From the second film, you realize that the trilogy was originally conceived.
This film tells the story of Vanya's mother.
I mean, in the first one, he found out about his father. In the second, he already communicated directly with the father, maintained contact.
Vanya, of course, got on well. He twists a portal with his sword and drives into his “own” world a coffee to drink and take a bath.
And then it is ported back and in every possible way tries to get used to the fairy-tale world.
Vasilisa is with Vanya, it's okay. But the world must be saved again!
To do this, you will have to find the deceased in the past film Kaschei. It is far, far away, in the land of the dead, where you need to get through the rock.
I really liked how Vanya communicated with the rock. At first I thought it was a failure. And then I realized... I even watched the scene.
Here the heroes are revealed interestingly. And play better. I’m curious, what’s next?
The shooting quality is still excellent. A flying whale is a great love.
So immediately remember all these children's fairy tales, some nostalgia wakes up.
Pros:
- The story line is kept
- Heroes develop
- children's stories intertwine. And adults nostalgia and children to watch
- no vulgarity. Available for viewing by the whole family
Cons:
It is not clear what Vanya lived on in his “own” world, if he no longer works in the battle of magicians.
It is not clear how the sword lost its power.
Anyway, little things. It's more like nitpicking. Because the main canvas is still interesting, understandable, it is very pleasant and easy to watch.
8 out of 10
In ancient times, I liked the first part of the trilogy, but the desire to go to the movies for its sequels did not arise. Probably for me, the potential of the plot was limited to one film, which should have ended with a banal “... and they lived happily ever after.”
The second part retains the quality level of the original, if you close your eyes to the extremely banal plot and its, not quite logical, development. I agree, it sounds funny, but the plot is not the main thing in this story, and its simplicity is partly due to the age of the target audience.
The main advantage of the project, the magical Russian nature of Belogorye, has been preserved – this is indeed worthy of respect, since Russia is replete with stunning locations for field shootings, but, until recently, they all stood idle. In this case, we were presented with a real fantastic journey from the villages of the middle strip to the centuries-old northern forests.
Mila Sivatskaya is strikingly organic in the image of Vasilisa, with the appearance of the girl, of course, lucky – a little pity that in the near future we will hardly see her again on the screen, even without the prefix “cinema”. Among other characters, it is worth noting Kolobka - the original interpretation, the rest - in general, at the level of the first part, i.e. play well, but nothing outstanding.
7 out of 10
A review of the tale “The Last Bogatyr”. The root of evil.
The idea is remarkable: through deep ancestral roots to distinguish between Good and Evil and become a Bogatyr, i.e. spiritually rich Man.
Ivan became a crook after the orphanage. Free money led to consumerism and a thirst for pleasure. It comes to Belogorye (the land of ancestors). He is a descendant of Russian heroes, so there is something left in his soul. In the house of Vasilisa decided to live civilly: bath, refrigerator, microwave, smartphone. All this is completely unnecessary trinkets. Here purely Russian hut, oven, costume, food, songs, watch, which is faster than airmail. That's all I had to show you. It's not in the movie, but it's implied. Housekeeping in a girl’s house is the ethics of the filmmakers. Baba Yaga, Koshchei – positive characters, already good. Good is seduced by the forces of evil. No way. Probably some dead cosmopolitan, not Dobrynya. Vasilisa, for Ivan to become a hero, must be many times wiser than he is. The image did not come out at all, however, the image of Ivan is no better. Everything else is solid pyrotechnics, often contrived, like some characters. The movie didn't work. And good! Wrong name. Not the last hero, but become a Bogatyr, tear out the root of evil - the loss of distinction between Good and Evil.
Z.S. Shukhalova.
Have you ever noticed that sequels of films on a neutral fairy-mythological theme necessarily fail? So it was already with "Seventh journey of Sinbad" and remake "Battle of the Titans", and now it's the turn for "The Last hero". To be honest, I don’t understand what the problem is with making a good film based on fairy tales. Original fairy tales over the past few thousand years came up in bulk, so just need to know some of them. No complications are necessary.
But the second “The Last Bogatyr” seems to specially take and emphasize all its apparent complexity, behind which lies a banal reluctance to show something new from Slavic folklore. It’s nice to see a lot of familiar creatures and characters jump from the first movie to the second, but who added them? Kolobok, which for some reason has the abilities of a cannonball, still somehow fits into the world of Belogorye, and the others ... I do not want to list all, but the feeling is that the writers simply scored on the myths of the Slavs. The main villain and inhabitant of the snows are fictional and extremely boring characters, who, if you think about it, can be replaced by anyone, and the plot will not suffer from this. And if the main events do not depend on the details - everything, write is lost.
References to popular culture, which in some places too much try to seem humor, are already beginning to frankly annoy. Mentioning Marvel superheroes and Game of Thrones characters as more familiar and comprehensible than “something over there” heroes – is this really something we should laugh at? What if I don’t like superheroes? I don’t mind funny tales, but if the film is meant to be a parody, then let it be a real parody. So more honest with the viewer. Starting with heroic games, "The Root of Evil" is no longer taken seriously, because even for such a fairy tale everything is too enchanting.
There's something wrong with this movie with Vasilisa, who's getting so boring that it's already quite hurtful. In fact, everything Vasilisa does in the sequel is reproach Ivan for his various shortcomings and sulk at him where it requires a template scenario. No better than the case with Barbara, which appears too rarely, and because of the clumsy editing, the viewer is even deprived of the opportunity to watch her transformation into an owl. This rarely occurs with a sudden change of staff. Was there not enough budget on the schedule? By the way, very cartoonish looks the same resident of the snow, from which even snowflakes do not fall during movements. I wonder why you couldn’t have come up with something simpler.
The result is disappointing: an interesting story about Belogorye has become a typical expensive, but meaningless blockbuster, as Night Watch once became.
6 out of 10
This is essentially a sequel to the first film. Both plot and conceptually. The plot revolves around Belogorye - a fairy-tale world, which in the first part gets from the world of the real protagonist. Conceptually, everything is built on showing atypical images of characters familiar to everyone since childhood.
Koschei Immortal, Water, Kolobok, heroes and other epic and fairy-tale characters here acquire unusual features and behavior for us. And this is actually the basis of humor and the main concept of the film. Yes, this approach has many critics, many had not liked that someone dared to show the established image is not as it should be. But personally, I don’t see anything wrong with this, because all these images are fictional in the beginning, and changing them doesn’t offend real people, rewrite history or hurt anyone’s religion. Except that someone really worships Babe Yaga.
In general, for the budget that is included in the creation of the film, it turned out extremely well. The film itself is designed more for a young audience. It looks easy, humor is not at the highest level, but without sliding to the level of American toilet comedies.
In general, I recommend watching it, preferably after watching the first part, if you haven’t seen it yet, otherwise there will be a lot of incomprehensible things.
Watching the movie is a pleasure. Not stupid charismatic characters, tolerable humor, a good plot do their job. The dialogue and motivations of the characters are logical - you don't feel "Spanish shame" or how young people say "kringe." The only flaw is peace. It is a kind of “cardboard”, not convincing, not sufficiently worked out. Events seem to flow somewhere “locally,” despite affecting multiple times and places. Maybe the smallest details are missing? After all, the more detailed creativity is created, the more realistic it seems. Probably, in such films as Pirates of the Caribbean, this good enough – the world seems so alive that the viewer wants to get there: feel the salty wind on his face, ride a ship, unravel the secrets of the endless seas. For this reason, from time to time you review the picture and no wonder you become an ardent fan of the fictional world.
The music here is average, not memorable. It does not intertwine with the general narrative and does not want to shy away from it. I think music is a very important part of the film. It makes the viewer cry, rejoice, fear. It brings emotion. Music should be part of the narrative, harmoniously complementing the plot. Howard Shore and Peter Jackson did a great job in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit.
Of all the characters, Kolobok is the most inconclusive and hulking. His humor is certainly not bad, but the viewer does not empathize with him. The nature and motives are not sufficiently disclosed.
My verdict is a little disappointed. The film did not have enough epic and scale to send the viewer to the old fairy-tale Russia with its specific unique atmosphere, which is felt in old fairy tales.
The sequel to Ivan (Victor Khorinyak) was no less fascinating than the first part. The universe of Belogorje is expanding and allows the viewer to see it from all sides and plunge deeper into its atmosphere.
Ivan still suffers from a lack of power hero and is waiting and waiting for her to come. And in the meantime, he feels, to put it mildly, out of place, experiencing Impostor Syndrome '. Well, in the intervals between guilt and remorse, Ivan wanders into his modern world for everyday comforts. The character of Mila Sivatskaya - Vasilisa, finally appeared a lot of words in the role, much more, compared to the first part. She found a voice and character and became clear to the viewer. Along with the already beloved heroes, new ones will appear - Finist Yasny Falcon (Kirill Zaitsev), whose basketball past (' Movement Up') will be a reference in the film, and Kolobok with the face, voice and, accordingly, jokes of Garik Kharlamov. In my opinion, Kolobok turned out to be something terrible, it would be better for him to draw the face of some emoji.
The director devotes enough time to the excellent landscapes that make up Belogorye, and thanks to which you can see how beautiful and diverse the nature of our country is. There will be a personal drama of Ivan, which he will have to go through (played well, tears came to his eyes), and his constant tossing between who he really is and who he feels in this fairy-tale world. There will be good jokes, painful themes, and the fight against darkness - a whole bouquet, what you need for a good family movie.
Simultaneously with the second filmed and the third part, so the continuation will not take long to wait. So far, we are focusing on December 2021. Moreover, the picture ends well very intriguing. I'm already looking forward to something big. The main thing is that filmmakers do not spoil anything and stop looking up to American blockbusters with superheroes ala Marvel saving the world.
Expectations were low. After the first very successful part, it was not believed that the sequel would be the original. This is to some extent the law of cinematography and sequels come out at the level of the original, and only the Terminator 2 could outshine the original, in my opinion.
We continue to tell the story of Belogorye, telling about Ivan, the son of Ilya Muromets, who was brought up in our world. In the sequel, Ivan became more courageous, wise, but at the same time the same slob, who is constantly drawn to our world, because it is difficult to get rid of them after getting used to gadgets.
Compared to the original, the sequel has become more humor, jokes, and just the film itself has become easier and simpler. Still, in the first chapter there was quite a lot of meaning and hidden morals, here as if everything is simple and loose, without removing the merits of the creators, who again prescribed a suitable script, again showing a fairy tale story, which looked very easy, and 2-hour timekeeping did not strain at all.
I really liked the characters, as in the first picture. You can find fault with the schedule, which was limping in places, but mostly convincing. I really liked Kolobok with a face and voiceover from Garik Kharlamov, his jokes constantly caused a smile. A number of points raised questions that were not answered. I hope that in the triquel everything will be told to the end.
Our fairy tales are our property. A bunch of stories are carried from generation to generation, so it is not surprising that the creators decided to focus on fairy tales. Stories about your favorite characters, told in the light of modern times - it's great! It's just great, that's what we need to show our children, a very kind and brave movie that the whole family should watch.
The film is incredibly rhythmic and full of a bunch of all kinds of events, whether it is the games of heroes or the fight against evil spirits. Even the dialogues were not annoying, the truth of philosophizing became a lot, but in general this did not interfere, because the main part of the timekeeping still went to fights. Lightning fast flashes time to watch this picture, so pleasant to the perception of the movie, which even do not want to scold, although there is something for it. The charge of vivacity gives out just incredible, and at the exit just a bag of positive emotions and a very good mood. This is a very important feature, which is rarely produced.
I definitely recommend it! Very kind and charming movie with a good share of humor, with a complete lack of vulgarity. A real family movie!
Nothing can ruin a movie as much as no script. Bad actors, meager scenery, and mediocre graphics all make the movie worse, but don’t kill it. And a bad scenario would do it for once. The root of evil, unfortunately, is one of those. Causal logic is broken at the very beginning, when the authors do not explain why the main antagonist is so bad and what his goals are. From this, the motivation of the subsequent actions of the heroes is unclear. And the narrative is perceived simply as an obstacle course with action scenes. I have no sympathy for the heroes, no interest in their actions. Hence boredom and indifference to how it will end. That's the biggest drawback of the movie. Of the less important, I will highlight the following:
1. Watery's weak involvement. The authors did not come up with any strategic function for him, so Burunov sits quietly in a barrel only for continuity with the first part.
2. Stupid Galina. Her embodied image of the sufferer from the TV series on the RTR was not glued to the picture of the henchman of evil. Yeah, there's a reason why Galina can't be evil. But, therefore, the director or costumers did not finish something, because in hellish guise and the face of the mother-heroine, this character looks exceptionally comical.
3. The transition to the history of Barbara and Galina is not considered. It's the same scenery, same Baba Yaga. The pendant story is supposed to explain everything. But I stumbled in this place, and only through analysis I compared what was what. And I would like not to strain the brain, but to slide along the plot.
4. There are very few jokes and they are suffering.
5. Computer graphics. It's an obvious disgrace. The only bright spot is water. Probably the whole budget went to him. By the way, there is an assumption that the CG department just rolled with the budget, and the guys for it frankly dared. In revenge. Otherwise, how to explain the special effect of turning an owl into a barbarian that is repeated many times in the film? When the bird on the left flies behind a pillar, and on the right comes out from behind the pillar already transformed Barbara? It's an honest demarche!
I was looking forward to the second movie because I really liked the first one. He could call himself a “loyal spectator.” By the release of the third part of the franchise will approach with the status of “biased viewer”.
Arranged a long time ago an evening battle of billionaires: mastered non-stop two Russian box office hits of the beginning of 2021, totaling more than 3 billion rubles, which at the time of coveid rolling is just a miracle of miracles.
The viewing was not uninteresting, but almost ended after the first hour of the sequel to The Last Hero, because the absurdity that the creators pass off as a sequel, managed to master with greater effort than I expected. From a charming, relatively original, coherent, albeit with small flaws, logical narrative, the sequel degenerated into a set of some primitive, poorly rehearsed, submitted, hastily tailored and sewn with white threads, mise-en-scene and gags, which are felt by such unsuccessful duplicates or bloopers, worthy of the section “Op. Materials” on the bluray edition. The editing of the film is also unknown, finally turning the crumbling narrative into an intra-workshop interlude, in which the actors crooked, fooled, strained half-heartedly or even look like a wooden title computer monster.
Particularly annoying is the obsessive desire of the creators and the studio to sculpt a full-fledged franchise, by crookedly inscribed cliffhangers and start-ups for the sequel (the wait-with-triquel this December). But even more discouraging is the shameless parasitism on the well-known fabulous formula of the cosmic saga, with its eternal confrontation of the Light and Dark sides and unexpected family ties. The stretching of the Lucasian heritage on the Russian-folk fabulous frame could be carried out less clumsy and painfully.
But sweeten the pill unexpectedly managed "Humpbacked Horse", which I started already with ogroom skepticism. Fortunately, this time the creators not only did not fail, but even most of the time they were excessively surprised and pleased.
First of all, I would like to note that with comparable production budgets, the film adaptation of Ershov’s fairy tale looks a million times better than the heroic dilogy. And this applies not only to the stunning costume and decorative abundance, which is impregnated with “Humpback”, but also the general approach to recreating the fabulous and magical CGI reality. The eye from this splendor is simply not taken away and for the most part inspires pride in our specialists in visual effects, the picture of which not only makes the clumsy “Root of Evil” easy, but the richness of the palette, the scattering of funny and original special-effectual solutions is not inferior to Western multimillion-dollar brothers. Bravo!
According to the mood, atmosphere, staged and acting assortment, the visual series “Horse” rather refers to the best examples of Soviet fairy tale adaptations, in particular, to the cult creations of Alexander Rowe and Alexander Ptushko. This continuity is reinforced in the moments of the King episodes and is densely mixed with the modern postmodern approach. At times, this mix leads to a rather cryptic result, but for the most part it looks and feels an organic meta-symbiosis of the past and the present.
As in any film adaptation of fairy tales, the absurdity of what is happening is elevated to the absolute, but unlike the “Bogatyr”, the hypertrophied narrative of “The Horse” does not cause “Spanish shame”, and the deliberate naivety and theatricality of the approach do not much cut the eye and ear. There are no claims to the cast, whose playfulness and sloppiness successfully stem from the specifics of the presentation of the story. Such an unassuming, easily palpable and charming idiocy, which, unfortunately, in the sequel to "Bogatyr" was transformed into a driving force.
Verdict: It is a pity that the well-tailored “Horse” though and stole a decent cash register, but the degree of audience interest gave way to the chaotic carelessness of the “Root of Evil”(. )
Kulik grumpyly leaves the first swamp and praises the second with great enthusiasm!
I don't usually write reviews. But in my opinion, this film deserves support, so here is a review.
I began to watch cautiously, because I liked the first part and did not want to be disappointed (spoiler, I would not be disappointed). Do I recommend watching it? Of course, I recommend, this is certainly not the top of a fairy-tale movie, but a strong, well-made film in an unusual setting of Russian mythology, which is not a pity to spend your time.
Can you say that the film is completely good? No, there are enough things that, personally, cut my eyes and ears, but there is more good in the film. But everything in order.
+++ First a good +++
Here classical Russian mythology has been qualitatively worked out and reworked, there is a fresh look at things that have long been known to us. Some references cause a smile, others exclaim: “What could it be?”
+ Interesting plot built. Although the end result (the good ones will win) is obvious in such a film, but the path that will lead to victory cannot be immediately guessed, so there is interest and tension when watching.
+ Pleases the actors (but the problems with the characters, more on this later), quality directing and excellent editing.
The graphics are at a good level, but it is too much for my taste. In some places there is a sense of woodenness of what is happening. Since it is good, but still not brilliant (for 2020) and it is sometimes too much to see.
The sound and music fit into the narrative and are pretty good as a background. There are no compositions that should be listened to separately, but immersion in the film music does not break, and sometimes even greatly enhances.
+ The rhythm of the film is well selected, I never had a desire to rewind some boring part.
- Now for the bad ---
- Several new entities and heroes were introduced. And if the main antagonist is revealed normally, then his assistants, although they are characters from the first part, are shown absolutely cardboard (despite the fact that in the first part of the film these same characters were perfectly shown and played). It seems that the authors simply did not have enough screen time for normal disclosure. And this is despite the fact that I watched the version in the online theater at 1 hour 50 minutes long, which is quite a lot for a movie. The same goes for other supporting characters. There are too many of them for a film that is 2 hours long, because of this, each old character received a minimum of time, and all attention is given to the main character and new characters. It looks very "not very good."
- (my taste) Some of the music is in English (although it was unpleasant in the first part). Personally, I am a foreign rap (or something like) in a Russian fairy tale a little quivering. The rhythm of the music is well suited to the action on the screen, but the speech track for a passage of 5 minutes could be recorded in Russian.
- The protagonist is too much bulging his stupidity. Obviously, he’s such a character and he has to be like that in the beginning to change over the course of the film, but still the intensity of stupidity is too strong. Especially since it was the same in the first part. And at the end of the first part, he kind of got smarter and became more serious (not much, but more serious), but no! Here begins the second part and we see the same dumb as the cork of the main character from the beginning of the first part, with the same stupid behavior, as if his whole path in the first part was not. This is a very strange decision by the authors.
=== Total ===
Overall, the film was good. Of course, there are problems and roughnesses, but if you do not try to concentrate on them, you can have fun and brighten yourself up with this film for a couple of hours with tea (or something stronger). At the moment, this movie can be found in online cinemas and watch for little money or even free (as lucky as the shares).
Thank you for reading to the end, pleasant views.
It feels like watching a school amateur or a puppet children's play. What is striking about the Russian reality is the absolute cultural degradation. "" For example, in this film, as a positive hero, a role model (by default), the hero-rich man in the form of an infantile stupid degenerate.
A good, quality fairy tale. In general, everything is at the level and it would be safe to put a maximum of stars if not for this attack with a copypaste. I don’t know why, but the originality of our writers and all sorts of directors just can’t, as they don’t try. Whether it is people brought up in the 80s, soaked in jeans and gum, or it is the influence of Disney. Everyone gathered here, Kharlamov in the makeup of Kolobka which is just there, Lukashenko made-up under Ilya Muromets, Davy Jones made-up under Rogolep and even shoved a reference to the cult cartoon & #39; Last year’s snow & #39; (by the way, the hut is not on chicken legs, but on chicken legs). A chicken leg is a type of foundation, now called a pile. If you look at the Dahl dictionary (19th century), then in general 'kurya' - flooded area. Hence the type of foundation, so that the building does not flood. In turn, the huts were usually put without a foundation and the word ' ground floor ' it should be taken literally. In ancient times, our ancestors buried the dead outside the village in log cabins, which were put on wooden posts - chickens. Baba Yaga lived in one of these logs. But that wasn't enough for them, so you'll also hear the Jedi philosophy from Star Wars' and Spartans'300'. And the cherry on the cake flaunts ' Lord of the Rings'... Although no, these notorious screenwriters and directors tried to originality - the miracle-judo-fish whale became flying, Baba-yaga as a conductor of death became a supporting actor, instead of her now works the head of a hero who sends to the world of the dead across the abyss immediately into a boat (Roman-Greek mythology? No, any coincidence is the fruit of your imagination.
Kashchey is now an immortal fool who just knows how to wag his sword quickly when the script requires it. And when the script does not require it, it is simply buried in the ground. That's the king of the dead. Oh yes, now there is an incomprehensible darkness that lives underground, so apparently there was a revolution there and Kaschei was asked to go out to the world of the living. That's what he must have done. So now you don't need to die from dead water - the elevator to the world of the dead is open to the living - answer only three questions. Darkness has engulfed an antagonist from backstory who lives underground and is aka Mother Earth who helps the good guys. And something I didn't say at all - it's darkness living in the earth or it's a split personality. I am glad that the timekeeping was not cut, although apparently they tried. Otherwise, again, very good. Graphonius does not cut his eyes, the actors play naturally, the zeal of the plot is not observed, jokes are quite witty, absolute good nature.
The only thing I would write down in the negative is the weirdness of the Clear Falcon. I understand that it just decided to cut the timekeeping, considering him not a particularly valuable character. If initially he was a positive-thinking man, enjoying life, then by the end more and more often slip the lines about the glorious heroic death. How and why he diametrically changed the perception of life is not really clear.
If not for the above misunderstandings, this fairy tale could be one of the best films of this year. In general, you can watch, but do not expect that it will cause a storm of delight. Let us hope that someday our creative elite will be cured of the influence of the West and begin to create, not copy.
I watched the movie The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil. This is a joint project of the Russian division of Disney Studio and the Russian studio Yellow, Black and White, which was released for the New Year holidays. “The root of evil” is the second part of the heroic saga, the first was called simply “The Last hero”.
Like the first part, the new movie went well. And if the first collected more than one and a half billion rubles, the second exceeded two and this is in a difficult year for cinemas. After the failed “Book of masters” Disney learned to invest in Russian cinema.
The plot, as before, is based on Russian folk tales. A viewer who is used to Disney's American quality might be disappointed. From the point of view of graphics it turned out not very: huts on chicken legs are painted poorly, the kolobok lacks details and, it seems, only water Burunov can not be found fault. But it only appears for a few minutes at the beginning and at the end.
But if you translate the budget into dollars, it turns out that the “Bogatyr” was spent ten times less than the average Disney cartoon. For example, “Rayah and the Last Dragon”, a new cartoon of the American studio, cost a hundred million dollars, and “Bogatyr” only nine.
Despite the modest budget, the field shooting is good – in the film you can admire the Russian nature, in particular, the beautiful panoramas of Karelia. Also for the filming of the fabulous Bologorye in the suburbs built a whole city.
And if the picture turned out to be good, then everything with the plot is not so wonderful. The basis of the script is based on a simple scheme: there is a conflict between Ivan and Finist, crossing which they will have to go on a journey to learn how to defeat the forces of evil. The journey will also go: Vasilisa, Baba Yaga and Kolobok, who not only left his grandfather and grandmother and exhausted the fox, but also pretty feral and stale.
In general, this is a campaign of a team torn by conflict, uniting to search for knowledge about the artifact, and then – a solemn return and reconciliation. In terms of the plot, "Bogatyr" does not offer anything new. In order for the viewer not to be bored, the authors try to capture the viewer’s attention with chips. In the course are flying fish-whale, Miracle-yudo performed by Semchev and curved Kolobok-Kharlamov. And I must say, these tricks work – the film will laugh easily.
In addition, there are some unusual scenes in the film, for example, how Ivan tricks with three questions and wins the entrance to the realm of the dead, and the final battle also turned out to be witty.
Compared to the first part of “Bogatyr”, the new film looks richer, but this is not surprising – the budget has doubled.
In the West, they have long tried not just to make fairy tales, but to raise difficult questions in them. In the same “Ray” it was about trust and how dreary life is without it. In “Soul”, one of the best cartoons of recent years, the topic of life purpose was considered. What about "The Last Bogatyr"? It’s simple – it’s a fairy tale without hints of depth. Ivan periodically jumps into his world for a cappuccino and thereby drains the sword-pocket? Think we'll recharge it by sticking it in the ground. Is Vasilisa looking at Finist? No problem, she wasn't going to change him for Ivan anyway. Gorgeous? Nothing happens. True, the writers make a timid attempt to raise the topic of the loss of loved ones, but it turns out it is unclear.
But the heroes of the “Last hero” can be considered from the other side. To some extent, this is an attempt to capture and rethink the legacy of Russian folk tales in cinema. Such attempts have not been made for a long time. It turns out that Kolobok can have a complex biography, although the fox did not eat it, but shabby life, Koschei in his youth was completely different, and Miracle Yudo is a woman, besides a kind one.
The filmmakers remind – look, there are such superheroes, fairy tales are written about them, love them and do not forget. And audiences go and watch and seem to really love. You can't look overseas at comics.
It is no secret that for the past two decades, Russian cinema has been desperately trying to keep up with Western cinema. Huntingly creating horror films, catastrophes, superheroics and films of another genre according to the same Western patterns. Including fantasy films with various magicians and varying degrees of lousy. The director Dmitry Dyachenko corrected the situation, who made me remember the impressive number of fairy-tale characters from various Russian folk tales, on which more than one generation of people grew up and decently transferred them to the wide screen. As evidence – more than a billion box office and a warm reception from critics and viewers. Did Dyachenko manage to hold the bar raised by his own hand and enter the same river twice? Let's figure it out.
The events of this tape again develop around the “Muscovite” and the last hero Ivan, who lives peacefully in the fabulous Belogorye and plans a wedding with his bride Vasilisa. However, everything changes when an ancient evil awakens, which Ivan has to stop again.
It is worth admitting that “Root of La” turned out to be noticeably worse than the original tape and largely due to the script. The “root of evil” is largely repeated by its predecessor. Again telling the story of the “becoming of a hero” and building around the attempts of the “hardened Muscovite” to adapt to the world of fairy tales, not only many plot twists, but almost all the humor. However, if all the above worked in the first tape due to some element of surprise, then in this tape all this looks banal repetition of the path already traveled and does not cause due interest. Including the central story arc itself, which obviously does not pull the entire film and looks a little poor. Except that winning points appearing strong and interesting moments. As if with a trip to the afterlife or the culmination of the tape in principle.
However, if there are comments to the script, then there are no comments to the directorship of Dmitry Dyachenko. Dyachenko again shot an excellent adventure fairy tale for the whole family, which perfectly recreates the spirit of good old Russian folk tales, but at the same time very competently adapts the fantasy elements of Western entertainment pictures. Including gladly delighting with an excellent picture and good special effects.
Victor Horniak and Mila Sivacka played just as well and their characters are still happy throughout the story. What can not be said about Ekaterina Vilkova, Elena Yakovlev, Konstantin Lavrenko and Sergey Burunov, who seemed to play well, but either by the “efforts” of the screenwriters, or for other reasons they look much simpler, boring and not more interesting than in the previous part. But the newcomers did great. Kirill Zaitsev very subtly managed to combine in his characters the heroic qualities and qualities of a comic character. When Garik Kharlamov with one of his voice gave charisma and breathed life into a fully computer kolobok on the screen.
6 out of 10
The root of evil is a continuation of perhaps the most successful fantasy work of Russian cinema, which was no less successful financially, but less successful creatively. The director and cast tried their best. But the script turned out to be frankly boring and not funny. Not to mention the fact that he dullly repeats his predecessor on screen. However, it turned out not a bad story, which is also quite possible to see.
It's not my fault, it's a shame, I'd run away. (c)
I would never go to a movie theater for this obscurantism. We looked at both parts at home with a difference in the week, only from nothing to do and only at the request of the child, because it is impossible for adult reasonable people to watch this pseudo-fairytale and pseudo-folk product!
Everything we see is so preposterous, carelessly spelled out and causing an all-consuming shame that one begins to doubt the adequacy of the people who let it out to the masses. Half the frames seem to be copied from fantasy masterpieces. And music in places, too. Coincidence? I don't think. Belogorje is a branch of Rohan, the heroes are Rohirrim. And a ton of unscrupulous plagiarism. Why bother and invent something when everything good has already been invented? So decided the creators.
It is difficult to call actors even wooden, they are nothing. The plot is porridge with elements of horror, without dynamics and logic. Graphics are poor, except huts and a whale. The humor is so mild that I want to cry. The main character has mental retardation. And what about Russian folk fairy-tale faces with fillers, veneers and all the like? And why do all sorts of costumers, makeup artists and decorators get paid for? I guess they all came in their everyday form.
All those who took part in the creation of this creation - whipped in the square! I wish others would be disappointed. Last year, I spit with a clap, but it turns out that it was still at least somewhat watchable compared to this bottom. Forgive me for such an insult. Please don't do the sequel.
I went to the cinema with the creators of this masterpiece. Before watching, I was strongly recommended to watch the first part, which I could not do at the end (it was enough for a couple of minutes). I was also very much promoted by the guys from the film crew. What can I say? I watched it, but it was difficult.
Starting from the selection of the cast, ending with graphics and soundtracks. Who even came up with the idea to insert Stas Mikhailov’s songs there? Who is this genius?! I want to meet you and personally put in the hand of a cow ... sorry.
1. Russian fairy tales are so beautiful that this film adaptation is a crime and should be punished with all the severity of the law. Since the idea of combining all existing fairy tales into one is complete nonsense. You won’t see the whole story. As pieces of meat were torn and thrown into a corner, as if by itself.
2. The cast: There's not much to say. It's just Russian cinema. I get it.
3. Characters: The main character is weak-minded. The actor plays on a level - um... The Kolobok is just a separate cauldron in hell. I can't figure out whether the graphics ruined everything, or the voice of Kharlamov. Elena Valyushkina as Galina the villain. Pull out my eyes. She's not a bad actress. Although after “Univer”, “Bitter” and “Grandma of easy behavior”, the epithet “not a bad actress” is probably not suitable. Do not show any emotions on the face, no emotional coloring of the voice. Do we have the same villains today? I wanted to say, "Galya, go clean up!" What are you wearing?! That's how Lavronenko got there. That question will remain unanswered. But the winner of the prize for the best male role of the Cannes Film Festival in the film “Exile” Zvyagintsev. I'm sorry where Zvyagintsev is and where Dyachenko is.
4. Humor. Oh, there will be a separate pot in hell for that too. I don’t think even the students are joking. I wanted to take a notebook and start writing, the jokes were so sharp. If you like the level of humour of hitting the head with a spoon and shooting at a generator, you can stop reading. In general, what can be expected from the director of passing tnt-ash films. It seems to me that everything that removes tnt is better not to let in a wide rental (you can get infected). And, well, the approach to the female giant-ogre with the songs of Stas Mikhailov is a separate art. Oh, still farting water. That's ridiculous!
5. Graphics: Oh, my dears. If we survived the mountain, water and kolobok, then the root of evil (as symbolic, otherwise you can not call it) is not realistic to survive. A colored pencil might be more realistic. The creators are not something that did not try to fill the color of the roots, so they did not even bother to correctly arrange the picture so that it at least coincides. And I keep quiet about the rest.
6. Pros: There was one beautiful tune. I liked the whalefish. The crowd in the village played well.
7. Generally speaking: It's very bad. It's embarrassing. You can't put 0. Alas!
These are the adventures of beloved heroes. I am absolutely delighted with this tale. The fairytale Belogorye is a place of power of heroes and harmony between good and evil. In this film, we learn a secret. It's all very colorful. Director Dyachenko made a chic, Russian-language fantasy. Adventures flow very smoothly. The picture in the film is dynamic. What did I like about the movie? These are fabulous heroes. I really like Kolobok (he is voiced by Garik Kharlamov). Good and evil cannot exist without each other. Maybe that’s why the movie was so beautiful and harmonious. I am absolutely delighted with this tale. Ivan (played by Victor Khorinyak) looks very funny with a cappuccino. These adventures in the fabulous Belogorye cause laughter, joy, smile, gratitude for good. The story carries the message: “Be sincere and do not hide your thoughts.”
Also in the film liked Kaschei (played by Konstantin Lavronenko). Kashchey, Kolobok are very funny heroes who cause laughter in the hall. The battles of epic heroes are really worth a lot. The fairy tale Belogorje holds secrets. Darkness and light, good and evil - all this harmoniously lives in a fairy tale. Harmony is an important thing in Belogorje. I really liked that story. These adventures of Ivan and his friends give the New Year mood, laughter and a smile on his face. A lot of positive emotions come from this film. Director Dyachenko made a powerful fairy tale where there is good and evil.
What can a hero in a fairy tale dream about? Just hot coffee. Modernity and fairy-tale world live harmoniously. Everything is harmonious in the film. Fantastic Belogorye exists together with the real Moscow. This is a very good fairy tale, where morality is simple: “Good can not be without evil.”
The special effects were amazing in the film. Disney made a very powerful and dynamic film. The film brings a lot of joy and entertainment from fairy-tale heroes.
Only give a chance to Russian cinema, as they immediately fall below the floorboard, right into the room for dirt.
“The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil” is our children’s/family film produced under the Russian label Disney, those who shot the “Book of Masters” failed, and after 8 years they still collected money for the series “The Last Bogatyr”. The continuation of the eponymous film 2017, in which Kostya from the Kitchen, the son of Ilya Muromets, enters the world of Russian fairy tales and remains there to protect the world from all evil spirits. I remember the first part very cool, but at that time I had not yet written reviews and could watch the film through my fingers, so I do not take an estimate. The very idea of taking all our Russian folklore – Baba Yaga, Koschei the Immortal, Princess Frog, Kolobok, etc., and making it a whole cinematic universe with unique, memorable characters – is very cool. My expectations for the sequel were correspondingly high, and how it was possible to blow everything so far is beyond my understanding.
The budget of 650 million rubles is almost twice as much as the first part. There is money for the scenery, there is also a great cast, there is not enough for normal computer graphics (it is just scary to look at Kolobka), but this can be forgiven - not the main aspect of the film. And a similar situation in most Russian films, with such means and actors you can make a great movie. So what's the problem?
Disgusting writers. “The Last Bogatyr” is a typical story about the awakening of an ancient evil, which can only be stopped by our protagonist, relying on love, friendship and support of his environment. Everyone already knows this story, it has been implemented countless times in many books and films (The Lord of the Rings, for example), and still, with a ready-made template, it was necessary to manage to write such wretchedness. From the very beginning of the film, from its very first minutes, an illogical, miserable development of a confused, fragmented and limited plot begins. The scenes jump from one to the other in no way ill-conceived, like a hastily crumpled salad. For the first time in my life, after about 700 films, I noticed the editing (how the scenes are glued together), it was so bad. And no wonder – in any normal film, the whole point of editing is to make the transitions smooth and imperceptible.
Nothing is clear – who wants what, who came for whom, who has what motivation, just: “Here comes evil, hit everyone who speaks pretentiously and is dressed in black.” “Villains” are absolutely useless and stone, Vilkova generally appears on the screen for a maximum of 5-10 minutes, and all this time she is either strangled or thrown somewhere. The characters are a little better, they’re fun at least, but every time the story needs to go beyond the silly, mostly inappropriate jokes, it hurts. The film is reminiscent of an animated children's morning - no expectations of acting, everyone was just going to entertain the kids. And I want to point out that it's not the actors who are to blame, but the poor writing that they were given instead of the script. Even Victor Khorinyak’s Kostyan from the Kitchen was developed much better than our Bogatyr. Each of the actors has potential, but if there is no script, your acting skills won’t help (the same thing happened with Robert Pattinson of Twilight, after that, you need rehabilitation).
Unfortunately, by the end of this year will be the third part, fasten.
2 out of 10
In the second part, Ivan is trying to get used to the new world, and the audience will learn about the origins of the ancient evil that the heroes had to face in the first film, see new corners of the fairy tale Belogorye, and witness exciting fights with the participation of epic heroes.
This picture contains elements of various genres: comedy, drama, melodrama, fantasy, what happened, let us consider in more detail.
Pros of the film:
- Excellent picture, everything is shot qualitatively, the cooperation with Disney affects; the beautiful nature of Russia is shown. Indeed, some places in our country are like illustrations to fairy tales.
- good performance of actors, especially the main character, his facial expressions are simply incomparable; the characters are written well and cause genuine emotions, good or not, this is the 2nd question.
- a unique opportunity for adults to return to childhood to the old heroes of fairy tales: heroes, Baba Yaga, Koschei, whale fish, water, Kolobok just class.
- a lot of humor; the picture is simply filled with jokes and comic situations that will cheer up not only children but also adults.
Now let’s get to the bottom:
Special effects are not always high. In some scenes, rough computer graphics were visible, which did not create a very good impression of the picture.
It is not always an appropriate musical accompaniment. Perhaps modern musical inclusions were specifically included in the film to remind the viewer that Ivan is not from this world, but this is repeatedly shown through his clothes and manner of speech.
The film is fun and exciting. It is worth watching it at least once to cheer yourself up. The end of the film hints at the continuation of the adventures of Ivan.
8 out of 10
The film is a sequel, which says a lot. It can hardly be called a standalone film.
Pros:
The style of the first film is preserved, new interesting characters (Finist, Kolobok) are added. Moreover, I really liked how Finist showed even slightly revealed his motivation and interaction with all the characters. Probably the most important plus - this is as in the first part in the film, there is a moment in which I want to say - ' Here's the twist ' That is, the creators are able and can intrigue, which cannot but rejoice.
Cons:
Much less humor in the film. The creators try to create drama in some moments, but it turns out poorly. The interaction of Ivan and Ilya Muromets is not disclosed, they probably exchanged 1-2 phrases in the first half of the film. And trying to knock out a tear from the viewer looks very clumsy.
Ivan - if in the first film he was a douche, but in the end they showed how he kind of grew up and stopped making game, then in the second everything rolled back. Ivan causes negativity again.
The rest of the characters are not disclosed at all in no way play only the role of the function:
Vasilisa's job is to be nice. It is beautiful to smile and look expressively. The function of Baba Yaga is to deliver from point A to point B. The function of Water is to try to humor.
Probably a little worse than the first part, but still a good, simple film. Good fit and showed Finist, even a little revealed - with his desire to become a hero. Weakly inscribed Kolobka, although the beginning was cheerful, on the old positive characters scored. I lacked depth and scale in the film. Attempts to create drama have failed. Of the unambiguous advantages - intrigue with Ivan's mother, which causes respect for the creators. I would like to see the development of the characters of the previous parts.
Let me tell you right away that the first part of the film went like this... very average and once. I'll probably revisit the same one. For the output turned out quite a strong fairy tale (well, maybe a little with an echo of fantasy about the fellas) with a pleasant picture, excellent color and - for some time - well-written dialogues and spelled characters!
They wanted to embrace the dialogue (they remembered the stylization of speech, they remember the stylization of speech!). Characters are hugging and crying. Especially in every way a beautiful and slightly narcissistic Finist - although everyone is really good, and acting helps a lot. Even the dorkiness of the main character is as if within a framework in which it is not annoying, but rather amusing. In addition, again, finally, the consistent development of the main character is shown. Characters go through trials and losses, and that affects them. The evolution of relationships and characters ... is present, and it is pleasing.
Transitions from location to location do not let you get bored, there is quite appropriate humor, there are touching scenes, there are dynamic, there are cute - well, just for every taste. Exceptional landscapes, especially winter ones, are of amazing beauty. Fantastic realities and color are also good. Especially since this is in contrast to the modern world. What else? Evil Evil in the fairy tale is also present, sometimes quite in the punching scenes, I must say. Again, the images of the antagonists are not so simple, but there is quite a place to dig.
And also - simple, clear and good morality. How nice to watch a film that carries a normal moral message, honestly.
The only point I get is for music. Well, kind of like a fabulous Slavic state is ancient, heroic games ... right, cheerful Western rapper is very suitable, yeah. And you know why, but why?
I watched it on the big screen. It was beautiful. Beautiful and even cute, but... Something was sorely missing. Compared to the first part, there is a noticeable regression. Especially the script part. You can see that its creators did not even bother much. What kind of thing?! And so does the peeple. He did. Wouldn’t this affect the upcoming third party? . .
Well, the good stuff first. Ilya Muromets. Baba Yaga and Water (but just criminally few!). Beautiful views of the fabulous country. The finalist is Clear Falcon. Vasilisa. Barbara. "Svyatar's Head" (who saw the film, he will immediately understand). Wonder Yudo Fish Whale. Our rich games. And on this ...
Everything!
The film is full of flaws:
The main character Ivan (Victor Khorinyak) most of the picture is simply brutally dull and annoying. Kolobok... It's just horrible! Azzi flying wolf from black smoke is an ancient special effect worthy of the "glory" of the film named "Wolf of the Grey Dogs".
Stupid jokes, to the place and out of place (and like Ivashka's profeminism, and about the Hulk with the White Walkers). One joke and la Hulk would do another. But the writers were selling... Degradation is evident.
A lot of the film is clearly tied to the upcoming third part – but how tied. It is indicated that there will be something like this. Oh, it will. It will and will be. Now, why would you put that in here? Or here is Martha Timofeeva, a sweet girl who has already lit up in a whole bunch of fantasy pictures. Her face is already "washed." It's too much for you. Too much of her everywhere. Like Goshi Kutsenko and his like in the days of it.
The script, again, was written clearly on the knee and on the back. Which is very bad.
Next. It's like a fairy tale for little kids. And here and the world of the dead (by the way, and why is this boat "Charon-Transportation" does in the type of Slavic fantasy?), and a terrible monster flying from black smoke... And not at all a terrible giant dendromutant a la the same "Wolf"? I just don’t remember a more sloppy monster... Well, his story... Indeed, Disney gave our producers a virus that has already liquefied Star Wars.
So the repetition of jokes (the reception with a spoon in Yaga, for example) does not make them funny.
Okay. One time on the big screen is definitely worth watching. But nothing more.
Figuratively speaking, the heroic horse did not bear this pile. And if not a whale, and not a Fenist with Ilya ...
For their sake alone, this review will be declared neutral.
I saw it in the cinema today. I have not seen the first part, so I watched with anticipation of a new film for me.
Unfortunately, from the first seconds of the film, we are shown the main character and this is the biggest disadvantage of this film. I have never seen such stupid and disgusting main characters, just never at all. Just a terrible game, not funny curves, blatant stupidity on the verge of insanity, that is what ours personifies ' rich man'. What is surprising is the world in which this fool is placed. It is not poorly worked out, the actors (except the main character) at least a little try to play, the action scene is also not bad.
The sad thing is that with a good idea, everything rests on the script written under the main character of an idiot. No character disclosure. He lies, whines and never fights until the end of the film. The other characters fit perfectly into the story. Here and Finist personification of the hero, and not spoiled, but rather brave and fearless. Here and Vasilisa, who fights better than the main character, here and secondary heroes in their places. What can I say when Koschei in 10 minutes of screen time completely outplayed the main character.
Everything in this movie would be fine, remove Ivan the fool from it.
2 out of 10
For the most horrible and ridiculous lead role in films. It is a pity, the idea is not bad, the implementation is lame. I cannot recommend this film to anyone. Because the main character's play is just disgusting. Throughout the film, I still don’t understand why Vasilisa loves him.
Great story, thanks to the creators. I always dreamed of shooting in this genre, as I love our nature, Slavic fairy tales and fairy tales. I will praise you briefly (there is everything clear, the creators are good), I will write the criticism in more detail in the hope that people from the team working on the 3rd film will see it.
The actors look harmonious. The main character, however, is extremely stupid. I would like to see a wiser, albeit unsuccessful, character in his place.
Basically, the picture is excellent, the director’s operator, his team and lighters – respect. Graphics in places undercomposed (seemingly sharp boundaries of masks, especially on people with fast movements). Some 3D models look too cartoonish, like a hut on chicken legs and a kolobok. That is, some shots look quite Hollywood (for example, with the root of evil), and some - serial. This is a strange combination.
The script is wonderful. You can see that a lot of work has been done. I like the jokes, but I want a deeper sense of humor.
Music. This is almost a complete failure, except for one scene in the market, when something Russian-folk sounds. Was it not possible to make arrangements in the spirit of Slavic folklore, and even do something original? Take at least Neuromonk Theophan ' Stomach' he would much better go under the scenes with the competitions of heroes. Or Arkhipovsky with his incredible virtuoso balalaika. We have a lot of musicians who will make you unforgettable, recognizable all over the world hit songs with Russian-folk shades even in drum and bass, even in jazz or pop music.
Of the common shortcomings, in my opinion, there is often a lack of elaboration of details about the fairy-tale world, some trifles (for example, inscriptions on the shields of heroes; the sword-pocket looks simple, etc.). Because of this, the fabulous atmosphere sags.
I'll be waiting for the third part. I hope he doesn't. The budget should be enough for more than was in parts 1 and 2.