious, pointless, this is the sort of film which gives art-house cinema a bad name. This is currently not long enough to be accepted so it is worth adding that the central dichotomy between a backward Middle Ages and a breakthrough Renaissance does not stand up to scrutiny, in that the Renaissance made minimal impact on most people's lives. That should do it. Meanwhile on the screen it's still raining, both water and tedium.