You are here:
DAU. The Empire. Novel One: Return Of The Prodigal Son

DAU. The Empire. Novel One: Return Of The Prodigal Son

2020

Director

Anatoly Vasiliev, Ilya Khrzhanovsky

Runtime

132 minutes

Average Rating

No ratings yet

Synopsis

«The Return of the Prodigal Son» is the first volume from the film (novel) of Anatoli Vassiliev’s «Empire» inside the Dau cycle. The story is about inner kinship, which is much closer than blood, about inevitable betrayal, about almost fatherly love and forgiveness. Cigarettes (papirossa), images from «Faust» and «Don Juan», walks in the Soviet Park of culture... And a terrible, narrow gap inside the brutal regime where you have to be skilled enough to survive... Yes! and they also play gorodki (skittles) with childish passion!

Where to Watch

Diversity & Representation

Overall Score

4.5/10

Fair


Category Breakdown

LGBTQ+ Representation

Limited

The film focuses on the psychological mechanics of a simulated Soviet microcosm. It lacks explicit LGBTQ+ identities or narratives designed to critique heteronormativity, prioritizing existential and systemic pressures instead.

Gender Representation

Fair

Gender roles appear tethered to the oppressive social strata of the simulated environment. Women rarely drive the plot through agency, appearing instead as subjects to the overwhelming weight of the institution.

Racial & Ethnic Diversity

Limited

The cast is predominantly Slavic to maintain the historical logic of the Soviet-era setting. The narrative does not utilize color-blind casting, resulting in a highly homogeneous demographic profile.

Religious & Cultural Diversity

Excellent

The film excels at deconstructing traditional institutional pillars and stable social orders. It portrays authority as corrupt and irrational, framing the breakdown of morality as a byproduct of the system.

Disability Representation

Fair

Psychological fragility is explored, but these elements function as symptoms of an oppressive environment. There is a risk of using psychological states as atmospheric devices rather than granting characters autonomous agency.

Strengths

  • Sophisticated deconstruction of traditional Western and institutional pillars.
  • Profound exploration of moral relativism and the fluidity of truth.
  • Effective critique of totalizing and corrupt institutional structures.

Areas for Improvement

  • Lack of visible non-cisnormative or LGBTQ+ identities.
  • Homogeneous demographic profile due to specific historical simulation.
  • Limited evidence of female characters driving the plot through agency.

AI Analysis

The film functions as a philosophical laboratory rather than a vehicle for identity politics. It prioritizes a deep systemic critique of authority and moral relativism over demographic inclusivity. While the work achieves high marks for its sophisticated cultural deconstruction, it remains limited by its hyper-specific historical simulation. This focus results in low scores for racial and LGBTQ+ representation. Ultimately, the narrative architecture is designed to examine the collapse of social frameworks, often treating individual identities as subjects to the overwhelming weight of the institutional system.

How are these scores produced? →

Rate this Movie

No rating selected
Use arrow keys to select a rating from 1 to 5 stars
Optional text review, maximum 2000 characters
Tip: Wrap spoilers with ||double pipes|| to hide them
0/2000 characters
You must be signed in to submit a rating

Reviews

No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!

Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.