浴火鸟

可能对世界总是充满期待的 总觉得会有解决的办法去平衡忽略了爱 真爱是永恒的 却做不到让事物保持平衡最后知道是真实事件改编更欲哭无泪了可能真正的离开才会让有心之人更留念更痛苦相爱的人啊 为什么总会被分开 为什么被现实拉扯（当你拍照时 有什么东西瞬间销声匿迹永远不会重现的瞬间 像鬼魂离开这世界）

从roman身上看到我的影子，我好几年前被迫入伍，然后在里面家人介绍了一个女孩，我以为我可以和她很顺利的恋爱结婚，但当我退伍之后，当我再次可以相遇男孩子之后 我发现我做不到。

会像roman说的没办法分裂我自己去爱两个人，我很痛苦。

我没办法和任何人解释我的难过，但我从roman中找到了我的影子，但庆幸的是我没有考上军校，如果可能我会是现实中的第二个roman。

我很庆幸自己离开了枷锁。

我最近才开始慢慢认同我自己，看完了这部电影。

我真的有点撕扯一般的难过，点点滴滴的回忆，我们甚至不如roman。

至少他找到了那个爱他至si的男人，他们经历了非常多浪漫美丽的回忆。

如果可以，我希望他们能一直在一起，如果不可以，我希望他们在天堂可以在一起。

正如电影里的，我的爱只存在于一瞬间，存在我的思想里。

我希望每一个人都可以真正找到属于自己的爱，毕竟我们只是来人间走一趟的平凡人。

在107分钟里，并没有火焰。

相反，水一直在影像中。

谢尔盖童年噩梦的幽蓝深渊，潮湿森林里的拥吻，让照片显形的一框静水，海边礁石后的躲藏，冰封的海边……水，作为火的对立者，在处理上达到了平衡。

因为谁都知道，火焰是情欲的，发源于内在的美好欲求。

如果谢尔盖和罗曼时刻在暖光中，在一片炎热的红中释放炙热浓情。

反而会让人感到唐然，过于直接。

在水与火拉开的距离中，二者相互补衬的张力才能显明。

苏勋宗的七十年代是过于扎眼的背景，让人不得不想到其中可以包含的政治指涉。

然而如果明确了电影“爱”的属性，淡化政治影响和改变政治影响的影像诠释其实是一种高明。

谢尔盖和罗曼并没有因为身份遭到迫害，那些可能的阉割，入狱，流放都没有出现。

但冷战就是冷战，高压就是高压。

那种雾气是一直弥漫在四周的，只不过尚不让人溃烂绝望。

同的身份受到的现实压力是每个时代都会有的病症，在苏联时期更会多一层体制性的束缚。

通过罗曼这个人物的前期踌躇和后期结婚来隐性的释放出这种无处不在的压力信息，并不会让人因为一些直露的对同的打压场面产生不适和畏惧。

同样，如果电影过度执着于对政权批判，也会失去本身的感性力量。

相爱，结婚，忘不了彼此，一人先去。

这种情节很难不让人想到断背山。

但事实上，《断背山》和《请以你的名字呼唤我》开创了G群体电影的两个形象。

世俗的，诗意的，纯真的，美好的，压抑的，痛苦的，空灵的，阴差阳错的，在看之后的西方同电影时，会不自主地联想到这两个作品。

这其实是正常现象，也不能单纯讥为烂俗，老套。

如今电影最难的，其实就是创造一个新故事，一个新人物。

但是同的身份又不得不牵扯到面对外界的脆弱，这是这个群体的属性赋予这类电影的必然。

况且《浴火鸟》里有一些别样的设计，比如罗曼走后，他的妻子在悲愤无奈之下却抱住了她的“情敌”谢尔盖。

这一瞬的异样举止使得人看到了她复杂翻涌的内心。

一瞬间是不可言说的，但确实也最能击中人。

这个电影可以说让我在屏幕上看到了今年看到的最好的情欲镜头，这当然包括颜控的情绪加持。

看完电影当然为之感到难过，可你想这不过是一个故事，有导演编剧的故事。

真正把我击垮的是“真实事件改编”。

为虚幻艺术所触动的痛觉和为真实生活所触动的痛觉原本是来源于一处，究竟没有分别。

每个内心的底色有善良和美好的人都会希望在我们的存在宇宙之外能有一个独立的灵的时空。

那些人们生活中和笔下的遗憾可以在那个世界里补足，那个世界里有一片海，让短暂分离的鸟儿浴火再会，然后一起笑着飞上蓝天。

爱是时刻都想要和那个人在一起谢尔盖在俄罗斯剧院大学里的这句话真的诠释了他一生对待爱情和罗曼的态度。

整部剧我边看边哭他们真的生错了时代和地方，可惜谢尔盖的原型在过世之前也没有等到俄罗斯对同性恋改变态度的那一天谢尔盖的原型没有孩子，也没有被记载的伴侣，士兵真的用一生来怀念年轻时候遇到的军官冰冷的体制和严厉的法律也没能阻止他们暗处滚滚燃起的深情，整部剧最感动我的地方是谢尔盖一直都在清醒地看着自己在一段不可能有结局的感情里沦陷。

在罗曼的婚礼上那句I try so hard to forget you. but I can't还有在索契谢尔盖靠在罗曼身上说我害怕这是一场梦，我害怕失去你那两个片段全剧最戳我。

这部剧诠释了背弃全世界也要相拥的勇气和爱情，某种程度上它的矛盾挺像free fall这部电影蛮像。

遇到需要背弃世俗去爱的人你是选择继续背负责任，规避世俗风险过一生还是free falk。

我很佩服能够用一生诠释责任感的人，同时也永远被free fall的勇气和爱意感动。

我最难过的是想到在罗曼的婚礼上谢尔盖质问罗曼你爱她吗？

罗曼最后对谢尔盖坦白这是为了保护他。

其实谢尔盖从来都不需要罗曼用婚姻换来的所谓保护，他一直都有罗密欧对爱情的勇气和执着。

柴静说，在没有光的地方没有爱，只有性。

我认为电影里面同妻，是环境社会的逼迫。

强制性的让人病态分裂，扭曲。

反观现在整体大环境的改善。

压迫的锁链虽消失不见，但也没有走出穹顶。

锁链消失的同时，好像也随之消失了什么东西。

以数字10为选择的核心，停留且沉沦于器官的化学反应，我们幸福太多，悲伤太多。

——————关于导演故事很长，明显不是以票房为主要目的，更像是对这个故事纪念和记录。

（当然票房肯定是有考虑过的）个人非常非常喜欢导演安排的一些细节。

这一组截图是他们在索契度假的情节导演这里给了鸽子一个特写，非常细腻的表达出了当时平和温柔的氛围，又呼应了当时战争的背景。

主人公只有在这个时候才能找到内心的平静吧。

后面又给了一个鸽子飞走的镜头。

暗示两人的美好转瞬即逝，又暗示着主人公无法强制留住这份爱，又与后文中，罗曼去世他们的爱情永恒呼应。

（可能是我过度解读了，但是我真的很喜欢导演留这些有趣的细节）重现了故事的全貌，导演几乎没加入自己的想法理解。

精巧的细节布置和分镜安排。

每个镜头里的细节都有自己的作用。

恰到好处的氛围把控。

最后再加上演员的演技和颜值。

光靠这些，它就注定不会是一个玛丽苏烂片。

个人觉得美中不足的是电影中女主路易莎形象并不是很鲜明。

2021年12月28号。

资源可私大家可以去ins上联系罗曼@zagorodniioleg。

会回私信的！

最开始被公映前那两个差评给忽悠了，竟然以为是一部庸脂俗粉粗制滥造之作。

抱着戏谑的心态观影，看完之后我完全得了失语症。

满腹感慨却提笔无字，电影中有太多内涵丰富的细节与描画人性的入木三分，思绪万千的我却找不到任何切入点可以引发哪怕一点点评论。

总有人给影片贴上断背山的标签。

诚然，在lgbt依旧被保守主流价值观视为异物的时代，所有同性之爱都会走上一条与断背山重合的宿命之路。

很多影片的评论你都会发现，“这是xx版断背山”，前几年的上帝之国我记得好像是HE版断背山，这次又贴了个苏维埃版断背山。

所以有人觉得俗套。

当你以欣赏故事、娱乐感官的心态去观看别人的经历，再波澜壮阔、大起大落的人生，看多了也会觉得千篇一律。

如果你抱着感同身受的态度去体验那些人的悲欢离合，他们的痛苦，他们的泪水，他们的抗争，他们的失败，一切都是那么切肤的真实。

他们的抉择如同一面残酷而真实的镜子，赤裸裸地折射出我们所有人灵魂的渺小和孤独。

与Sergey相识，与他情投意合，Roman一直都明白Sergey是自己的人生挚爱。

但是，他所受的教育、根深蒂固的观念，当他面对冷酷的刑罚与前途尽毁的恐惧时，他退缩了，就如同平凡的你我一样。

与合适的女子结婚，生儿育女，享受着家庭温情的同时，却又割舍不下此生挚爱，所以，Roman又找回了与Sergey的温存，就如同平凡的你我一样。

短暂地幸福过后便是撕裂人生的痛苦。

一边是妻儿的奉献、回报家庭的责任；一边是灵与肉完美契合的爱人，Roman无法在非黑即白的裂谷中找到平衡，就如同平凡的你我一样。

普通人或许会和稀泥似的永远周旋于二者之间吧？

直到家庭的亲情被一次次的出轨消磨殆尽、直到情人的眼泪被一次次的背叛蚕食成剧毒的脓血，爱与亲情最终抵不过时间的灰飞烟灭，白月光最终沦为了恶心不堪的蚊子血。

可是Roman最终却选择了一条不平凡的归宿。

他想把此生对Sergey的爱永远定格在最美好最纯粹的时代，他也不想看到妻儿失望鄙弃的目光，所以，Roman选择死在蓝天。

Roman至死都在爱着Sergey，他想去一个不再逼他做选择的地方，等待Sergey的到来。

——————————————————————————评论中有人提到，本片的细节设计精巧到位，可以反复推敲，非常赞同。

太多例子，只给大家推荐3个我印象最深刻的。

1 因为字幕组是英文翻译，所以Roman孩子名字音译不准确。

Roman孩子的名字是谢廖沙Сережа，英译Serjozha是俄文名谢尔盖(Сергей)的昵称。

Roman把自己儿子取名谢廖沙，用的是谢尔盖的小名。

相爱之人既然不能厮守，那就在每日呼唤其昵称的幻想中寻找爱的影子吧。

或许Roman还有过更疯狂的幻想也说不定，他幻想谢廖沙是他和谢尔盖的孩子。

谢尔盖和谢廖沙这对名字组合，常见于俄罗斯家庭的父子。

爸爸叫谢尔盖，孩子就叫谢廖沙。

婚前唯一一次与谢尔盖的交合，Roman的身体接受了谢尔盖的播种。

Roman幻想着，这孩子或许就是谢尔盖的( ･᷄ὢ･᷅ )呢 2 影片1小时09分左右，当时Roman和路易莎已经成婚，和妻儿在一起已经成为了他生活的全部。

他把对Sergey的思念深埋心底。

在那个没有数字存储设备的年代，即便把爱人的照片小心珍藏都有可能招来祸端。

所以，Roman唯一再见Sergey的机会，就是把胶卷中Sergey的照片偷偷冲洗出来，只让照片现形几秒钟。

几秒钟后，在妻子的呼唤中，Roman故意开门，让照片曝光，毁掉证据。

在漆黑狭小的暗室里，Roman可以享受片刻的只属于自己和爱人的回忆。

偷偷冲洗出爱人的影像，仔细地凝视片刻。

只在这片刻之间，贪婪地吸取从前美好的记忆。

片刻之后，在妻子的呼唤中，回归家庭的Roman故意打开门。

照片被曝光，影像消失。

只把瞬间的回忆刻进脑海。

影片的调色也和故事情节的发展环环相扣：Roman的公寓，和Sergey在一起共度的快乐时光，采用淡黄的暖色调柔和的暖色营造出油画的效果

同一间公寓，和Sergey天各一方的Roman，采用灰蓝的阴冷色调。

潮湿阴暗，即便有美丽的妻儿相伴，Roman的心也是寂寞的。

Roman死了，同一房间呈现出更加阴冷死寂的灰蓝色。

公寓以外的画面也一样。

爱情幻灭之后的冰冷色调

短暂的幸福，梦幻般的暖色光影，愿时光永驻此刻。

就如同Sergey说的，我们的爱情只能存在于没有思想、没有时间的地方。

就如同Roman祈求的那样，Later…later…再等片刻吧。

最后一个细节：结尾，失去Roman的谢尔盖坐在剧院观看芭蕾舞剧浴火鸟。

影片给出了一个看似是谢尔盖回忆的画面：谢尔盖回忆当年，Roman第一次带自己来剧院看戏。

其实，我们也可以把这段回忆看成是谢尔盖最终的幻想和憧憬。

仔细看，Roman是面带微笑地离开谢尔盖的。

他去了一个无人打扰的地方，就如同谢尔盖所说，一个超越了时间与空间的地方，去等待谢尔盖。

影片的最后一刻。

现实中在影片拍摄时，谢尔盖已经离世。

我们可以把它看作是谢尔盖人生的最后一幕。

生命走到尽头的谢尔盖，明白了先于自己离世的Roman一直都在等待着自己。

所以，他也笑了。

爱人从未离去，他一直都在等待。

谢尔盖终于可以去找Roman了。

——————————————————————————当然，所有断背山模式的结局都会产生无辜受害的妻子、甚至还有无辜的孩子。

我们鞭笞同妻现象太久了，希望能早见成效：当lgbt群体可以自由地行走在阳光之下时，无辜受害的妻儿就不复存在了。

而且，具体个案还要密切结合实际环境。

评论里有人说Roman是个渣男，该死。

我对这种不分青红皂白的指责实在气愤。

在同性恋婚姻合法的地区，依然出于个人目的比如说为了遗产继承、职位晋升等等诱骗无辜女性同婚的基佬确实是渣男该死。

在同性婚姻尚未合法，但同性行为已经去罪化的地区，如果你坚持站在道德制高点上指责，同性恋应该一辈子不婚，宁可顶着社会歧视甚至是暴力威胁而公开出柜，也不应该连累无辜女性同婚，这也勉强说得过去。

但是，结合本故事的年代背景和社会现实状况，在Roman那个时代，同性恋尚未去罪化，先不说恋情曝光他和Sergey都会面临牢狱之灾，即便他一辈子不婚，身处于他的职位，有可能不受怀疑吗？

如果说，Sergey的职位使他处于被放大镜观察的状况，那么，Roman所处的级别就是显微镜观察。

和平凡的你我一样，Roman不得不为自己找一个安全的保护伞——婚姻和妻子。

而且，Roman在妻儿的保护伞之下，比那些真正殴妻虐子不务正业的渣男丈夫优秀千百倍了吧？

尤其是他受人羡慕的职务。

很多女性即便在爱情不足的情况下，也会优先考虑丈夫的事业前景。

如果还有人觉得，你怎么不辞职？

你怎么不放弃分飞行员的职位？

你为什么不接受Sergey的提议背叛祖国背叛家人飞去瑞典呢？

你为什么不去选择坐牢而是自私地去骗婚？

我只能说，等你哪天真的自己做到舍生取义杀身成仁，那时候你就有资格扮演圣人了。

还是那句话，有朝一日，当lgbt群体可以自由地行走在阳光之下时，无辜受害的妻儿就不复存在了。

首先我是一个退役军人，有感而发，希望看完🤲不知道大家有没有感觉这一类的电影看完给人的感受都基于、延伸于《call me by your name》。

我上学期大学里一个语文老师说为什么现代作家总喜欢写耽美文，就是因为男孩子和男孩子的爱情无论放在这个爱站队的当下社会，还是从前都是百般受挫的，结局基本上都是不美好的，这样的文字，比起甜甜的撒狗粮更能触动人心弦，所以导演估计也是为了冲掉观看电影后的受虐感，在电影中很多地方还是安排了一些令人会心一笑的桥段，这一点我觉得很好，因为电影确实很需要不同的情绪来提高受众群体的观影感，毕竟是这是电影，并不是像电视剧那样可以一件小事讲一集的。

其次，这是一个很长的真实的爱情故事，电影本身就已在尽善尽美的把故事的完整性和细节二者融汇贯通。

再说说角色的演技，个人看来三位主角演技都是在线的，有一些说人角色演技很直男，没有共情感，我觉得这是抛开环境去评论演员，首先我们要知道，时间是上世纪70年代，地点是苏联又是在部队，但凡把这三个要素随便换一个更自在一点的不那么压抑的，我都觉得主角就不会有被人说没有演技了。

不知道大家有没有观察过很多细节，电影中频繁的来演习，上校说不准男主讲那种笑话等等很多，这说明什么？

我以亲身经历告诉你，这是准备要dz了，这是一种很压抑环境，要去dz了！

兄弟，更何况他们是上下级关系，一个是高高在上的军官，一个是默默无闻的义务兵，期间的鸿沟，很难一时逾越，没有去部队的人也许真的很难感受这种等级制度极度森严的上下级关系，所以才会对他们的情感产生疑问，综上所述，演员所演的关系真的是恰到好处。

还有一些涉及伦理问题的，我不好评论，但是我觉得还是要去看他们当时所处的环境和人物的真实性格。

总之这部电影给我的感觉就是 捡到宝了

Firebird is an epic Queer love story set in a tense Soviet Union. This unconventional film followed the romance of Sergey, played by Tom Prior, and Roman, played by Ukrainian hunk, Oleg Lobykin.

Set in the 1970's Cold War, Firebird is an incredibly stylish film. The visuals feel authentic and true to its setting. But surprisingly, there are bouts of action, adding more thrill to a story that is already anxiety inducing. Another twist is that the film explores a love triangle between Roman, Sergey, and Roman's partner, Luisa- played by Diana Pozharskaya. This part of the world has always been incredibly hostile to LGBT+ people. It is common to see an attempt to erase Queer people from the histories and identities of post-Soviet countries. From the 'LGBT free zones' in Poland; the Gay Propaganda Laws in Russia - to the toxic political discourse in Hungary - 'Firebird' is a symbol of Queer existence throughout history. It is a statement that Queer love is not a modern and Western construct, but it is imbedded in the fabric of humanity. And this piece of history- beautifully shown in the film- is a shining example that the #TheNewEastisQueer, and it always has been.In this interview, the writer/lead actor, Tom Prior and director/writer Peeter Rebane talk about the true story of 'Firebird', its making, and what it was like to meet the real Sergey. EAST: Where did you first meet each other? TOM: I was doing some work in Los Angeles, and a film financier that I was meeting- by coincidence- mentioned that she heard about the story of Firebird- which was under a different name at the time- and promised to introduce me to Peeter. Then we basically connected and I read the script, and fell in love with it instantly. It was when the draft of the screenplay was at a very early stage, and that’s really where it began. EAST: Peeter, when did you first discover the story?PEETER: That was over 10 years ago. A friend of mine- who founded the ‘Black Nights Film Festival’ in Tallinn- she received the original story from a Russian journalist showing it around at the Berlinale, and she knew that I was looking for material for my first film. So I read it over a weekend at home, I literally cried and decided that I have to turn this into a film and then started writing for the first time ever.

EAST: ’The New East is Queer’ is a campaign to debunk the myth that Queer people don’t exist in Eastern Europe and Post-Soviet States. Yet here is a queer love story set in Soviet Russia. Were you conscious of this when deciding to make the movie? Did you feel a sense of duty to tell the story?PEETER: Foremost, I was taken a back by the universal love story. I was also fascinated and really surprised when I read the original manuscript that such a relationship could have actually existed in the Soviet airforce. Then we went on to interview people who served in the Soviet military in the 1970’s and found out that many such relationships existed, and we were also fortunate enough to interview Sergey in Moscow. But at the same time I do feel also that it is important to share this story in light of the real horrors that are going on in Russia and especially in Chechnya today. It is important to remind people about the importance of love and how such relationships have existed throughout the ages. TOM: For me its really important to share these messages. But we were very true when we said we made this film- not for political reasons- but for about love, love wins. Sergey’s character in the film is really about following his heart. There are terrible atrocities happening, but being able to make movies like this, we are effectively being that very change that we want to see in the world. EAST: How was Roman cast? PEETER: That was a really long process. We set a very clear intention to find the most authentic actors that are believable to the true story. So we did a world wide casting, and got 2,500 submissions for the role of Roman. For months we were casting in Europe and the UK, to Moscow. One day in Moscow, Oleg walked in the room and everyone was like: “That’s our Roman”. EAST: How was it working with Oleg?TOM: It was a really fascinating process as Peeter said. We just knew from the minute he walked in the room that it was right, this kind of presence. When you talk about casting in a film, you really are casting a person as you are a performer. He had this real presence and he was the nearest person that we felt was Roman, and so, our journey began. Because he is not a native speaker, at all, in fact he had a very small amount of English when we began the project. It has its challenges, and in some ways it actually helped, to a degree, because it meant that we couldn’t communicate as freely as we would, say in a modern day context in English- which serves the story in an amazing way. Because at the time there was no language around the subject matter. Today we are in a very liberal society where we can begin to scale that in a very easy and transparent way, but at the time there wasn’t that. So it bought a really interesting dynamic to the film. Working with Oleg was a real pleasure but it of course it had its challenges as well: cultural background differences, and things like that. But it was a really beautiful working relationship. EAST: Tom, you were a writer as well as an actor in ‘Firebird’. How did this come about?TOM: When Peeter and I met- and fell in love with the story- at that time we didn’t have the financing in place to make the film. So we made a teaser for the film, and the scenes that we selected for the teaser. I made some suggestions about how we might improve the script a bit, and the lines and the nature of the lines. I have a real sensitivity to being able to produce texts or language of how people actually speak- as oppose to how people one would think people speak- this is something I am quite sensitive to. So I made these few suggestions on how we might improve the script and that ended up several pages of notes and ended up as several weeks of work, which ended up being overall significant rewrites and redrafts and restructures- and doing lots and lots more research. Then by that point, the script was completely a different animal to what I first came to. So we took the strong elements of that and then imbedded in a lot more research.

EAST: Thats an interesting point. After stalking your Instagram its quite clear that you are a spiritual person and quite centred. Did these qualities help you in your writing or acting?TOM: Most definitely. For me this project has been quite extraordinary, in the sense of the level of depth that I have been able to get to. Writing the content, for sure, is a whole other level as a performer. Then also meeting the real Sergey, we interviewed him in Moscow, we also very tragically went to his funeral. He passed away in the time that we were developing the story, and it was a very surreal moment for me, to be at the funeral of a person whose life you have extended in the literary form, and who you will play in real life. So there were very strong moments during the time filming that there was this awareness that Sergey was with us, or certainly the energy. For me, having a real level of emergence within the project meant that the emotion came easily, or the stream of conscienceless, lets say. It was very profound and beautiful for the opportunity to do that as a performer. EAST: And when you met Sergey Fetisov, what were your impressions of him, and did these impressions influence the way you played or wrote about him? TOM: Very much so. It was an honour to meet him, and he was so very full of heart. He was a very heart-led man. You could tell that he had such a sunny persona, and despite having had a lot of trials and tribulations in love, he was bold and happy. So I bought that level of following your heart, and that bounciness to the performance- where I could - without making it seem to out of context at the same time. EAST: And for you Peeter, how was it meeting Sergey Fetisov, and did this impact the way you directed the film?PEETER: As Tom said, he was an amazingly warm and heartfelt person, considering what he had gone through in his life, and how these experiences had made him loving and not hating. I think he definitely informed how we developed the character, and it was an amazing treasure trove speaking to him about actual details, like: what were their favourite pieces of music; what were their favourite foods; which music they would play to each other; which books would they read; which theatre plays they went to see. It all kind of built a world, and helped us to be very authentic in directing and staging the film.EAST: Peeter, being from Estonia, was there anything about your heritage and personal identity that you bought to the project?PEETER: Definitely, when I was a very young boy I still recall the Soviet occupation, and our summer house was actually the airforce base where this story takes place. I have this distinct memory of my friend being on this bicycle and these two MiG’s (Mikoyan-Gurevich) flying overhead at maybe 150 feet, and us literally falling off the bicycles because the noise was so deafening. So I have a very strong personal connection, besides having grown up with this feeling of shame about ones sexuality, having to hide your true identity, and the surrounding environment lacking understanding and being ignorant. So, a lot of parallels for me. EAST: How much history is in the story?PEETER: I think its, well I don’t dare to say 100%, but I think its 99% historically correct. The events happening, the small details of the airforce base, the setting, we really made our upmost to make a film that looks and feels like the 1970’s could have looked and felt like.

EAST: And there seems to be a big military presence in the film. PEETER: From the directing perspective, we had amazing consultants. We had a retired airforce base, a retired Soviet airforce base commander, flight pilot, a person who worked in the command centre, who directed all the flights. We had a lot of people who literally went through the script, went through the dialogues, who were on the set with us, telling us to do it like this, or do it this way. We put trust in not making a Hollywood version of what someone envisages, but in thorough research. TOM: The intricacy of the details is very particular, I mean, even when it comes to the radio announcements, and things like that, and the calling in’s to the planes and the lights from the command centre and everything- its all very accurate. We did the best research to our knowledge, to make sure that it was as real as possible, and the same really with the job titles, the job roles. The military consultants in particular were very useful and an intrinsic part of the training for the performance: the way we would walk; the hand salutes; all this military realism that actually happened, and making sure that the attention to detail- our costume department were really great around that also. So, the military aspects of the film, even this accident, there was an accident sequence within the film as well, which was in the original story, and I was absolutely adamant we had to put it into the film, to give it this military flare, instead of having it simply as a backdrop, but actually as an action sequence, this was really paramount and important to me, to ground it into the real world. EAST: Any personal highlights from onset?Peeter: I think for me one of the most amazing shots was the last shot of the film. Without giving away too much, it lasts about 1.5 minutes, and the camera is going into Sergey, and technically it was huge challenge for our team to pull it off, but also performance wise, for Tom to act out all the different emotions, truthfully, being surrounded by 50 or 60 extras, and knowing that we can’t cut, and that this is all real time, one very long take. TOM: Its a very unforgiving shot, lets put it that way. I’m very proud of that moment, and what came through. It was one of those moments that I was speaking out earlier, where there was this profound connection. I started experiencing some very curious things, emotionally. It was like being show the end of ones life, but I was experiencing it in the real time, which was quite curious. For me, the highlight and more significant highlights of the film was really my personal growth. That to me is a huge success. As a measure of success, it challenged me emotionally, physically, spiritually, and now its a sort of standing point, as a physical manifestation of what one can achieve when there are so many odds against you and challenges and time limiting factors, and all those kind of things. So yeah, we can have a whole other discussion of that for the highlights. But we were so blessed, to have such a wonderful committed and loyal team who were willing to go way above standard hours, the commitment was astounding. EAST: Peeter, did you learn anything about yourself personally or professionally during this project?PEETER: Absolutely, first of all it was my first full length feature. I have done documentaries, but that’s a whole different game. Learning all the nuances of directing on the set of the feature, and actually doing a pretty challenging script. We shot in the air, under the water, in the baltic sea, staged Hamlet in theatre, staged the full production of Firebird, including costumes and choreography, dancers and sets- a lot of very specific scenes. It was very challenging and I had a lot of personal growth during this process, over the last couple of years. TOM: I think for me also, as I mentioned, the physical challenges, the stamina, keeping up your health, mental clarity and sharpness through longer days, and resilience through that. Some days there would be, 5, 6, 7, 8 costume changes, multiple different set environments, we would have to change them very quickly as well. I would be sitting on the train, where we would shoot the train sequences, and moving from one emotional state to another, within minutes, and the whole world of the character has changed and gone upside down in that time. So, to be able to tune in to that energy, that emotional change very quickly, was really amazing. And to also play a lead in a film, there is this overwhelming pressure that you can put on yourself, and to scale that, was for me, a real joy and a real challenge, at times. To stay centred, to stay focussed, and to know what we have got to do and what we are there to do, and yeah, this was a really beautiful example of change and growth, and long hours, knowing that you can do it, and you have got to get through it.

EAST: How relevant do you think the story is for todays audience?Tom: For me, the story is very relevant in terms of following your heart. We live in a world which is probably more divided than ever, with regards to health, with regards to beliefs and perceptions. It is a standing point for following your heart. Actually, if you choose to walk that path, its not necessarily going to be the easiest route, but its probably somewhat the most rewarding- in terms of being able to feel and develop as a person. The film is about following ones heart and ones desires against all the odds, and against the laws of the country and the environment in which somebody grows up in. I hope this is a standing point of inspiration to follow your heart, to love daringly, that would be my wish and hope for its relevance today. EAST: Do you have any plans to show this to Eastern audiences? Peeter: Absolutely, we will distribute the film across the world. We trust we will be at some festivals in the summer, also Autumn, late October- and end of the year we will have a wider distribution across the region. So, I guess we will see how the world is as we open, and depending on how much we will be in cinemas. But definitely, we will be on all major platforms across Europe. 'Firebird' premiered at the 2021 BFI Flare Festival on 17th March 2021 and is available to stream on the BFI Player until 28th March 2021.

”那片天空，是最后的自由之地“可是没有那个人能一直飘在天上看这个电影的过程，就觉得是很多人的真实写照尽管生活背景不同，可是这样的路却大差不差影片中的环境压抑，处处都是都同性的监控，甚至欺压这是摆在明面上的在当下呢？

不过是阴在暗处罢了甚少有人敢把那双十指相扣的手，暴露在阳光下这是长久长久以来的共同之处而这份爱而不得的伤憾，又何其相似小男主多帅啊，一眼万年的那种可是当他在婚礼上苦苦哀求的时候，说出那句”我用了很多方法，想要忘记你“这又是多少人的曾经呢其实很难评判，到底该不该与好友的男人走在一起该不该又踏上火车，坐在对面去重复过去，去加深伤害这很难评因为我们不是他们，因为我们也幻想过他突然出现面前，在一辆去往曾经的火车上等着我可是，绝大多数人没有我们都走散在人海里了

到底什么才是对的呢我不知道，至少现在不知道因为没有谁给我答案，也没有谁告诉我这条路该走向何方，或者该从哪截断我一直在自己找，自己定毕竟，这是自己选择的路，不怪什么人只是，看着这样的电影，看着男主在雪地里独行的背影很难不想到自己若世事太难，那自由之地又在何方？

我看完之后有被剧情和画面震撼到，立马去官网看了下幕后导演故事，导演2011年看到了谢尔盖（电影主角原型）写的传记《关于罗曼的记忆》，读完非常喜欢然后决定写电影剧本作为自己的第一部电影作品，几年之后剧本完成，2014遇到了tom（饰演谢尔盖的演员），tom加入了剧本创作，2016年两人去俄罗斯和谢尔盖见面，又了解了大量的细节使剧本更加丰满，2017年演员确定开始排练，2021年在电影节上映。

电影的三角恋让我想起了之前看的《橘衫男子》，同样的军官和士兵，军官和女人结婚生子。

另外浴火鸟的取景摄像和画面调色都太厉害了，画面质感在同性片里面绝对超过了大部分的电影，改编自真实故事让电影里感情更加动容。

不得不说谢尔盖年轻的时候很帅，典型的俄罗斯长相，演员有些神似，不知道罗曼的原型是什么样子，应该和扮演他的演员一样英姿飒爽吧。