User Reviews

Atom Egoyan's been very consistent in his career about two things. He likes messing with time frames, and his movies can come across as distant bordering on pretentious. Over the years he's been perfecting the former, and making improvements on the latter, as evidenced in Exotica, and, especially, in the beautiful, devastating The Sweet Hereafter.

Calendar came before those films, and it is even more experimental than they are. It would feel pretentious if it wasn't for the fact that Egoyan (more or less playing himself) portrays himself in a very unflattering light. But the whole enterprise does have that familiar Egoyan chill. He plays a photographer who is taking pictures of old Armenian churches for a calendar.

In what is perhaps an expression of self-doubt regarding his aesthetic instincts, his character seeks only to capture the superficial beauty of the churches, paying little attention to the history behind them. He is on this trip with his wife (played by Egoyan's wife), and both of them are of Armenian origin. In Calendar, Egoyan could be trying to comment on any number of things, about his relationship to his wife, to his roots, and to his art. At times it seems like you can almost discern a message coming through, and the film does become somewhat intriguing, but in the end the director is simply too subtle for his own good. And thus he keeps his audience at arm's length.

The shots of churches, though, are beautiful enough to make one want to visit Armenia.

Questions of diasporic national identity are brilliantly addressed in the concept of a modern society, through various media, paralleled to more personal and private issues such as jealousy, stubbornness and personal pride. Only a person with very little life experience could not comprehend anything to what is going on in this movie. Atom Egoyan succeeded in making a very universal film that is touching at more than only one level. With this film, he proves that he is more than a good film director, but truly an artist who is able to transpose a world view through simple a medium, with low budget. This is personally my favorite Egoyan film, though it's by no means the longest or most commercially successful.

This is a wonderful little film that I recently saw on a friend's recommendation, knowing virtually nothing about it except that I'd immensely enjoyed Atom Egoyan's "Exotica" and "the Sweet Hereafter". "Calendar" is not nearly as tragic as those two films; it concerns itself with the sadness of the disintegration of a relationship, but there is a subtle comedy to the film as well. The film is an experiment with a very specific, rigid, yet somehow apt structure: the film has twelve segments, one for each page of a beautiful calendar hanging by its photographer's phone. Laced into this structure is the story of the photographer and his wife's trip to Armenia, and the conflict that arises out of their different reactions to being in the land of their ancestry. It's all very well-told, and even though there is an element of inevitability, reinforced by the structure, the film never really strays into the realm of predictability. Finally, there are moments when the film seems to toy with breaking the sanctity of the fourth wall. This goes beyond the fact that the photographer and his wife are actually played by Mr. Egoyan and his wife. It's impossible to describe briefly and without spoiling the humor, though. If you're intrigued, check it out! You'll be glad.

'Calendar' is a slightly unusual film offering, written, filmed, directed, performed and possibly even fixed together with Scotch tape by Atom Egoyan, with this being my first trip into his cinematic world. It is a film that builds subtly, almost voyeuristically, so that the viewer finds themselves delving into the lives of its subjects to a level of prolonged discomfort, which reaches its crescendo as their true nature unfolds, all the while within some wonderful Armenian landscapes.

The plot concerns a Canadian-Armenian photographer returned to the land of his ancestors with the job of photographing his homeland's most picturesque churches for a forthcoming calendar. He is accompanied by his Armenian wife, acting as translator for the local driver and guide they have hired to provide them with background information on all the sites visited. The unassuming beginning suggests that this is more or less the sum-total of the film, but with every new location, we slowly learn of the deeply fragmented relationship present between the married couple and the cause of the ensuing distance between them. The way in which the film is shot helps to underscore this gulf, with the photographer never seen with his wife in the same place at the same time. Indeed, we only see him some time after the calendar has been printed, while we only see her during the photoshoot, very tellingly only in the company of the driver.

In some ways, 'Calendar' is rather difficult to watch, with the characters becoming more and more grotesque as the narrative progresses, especially that of the photographer, whose mounting jealousy (which could itself be described as a grotesque emotion) is exacerbated further by his unpleasant personality, particularly evident throughout scenes occurring in the present where, still emotionally in orbit around his estranged wife, he 'auditions' a long line of potential replacements (something that is not explicitly stated, so other viewers may have a different interpretation). Yet the film is shot in a very simple and effective way, which captures the claustrophobic mood of the piece while highlighting the wonderful natural backdrop. The camera is locked off in every scene, perhaps to mimic the still photography of the calendar itself, forcing the viewer to pay close attention to the tense and unspoken decay of the relationship. The still frame, accompanied by the subjects frequently in mid to long shot, further symbolize the distance felt by the man behind the camera and only serve to heighten his sense of isolation. These sequences are intercut with handicam footage of the characters' journey through Armenia, and yet despite providing the opportunity for motion, it is no more comforting, with the bluish tint and frequent lack of sound simply another form of isolation.

Egoyan is clearly a skilled photographer, and he lovingly captures the churches with the warmth and texture you would expect to see on a professional calendar. This only serves to heighten the contrasting coldness and unease created by the characters themselves, which Egoyan as the photographer and Arsinee Khanjian as the wife expertly create. It's certainly not a pleasant cinematic adventure, but anyone who has experienced that phase of a relationship will at least know the horrible awkwardness created between two people who were once close, and the helpless feeling of loss as a result. Unfortunately, drawn as he is, it is well-nigh impossible to sympathize with the protagonist's predicament, though his wife is by no means a victim.

The deeply personal discomfort, while real, does perhaps ensure 'Calendar' is probably not something I could sit through too often, but the effective minimalist approach on the production side and the jarring juxtaposition of cold, reserved knife-edge drama against the ultimately inconsequential polychromatic background has imbued a strong sense of the Atom Egoyan style. Certainly not a crowd-pleaser, but a director guaranteed to provoke thought. I'm certainly curious enough to explore some of his back catalogue some day. Actual rating 6 1/2 stars.

The photographer behind the camera (Atom Egoyan) and his translator (Arsinée Khanjian) are touring Armenian religious sites with a driver/guide. They are taking pictures for a calendar. The movie alternates between that and the photographer repeatedly having the same date with different women in his home. He pours the rest of the wine, the woman asks for a phone, he writes in his notebook, and she talks on the phone in a foreign language next to the calendar.

The Armenia half is a little interesting. At least, there are interesting sites. After about twenty minutes, the repetitive nature is well established and I just want the plot to advance. The reveals are interesting although way too slow. The phone reveal is fun but there is little or no tension. This would be more compelling if the second half can be condensed and something more dramatic happens. It's already at an odd running time. It's open-ended and feels incomplete. Egoyan is probably working through some stuff with his Armenia heritage and his relationships. It's not a movie for the masses but maybe for his fans.

Atom Egoyan's work is almost always about a distance from the immmediate events occurring. This film is no exception to this rule, but is heartbreakingly more accute in its treatment of the theme. Unlike the more popular films, there is no sympathy for the supposed main character, played by Atom himself. He is a dispicable, soul-less chap, without hope or redemption, lost in a fate of repetition that is of his own creation. Moreso than Egoyan's other films, this repetition is a fantasy, moreso than compulsion. Here guilt is as much at play as destiny.

This film hurts me.

A small project wedged between his first two more mainstream products, The Adjuster and Exotica, Calendar stars the director and his wife, Arsinée Khanjian as a photographer and his wife. They are traveling to different Armenian churches in order to photograph them for a calendar. Both of them are Armenian by heritage, but he is disconnected from it, while she speaks the language (and acts as translator). During the trip, their Armenian guide begins to grow closer to the wife. The film actually takes place much later, as Egoyan, now no longer with his wife, is trying to duplicate her by holding "auditions" with women, presumably re-enacting the first meeting with his ex. It's all rather confusing. I never quite figured it all out. I'm not sure the film works. I liked all the stuff about the Armenian churches (some beautiful images here, and the film's style in these scenes is great), but the whole narrative about the dates never seemed to come to fruition. However, it is an extremely interesting film, and it's rather haunting at the end. Calendar itself may feel somewhat incomplete, but Egoyan is definitely a fully-fledged artist here. The only earlier film of his I've seen, Speaking Parts, did not communicate his talent. This is definitely worth seeing, especially as it only runs at 75 minutes.

Before you sit to watch this movie, please make sure that you are enough open-minded to see a movie that is there not to entertain, but to express feelings, and that you have patience to see it through even if after first half of it you feel bored to death. Because, at one point, I felt that I was watching a movie with almost no plot, and with numerous repetitions of similar scenes that I could not comprehend.

But then things began to unfold, I began to pick up symbols and feel emotions plugged into characters. There is no guarantee that all I understood was exactly what the director wanted me to, but I guess that is how art should be.

Let me just mention some of my ideas that shouldn't spoil the movie for you. (1) The girls Photographer meets are all very beautiful, and also seem to form a sort of calendar. (2) Note that they ask for a phone exactly at the moment when he pours the last drop of wine into the glasses. I feel that this is the moment when purely physical relationship ceases to satisfy. (3) Translator and Driver entering the churches, and the Photographer staying outside, reflect perfectly different relations to life that they have, and the reason why the distance between them grows. (4) The sheep scene at the beginning seems endless and making no sense, but the same scene at the end hurts the most, because by that time you can also feel Driver's hand on yours.

I watched many "art" movies that were praised by critics, and in which I felt there was nothing to feel or understand. This is not one of them, so please don't give it low votes just because you couldn't relate to it (or even worse, if you were not able to see it through)!

A photographer and his wife take photographs of Armenian churches for use in a calendar. Their driver, a local resident, expounds on the history of the churches while the wife translates. The photographer becomes jealous of his wife's bonding with the driver.

This film seems to have near-universal acclaim, with one exception: a reviewer at a certain Washington newspaper who found the film to be too intelligent for the average viewer. Really? The plot is not that hard to follow, and you know what else? Not all movies need to be mindless entertainment.

I applaud Egoyan for making smart, and still good-looking, film. I have now seen most of what he has made, and I can't say he has really let me down yet. Some are better than others, but there are no duds. And this is far from a dud.

I have to speak out at how mediocre I felt this film to be. It has some creative gestures, such as the use of the calendar sequence and the once a month dinner dates, but these wore thin; I found the film not to be dynamic and highly predictable, if not in its outcome then at least in its process. The dialogue lacks, consisting mostly of monologues. It can be perceived as poignant and inventive, but not nearly enough to redeem it.

Not Atom Egoyan's most 'story-driven' film, but his best from a purely aesthetic/cinematic perspective. His use of non-linear chronology, repeated scenes that slowly give way to understanding, and long drawn out takes that let you really start to feel the moment (how many viewers start to notice the slight differences in the various sheep, or look for their birthdays on the pages of the wall-calendar?) puts this film close to the level of Tarkovsky, Angelopolous, Bresson, etc.

While "Exotica" and "The Sweet Hereafter" are, understandably, his better known films (and good ones at that), "Calendar" works even better as the full realisation of theme and emotion using all the elements of cinema working in conjunction.

I watched a phenomenal Armenian film by Atom Egoyan from 1993. Great movie with a wonderful presentation of Armenian churches, and nature. Cameraman goes with his wife (Armenian) to take pictures for the calendar, on which are the Armenian churches. They take a guide, who tells them about the history of these cultural sites. His wife is also a translator. The film is interwoven with shooting staff, and current times when the photographer is thinking about his life. He is trying to establish a relationship with many women, and takes them to dinner . It's always another one. The most interesting shots in the film are the scenes which are constantly appears. The same romantic dinner, scenes starts with a bottle of wine ,and her question, can I use the phone ? Each of them do the same, called their lover with whom they talk for hours, until he remembers his life and trying something to write about it. The film impressed me with its concept.

In Calender, Egoyan succeeds in capturing how recollection and enlightenment meet in order to have an understanding of personal memory and collective consciousness, it goes on to show our inherent inclination towards struggling against the erasure of personal and cultural traumatic human history. The collapse of bonds with Armenia, this national umbilical cord can be seen as a reproduction of essential element of trauma of the Armenian people which is their violent separation from their homeland and their families at the beginning of the twentieth century.

Language is a very important element of this film, Egoyan cleverly refuses subordinating other languages to the global hegemony of English by not using subtitles and leaving other languages untranslated, doing so he is also able to preserve the otherness of languages and cultures and give them a voice when they might otherwise be silenced. More importantly, Egoyan having lived as an immigrant in Canada, reproduces in the viewer who does not understand them a feeling of alienation and disorientation. This sensation is a crucial part of the Egoyan aesthetic, it allows him to create a crisis of meaningfulness from which new meanings, and new ethical orientations can be generated. The film's otherness is also in its accented nature, his film's language is not that of a native speaker, it comes from certain looks, styles and music as well as themes of absence, loss, love, abandonment, alienation, obsession and seduction. Egoyan has said that" one of the advantages of working with the Armenian language or Armenian culture is that it is for most people, not something that can easily be identified, and that allows me the luxury of being able to treat it almost on a metaphorical level".

For the photographer in Calender whatever he does is bound with economy, he is constantly insisting on the presence of capital in numerous occasions. To Him the pagan temple looks like a bank, he thinks the guide is talking about the history of the place just to ask for more money in the end, he even asks one of the escorts how much her children cost her and tells the other who is an exotic dancer about his experience of putting money in dancer's dresses.

Throughout the film there are repeating scenes of the photographer having dinner with different women, the narrative of these scenes always remains the same. For Egoyan repetition does not function monolithically as a mechanical and numbing recuperation of sameness. Rather, repetition may depict a sense of poetic indifference that discloses in an accumulative way, to indicate the least apparent yet most determining drives of the subject.

There are moments in the film of sheer visual brilliance and even a fantastic narrative, though I doubt anyone could ever deny Atom Egoyan is a visually haunting artist. Between the various ruins and moments of real time captured on the trip making the film you see a true landscape, not only of the area, but of its people and what makes them who and what they are.

The problem is that with all that greatness are long moments of unneeded scenes or derivative exposition that remove the warm touching moments and at times just bore the ever loving crap out of you. Mind you I'm not anti art or art-esque films, it's just that these didn't really add a magical moment or create an air of mystery to the overall story or film.

I feel like the best part of the film was the Armenian man's story. The added problem here is that you only ever hear his stories second hand via the female translator, and they lack the dramatic impact he has when telling them, only you can't understand his words because there are no subtitles.

The 5 rating was mainly I just felt like everything good he captured he lost in being a tad pretentious.

I don't usually give movies a rating of 1. Normally I have the good sense not to sit through movies that I'm going to hate. However, in this case the filmmaker was Atom Egoyan so I decided to bear it out.

Calendar is one of those films which hangs in time. The events on the screen are initially incomprehensible to us, but as the plot drags on, the same basic scenes are repeated again and again, each time casting new light on the relationship between the protagonist and his wife.

Egoyan seems to have a love affair with European languages. A large portion of the film is spent listening to women of various nationalities jabbering on the phone (without being able to understand what they are saying).

Then there are the scenes where Egoyan films his wife's trip to Armenia. The whole episode is deliberately constructed to play like a home movie. The subtle nuances in these scenes are overshadowed by the fact that the scenes themselves are boring.

A large part of the home video is spent having Egoyan's wife translate one character's narratives from Armenian to English. The last film I saw with that plot device was Godard's "Contempt" and I hated it then as well.

Egoyan even ridicules this plot device in a subsequent scene when his photographer character spends several minutes (onscreen) videotaping a man talking without having any conception of what he is talking about.

There is a section in the middle of the film where the plot seems to accelerate. We see the distance forming in the relationship between Egoyan and his wife; meanwhile, Egoyan opens up to his date about the Armenian foster child he supports.

At this point, I had mentally upgraded my evaluation of the film to at least a 2. But shortly thereafter, the film reverted to its previous boring tone.