Watching the film adaptations of cult works is always difficult, so in this case I decided not to read the book in advance, so as not to spoil the impression of the film later. And I didn't regret it. “Kamo Grydeshi” was remembered for its bright cast and stunning play not only of the main characters, but also secondary ones, a beautiful testimony of the era and the plot itself. I cannot ignore the fact that the film touches the soul and makes you empathize, live all the events together with the main characters.
The film takes place during the reign of Emperor Nero in Rome. He was a very controversial person, which made his reign ambivalent and frighteningly contrasting. Nero burned cities only to satisfy his muse, indulged in lust and other vices, trying to present himself as a man of art. In such an ambiguous period, the main character of the story lives - Mark Vinicius, a noble Roman who recently returned to Rome after military service.
The plot of the film intertwines the theme of religion, art and difficult love. The theme of personal growth of the main character is especially well revealed. Mark Vinicius (Paul DeLonge) goes from a depraved twister and lover of women to a decent man who is imbued with love for his woman - Ligia (Magdalena Meltsage).
The film perfectly reflects not only internal themes and conflicts, showing the background of the Roman Empire, but also show the color and entourage of those times. The scenery and costumes are on a completely different level, they, together with the play of actors, help to fully immerse yourself in the right era.
Even though I didn’t read the original source and can’t rely on it, the film really captivated me. I am definitely my favorite and will review it several times.
10 out of 10
I watched the movie with bated breath. For the first time, the characters of the film supplemented my ideas after reading the book. When I read Kamo Comdeshi, it was hard for me to imagine the characters, but when I saw the film, everything fell into place. Now I find it hard to see heroes any other way!
I am very happy to have two of my favorite actors, Boguslav Linda and Pavel DeLong, in the film, as well as the main roles. A perfect duo of friends and colleagues.
I am delighted to see Magdalena Meltsage as Liga. This role she managed much better than the role of the panyanka in the new version of Taras Bulba. A sweet girl, an angel who with his purity re-educated a cruel pagan.
Bohuslav Linda played Petronius, Nero’s faithful advisor, the arbiter of grace, who criticized his poetry and music, his performance on stage. An ironic, intelligent man with a sharp mind, just as he was in the book. In fact, his situation was unenviable and difficult, because the emperor could change his anger to favor or vice versa. “Past us, God, more than all sorrows, and the lord’s anger, and the lord’s love...” Looking at this hero, this quote is recalled.
Pavel DeLonge in the role of Mark Vinnitius turned out to be a beautiful and noble man who transforms next to his beloved. Unsurprisingly, there may have been feelings between them.
The perfect pair went between Poppeia and Nero. The mad emperor who wanted to burn down the city for the sake of a whim, this is how history is remembered. And his wife, arrogant, cold intriguer, but also stupid and superstitious.
The apostle Peter is perfect in his role. A patient, forgiving and understanding teacher, in whom there is no cruelty and anger, is a true messenger of God. František Piecka brilliantly coped with this role.
And it is impossible not to notice Ursa, a strong and loyal defender of the League, who guarded her throughout the film. But I was tormented by the question of the whole movie, to which I did not find an answer. Did he love her as a faithful servant and even as an elder brother, considering it his duty to protect her or did he love her as a man? But his loyalty is only admired.
Hilon is also a complex character, the attitude towards him changed throughout the film, from disgust to sympathy, because of his hypocrisy and lies, and then sincere remorse.
And how believable and heartbreaking came the scene with the persecution of Christians, how sincerely looks a girl trying to protect her little child from wild animals, how people were tormented on fires and crosses, and the public thirsted for blood in this amphitheater. This scene evokes only tears and sympathy for the innocent victims who gave their lives for their faith.
The movie was perfect. Close to the book and the story. A film where real and fictional heroes are perfectly combined. A film that complements a book, not spoils it.
10 out of 10.
Quo Vadis: When the screenplay is not inferior to the book
Shortly after reading Senkiewicz’s Kamo Grydesha, I decided to watch the film of the same name. I confess, I did not make big bets, because such a scale and such talent of the novel is difficult to reflect on the screen. But the film exceeded all expectations.
This work is a subtle, beautiful and most successful reduction of a literary work in the process of its translation into the language of cinema. In my opinion, the ability to correctly shorten the novel, leaving the most important and memorable parts for the reader, while not violating the structure of events and without losing meaning - this is one of the main indicators of the director's skill. And now more down-to-earth:
I really liked the casting directors’ work: all the actors were great for their characters (especially those who read the book would agree with me). The charming Ligia, the brave Vinicius, the reasonable and sedate Petronius and Nero himself - the actors delighted the eye, with the exception of Sabine Poppeia. I didn’t know Agnieszka Wagner who played her before, but Vadis didn’t come to Kvo, I’m sorry. The image of her seemed undisclosed (although Sabine’s book has a very clear character), and the movements / facial expressions of the actress herself seemed artificial and ridiculous.
There were moments when the emotions of Ursa (Rafal Kubatsky) and Evnik (Marta Pehowiak) seemed not reliable enough. I will note with a separate minus the obvious improbability of one of the final scenes of the opening of the veins: this is the transparency of blood, which is more like pomegranate juice, and the absence of a cut on the skin as such, and in fact, anyone will understand that with such a cut the blood will quickly baked, but our heroes die suddenly. Maybe it's a trifle for someone, but personally I was spoiled by this fake scene. I wanted to write it off for 2001, but I can’t: the scene with the lions made very, very plausible.
So, despite the described shortcomings, this film, without hesitation, put the highest score and add to the treasury of loved ones. All its pros and the scope of the impression left outweigh on the scales any shortcomings, of which there are absolutely few.
For me, Jerzy Kavalerovich’s “Quo Vadis” was a real revelation when I watched the film. That's how successful he was. I hadn’t read the book yet, so I had nothing to compare it to. Later I realized that the director managed to convey the essence of the novel, and at the time of watching I was fascinated by the action. The contrast between Nero’s aristocratic Rome and Christian communities has been shown with astonishing realism. Faith strengthened people, gave hope, in a world where powerful permissiveness killed all human beings. The heroes of the film had to pass tests to find their happiness - Mark had to take a new look at life, change himself, Liga helped him in this, but she learned to look at the world with different eyes. But the brightest character turned out to be Petronius, a clever and charming courtier, cynically looking at others, as he appears at the beginning, by the end of the film acquires humanity and reveals himself from a completely unexpected side. He did not accept the new faith, but he showed that the time of the old gods was passing away, and those who worshiped them became superfluous before the new religion. It is Christian charity that becomes the driving force behind the actions of Petronius, Mark, and Liga. The first Christians are bred in the film as a community that is ready to accept any person, regardless of social status, forgives apostates and brings love to others. Perhaps, in the early 21st century, it is difficult for us all to understand that Christianity was originally about charity and love, which is why it won hearts so quickly. Persecution of Christians, the fire of Rome are shown very reliably, vivid images of Peter, Paul, Urs, Nero, Sabine Poppie stand before the audience, we seem to become participants in the action on the screen. And of course, Peter’s meeting with Christ (which gave the name to the film) turned out to be heartfelt and dramatic, penetrating into the soul.
I cannot but mention the actors who embodied the heroes, Boguslav Linda played Petronia out of competition, his hero turned out to be alive and close, the words were not a text, but came from the soul. Frantisek Pechka, who played the Apostle Peter, also looked great, he managed to convey the image of the Companion of Christ, very close to the biblical texts. And I cannot but mention the role of Jerzy Trel, his hero Hilon turned out to be bright, multifaceted and tragic. The actor managed to convey the torment of his soul, evil, betrayal and redemption. Of the women, I note the cold and cynical Poppie performed by Agnieszka Wagner, and the gentle Liga performed by Magdalena Meltsage, both women played perfectly.
Despite the fact that the film was shot sixteen years ago, I review it quite often, and every time I find something new for myself, and of course I enjoy the spectacle and the acting.
10 out of 10
So the first thing I want to say about this film is that it stands out from the rest. First of all, Polish production, which explains a lot. Secondly, there is the cast: there is a really live acting, the feeling that you are watching not a movie, but a dramatic production in the theater. All actors are professionals who have honed their skills to the maximum. Yes, this is a live movie, live actors, and not what we are now shown – one fantasy and action movies, where it feels like not actors play, but passers-by from the street who do not understand anything about the skill of conveying emotions.
The third thing that is worth noting about Kamo is a great philosophical meaning and a lot of raised life issues and problems: the birth and spread of Christianity, its persecution and all the associated difficulties penetrating to the very depths of the soul.
From the film I saw that before (although I knew so) in the Christian Church fit only the concept of the teachings of Christ, and then the Church gradually made an instrument of subjugation, enslavement and control of people, as it was in the Middle Ages, and now it is more profitable business than a place of worship of the Lord.
The early Christians had little distraction from the faith—no Internet, no television, no boundless entertainment, as today, perhaps every believer fulfilled all the commandments of the Lord. And now I can judge by myself that a believer seems to come to church to repent of sins, but comes out of it with the same hidden pride, envy, anger (well, everyone knows himself).
Here I want only to recall the words of Johann von Goethe "The common man does not notice the devil, even when he is holding his throat."
There is no better medicine for a sick soul than sincere prayer and repentance.
“Quo Vadis” Jerzy Kavalerovich I looked immediately after reading the novel Henrik Senkevich, perhaps for this reason the picture seemed to me ... small. Drowning in the plot and experiences of the characters - in the book, in the film, I saw only their schematic sketch. The fire in Rome, which lasted several days, took no more than 10 minutes, the consequences of it remained behind the scenes, some of the actions of the heroes are not clear, and in the final part of the event they were completely rearranged, violating all the logic of the narrative. This is not all the downsides of the film. The curious fact is that everything that happens in the book at night is shown during the day - another unlogical move. What is worth at least a gathering of Christians hiding from prying eyes, going to meet with the apostle in the light of day? As for the characters, although Vinicius, Ligia and Petronius are not exactly the same as the author described them, I liked the work of the actors. Especially vivid in his game looks Boguslav Linda. His "arbitrator of grace" captivated me almost as much as the book. Paul DeLong and Magdalena Meltsage are very beautiful, and to look at their Vinicia and Ligia is a pleasure, but here, the feelings and experiences of these heroes, unfortunately, I did not have enough. Too quickly came to a new faith proud and willful young tribune, too easily got his League, while in the novel “b” Senkevich “b” leads his character through a lot of heartache and joys of finding love high and unshakable. Not bad coped with his not easy task Michael Bayor Nero in the movie is a comedian and a coward, although he probably lacks insanity. But Urs, a giant with blue eyes of a child - on the screen Rafal Kubatsky, 100% hit.
Well, to conclude, the film was controversial for me, but the work done by its creators is respectable and worth seeing.
I first saw this movie about 7 years ago, when one of the federal channels showed it in the dead of night. The incredible history, the entourage of ancient Rome and the magnificent Petronius were firmly embedded in my memory. Now I revised the film after reading the book Senkevich and can assess the film adaptation more soberly.
Of course, it is incredibly difficult to film such a work. Many characters and storylines, the depth of questions raised in the novel – of course, not everything was transferred to the screen. The action at the beginning is too abrupt, without knowing the text of the book it is difficult to fully understand the logic of the behavior of the characters of the film.
The polemics of Petronius and Paul about Christianity are completely absent, only religious pathos is preserved. On the other hand, Senkiewicz himself has no desire to leave the truth to Christians, both the apostle from Tarsa and the Arbitrator of Grace are right for him. The creators of the film award ideological victory exclusively to Christians, but from the most zealous European Catholics, which are the Poles, to expect otherwise.
I didn’t like the scene in the arena. The audience should literally rage, and extras only restrained clapping their hands. The scene, which in the novel is the culmination, in the film passes as some ordinary episode.
At the same time, Nero and his surroundings are brilliantly depicted. Manners, dialogues, clothes - everything according to Tacitus, everything according to Senkevich, for which Jerzy Kavalerovich thank you very much.
In each of Senkevich’s works, the plot is governed by a love story, which is only a background for revealing global social and spiritual problems. He's dazzlingly beautiful, she's angel-like - that's how you describe any couple of his novels. Someone accuses Magdalena Meltsage and Pavel DeLonge of faded acting, and in vain: actors only perform their function, and more from them is not required. Nor are Vinicius and Liga Callin the main characters. The most excellent Petronius performed by Bohuslav Linda is the main advantage of the film. The tragedy and magnificence of this character is that he will be a stranger in any environment: too noble for Nero's retinue, too poet for Christians. And here Kavalerovich is delightfully adamant in his persistent desire to follow the source.
In general, we see a sincere and honest attempt by the Poles to approach one of the main works of their world literature. These sincerity and love, which are felt in every scene, and following the traditions of Polish historical cinema more than pay off all the shortcomings and allow us to consider the film a successful adaptation of the great novel.
Such a great and, frankly, a masterpiece novel as “Kamo Grudeshi” by Henryk Senkevich, it would be very, very difficult to adequately film. The director would risk a terrible Christian tale of the first martyrs and a monster on the throne of power. The soul of the novel, with the help of which he became great, can only be depicted on the screen by a brilliant master, subtly feeling, with a golden nerve.
Even if the director Jerzy Kavalerovich did not become such a magician, but his picture completely conveyed the beauty and madness of the century of the reign of the monstrous Nero. The novel of Henryk Senkiewicz makes it clear to us, and perhaps to remember, why the early Christians accepted such unthinkable tortures. Seeing such a great faith, giving the power to go meekly to a cruel death, lost souls were illuminated by this light, as butterflies opened to the warmth of the sun, understood and accepted the truth. Evil forces, thinking that by killing the innocent sheep of Christ physically and cruelly, forever cleanse the world of them, frightening other souls with such nightmarish spectacles of executions, miscalculated. The first martyrs were bright examples, lights, followed by new ones. The example of the same repentant sinner Hilon Hilonid is very eloquent.
But the fact is that to this day people do not change. There are still calls: “Bread and circuses!” Have you ever wondered why sports and action movies are so popular? Same amphitheatres with gladiators. Spectacles remained, and bread replaced pop-corn. We should often remember those who shed blood not only in the Name of Christ, but also for us, and think where we are going.
8 out of 10
Strong movie. It's on the screen. The first Christians are shown under the leadership of the living apostles. In this movie, Peter and Paul. In parallel, life goes on as usual. The lives of those close to His Majesty Nero. Nero himself is a disgusting clown. What “makar” in general, I wonder if he climbed the throne?
The Capulets and Montagues find each other Vinicius and Ligia. At first, the arrogant Vinicius, who is used to getting women like another boring trophy, becomes the patron of Christians (still in the first half of the film, so don’t think of it as a daring spoiler). Thus, Christians have support from the authorities.
But it's not all that casual. The way of Christians is not the way of the world. They crave happiness not selfish, but comprehensive. This is what the Apostle Peter himself says.
Well, here's about that movie. The story is not just meaningless. You can’t tell them that easily if you want.
The most pleasant character here, in my opinion, is Petronius. The emperor is the other way around. I've been craving the whole movie for human judgment over him! . .
We are very pleased that we have the lion’s share of Polish here.
9 out of 10
Until the very end, I was tormented by the question: “What is “Quo Vadis”?” – and the answer was found by chance on Wikipedia ... only later.
It is rare that the film adaptation of any book (especially your favorite) more than met your expectations. Well, this is exactly the case.
Henrik Senkiewicz is one of my favorite writers when I was young, and Kamo Grodeshi is one of the novels that shocked my soul to the core. Therefore, to view any such film adaptation, you tune in with a decent amount of cynicism.
But what can I say? The director not only justified the hopes hidden somewhere deep, but also brought to a new level of development with his ending. I have to admit that I haven’t seen the previous film yet. But give this novel into Hollywood's hands now - and what do you get? Snotty melodramatic sobs, backed up for loyalty by cruel special effects. This is exactly the opposite. Romance is not tinted, shocking details are not shown that the creators of consumer goods would not fail to use. Moreover, some horror is even mitigated to enhance the impression. There is depth, emotion and, most importantly, meaning. Magnificent selection of actors, amazing music (what kind of composer), strict adherence to the plot with a small, but more than interesting retreat at the end.
Thank you for two hours of great cinema, immersed in the world of nostalgia and real art!
