"43 Years of Tehran" is a historical film made in the former Soviet Union that is equivalent to a spy war film, released in 1981.
The whole film is complicated and intricate, and it does not adopt a heroic tone of praise, but instead tells the whole story from the perspective of witnesses from different angles. As a film made by the main creators of the Soviet Union, it is not even as full of invincible heroism as Hollywood movies, but it embodies a deep helplessness, a powerlessness to grasp the direction of history.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" > I. Andre's re-unveiling of historical accounts:</h1>
Looking closely at the plot of the film, there are still many blank spaces that are incomprehensible, and the main line involved in it is the autobiography and film of a Max killer, which triggers a re-examination of the historical suspense.
That is to say, the focus of the film is to solve the mystery of history layer by layer through the perspective of a killer involved in the murder of the three giants.
However, all this was defused by Andrey, an agent sent by the Soviet Union, thus curbing a murder that affected the course of history. However, it is strange why Andre did not disclose the truth of this incident, but instead the killer took the initiative to expose the incident, is this not a way to seek his own death? In the film, it is said that Max decided to write his experience as a manuscript because of loneliness and emptiness, which is almost a lead and clue, so as to reveal the real inside story of the murder of the Big Three.
The elderly André also came to Paris alone to verify the authenticity of the film and manuscripts. It is hard to imagine that thirty-five years later, what value will those films and manuscripts have. It is worth starting a new operation by the german expert Schönel, who was an expert in assassination in the past. After all, history will be declassified, is it worth fighting for film and manuscript? In particular, Max had long since left the system of the Third Reich and had been a maverick killer for decades, so why should he have to duel him again?
It can be said that the historical truth that Max pulls out in the film is actually not lethal, and all of this is in the hands of the Soviet Andrei, and there is really no need to start a new competition for this historical account. In fact, the price paid is enormous, and it is puzzling that Mary in the film did not die in the extremely dangerous atmosphere of Tehran at that time, but died at the hands of the enemy in Paris thirty-five years later.
The film's narrative of events is very layered, but because there are too many layers involved, it is necessary to painstakingly capture its main clues.
At the beginning of the film, the origin of the story is revealed through the auction of a memoir of the killer who murdered the Big Three, led by lawyer Red Lang. The author of this memoir is the killer Max, but by this time he has changed his name to Beklier. In a shootout at the scene, Max kills a killer. The film then goes on to show Redrand coming to the United States, kidnapped, and after handing over the film, escapes safely and talks to the buyer about the film stored in a safe deposit box in Paris.
The Soviets sent Andrei to Paris to investigate the truth of the manuscript, and it was learned from Redrand that the film had been brought to the United States by Redrand, so that André had nothing to do. At this time, a new character Natalie appeared, she followed Reitlang and asked her about her mother, but what exactly it was, it is not known, and later in the scene of Redrand's documentary, Andrei was also present, saw Natalie behind, so André met Natalie (from her face, he saw the face of Mary at that time).
Natalie boarded the car of George, played by French policeman Alain Delon, in order to find Reitrand, and chased all the way to the airport, where André was also on the plane. Unfortunately, the plane was hijacked by a group of gangsters, later introduced to rescue Schönel, who was imprisoned in France and was to be released in a month. According to Andre, her mother, Mary, was also threatened. Captain George volunteered to track down Natalie's whereabouts, and god knows why he obeyed Andre's orders to help Andre come with him to find Natana. Just as Natalie came downstairs to speak to George, the killer opened fire and Captain George was shot. Below is Andrei sees Mary, and the two lovers meet again, surprised, as if they are separated. Whose fault is this? However, just as the two were talking for a moment, just as Mary was going to make a phone call, suddenly a truck rolled over and Mary was buried under the car. André saw Redrand again, and Ray said that the manuscript was nothing, all gone. The final shot is of Andrei seeing a little girl smiling at him on the plane, and flashing back to a conversation in Iran that Mary used to say that according to the rules of Islam, only by merging with the earth is the true destination of life.
The film here carries a strong pessimism and fatalistic meaning, it seems that everything that has happened will eventually return to the soil, and the heroic acts of that year have lost their value and meaning, as if they did not exist at all. This is reminiscent of Andre's view of contingency when he was traveling with Mary on the plane, as if contingency had made history, with a strong nihilism, but later André still emphasized the element of rationality in contingency, and the world was not a space in which the butterfly effect played a dominant role, and contingency was more used as an excuse to explain behavior, just as he claimed to have come to the plane only because he had not bought wine once a few months ago.
This is Andre's present paragraph, in which he basically does nothing, and all his role in the film is to see the final destination of the manuscript through his eyes, and the final ending of the other characters in the film, in his eyes, he sees Mary's death.
<h1 class = "pgc-h-arrow-right" > ii, the assassination mystery given in Max's clues:</h1>
The main part of the film is represented through Max's point of view. And this kind of performance, once introduced by his perspective, has begun to be positioned in a subjective position, that is, the memory is Max's, but the perspective position inside is Andrea's, which makes the film's narrative angle become strange, that is, the picture of memory is not the narrator, but the narrator is explored as a mysterious character.
Through Max's introduction, the film highlights the character of Schönell, but the important role of this character is nothing special, and the murder of the Big Three he planned did not make any significant progress.
The film begins with a chain of plots in a small bar performing acrobatics, where a white-bearded teller introduces Andre that the Germans have set their sights on Tehran, as the Germans learn that plasma with the same blood type as the Big Three is being prepared in the field hospital in Tehran. Schönell then consulted with people, and from Churchill's autobiography, he guessed that the date of the Big Three's date would be November 30. Thus, the 30th became a key day.
Below are a few shots in a jumping motion, expressing a continuous set of events. First, ask Schönel to inquire about the address of the Iranian rich man. Then Simon, the rich man's lawyer, received an anonymous phone call asking him to amend his will so that the rich man's body could be transported back to Tehran. In the next shot, max may find the doctor and ask him to characterize the death of the Iranian rich man according to the caliber of his death. Below is the funeral scene of the rich man.
At the same time, the white-bearded teller in the acrobatic bar ordered Andrei to sneak from Sweden into Tehran on a flight.
Below, a lengthy shot introduces Mary getting out of the car, meeting Simon, and then meeting Max, who claims to be the representative of the Geneva funeral home. In Tehran, Simon died because he suspected that the rich man was murdered, Mary worked as a translator for Max, met the Iranian father and son, and trained in the field every day to drill holes, in fact, this is the real group of killers of murder, that is, through the sewers into the British embassy.
At the same time, Andre and his men stole the items in Max's room, marked 30, analyzing the day the big three met, and then determined how to carry out the mission to prevent the grass from startling the snake.
The film then abruptly adds another scene of Nischer simulating a meeting of the Big Three with a man named Piyou, conducting an assassination drill. Pioux successfully blended into the camera team, but on the way, pretending that there was a problem with the camera, and went to a photo studio for repairs, the owner of the photo studio put a pistol in it, but halfway through, the inspection was found, and Piyou was arrested. At this time, it was explained that this group was just an eye covering, and the real killer was Max's group.
However, Max sneaks into the sewers, but is blocked by Andre, thus foiling the plot. Many years later, when Nasher asked Max why he hadn't succeeded, Max confessed the reason for the failure, which was actually very simple, that is, the plan was discovered and cancelled. In fact, this plan is too easy to expose, but it is not as effective as the group of reporters. What is particularly puzzling is that Max has seen Churchill on the way through Churchill, but he has not moved, and has lost his precious opportunity. So there are a lot of things that the film can't understand.
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > three, transnational love adds a touch of crimson seasoning to the film:</h1>
In the film, the clichéd plot of the hero saving the United States is also installed. Andre and Mary's acquaintance on the plane, especially the consideration of life and death in the cemetery, enabled the two to communicate ideas. Then, visiting the store together and talking about Mary's childhood, the two seem to be arranged by the movie and suddenly have a sharp mind.
After the two were chased by the killers, Andre sent Mary to a nursing home in the suburbs, did not want to be kidnapped by Thescher's people, and used her to blackmail Andre and force him to come, Andre's partner went to rescue Mary and sacrificed himself. As an agent, how could Andre have the energy to devote his time to a female secretary and me, and also use his limited protective power to rescue an insignificant girl? This kind of vignette, which has nothing to do with the main line, has nothing to do with Andre's reconnaissance operation against Max, I don't know what the significance is?
In addition, Mary stated thirty-five years ago that she had a daughter in the country, while Natalie, who appears in the film, is quite young and not on the right age. So, why did Andre break up with Mary again after completing the task? All of this is inexplicable.
Max's ending is quite interesting, a woman named Franço inadvertently enters his room, he trusts her very much, and does not have the wary mentality of being a killer for many years, but instead shows her a movie and introduces his experience, until he is taken by this woman, hidden in the basement, and meets Nischelle. When the two met, there was no thrill of sword fighting, but like old friends, talking about each other for a short time, talking about past experiences, Max sadly talked about his continued political murder, but "then no one looked for it, there are so many young, who wants me?" Nischer describes himself as "continuing to work with a group of people", which, according to the film's implications, may be a terrorist group, continuing to maintain Nazi secrets according to the program of the Third Reich. Max kidnaps Nasher, but is killed anyway, ending the narrator.
The structure of the film seems to be a mode of exploration, arbitrarily pulling up a clue, and then describing it with taste, there is no point in the weight, only continuous, you can understand what it means, and there are too many blanks in it that are uncertain.
The film lens is still the rough and stupid of the Soviet film, and there are more shots of follow-up and shaking, but because the picture is more realistic, there is no false and empty problem, but the dullness of the film is still obvious, many shots are very redundant, so it seems that the switching and jumping of the lens is a good way to watch the movie. The shots in the film are not light, but stagnant, and they are not refreshing.