User reviews

"Ashes and Diamonds" is both an essential historical film and a visual masterpiece. Set in the first days of Soviet occupation following World War II, the film examines the moral dilemmas of the protagonist, Maciek--a young rebel hit-man-- in following through with the assassination of a leading communist party member--Sczcuka--who will soon be empowered as a means of forming a puppet communist government in Poland. The film is not limited to the perspective of the protagonist, and alternates between the moral dilemmas of each of the characters in fulfilling predetermined Soviet agendas in the formation of a communist Poland.

The visual composition of the film is as masterful as the complexity of the characters and plot. Despite the notoriously bad film technology in the Soviet states and the constraints of Socialist Realism, the film manages not only to capture the potential richness of black and white, but also manages to avoid the standard pitfalls of over-zealous editing that often destroy other contemporary Soviet films. The frames are longer shots in general, and forced schematization through editing is all but absent. The precise composition of each scene throughout the film provides the visual coherency that would otherwise be imposed by careful editing; as an example, see the scene in which Maciek is underneath the staircase in the lobby of the hotel towards the end of the film, or the final "Polish" dance scene.

I would highly recommend some research into the political transitions of Poland in the years directly following WWI before viewing this film for the first time; this film was made for a particular audience who clearly understood certain cultural and historical references that a modern Western audience will inevitably miss (ie. "Were you in Warsaw?"). The thematic and emotional complexity of the film is also enhanced by an understanding of Polish history. I would highly recommend this film for any class examining Eastern Europe or Soviet Russia (which is the context in which I was introduced to this film in particular), or to anyone who would like to better understand the complexity of Cold War politics from a perspective behind the Iron Curtain.

Surely the most mature of the trilogy; it's certainly the most elliptical and stylistically audacious. At the start, Cybulski is a laidback, coldly cynical assassin who lolls on his back in a field waiting to carry out his latest hit; suffering a crisis of confidence in light of his awakening love for a woman, he flirts with desertion before resigning himself to the demands of his position. His personal journey speaks eloquently to the national trauma, and he's just the most prominent in a complex collection of transition figures, caught on the official last night of the war, now looking forward but not yet able to escape the ravages of war and the attendant moral and psychological confusion, not yet free of potential victimhood (like the mayor's assistant who on learning of his boss' promotion drinks excessively in celebration of his own presumed advancement, but in his disruptive drunkenness kills off what future he had). The ending, intercutting a personal tragedy with the dancers doing the elegant polannaise in the streaming light of dawn, like disembodied Felliniesque figures, perfectly encapsulates the film's mix of toughness and allusiveness.

First, I've read a book by Jerzy Andrzejewski and then I've seen the movie. After that, I never went back to the book. It was not because it was bad, quite the contrary - it was very good. But the movie by Andrzej Wajda is definitely a masterpiece of Polish movie-making. The main plot of the movie revolves around Maciek Chelmicki, a young idealist who fought against the Germans and then turned to fight against the Communists. He is sent to kill Szczuka, one of The Party's middle rank administrators, by the Polish underground.That's the plot. The movie itself is about a lot of important things, common to all people (but I believe the Polish people will find a few of them more emotionally binding):

1. Nothing is black or white, everything is just a shade of gray

2. Is death, no matter how you try to justify it, senseless?

3. Is it better to live, while on your knees or die standing straight? Or maybe it's better to try to live standing straight?

4. That sometimes it's not war that is hell, it's living through war and trying to live a normal life that is a lot harder (thank God I do not know if it is so)

Wajda's movie doesn't give direct answers to any of these questions - each person may watch the movie from a different point of view and get to a totally different conclusion. But even if you're not into psychological movies about war, or noir-movies (and Popiol i Diament is definitely a sort of a noir-movie) it's worth watching for just one scene - the burning vodka glasses at the bar - Cybulski at his best.

And lastly - the motto of the movie (and of the book as well):

"Will ash and chaos be left in the end, that follows a storm into abyss Or may a diamond be found in the ash, a dawn of an everlasting victory"

Cyprian Kamil Norwid

PS: I hope Mr Norwid will not turn in his grave at the quality of my translation but that part of a poem by CK Norwid sums up the movie really well.

At its most basic, Andrzej Wajda's "Popiol i diament" (called "Ashes and Diamonds" in English) may seem to be a look at where Poland would be going after WWII ended. The plot involves young Maciek Chelmicki (Zbigniew Cybulski), who has helped expel the Nazis from Poland. With the Soviet Union now taking over the country, he is ordered to shift his allegiance to them. Through Maciek's acquaintances with communist leader Szczuka and barmaid Krzystyna (Ewa Krzyzewska), a potentially explosive situation arises.

If you know nothing about how the movie got made, this seems to be the whole purpose. But there are other points. In a mini-documentary about the movie, Andrzej Wajda and his collaborators explain how the novel on which the movie is based had Szczuka as the main character. Wajda not only moved the focus to Maciek - and gave him sort of a James Dean look - but also stressed the scene where Maciek talks with the man who fought in the Spanish Civil War. Apparently, fighting like the man did is a Polish tradition. Therefore, the film likely appeals to the Poles in almost every way; the perfect Polish movie, if you will.

Although I've never seen any of Andrzej Wajda's other movies - hell, I'd never heard of him until the Academy Awards gave him an honorary Oscar - I staunchly recommend this one. One can clearly see how he used the movie to subtly challenge the Soviet domination of his country (of course, they couldn't openly say anything against the USSR). Poland's pro-Soviet government had approved the movie, but didn't want to let it outside Poland. Wajda got some people to smuggle it out of the country, and it reached much of the world. Probably the most amazing scene is the end. I won't spoil the end, but I'll note that blood on a white sheet looks a bit like Poland's flag (a nationalistic statement).

All in all, a great movie. Andrzej Wajda has every reason to be proud of it.

I've seen this movie only twice, stumbling across it the first time in a theater in Skopje, Yugoslavia, and I left the theater almost in shock. I'd never seen such a combination of direction, editing, cinematography, and acting. (That business about Cybulski being "the Polish James Dean" is disregardable nonsense; like saying that Chopin was the Polish John Phillip Souza.) Wajda's other films didn't seem so impressive, but "Ashes and Diamonds" was simply superb. The images linger in the mind, even now, when artiness has become commonplace. The shattered crucifix hanging upside down; the final chase through the drying laundry; and Cybulski on his side, kicking himself around in circles atop a heap of garbage! It wasn't simply thought provoking, it was shocking. I can only remember one other time I felt stunned into silence on leaving a theater, and that was in LA after the first Bergman film I saw, which happened to be "The Seventh Seal." Don't miss it.

Ashes and Diamonds is the film I have seen at least 15 times in my youth. I know it by heart as I was deeply impressed by the dilemma it depicts. Maciek remains for me the hero of illusions and disillusion. The small hotel of the film will be allways the scenery of personal and historical fate and the last scene will sum up for me always the eternal question of "quo vadis?"

The post-war years were a difficult time for much of Eastern Europe, and ended with that region being plunged into dictatorship; so in many ways, it's surprising to see a film about that era (made under the communists) whose heroes are a pair of anti-communist assassins. One might more accurately say "anti-heroes", but the truth is, Andrzej Wajda's film is a critically sympathetic account of the motives on those on all sides in the conflict. Also marking this film out as modern is the dry script and mordant humour; while a big improvement over Wajda's previous movie, 'Kanal' (which had a horrible score) is the clever use of background music as orchestration. Some things do remind you that this film is (by now) almost fifty years old: not all the acting reaches contemporary standards. Still, it's as good a movie as was made in the 1950s, and all the more telling for its relative proximity to the events it displays.

I watched the Wadja War Trilogy back to back, so you can imagine I was looking forward to the final instalment which is generally considered to be the best of the three. However, I was quite disappointed. The reason for my disappointment was because O felt the lead character was trying much too hard to be a Polish James Dean. The only difference being that the odd things James Dean used to do when he was acting, didn't seem weird out of place. Unfortunately, you don't get the same feel from the weird things that the lead in Ashes and Diamonds keeps doing throughout this movie. Even the final scene seems to me to be quite strange and almost comical.

Having said that, the plot is great and Wajda does a great job capturing the atmosphere of confusion which must have existed in Poland on the last day of the war. Nationalists and communists were no longer fighting a common foe in the Nazis - rather they were now fighting each other for the right to rule Poland.

Despite my reservations about the lead character, this is still worth watching. Given the other reviews I have read about this movie, I am clearly in a minority in my views about the lead character.

I have seen this film several times and often I asked myself how the director Andrzej Wajda was allowed to film something that clearly shows the corruption of the new governing bodies in post-war Poland. This is a film of 1958, i.e. Poland well occupied by the Soviet troops and only 2 years after the Hungarian massacre. The acting of already disappeared Zbigniew Cybulski as Maciek is really impressive and reminds me to some extent James Dean playing "Rebel without a Cause". The personality of Maciek is difficult to understand if one ignores the suffering of Polish people during the war. Once this bloody confrontation finishes the Soviet came over and put their loyal people in the important posts of the government. The fact is that those soviet loyalists were not the appropriate ones, often corrupted and looking to climb for better position. The presence of the Soviet officers in the official parties and ceremonies was very common and this can also be well seen. Ewa Krzyzewska plays the role of a young lady working in a restaurant,she wants to live and to love, but even her dreams cannot become a reality. The film draws what was then wrong in Poland and how wrong the people felt and behave. Maciek is used by an anticommunist violent movement, in fact he wants to live differently, to stop fighting, to live and to love too. This film is really one of the classic of the filmography of Eastern Europe under the domination of the Soviets.

"Ashes and Diamonds" (Polish, 1958): And, this is the third of Wajda's trilogy about WWII in Poland, or perhaps better stated, inside the Polish people. This one is set on the last night of the war, and the following first day of official peace & freedom from German domination. As with both of the other films, nothing is as simple as it might first appear to us, or to the story's characters. Although it might not be "necessary" to view this trilogy three nights in a row (as I did), they SHOULD be seen in sequence. The writer and director chose exceptionally interesting and symbolic moments in time to place these stages. Note: NONE are upbeat, optimistic considerations of what war creates, except perhaps Wajda's inclination that the Poles do what they MUST for the greater good, even when it is for their individual worst.

This is a movie that becomes mostly great due to its fine directing approach. The movie at times picks an artistic approach but without disconnecting itself ever from its viewers.

It's really the way how this movie looks that made this an interesting and good watch for me. It features some beautiful black & white cinematography and it has some some really strong and unforgettable images in it.

The story in itself is being kept deliberately small and simple. The movie very rarely dwells, which is a good thing but it at the same time also prevents this movie from making a truly lasting impression with a good or powerful story. In my opinion the movie was lacking this, which prevented me from truly regarding this movie as a perfect movie, or a must-see classic, even though it is generally being regarded as perhaps the best and most definitive Polish movie ever made.

Neverhteless, the characters all do work out well, due to the movie its story and overall approach. It was also truly a pleasure to watch Zbigniew Cybulski act, who is known as the Polish James Dean. He was truly great and really solely carried the movie, for most part.

Due to the fact that the movie is being kept simple and small, there is also very little to indicate in this movie that it's actually one being set during WW II. Don't know whether this was done intentionally or not but anyway, I liked that about this movie. It's a war movie without the war and everything that goes along with that and basically all that ever indicates that there is war going on is shown by the presence of a few soldiers.

A solid but above all things beautifully directed movie, by Andrzej Wajda.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Is it wrong to kill wrong people for the right cause? Is there a right cause to kill people? Would you rather make love to a beautiful woman or put somebody a bullet between the eyes and risk being hunted down and killed? Wajda embarks on the journey to prove that death is meaningless and awkward business in this cinematographic masterpiece.

This film is set on the last day and night of WWII in Europe. Poland is liberated from the tyranny of Nazi Germany and falls into the hands of Joseph Stalin. At the time the Poles were not sure what this meant but they feared the worst. The end of the war, of course, meant something quite different for Poland than it did for France or England. The "liberation" of Poland was just another invasion and occupation and the Resistance shifted targets from Nazis to Polish communists and in doing so went from heroes of Poland to criminals.

The story follows Maciek, a young Resistance fighter. His assignment is to assassinate a Polish Communist leader who is in town for a banquet to celebrate the end of the war and his subsequent promotion. It's a long night with lots of drinking, reminiscence, hopes and fears for the future and the unexpected crises of confidence that conflicts our protagonist, Maciek. He falls for the beautiful young barmaid at the hotel and for the first time sees a different life for himself and questions what he is about to do. A heavy feeling of impending doom hangs over the film as the fates of people and a country are in doubt. Into this the director weaves some comical characters and a tragic romance. Good stuff.

The look of the film is very expressionist as opposed to the neorealism which was a common style of directors in Europe at the time. The ideal was American Film Noir which the director was a big fan of – The Asphalt Jungle being his favorite. The entire hotel was built and lit artificially so they could create the look and feel they wanted. And, there were a lot of very artistic, purely visual effects and what some might call overly expressionist scenes: a drunken polonaise at sunrise, an upside down crucifix in a bombed out church, a white horse wandering into the frame in a scene in the hotel courtyard. Beautifully photographed in shadowy black and white, this film succeeds as a work of art on every level.

The film is based on a book that depicted the assassination target, Szczuka, as the sympathetic figure. And, really, he's not a bad guy. However the director went the other way and made a minor character in the book (Maciek) the lead player. The role was played by one of the leading young actors in Poland, Zbigniew Cybulski. The director let Cybulski keep his trademark long hair and dark glasses even though he knew no WWII resistance fighter looked like that. Even though the Party watchdogs made sure Maciek's ultimate fate was punctuated (in another overly expressionist scene), the Polish movie going public perceived the film as it was intended and Maciek was seen as the hero. Too late to censor the movie in Poland, they were determined to not let it get out of Poland. They were successful in stopping it from going to Cannes but a Party Minister relented and let it go to the Venice Film Festival, allowing it to be seen "out of competition." It won the Grand Prize anyway, Cybulski became the James Dean of Poland and the Party Minister was fired (at the very least). The film is considered one of the greatest films in Polish cinema. 10/10.

For my money, one of the best historical films I've seen. Although I know nothing of Polish history in WW2, I still found a great story on morality and the complex nature of war. The main character, played by Zbigniew Cybulski was fascinating! He was childlike, cynical and violent at the same time. It's no wonder they called him the Polish James Dean, he acted with such subtlety, style and charisma that you could't help liking him. Man He Was Cool!! And the Director too! I give many kudos to him for the excellent directing. The excellent plotting and symbolic imagery throughout the film made it an enigmatic experience. What a great move to open the film with such action! The first scene starts off things with such a bang and never lets you go! You are invested in every character, even the relatively bad ones (ie The Communist Guy). See this movie even if you know nothing about Poland in WW2, it's a great film anyway!

I read the novel (in Welsh's translation) just before watching the film. Since Andrzejewski himself is credited (along with Wajda) for the screenplay, he must have been satisfied with the cutting out of half the characters and half the sub-plots.

Ewa Krzyzewska was lovely, wasn't she? And to think that she was only 19 when it was made--her first picture!

My biggest disappointment--a serious one--was the absurdly melodramatic way in which everybody who dies, dies. Granted, making movies in the '50s was different from today, but this is reminiscent of American gangster films of the 1930s! Wajda himself did much better, even in the same era, e.g., in _Kanal_.

My Rating : 7/10

I was very curious to watch this after knowing that both Scorsese and Coppola were influenced by it. Although I have zero knowledge about the life and times the movie is based in - I must say it kept me engaged and some of the scenes were very well done.

Always good to know what the greats like Scorsese et al watch and absorb whatever I can from such obscure world cinema classics.

I'm not sure how much of the blame should fall on the subtitles. You can never tell how good the translation is. Each sentence on its own was grammatically correct, but put together, the film's dialogue made no sense.

Was there even a story here? What little story there seemed to be kept getting interrupted for random tangents or philosophical musings nobody asked for. And the characters were all over the place. Stone faced one minute, laughing the next, can't give you the time of day, then suddenly passionately in love. None of it made any sense. Maybe it just all got lost in translation. And that death scene. Oh my god, just die already.

I've seen some of the director's other work (Kanal was fantastic, and Katyn was brooding and somber), so my reaction isn't due to an unfamiliarity with his style. But this film was just terrible. So unbelievably boring. I have no idea what film the other reviewers saw, and everyone's entitled to his/her opinion, but those people must have been smoking some damn good stuff.