Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie's plot.

1969, Czechoslovakia. A man and his wife are returning home after a late party. They discover that neither has the house keys. They argue. He finally climbs over the garden wall and breaks into the house. What begins as an irritating hassle, evolves into a story of suspicion and panic when they realize that someone has been in the house. Flashbacks to the social gathering earlier that evening piece together the reason for the panic. The man is a high level member of the Communist party. His boss, a minister, had been arrested that very evening by the secret police; a victim of the 'shoot the messenger' reaction when he turned in his report on brickyard closures. As for the couple, while the panic sets in, a picture emerges of a family living precariously in the peak of communist luxury but in an atmosphere of fear within a political world that capriciously promotes people, or strikes them down at will. They assume as a given that their house is bugged and refer often to "The Ear" -- they argue in the bathroom where they can turn on the water and make love on the floor in the kitchen which they calculate is less likely to be bugged than their bedroom. The movie is the story of one psychologically harrowing night, combined with flashbacks to key conversations at the earlier social gathering, as the man tries to sort out what's happening and whether he to is to be picked up and dragged away. Random memories of remarks and incidents become full of meaning and foreboding. Claustrophobic uncertainty builds throughout the movie, and film eventually culminates in an unexpected twist.

Behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War years, moviemaking like all of media was heavily censored by The State. Thus there are few films about the realities of life in the Soviet-controlled socialist countries. But during the 1960s in Czechoslovakia, the director/writer team of Karel Kachyna/Jan Prochazka started making films that pushed the boundaries of what was allowable. They made films that were pessimistic when films had to be optimistic by strict party demands. They followed characters that were not supposed to even exist in socialist Czechoslovakia, such as prostitutes and alcoholics. They told stories involving the dark side of agricultural collectivism and even of WWII partisans. Many of their films were banned upon release. But the miraculous fact that these films were allowed to be completed at all was not so much the result of the easing of the political climate in the mid-1960s, but rather of the fact that ironically Jan Prochazka was an influential member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. During the last of 1960s, many reformers like Prochazka had moved upwards in the levels of Czechoslovak society, both within and outside the Communist Party. Through a chance meeting, Prochazka became a confidante of sorts for the back-then Czechoslovak president Antonin Novotny, in the latter's difficult relations with the rising guild of Czech writers and filmmakers, and the 1968 reform era of Prague Spring owes in part its existence to Jan Prochazka.

In Ucho (translation = “The Ear”), Kachyna/Prochazka point the lens straight at the Communist Party and its leaders. Party members are generally scheming ambitious bullies and the few true idealists who spout about 'socialist principles' are bitter caricatures. In the film, the president of the country and the head of its Communist Party, a not so subtle parody of president Gustav Husak, is a scary combination of power and stupidity. At one point he says, "Sometimes I even think to myself: 'I don't know anything about any of this.' But then I think: 'I need to make a decision; we can not defeat imperialism by being indecisive.' So I make the decision. And you know, I then tell myself: 'You made a good decision!'" The audience nods and smiles vigorously, 'Comrade is such a good leader!'. Indeed, this film is so scathing towards the Communist Party that it seems unlikely it would have been allowed even in the thawing climate of early 1968.

But this movie was not made in 1968. It was made in 1969 after the Prague Spring was crushed by the "Armies of the Brotherly Nations" (the Warsaw Pact) to protect Czech socialism from counter-revolution (cough). In the aftermath, the Communist Party was purged of reformers -- such as Prochazka. This film is the story of one night during which one of these reform-minded ministers (the man's boss) is purged. Ucho was immediately banned on it's release. Karel Kachyna was fired from his job at the Prague Film Academy and Jan Prochazka was banned from further work and died a year later. After his death, use of Prochazka’s unfilmed screenplays was forbidden. Ucho was released 20 years later in 1989, after the Velvet Revolution overthrew communism in Czechoslovakia. It stands as a true insider's view of the Community Party behind the Iron Curtain and the associated 'priviledged' life of those at the top of it.

My personal take on the film: That this film was even made is astounding to me and I am moved by the bravery it represents since all involved with the film would have known that there would be personal consequences. Jan Prochazka suffered the most severe consequences, but the others, directors and actors, had difficulties afterwards also. To make this film was a statement of dissent against the 1968 invasion and represents the depth of feeling about the invasion. For this I would give the film 5 stars. However, as entertainment, I would personally give it 3 stars. The lead acting was fine, but not anything incredible. The directing is fine, but does not compare to that of the eastern European greats of this same generation (e.g. Szabo, Menzel, Forman). As a psychological thriller, it was for me only slightly above average. I watch a lot of eastern European films from this era, so my lukewarm feelings have nothing to do with the fact that it’s a black-and-white, subtitled film with lower production values than you see in western films. So I gave it 4 stars – averaging the two.

EHolmes
http://sunnysidekitchen.blogspot.com/

******************************

Film as form of dissent: the films of Karel Kachyna and Jan Prochazka, 1963-1970 in communist-controlled Czechoslovakia

1963. Nadaje (Hope) was the story of a prostitute and an alcoholic. According to the strict state ideology at the time, these conditions which did not exist and to suggest otherwise was clearly subversive.

1965. At' zije Republika (Long Live the Republic) challenged the simple state-decreed ideological myth of the post-WWII ‘liberation’ of Czechoslovakia.

1966. Kocár do Vídne (Coach to Vienna) not only challenged the state ideology but also popular myths glorifying the WWII partisans. This ultimately anti-war film was uniformly unpopular.

1967. Noc nevesty (Night of the Bride)) took on collectivisation of agriculture, one of the paragons of communism.

1969. Smesny pan (Funny Old Man) is about a man who was a political prisoner in the Stalin era but who has now been rehabilitated. He is in the hospital for surgery and his bed, the staff, all represent a continuation of his imprisonment and a metaphor for the state of society at large.

1970. Ucho (The Ear) was the last-straw. In this film, it’s as if Kachyna and Prochazka decided, “Let’s just cut all the b.s. metaphors and subtlety and get right to the point.”


Recommended: Yes

Viewing Format: VHS
Suitability For Children: Not suitable for Children of any age