Cult Review
Senior Film Conservator

You should probably watch this if you have a soft spot for weird old movies that feel like they were made by people who drank way too much coffee. If you want a story that actually makes sense from start to finish, you are going to hate it. 🤡
It is a comedy from 1930 called Dvadtsat dva neschastya, which translates to Twenty-Two Misfortunes. It pretty much does exactly what the title says.
The movie is basically a giant pile of slapstick moments. I lost count of the actual misfortunes around number twelve, but they keep coming anyway.
It stars Andrei Kostrichkin and Pyotr Sobolevsky. They were part of this group called FEKS, which stood for Factory of the Eccentric Actor, and boy, do they live up to that name.
Everyone in this movie moves like they are being controlled by a puppeteer who is having a panic attack. It is all jerky movements and wide eyes.
Yanina Zheymo is also in this. She has this tiny, doll-like face that makes everything she does look twice as funny.
The plot? There isn't much of one to be honest. It is just a guy trying to get through his day while the world decides to trip him at every turn.
It reminded me a bit of Dekabryukhov i Oktyabryukhov because of that frantic Soviet energy. But this one feels a lot more grounded in just being silly.
There is this one scene where a character is trying to deal with a bunch of clothes. It goes on for way too long, but it’s kind of hypnotic to watch.
The editing is really fast. Sometimes it cuts so quickly you miss the punchline of the joke.
I think the director was trying to be experimental, but mostly it just feels like they were having fun with the camera. It’s not deep, and it doesn't try to be a "profound exploration" of anything.
It is just a very loud silent movie, if that makes any sense. The visuals scream at you even when there is no sound.
Compared to something like The Uneasy Three, this feels way more chaotic. It doesn't have that same moody atmosphere.
One thing I noticed was the lighting in the indoor scenes. It’s very harsh and makes the actors look like they haven't slept in three weeks.
Maybe that was the point. Being that unlucky would probably make anyone look tired. 😴
The movie gets way better when you stop trying to follow the logic. Just let the weirdness wash over you.
It’s not a masterpiece. It’s a bit of a clunky mess, actually.
But there is a charm to it that you don't see in modern stuff. It feels like someone’s actual notebook of bad jokes brought to life.
Some of the gags don't land at all. Like, there is a bit with a bucket that just sort of... ends?
I wish the ending was a bit more satisfying. It just kind of stops, like they ran out of film or got bored of filming misfortunes.
If you’ve seen On the Fire, you might recognize some of the rhythm here. It has that same 1920s/30s energy where they were still figuring out what funny looked like on screen.
Overall, it is a decent way to spend an hour if you like film history. Or if you just want to feel better about your own bad luck. 📽️
The print I saw was a bit grainy, which actually made the slapstick feel more authentic. It felt like a found object from a different planet.
I wouldn't watch it twice, but I'm glad I saw it once. It’s a weird little time capsule of Soviet slapstick.

IMDb —
1925
Community
Log in to comment.