There's Plenty Of Space In Russia To Bury The Past

Archangel revolves around a history professor, Dr. Kelso (Daniel Craig), who listens to the story of an old Soviet soldier who was present at the death of Stalin. The soldier, named Papu Rapava, tells of driving the chief of the secret police, Beria, to Stalin's office, where Beria removed papers, which he instructed the solider to bury in Beria's backyard. Kelso, who hasn't published a book in 6 years, sets off to find this possible secret diary, and winds up getting a lot more than he bargained. The Rapava quickly turns up dead, Kelso drags Rapava's daughter Zinaida (Yekaterina Rednikova) into, partially to protect her, partially because he needs her help. A nosy reporter gets himself involved. The FSB sends a man after Kelso, trying to get him to drop it, and pretty soon the military is involved and people are getting shot out in the woods.

For a historian, Kelso seems remarkably dense. He consistently does things that struck me as very bad ideas. Blathering on to colleagues he knows can't keep their mouths shut. Asking a Russian author (and former official of the Party) Vladimir Mamantov for help tracking down information. Reporting a murder to the police, then being surprised they treat him as a suspect. Not realizing how badly some people would want a return to Stalin. Incidentally, this seemed ludicrous to me at first. Then I remembered there are lots of people in the United States today who would love to turn back to the clock several decades, because they think it'd be better for them (or just worse for other people they don't like, women and minorities for example). Anyway, it seemed to me Kelso would have been better off keeping this to himself for as long as possible, then turning to others only once he had no other options. It could be argued he was on a limited visa, he had to move fast, so he took some ill-advised shortcuts.

I think his lack of comprehension is part of the point. He's a Westerner (IMDB says British, and that's certainly his accent, but he studied at Harvard and lives in the U.S., so I'm not sure he isn't supposed to be American), looking at Russia from the outside, passing judgment. His perspective is not necessarily their perspective. Not that all Russians have the same perspective. Given the limited cast, there's a definite generational gap. Zinaida and Felix (the FSB agent) don't pine for the old days, and Felix doesn't even really see what the big deal is about some old papers anyway. It's the older people who have fooled themselves into thinking things were better back then, or in the case of Felix' superior, are terrified of anything reviving Stalin's ghost. Either way, Kelso's a fool stumbling through all this, trying to make some cash. I don't think he's ever motivated by some desire to uncover truth, or that he even tries to fool himself into believing that's his motivation. He needs to write a new book, simple as that. I can sort of appreciate the simplicity of that motive, and that he gradually realizes it isn't worth it. It's not a new trope, the outsider who learns that he knows nothing and is sent home humbled, but it can be an effective one.

The movie's based on a novel written by Robert Harris, an Englishman. Watching it, I couldn't help wondering how different it would be if it was written by a Russian. I kept expecting a more quietly bleak ending. Something like, after a long struggle they track the files down, only to learn that it's a grocery list, or some inconsequential doodles Stalin made, maybe some electric bill statements. The joke being twofold: One, that Stalin isn't any better at throwing away useless junk than the rest of us, and two, that Beria (and by extension everyone else) was so terrified of Stalin, even after he was dead, that they would never dare to actually look at his papers. They would merely assume that because they were in a safe, they are vitally important and must be hidden. All the death, terror, running, betrayal, it would all be for nothing. Nobody would get anything of use.

I'm not saying that would have been a good ending, mind you. It might have been darkly humorous, but not necessarily good. It just feels more Russian than what actually happened. What did happen though was a fairly tense little thriller, with some decent character moments. I quite liked the man who played the young Rapava. His walk had the right mix of eager to obey, and terrified to obey, which seems appropriate. The bit with the old woman in Archangel, who is so proud of how she and her family served the party, because she refuses to see the truth of the matter. She was sweet, but very sad. Craig and Rednikova have pretty good chemistry, not in a sexual romantic sense, but they get along well. She's studying law, but working as a high-class (to my eyes, anyway) call girl to pay the bills. But he's a guy who chases history to sell books, so they're both in it for the money. So neither one bothers with much pretense, and that makes for some honest and occasionally funny conversations.