Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Lee Eisenberg Aleksandr Dovzhenko's "Aerograd" is the sort of movie that you watch to see how masterful cinematography can be. Where it's lacking is in real plot. Obviously intended as a propaganda piece, it depicts an airfield in the eastern Soviet Union that comes into conflict with the Japanese. The characters come across as cartoonish and it's a predictable movie. It was probably a movie that Stalin wanted them to make. Now that I think of it, I should have spent the whole time riffing the movie like on "Mystery Science Theater 3000".No, it's not a terrible movie. Just overacted and generally corny. Might be of interest to film buffs, but not to anyone else.

cstotlar-1 For those who fondly remember the terrific visuals of Dovzhenko's "Earth", this is a very, very long way off. As some have mentioned this IS propaganda but the sort that shoots itself in the foot rather than pointing fingers. In the first thirty minutes alone there were three monumental speeches, all over-stressed and so painfully long they made me actually home-sick for the Academy Award-winning overacting we know so well. There's not really much of a plot here - the screaming propaganda would have buried it anyway - and the characters themselves go no deeper than comic-book roles. In fact, the characters don't develop either, so the film is quite static in just about every way. All the foreigners here are despicable as well as people making the signs of the cross. This is a textbook example of Stalinist film, with exclamation points at the end of every sentence. And as we remember from grade school, too many exclamation points weaken the ideas. Perhaps that was why the film is so tiring.

jennyhor2004 It's a well-made film with stunning shots of wilderness and planes flying in the sky but where would a Dovzhenko film be without the requisite pro-Soviet propaganda? "Aerograd" leads the way in staking the Stalinist government's claim to ownership of the Far East territories, those areas from the border with Manchuria running up through Sakhalin island to the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy and Chukotski peninsulas (the latter separated from Alaska by the Bering strait). The film constantly emphasises the frontier nature of the country in these areas: the forests of huge trees and mossy undergrowth stretch for miles, the rivers are wild and the seas vast, and the ice also stretches on and on over the horizon forever. Pity in a way that "Aerograd" had to be shot in black-and-white as colour film could have focused on the majesty and richness of the forests and on the cold blue and wild white of the rivers, seas and ice floes.Unfortunately the version of the film I saw on Youtube.com didn't have English subtitles so much of the plot went way over my head. The plot is not very clear and has several parallel strands to it though there are definite lead characters (the sharpshooter, a pilot and a Rasputin-like Old Believer demagogue) and a head Japanese villain. There is an airfield being built in a remote part of the Soviet Far East near where a colony of Old Believers (Russian Orthodox Christians whose ancestors rejected the reforms of Patriarch Nikon in the 1600′s and who were persecuted and forced to flee to remote parts as a result) has lived for a long time. The Old Believers don't support the Communist government and this stand brings them into conflict with recent Russian settlers building the airfield. In the meantime a few Japanese spies have snuck into the area and see the spat going on so they try to stir up the Old Believers into rejecting Soviet authority and the airfield. One local Russian man is friendly with a spy but is caught and condemned to be executed as a traitor; the man's friend who appears to be a sharpshooter is given the task of executing him.The film clearly urges support for the Stalinist government by showing the Old Believers as naive, superstitious and backward in their ways, the Japanese as sinister and duplicitous swordsmen, and other Russians as progressive and rational. One scene in which the Old Believers are at worship portrays them as a bit fanatical. Dovzhenko strives not to appear racist: the handsome pilot, one of the heroes, has a young Asian wife; and a young Siberian hunter with a lance declares his support for the Russians. The sharpshooter who must execute his friend seems upset but knows he must carry out his duty.For Western viewers, the best parts of "Aerograd" are the silent scenes at the beginning and near the end of the film: at the start there are several minutes during which the sharpshooter pursues two Japanese spies through the forests, and near the end a huge flotilla of planes from all over the Soviet Union fly to the Aerograd airfield to help defend the area from Japanese invasion. The forests dwarf the humans running through them; even the undergrowth threatens the swallow them up. During the film's climax when Aerograd is in danger, planes in strict formation roar through the sky and each succeeding shot, spliced in-between with title cards showing the planes' cities and regions of origin, includes more planes until the skies are thundering with their presence and authority. The music during this part is rousing and dramatic. A very stirring highlight indeed.Acting varies from natural to over-acting, even histrionic in one scene where the fiery-eyed Rasputin guy fires up a crowd so much that women start sobbing and collapsing.As it is, "Aerograd" looks very good and if it had English and other language subtitles I would recommend it to history and film students for its value as a propaganda piece urging support for Stalin and collective action, and resistance to Japan. If "Aerograd" were considered for a remake for general viewing, it would probably be in the form of a "Western" as plot, location and character elements ripe for that genre already exist: wild frontier territory near Manchuria; a sharpshooter and a hero pilot who find in each other a natural ally; an isolated community whose political loyalties are vague and have to be prodded in the "right" direction; enemies sent from another country with territorial ambitions; and an aerial version of the US Sixth Cavalry to come to the rescue.

pingnick If propaganda is your thing you'll love this movie. Although I succumb to propaganda in really well done movies like I Am Cuba I wasn't sucked in much by Aerograd. Therefore, all I really liked about this pro "manifest destiny" piece for the Soviet Union were the beautiful landscape and airscape vignettes. Russia's Far East sure looks like a place worthy of conquest so I feel the movie is at least somewhat successful in that. If you're a historian you may also be interested to see how the interwar Soviet propaganda machine rails against Japan and other Asian countries in 1935.