How long the fairy tale affects, but not soon the case is done. It took almost 4 years for the authors of Part 1 to get to the root of evil in Belogorye. It still lives a good fellow Ivan - the son of Ilya Muromets, and the red girl - Vasilisa the Wise. They spend their leisure in choirs with a microwave and a music center. The power of the unclean in their friends walks. Baba Yaga is a cappuccino who drinks, water at the auction, fish. The heroes of the monsters of overseas win: the bluetooth column is overtaken by an arrow, the generator will be struck with a spear. All right, but evil doesn't sleep. . .
Delicious filling from Slavic folklore skillfully wrapped in a modern wrapper, which makes the images of the characters funny and memorable. The situations in which the characters fall, looked ridiculous, but funny. The approach worked very well. . . in the last part, now the script cake has become sweet.
No, Viktor Khorinyak continues to please with comical slang and youth slang in the entourage of ornate speeches of the inhabitants of Belogorye. His simple-minded hero is amusingly jealous of the Clear Falcon Finist, shows invariable dance charisma to the song “Everything for you” and even gets along with a predatory kolobok. However, this is not enough to support, and even more to strengthen the buffoon scent of the new story. The producers tried hard to add recognizable images from The Lord of the Rings to the film, the scriptwriters deftly inscribed the theme of darkness from Supernatural, and the directors of the fights simply broke away in battle scenes. A fashionably decorated dish is curious to consider, but the content is saturated too quickly.
One of the reasons for the failed castlings of heroes. You are regularly forced to smile at the epic dreams of Finist, listen to the curses of a lump of dough voiced by Garik Kharlamov, and miss the former cheerful company of evil spirits. Does not add a spicy taste fleeting tragedy and insidious plans of “brunette nazbuletka” with “dark root vegetable”. The fairy tale came out beautiful and has already collected over 1.5 billion rubles. But I was waiting for a juicy continuation of the handmade comedy, and I bit the usual sweetness, made according to old patterns with taste substitutes. At the same time - not the last hero, in December will be the 3rd part of the story.
The whole film struggled with an irresistible desire to turn off the image so as not to see any more of the absolutely stupid protagonist, who has perception and psychology at the level of the simple household gadgets he so respects. According to the script, the hero should experience emotional experiences due to the death of loved ones and their captivity. Only experience is very difficult to call, if he says himself: ' And it's not that my bride will be strangled?!' And this line is intended for the main villain.
On the one hand, it is clear that the choice of this type is dictated by the desire to raise money and for this they are betting on part of the residents who actively visit cinemas for fun.
Nevertheless, it is still a shame for the nation that gave such storytellers as Pushkin and Shchedrin.
The film is spectacular, one flight on the whale is worth it. Just a question: 'Why?!' Raise the budget? Nothing useful in the development of the plot and for the characterization of the characters it does not give.
There are interesting moments with kolobok, water and baba-yaga, but they absolutely do not smooth out the negativity received from the vision of the beggar on the emotions of the hero. This, in turn, discredits the relatives of Vanya: father and Vasilisa. Their affection can only be justified in the only possible way: ' Love of evil - you will love a goat!'
Nevertheless, the hero considers everyone around him as goats, but not himself.
One can speak of any positive assessment only by abstracting from the above and remembering, as a Good Samaritan, the efforts of artists and special effects masters. It would be their energy in another movie!
Just for them.
4 out of 10
Torah', 'Kolobka', 'Maleficent', 'King Arthur' and 'Lord of the Rings', season with STS series, Internet memes, Russian flavor and Greek myths. The result is quickly eaten by a ladle, swallow without chewing, so as not to be disappointed in the taste.
2. Heroes.
Well... They are. In memory - except Kolobka and huts - do not remain, and thank God.
3. Actors' play.
I suggest you just skip this point. During the film, there was a feeling that Khorinyak felt out of place - as if not in his place, not wanting to play for real as he can.
4. Visual range, including special effects and costumes.
Kolobok is not bad - Swiborg ball reminded. Huts-layers - cute and made from the heart, with good detail! Oh, well, the interdimensional hole didn't work out that way. In general, for children - primary school age - it will roll. The age of 12+ will be missed.
To summarize: this creation is worth going only if you have children aged 6-10 years, who watched the first part, and passionately want to know what happened to GG next. The rest of us recommend that you stop the hand stretching to pay for tickets and spend the money on something more worthy. For the same 'Soul', for example. Trust me, you won't lose anything.
The first ' The last hero' I liked it. It was a successful fusion of Soviet film fairy tales and Disney tales; the fairy-tale universe and our modern reality. It was a great story, great actors who had something to play. It felt like the authors wanted to tell this story, and they succeeded. But no box office success should go unnoticed. So we assembled a team of five, I think, writers-specialists to make it even more fabulous, even funnier, even more successful. But whether they did not have the main thing, or completely lacked self-criticism.
The output turned tracing with ' Pirates of the Caribbean 3' with humor at the level of today's KVN, several (in my opinion not the best) gags from the first part. Everything rests on Ivan, he is not comfortable in the fairy-tale world, but we understood this in the first part. The rest of the characters are almost forgotten, they are all for furniture, and at the right time perform the necessary actions, say the right words so that the fairy tale can crawl to its finale. Why Yakovlev, Lavronenko and Burunov were brought here is not clear, they had absolutely nothing to play. Vasilisa needs Ivan to have someone to prove that he is a hero. The two villains from the first part could be wonderful antagonists, but no scriptwriters decided that witches need a boss, a more serious mastermind.
They actually made it worse, because it's so damn hard to know what this tree wants, who the witches are for it, who's for it, who's hesitating, and why you should have been so afraid of this root of evil.' Indian surprise', which could have been predicted from the middle of the film, finished me off. But the trailer of the 3rd part pleased, there the fairy tale comes to our world, maybe it will refresh the series. And the second one could not be removed!
Disney, The Root of Evil and a Look from the Past.
The recent history of world cinema is inextricably linked with the development of franchises. The main task of modern writers and marketers is to find a connecting thread between their creativity and the target audience. Not reflect reality, but find intersection points, and link them with your narrative. World trends are carried to the domestic audience by the Disney film studio. This campaign knows a lot about filmmaking and popularizing new trends, as well as turning successful projects into long-running franchises.
The last hero is just such a project. Disney releases the second film “Root of Evil”, a movie that uses the successful reception of the first tape, basing its narrative on innovatively redesigned domestic fabulous motifs, and once again turning children’s cinema into a successful franchise.
It's a lie, it's a hint. Human memory has the funny property of forgetting all the bad things that happened in life and leaving only good memories. And for this reason, sitting with my family in the cinema hall, I enthusiastically discussed the heroes of the last film, as well as what new characters will appear in this. About viewing the “Last hero” popped up only the laughter of the child, beautiful views and decent graphics. And, quite, I forgot, on what deep reflections led this view. Memory began to pick up these memories from the first frames of “Root of Evil”, and after 15 minutes it became clear that all the problems of the previous picture did not disappear.
But first, the pros. You got to applaud. All the advantages of the Last hero were certainly taken into account and improved in the Root of Evil. Beautiful views of Belogorye - constantly resemble the best shots from the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, Peter Jackson. Magnificent makeup, wonderful scenery and delightful computer graphics actually take us to a wonderful fantasy world. Special thanks to the designers and props. The princely choirs are made on 5+. This is what a real ruler should have. And the costumes, everything is like a selection of smooth and neat. It's done really well. My heart was happy when I watched the camera work, and did not notice any problems at the installation level. In general, the picture is worthy of the best foreign analogues.
But as someone who grew up on Rowe's fairy tales, it just hurt to watch some of the footage. The narrative is based on the penetration of a modern, real view of life, into a conventionally fairy-tale space and the use of his new reality for his needs by the main character. The classical understanding of the fairy-tale world is not suitable here. And neither Ilya Muromets, nor the Finist-clear falcon, nor Vasilisa the Beautiful, nor the honor and conscience of the main characters can change this. Therefore, it is quite strange to see how negative heroes joyfully begin to indulge in new trends, and disguise themselves in inappropriate guises. Turning upside down the established concepts of evil and good. This boundary is so blurred that the hero Kharlamov is taken for granted. And the kids laugh at his "Camediclabian" jokes. It can be said that this is a lie, but the hint is clear and understandable, the new reality does not accept fairy tales as we remember them, and this is the true root of evil. Coming out of the cinema, to the cheerful English-language song in the seemingly Russian folk scenery, it seemed to me that I understood who the Last hero in the new narrative. This is Ilya Muromets. He's really the last. It's real and untainted.
I like the film and left a positive impression. But everything in order.
Mini background: a man of our time, in whose veins flows, but sleeps heroic blood, relatively “lucky” to be in a completely different world with fabulous characters. Well, since Ivan can not spend even minutes without adventure, contacting Baba Yaga, Koshchei Immortals and Water, then we will logically be pleased to follow him. That was the case in the first movie.
In the second part, the scope is wider in everything. Added antagonists (as many as three), there was a prehistory of Koschei. Added a rounded, agile funny character. Conversations of the characters have become a little sharper (in skirmishes), more interesting, and sometimes even carrying a memorable artistic value. Cinematography is enough and many modern films, including foreign ones, can envy it.
In "The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil" there is some unusual magic, transmitted by sensual music and mystery transmitted to the screen by competent camera photography. There are many fascinating landscapes. The plot is straightforward, understandable and interesting. The special effects are at least not bad. There are no complaints about acting. The jokes are exceptionally kind. Nothing "left" film does not promote or impose. In general, no matter how hard I tried, I did not notice the drawbacks of the film. I liked how the Slavic city was shown, its life and people with their cares, as well as Ivan, who settled in it with all modern amenities.
The work of director Dmitry Dyachenko, whose works I am not familiar with, turned out to be generally entertaining, positive and beautiful. He contributed to the film and guided it, like the captain of the ship, in the right direction, avoiding shipwreck (catastrophe, failure).
The film is close to our understanding and we want to believe it. Vasilisa is invariably charming and to her, like drowning to the raft, reaches Ivan. Heroes speak properly, in Old Russian, with the exception of the incorrigible Ivan (although he begins to gradually adopt their words). He is still a fearful, unlucky, talkative guy from our world, who loves to show off in front of others, for which he often has to pay a price. Ivan's honor and strength were repeatedly questioned and tested. Towards the end, there was a significant change in this character, and one can only guess how it will affect further plots, and whether his character will change because of this.
To break away from viewing, writing notes, was very difficult. Moments in the memory of the trilogy “Lord of the Rings”, which is not bad, because the first is a guarantee of quality, and “The Last hero” is still original and original.
I am glad that there will be a continuation of such films.
Good will certainly eradicate evil. It was, is, and always will be.
P.S. I really hope that everything will be done with the winged baby.
In general, I liked the film - in something better, in something worse than the first part, but the general feeling is about the same.
From the good: the atmosphere of the film, the main character (the actor is just a bomb, half the film with his charisma pulls out), Finist and his red boots, views and camera work, soundtrack.
But how much potential there was in it, how many undisclosed characters:
1) Barbara. What do you want? Why did you rebel? How could such a character be so ingloriously removed?
(2) Ilya Muromets. On the one hand, the father + son line is one of the strongest, and on the other, we know almost nothing about Ilya - an absolutely colorless hero is one thing. It is a pity that he was not given any highlight, and left just a spherical father figure in a vacuum.
(3) A villain. I don’t know what I wanted to achieve in the end. Well, he would have taken over the whole world, but why... (in fact, we have a fairy tale here, so the point of motivation of evil I care less than the rest).
(4) Vasilisa. Half the film runs after Vanya with shouts ' well, what?!', a quarter looks into the eyes of Finist, and then it turns out that she does not need a hero. Oh, guys, she didn't say a good word to Vanya for the whole movie. They wanted to show her like a devoted companion, but all she actually says is reproaches and fair insults to lies. In the first film, they had at least a couple of minutes alone, why not give them these same touching minutes, so we can see how their relationship became stronger, more trusting. Then Vanino’s behavior would become more dramatic, and Vasilisins’ offenses gained more weight.
(5) Kolobok. Apart from the decomposition of a well-known fairy tale, I never understood why it was needed. Only Vanya talked to him, the others completely ignored him. For some reason, everyone wrote about some enchanting jokes from this character - in the hall, none of his remarks about ' Myakish' no one even grunted.
(6) Finalist. The character of Finist is good - he is understandable, sincere, his motivation is in the palm of his hand. But why didn’t their relationship with Vanya last? It is obvious that in the end they were supposed to become friends, but why, apart from the hand, there were no manifestations of friendship, although in the final scene it was possible to show how the two of them go into the woods, chat about something, maybe one would call the other a very good Russian expression ' called brother' - pathetic and in the heart.
The film managed the worst scenes using graphics, so the final battle looks very bad. Against the background of battles with real people, the battle with the graphon feels inanimate and simply dead.
Summary
Such films should definitely be supported by the ruble in order to continue making good films for all ages about our culture. But, Disney, if your movie is so popular that you start putting the product placeman of the laundry detergent and the shoe store into it, then you can get some of that money into secondary characters.
Going to the movies and paying for it was my big mistake. If you're reading this hoping to find out if you should go, I say don't. I understand why this tape for the first weekend more than 1 billion rubles, but it is still very disappointing that such a movie pays off, and good films do not.
Let’s talk about the first part of this franchise, because comparisons are inevitable. And so, ' The Last Bogatyr' I liked it. It was an easy one-time adventure, extremely template, sometimes silly, but really funny and quality. I didn’t laugh with every joke, but the funny ones skipped, I didn’t sit with a saggy jaw looking at the effects and the production, but the chase in the hut was good, and most importantly original, there were really beautiful locations and, most importantly, I understood what the characters wanted, where they were going and why. Of all the above in the second part there are only locations. Everything else has either degraded or disappeared altogether.
The main character has turned into a cattle that makes such shameful and unfunny jokes that while watching my face burst with shame. And he does it in any situation. All minor characters are not written at all, some appear in the narrative out of nowhere and do not play any role in it, some forgot their arch passed in the first film, and some were inserted as functions to promote the plot. Also bad acting, the effects are worse than in the first part. Oh, my God, how hard it was to look at that rusty-eyed kolobok. The plot itself is stupid, ill-conceived, with a lot of holes and pianos in the bushes. The drama doesn’t work, the love line is delusional and fake, the villains are boring, and the adventures are cardboard. The plot is just as idiotic. There is an unexpected twist in the film, which is guessed at the very beginning, but due to all the problems listed above, it does not cause 'wow'-effect, but vice versa. The audience sat perplexed and in their eyes read 'What?'. And of course, I got a triquel too. Of course, the saddest thing is that there was not a single good joke that could at least smile.
In the end, everything is bad, I am disappointed.
2 out of 10
I'll kick one for the beautiful views. Finally, I ask you not to go for it and not to support the ruble in any case.
This film has only two advantages. This is the quality of the actors’ play and beautiful landscapes. . .
If in childhood you did not read fairy tales, if you do not know anything about the heroes, those without a horse Julia, then another option ' Twilight' - this is for you.
Good and evil have changed places. And if Baba Yaga has no complaints, she is the guide in fairy tales - the guardian between Yavyu and Naviu, then the good, sacrificial Koschei is something!!!
Troll, she's an orc, far away. . .
The finalist, the most tragic character of Russian folk tales is just a knight of defects.
The main character is not Ivan - a fool, but a mixture of Luke Skywalker, who cannot share Princess Leia with Han Solo with Spider-Man, when he is without a suit, the complexes of a 13-year-old teenager and climb...
I won't mention Kolobka. . .
Quotes from the American classics begin to get bored by 10 minutes. Just Olivier's New Year. .
It's more honest to watch the next Avengers or X-Men. .
“The Last Bogatyr” is one of the few domestic films that can be revised. And one of the few comedies that I don't want to spit on yet.
The second part was released 4 years after the first and set a record for the first week. The characters are the same: charming, cute, funny. Evil does not sleep, so the adventures and exploits of the heroes do not end.
Cons: I didn't understand the first appearance of the colobok. I thought that the writers oversmoked something, so painfully this character beat out of everyone. Well, most jokes are like hastily made cakes, because they are built on the difference between the 21st century and Belogorye. This all causes just laughs, and some real funny moments are few.
Pros: plot. Don't get bored! All a couple of hours I happily spent in the chair of the cinema and sometimes even pressed into the back of the chair - so worried about the characters. Actions unfold quickly, but interesting: the heroes manage to overcome several tests.
Landscapes. Incredible beautiful landscapes of the winter forest, snowy valley (Karelia), some harsh river (neighborhood of Ladoga), green hills – I wanted to Google immediately, where they took such beauty. (Then they even discussed why there are so few films that reveal the beauty of Russia – we have so many extraordinary places.)
Decorations and costumes. Very, very. I read that the city was specially built in the suburbs - in Khimki.
Actors. There are few of them, but each has very bright roles. I am glad that the full-length film opened up heroes unknown to the mass audience and offered worthy roles to those we can see only in TV series: Elena Valyushina (plays in the theater and stars in TV series, but mostly she gets harmful aunts), Mila Sivatskaya (here she is not much different from the heroine of the series “Grand”, except that she fights coolly and more noble), Viktor Khorinyak (he is also not quite visible on the big screen), Ekaterina Vilkova (also disappeared, although 10 years ago she had one meter after another).
Meaningful load. Yes, it's a movie to relax the brain and not think. But I really liked the small details: for example, at the games Ivan wins due to ingenuity, smile and friendship, and Finist - due to physical strength. And he and he won, but still the viewer knows who flaunts more. Or a moment about finding yourself, honesty, friendship, heroism and a common cause.
The film will appeal to both children and adults. At the end there is a good seed for the next part, which will be released at the end of the year.
The results were all summed up, and about the whole cinema, too, it was time.
The year was very unsaturated in terms of cinema.
There were strange, funny, amazing movies.
But they were doing their job. It brought people emotions.
I did not want to write this review, I did not even think about it.
I was disappointed in this movie.
Starting with the plot, and ending with parodies of various films.
But it was necessary to watch something, because none of the major premiers came out in the appointed time “except for the Argument”. And movies like Wonder Woman or Black Widow didn’t interest me, and I don’t advise you to watch them, unless you are a person with a socially low level.
With the adaptations of fairy tales we have weak since the end of the USSR, so it was interesting what they came up with, and besides in cooperation with the company
"Walt Disney"
The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil is a continuation of the very good first part, which I personally liked much more. Like a fairy tale, the first film felt more atmospheric than previous attempts to make fairy tales.
What is the film about?
About the hero Ivan, the son of Ilya Muromets, who from all aspirations wants to get the power of heroism to look on the background of his father nothing worse.
In the film there are both new and familiar heroes and villains.
One of these Varvara, who dreams of revenge on Ivan and everyone else.
I can only say that it is banal and primitive.
All subsequent actions of the characters are guessed after 15 minutes of the film, and at the end for the inattentive all chew.
Fortunately, there is humor in the film, which sometimes does not save the truth.
There is nothing original in this story. And when they show fights in the style of Harry Potter, or treks through Belogorje, in the style of the Lord of the Rings, you experience Spanish shame throughout the film.
It's all about the cast here.
I can only single out among the rest Viktor Khorinyak, Garik Kharlamov and Taisia Vilkova.
All the other actors played either boring, that looked empty in the frame, or like
Sergey Burunov, who was practically not shown in the film
The makeup of Koschieu and Babe Yaga is a nightmare.
The film has a budget of 650 million rubles, it looks quite good, I do not argue.
But when you see that makeup is worse than in performances, then such workers are ashamed.
In general, a very one-time, passing film was released.
Yeah, he's funny, interesting in places.
But if, without exaggeration, when you have watched a lot of films, different genres, you expect exactly not to repeat the same films over and over again.
The Soviet adaptations of fairy tales had something spiritual that does not look next to Bogatyr.
The time of these films is long gone. They are hardly watched by a large number of people, I would hardly watch these films.
But when you see that Soviet films looked more interesting, it becomes sad.
Only out of respect for the promotion of domestic fairy tales I make this assessment.
I don’t recommend watching.
The last hero is weaker than the first part. Humor is less successful and there are fewer really funny scenes. Koschei, Baba Yaga and Water burned in the first part and became completely gray in the second, their sparklingness disappeared, unfortunately. Kolobok partly amused, but did not fill the void.
The line of Ivan and Vasilisa is completely absent. They interact less than in the 1st part, and the behavior and action of Vasilisa, talking more about the lack of feelings. Walked with children, they really disliked Vasilisa after that.
The line of Gali and Varvara is shown as a parallel action, and in theory it should be a flashback (a memory or something like that). At the end there is a scene, which is also kind of like a memory should be, but goes like a real one, where Galya is pregnant and Varvara, she has been living with her for a long time, and everything is peaceful and good, only at the beginning of the film, on the day when Galya (not yet pregnant) met Barbara, they encountered a sorcererer on the same day and changed. Something's missing! It is possible to think and understand of course everything, but I would like to watch a film where the plot is logical and do not assume that this is probably so, and this is like this.
The sword of the harlot is touched by all who do not fall, although in the first part they said that if he does not grasp, then he will perish. Perhaps the authors were too lazy to revise the first part.
Why did they introduce Finista, if it was possible to prescribe the role to Alesha Popovich (Wolfgang Cerny), who was in the 1st part at the beginning and it would be more logical (Finist is still another fairy tale).
In general, the script is not thought out, humor, in some places, is sucked out of the finger, a lot of inconsistencies. It feels like the director didn't pay much attention to his film.
It is a pity that the little good that sometimes appears in the movies, still manage to spoil.
I mean, part 2 is more than the first. The first film turned out to be too simple, but still interesting, and the second part turned out to be very large-scale, beautiful, emotional and fun. I was afraid to go to the movies because I thought I wouldn’t like the movies. Let’s get to the review itself.
The main characters learn about the origins of ancient evil, which they faced in the first film.
We've got a new character, the koloko. It's voiced by Garik Kharlamov. It turned out to be very funny, touching and cute. All the kids in the room were firing at him, and for some reason I wasn't funny, but it was very interesting.
I also noticed a small reference to the movie “Moving Up.”
In this picture, the plot is based on the scheme of classical fairy tales: good fights evil.
I recommend watching the movie with my kids.
“The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil” is a sequel to the previous film of the fabulous franchise from the Russian division of Disney, which differed from today’s patient only by the lack of a headline. This is not just about the name.
“The Root of Evil” is a film with which the already imperfect source copies the already dramatic word for word: all the characters roll back to their initial characteristics from the first part and go exactly the same way, with similar quests and absolutely the same atmosphere, which they do not try to dilute with new non-standard solutions and at least some deconstruction of the plot. This is the worst example of the tired of all the principle of “the same, but thicker pour”.
But in addition to the secondary in relation to the first part, the film also has a dependence on the third: “Root of Evil” is an example of the genre of eyeliner film almost extinct in the rest of cinema. All the most interesting and important, new for the viewer, he leaves the next part and does not end, and thanks to the first problem, nothing begins.
But The Root of Evil manages to be even worse than the first part with its content. The characters of the film practically do not have a single worthwhile problem, and those of which skilled screenwriters could make a good adventure, in the hands of the creators of the sequel are solved literally by the click of their fingers or “God from the machine” (and the characters themselves at one point ironize over this fact, which is, consider, a personal receipt from the director in their own impotence).
Well, the fourth “minus” of the film is its editing, messy and uneven. I don’t know what genius came up with the idea to darken the screen almost every five minutes, but in any case, this “trick” only throws the viewer out of the world of the film, which you had to try to enter. Disturbing and the staging of fighting scenes, in which the camera shook like on the set of a children's morning, and plans were shamefully changed so that the viewer did not have time to see that the coordinator of the tricks did not even appear on the set.
But, for the sake of justice, the "Root of Evil" has its merits:
First of all, the humor (mostly) was successful. There are a few really funny moments, and even two jokes, from which I was ready to laugh in voice: one at the beginning, with a pretty good situational scene, and one in the middle, which is the only original solution to the side quest for the entire film.
Secondly, the work of the cameraman was not particularly elegant, but pleased that at least it did not choose plans that would completely kill the aesthetic sense in me. The picture as a whole looks normal, and special effects and scenery are the only thing that allows you to immerse yourself in the film.
6 out of 10
How good that the year begins with such a chic and life-affirming film, the continuation of the acclaimed and insanely funny “The Last hero”. Despite the fact that three years have passed, I can confidently say that the first part lives in the head and heart of our citizens, because on the one hand, it is unusual and magical, and, on the other hand, gives off Russian flavor, some familiar life situations, in each of which you will recognize yourself.
“The last hero. The Root of Evil is a confident dispersal before the third part of this story, the last of which was presented at the pitching of the Cinema Foundation in the summer of 2020, since the plot component of the second episode is very much inferior to the first and you can see how the viewer is prepared in advance for another part, which should be the final one. This is also evidenced by the increased timekeeping of the “Root of Evil”.
Performing such a role as a guiding star for the next part, the "Last hero". The root of evil has been strengthened from a visual, acting and humorous point of view.
The visual part. Beautiful graphics, so many different special effects and infinitely beautiful landscapes that accompany the characters during their journey. You can look at all the forests, fields and animals.
The actor part. To all the heroes we love, new ones are added, among which I wanted to mention Finist and Kolobok, who was voiced by Garik Kharlamov. Everything just coincided here: the image of the “round hero” (his drawing is simply magnificent, especially the blush crust delighted me), and the voice, which completely coincided with the essence of the magical hero, and jokes (you can certainly give first place in the amount of humor that this character brought).
The humorous part. Despite the fact that Kolobok occupies the first place in this list, other heroes also did not lag behind. I especially liked the cappuccino jokes by Ivan and Baba Yaga. In general, I will say that throughout the whole picture you will not be bored.
One of the downsides for me was the commercials that we see every day, and I want to see the movie without all that nativity, but, alas, we are shown Ariel capsules and Kari shoe store. And Ivan's socks with Mickey Mouse, so to speak, Disney alaverda. The most important thing is that the story does not turn into advertising integrations like in Christmas trees.
The movie "The Last Bogatyr." Root of Evil is insanely interesting, I don’t know how much it will collect at the box office, due to the current situation, but I highly recommend you to watch this insanely beautiful and magical story that will resurrect your little child in you! I sincerely wish the creators success and look forward to continuing!
What comes out under the auspices of Disney is always done under the control of Disney. To some extent. Perhaps this is where the success and really high-quality performance of this fairy tale lies. And the arches of the characters pass, and the acting game is moderately pathetic, and the logic in the narrative is there. I liked the first part, the second part did not lose its merits. And the kids liked GlavHero. Confused only Kolobok, because in some places he is too much Kharlamov.
In 'The Last Bogatyr - 2' grouped 3 excellent stories: 'Pirates of the Caribbean - 3', 'Star Wars' and 'The Tenth Kingdom' (two of them, of course, produced by the famous 'East' film company). Implemented competently: plagiarism - yes, stamps - yes, but everything is clear to the place, you can endure. Only, of course, the dramatic moment from 'PCM' could not be fully transferred, because there we already knew the history of the family, very sympathetic to the heroine and wept with her. Here Vanya is not so close to the viewer, because he is more comical than Elizabeth Swann, but the drama still played. A couple of other dramatic moments also happened. And in the category ' Plum of the Year' I can definitely nominate "Barbarian", which so ignited in the first part, and in the sequel it was deprived of order. And Glavgad is too miserable to be seriously feared. Vasilisa - again 'Gloomy Rapunzel', a beautiful and brave princess for the prince, this is her main task, she copes with her perfectly.
Epicically, ironically, there was even a reference to Tarantino. And with all the borrowings, the Russian spirit and all our folklore heroes have been preserved. Watching the whole family for the New Year is the best thing.
8 from 10
P.S. There's one song there... A couple of minutes ' oh my God, my ears!' it will pass and you can move on.
On the January weekend of 2021, the choice of options for going to the movies is small: The Last Bogatyr-2 and Silver Skates. Let's figure out what is good "Root of Evil" and what problems the film has.
On the forums, many write that the sequel to Bogatyrya is boring and childish. Don't believe it. “The root of evil” is bright, funny and simple, like a slipper, a family movie with jokes of varying degrees of success. Some gags are repeated five times. To some it will certainly seem too much, but the audience in the hall laughed in the voice every time Koschei was hit on the head. At least it works for someone.
The movie is full of references to pop culture. Seriously, it's every five minutes. Some of them are very cool, like throwing like a basketball, Kolobka in the ring of Kirill Zaitsev (“Movement Up”), or socks with Mickey Mouse, a symbol of Disney (“The Last hero” is a project of Disney). But there are also references from which the film looks secondary. The camera now and then goes from the white owl to the local “devil’s snares”, and the wizard Ragolep is very similar to either Sauron, or the gravada from the cartoon “Prince Vladimir”. Yes, fantasy is a hackneyed genre, all its techniques have already been somewhere, but there are so many bright images and moves in Russian folklore, why not use them instead of Hollywood clichés? The creators revealed only a few such images (Miracle Yudo Fish-Whale, talking Head, power coming from the earth, etc.). The rest, apparently, saved for the triquel.
In the sequel, new characters appear. The creators gave them unexpected features, re-imagined them and, in my opinion, made them more interesting. It is a pity that the depths of the characters were almost not given, all of them remain walking functions, cute, but cardboard. It looks good, but the interaction in the team narrows to the skirmishes of Vani and Finist. Sometimes it's funny. Sometimes not so much.
And the strangest moment was the arch of the main character. Throughout the plot, the filmmakers lead Ivan and the audience together with him to the idea that the hero of a person is not given at birth a mythical force, but determination, ingenuity and all sorts of soft skills. Vanya repeatedly proves that he does not need power, he is already a hero, even if he does not throw one left anvil on the roofs. However, at the end of the film, Ivan’s superhero abilities still come. And that somehow devalues the whole journey he's come. As if it was impossible to leave the character without superpowers, and the fact that it is he who is poor some kind, the Belorans will not respect. Or, as if the creators were afraid that without this, the audience would be unhappy with the film.
If you compare "Big Man" with another favorite rental, "Silver skates", he, of course, loses. Skates is a new word in Russian cinema. “The Rich Man” is a pleasant, but ordinary popcorn movie that will appeal to even the youngest children. It is beautiful, well-made in technical and camera terms, it has pleasant soundtracks, a whole carriage of jokes, and at least a third of them you will like. But in "Root of Evil" there is no original idea, and its characters have intelligible motives, there are few interesting details in the frame, and therefore the atmosphere is not exciting, and the film does not cause goosebumps. Cinema takes its bar, and does not count on more. And it's a little frustrating, frankly.
Get ready, Vanya - it will definitely not be boring.
The action begins without any swing - the Belogorsk rapid reaction squad moves through the forest, looking for a likhodei. At the head of the local special forces - the Finist, a tro-bogatyr and just handsome, and desperately complex Vanya, put forward as a leader with an eye on the legendary father (Ilya, as is known from the first film, Muromets), but not for the totality of personal merit. Ivan tries to compensate for his inconsistency as a hero, opening portals to Moscow every day and dragging all sorts of rubbish from there, which does not produce a great impression on the Belorsk people in general and the bride Vasilisa in particular. Ivan laughs and teases Finist, but the viewer feels the insecurity of the hero: he is not akin to Belogory, the strength of Ivan is still in our world. And it seems you just need to give the guy more time, but it just isn’t – evil, more thoughtful and concentrated, again comes to visit, which means, Vanya, solve your problems along the way!
Compared to its prequel, 'The root of evil' more serious and tougher - the smallest, - 6+, which means no blood and murders in the frame, and even Kolobok squeaks Kharlamov's voice unusually restrained. The themes the film invites its audience to think about are standard: what you're willing to live for and die for, how you're going to fix if you screw up, and what you're going to do when you find that both evil and good are in you and determine your choices. The villains now only serve other villains, cooler, and the motives of evil are somewhat more clear, up to the post-credits scene - after it, the motivation is again zeroed out, question ' But why?' hangs in the air, and will hang until the release of the third part. Evil also rushes, dissatisfied with itself and the situation, but this does not make it more ambiguous, just each antagonist pulls the wagon in his direction, wanting something incomprehensible, eventually pushing back the final victory, which they would easily achieve if they were truly united.
Good also behaves absurdly, and the only character suitable for the role of paladin is left behind. Heroes play the fool, each in his own way, demonstrate miscalculations and weaknesses, but by the end they pick themselves up and imbue themselves with the power of unity. Pianos of bushes, with the exception of literally a couple of moments related to the ways of moving, are not here. Logic is there, Ivan finds his long-awaited ' strength ', starting to identify himself with the land on which people and inhumans dear to him now live, and the act committed at the beginning of the path will respond at the end, and old friends will come to the rescue.
The action of the film is verified so carefully that it does not have sags at all - the creators did everything to ensure that the viewer, even the youngest, did not get bored or distracted (at the evening session there were many children with me, and, rarely, no one ran or chatted, but the baby responded actively to what was happening on the screen). The world of Belogorye is no longer limited to the heel of locations, as it was in the first part, now it is larger and more populated - but at the decisive moment the heroes can count only on their colleagues.
Conclusion: how a children's film is great, everything you need is in the right proportions. As a full-fledged universe - maybe if the creators in the third part will prescribe at least Ivan, as the main character, the development of character, and an interesting conflict. What a wedding without her in a fairy tale!
The creators of the film for children had a difficult task: it had to please adults without looking at 6+.
And the creators did. I left the theater with a slight feeling of regret that the film was over, I would have loved to watch both 3 hours and 4 hours.
Everything in it echoed in me: the suffering of a Moscow resident Ivan in a hot bath, and the complex moral choice of Vasilisa - to love and unquestioningly believe the guy who once gave a slack and escaped, and jokes about the disgusting six under a cappuccino.
The film is as organic as possible, it seems to be a simple plot about a hitya, but it is not about a hitya, Vanya, like all of us, flesh of the flesh of Russian epics and a steel metropolis.
There were fears that the template hero will be Finist and take the role of the stupid boastful Hulk, but he is an incredibly good whole guy, and their working bromance with Ivan is a separate delight.
None of the characters can complain about the lack of intelligence, everyone has his own character, and Vanya has a wit and the ability to think very quickly and talk to people’s teeth (don’t forget what he earned for an apartment). Apparently, this is why we have the third hero Finist, not Alyosha Popovich, who just personified his wit. I am looking forward to seeing it in 3 parts.
The actors play with great pleasure, not for a millimeter without breaking out of the organic story. It’s a great success for each of them to get into this wonderful project. No one is the main one, the leitmotif of the picture is the Russian WE, not the American I with the main superhero (thanks to Disney, I wonder how the negotiations were going, there is also no black (although Water is conditionally lipid) and the only disabled person in the form of Kolobka).
Kolobok is a delight! You should have thought of that! Bravo to the writers, bravo to the author of the idea! One of the best solutions!
Separately, I want to note the efforts of the casting team, young Kaschei (hot hot!!!) and Gala one in one with their age characters.
Vasilisa conquered in the first part, so, apparently, she was not given much to reveal in the second, but clearly showed that the heroine with her own motives.
The main evil in the end was even sorry. So powerful, furious, in its own rightful revenge, so helpless in the world of asphalt and concrete.
Evil has no excuse whatsoever. Yes, every “evil” has its own heavy backstory, but it is not a redemptive excuse, and it is true. Evil must be punished and uprooted, and good must be with a fist.
Watched it in a movie theater. A very good trailer for the movie, we saw it and decided to go. In the course of action there are quite bright moments, there is humor, good animation. But while watching, there is always a feeling of something superfluous. From half the session I even wanted to leave, but then somehow ' pulled in '. I didn’t try to find logic in the story, it’s a fairy tale. Heroes are pretty good. A little hysterical protagonist (who in appearance does not look like an 18-year-old young man, who is in a state of permanent objamas due to the age of acne). A slightly narcissistic Finist (probably made so that he was not too good). Very feminist heroines (why do we need heroes if ' there are women in Russian villages'?).
For whom the film was made in the end is not clear. He's illogical as an adult. Those who are in their thirties will only go with their seven-year-old children. Teenagers, it seems, like ' fairy tale' will not go (not because the fairy tale is bad, but because of age stereotypes). As a result, the option is from 4 to 10 with moms or grandparents. If you cut 30 minutes out of the film (according to different plots), the film would become more dynamic, getting rid of the noodle of the main character and logical screwups of the other characters. Sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings. I haven't seen any previous movies. The final chord with the eggs is great.
Well, indeed, the first film against the background of modern was very original, there were heroes in it and they did well without super powers. Here to move the brains of the writers did not and instead of the plot pushed superpowers.
In general, the claims are mainly to the script and the desire to cram successful images into the film at any cost. The line of Galina and Varvara is not needed, all of it could be told in the 3rd film, and so they interfered more than made the film interesting. The same with Gorynych and Mikhailov’s lover. There was not enough time for the revived Koschei and it turned out to be more than about nothing. The same with heroes and their fun is an interesting event and about nothing. I couldn't open the kolobok.
The worst part is a year before the movie comes out, and I already know what to expect from it. It'll be the same! The films were clearly shot together - in one fell swoop. In general, the endings also killed the expectation of a new tale.
That’s exactly what happened after watching the movie. Before going to the movies, there was hope that the second part would be a worthy sequel to the first one (which was not so bad after all). But it's worth a little thought... In general, judge for yourself:
The first question that arises almost in the second minute of the picture: why the main character remained the same as he was? In the first part, he went such an amazing way. And at the end of the first film, the authors emphasized that Ivan changed (when he remembered the boy in a coma and gave him live water, after which he and Vasilisa rode on a hut on chicken legs into a happy future).
But now the second part begins, and we suddenly see that the main character remained the same fool: the world, where he comes from, he is not interested, he has no craving for the heroic cause, and in general it turns out that something somehow pulls him back, into his world. The only difference between the new Ivan and the old one is wild jealousy. Although this is not a difference, but just before there was no opportunity to reveal the hero from this side.
As for the plot... The creators decided to go into intense drama. In general, their desire to deepen both the universe and the plot is the right one. But I think they went somewhere wrong. In the classic Hollywood cliché a la: 'I am your father' on which they decided to wrap the rest of the story.
In principle, in the direction of Hollywood authors and slightly in another way: the second film has many plot and visual similarities with the films about ' Harry Potter' and (don’t laugh)... with ' Asterix and Obelix' (not only that the authors ' borrowed' something important from the universe of Asterix, and also stole the visualization of the action of something important).
But not only the plot and visual stretch across the ocean: watch the competitions of heroes under the incendiary composition in English. I am not a Slavophile, but this choice of sound does not complement the picture - he comes into conflict with it. Perhaps, it is difficult to call it an imitation of Hollywood, because it is not quite clear whether it is an imitation, or a banal lack of taste.
But okay, and that's forgiven, too. But it is impossible to forgive outright stupidity, which sometimes becomes very obvious. There is almost no logic in the film.
It would not be possible to give examples without spoilers, but there were a few moments when I was ready to scream at the ravings of the script. They could be explained in the film. But no, it is better to insert a scene like a creepy painted dirty yellow 3D ball with the face of a 60-year-old grandfather drinking companion, who in the film is called Kolobok and who, according to the authors, is the focus of all the humor of the picture, reveals to the viewer a centuries-old secret, what the kolobok actually did with the fox at the end of the original fairy tale. And I very much doubt that the story ' Kolobka' (in quotes) will make you laugh.
By the way, it should be stopped separately, because it is just something. I am very sorry if there are children in whose memory Kolobok will be associated not with the resourceful and naive character of a children's fairy tale, but with a wretched 3D model with Kharlamov's voice. However, visually Kolobok is simply terrible. For some reason, he did not arouse the desire to try in artists. And not surprisingly, because the image of this hero is twisted so much that, apparently, they considered it a spit in their own childhood and drew it, in response spitting on the keyboard and leading back and forth with a mouse. You can argue that this is just a rethinking of the image. Well, then why did the authors not 'rethink' Koschei of the Immortal? Why not ' reimagined' Babu Yaga? And with those other characters? I'm not saying you should have copied everything from fairy tales, of course not. And between the heroes of Russian folklore and the heroes ' The Last hero' a lot of differences (and this is good). But the basis of characters and external images in the first film, the authors preserved. Therefore, the usual characters, who appeared in a different light and in a different story, remained close to the viewer precisely due to their similarity with well-known images. And so the film itself, also new to the audience, became closer.
In the second part, the cinematic image of Kolobka works exactly the opposite: you do not see anything familiar in this character except the name. You don't understand why everyone calls him Kolobok if it's not Kolobok. And already on a subconscious level it repels. And therefore numerous jokes associated with his ' combat ' character, do not cause laughter.
And from this follows the difference between the second part and the first, associated with jokes. If earlier, humor was based on ridiculing some traits that the heroes of fairy tales possess (or rather their well-known images). Now it is based on images entirely invented by the authors. Humor also ceases to be close to the viewer. After all, the actions or words that the heroes did would not cause laughter. The laughter was caused by the fact that these heroes, heroes whom we know well, do or say it.
There are funny moments and jokes in the movie. They are few, but they are, and they are mainly associated with Ivan, thanks to whom again there is a mixture of the fairy-tale world and the real world. Fortunately, the authors left it and it somehow drew the humor of the picture. Thank you for that.
Of course, apart from some good jokes, there were some positives. There were interesting scenes, new locations. The actors play well. The authors reveal the very universe of Belogorye a little deeper (although this disclosure is mainly in heroes, who almost all turn out to be boys for whipping, well, come on).
But all this does not save the film, because after watching a lot of questions turn in my head, to which no one answers. Apparently, the authors wanted to add and do so much that logic was completely forgotten. It’s not always a good thing.
Although it is very possible that my discontent is in vain, and in the third film, which was announced at the end of the session, the creators will explain everything and answer all the questions. I really hope so.
The saddest thing is that the film was unatmospheric. It is hard and sometimes downright boring to watch. The transition between the scenes is too long, the editing is corny eyes. And you don’t have to be a critic or an elite – the film is atmospheric. The first part had an atmosphere. In the second, she disappeared. Therefore, even turning off the brain, the film will not just watch.
So I do not have any particular hopes for the continuation and I hope that the franchise ' The Last hero' will remain a trilogy and will not turn into another conveyor for pumping money.
But even if that happens, at the beginning of each film we will be greeted by the eternally identical Ivan along with his spherical CGI-Kharlamov.
Beautiful!
A few years ago, when The Last Bogatyr came out, my intuition told me that this picture was worthy of attention, and I was right. Now, when its continuation comes out, not only intuition but also experience speaks in favor of the new picture. The main fairy tale for the New Year holidays lived up to expectations, being not stupid, cheerful and atmospheric, transferring to the endless expanses of epic Rus.
“The Last Bogatyr: The Root of Evil” very ironically considers the cult of power, which is essential for Russian culture – heroic power, showing that many deeds and exploits can be accomplished not even with the help of intellect, but with the help of the original Russian ingenuity. The main character of Vanya is no intellectual, but against the background of the typical hero of the Finist the Clear Falcon going ahead often looks like a titan of thought. The point is not in the thoughtlessness of the fairy-tale hero, who does not exist, but in his quite understandable "dreaminess" in comparison with modern intelligence. Thus, the necessity of the usual physical hollow force is questioned, which can be easily replaced by both reason and all sorts of “doping”, but the brain cannot be replaced with anything, therefore, the ability to think much more significant and weightier even in heroic affairs.
The main line of the film becomes a banal battle of evil and good, but evil here is offended good, and therefore the most terrible, irreconcilable and powerful. However, this topic can not be considered fully disclosed, the authors did not give anyone a second chance, did not enter the position of antiheroes, focusing purely on the confrontation of bad and good, without delving into the motives driving them, except for a formal flashback. An interesting visualization of the action of evil in the form of blindness in the literal sense of the word, which means that you can follow evil, darkness only blindly, that is, without realizing your actions. No one in their right mind will follow evil, which means that people are not evil by nature. The line of one of the antiheroines and her atypical behavior seemed somewhat abandoned, since the motives of her actions were not explained in any way, and she herself was rather carelessly taken outside the limits of the narrative.
At first glance, the good in this film is relaxed, somewhat slack, slightly irresponsible, as opposed to structured and organized evil, which, of course, has a plan. However, the primordial Russian mess is an invariable part of both good and evil, so none of the opposing sides is perfect. Not all successes are the consequences of successful decisions, often they are the result of miscalculations and simply stupidity of the second party. This circumstance is the reason for many humorous moments, laughing through tears from the realization of the next failure of certain characters.
The key plot twist in the final battle suggests the idea of the opposition of modernity and antiquity, where our time, expressed in a typical setting for it, seems neutral and even spiritual in contrast to the energizing antiquity. That's just the old days here - fabulous, epic, fake, it has never been like this, which means that this is not a confrontation between the present and the past, but a contrast of reality and fairy tales. The past is not considered, not exalted, leaving behind the brackets of this involuntary comparison.
It is also interesting to look at the nature of a special force, more powerful than the heroic one that arises in the very finale. Perhaps the plot twist that in any normal person there is a place for both good and bad, good and evil, and only in interaction these opposites can give such power that none of them can independently.
“The Last Bogatyr” is a film that you want to see on New Year’s holidays. The secret is not only in wit and irony, the effect of bringing elements of modern life to the fairy tale, but also in the actors. They are so delighted to play the fairy tale that this positive energy transcends the screen and fills the viewer - a rare and precious effect. Watching "Bogatyr" is worth at least for his sake, although, of course, this is the case when the film is equally interesting to viewers of all ages. Not stupid and not so simple, but easy to perceive and very positive.
': The last hero. The root of Evil #39 is, in short, very stupid and very embarrassing. How eagerly Russian filmmakers chase huge earnings affects the quality of such films. And making a franchise out of an incredibly box-office blockbuster is by no means an innovative decision by the Film Foundation.
The main characters are a bunch of cliches from other people's films. Ivan is a hysterical and infantile egoist, whose facial expressions, copied from the habits of Jim Carrie, apparently, should make the viewer laugh, since otherwise in terms of humor the film does not catch on. The finalist is played by a hostage actor of one role, Prince Charming of ' Shrek'. It is funny that with a difference of a few days there were two New Year’s films, where the same actor plays the same role, a kind of narcissistic conqueror of women’s hearts. In ' Bogatyre' his whole message in the film is to repeat the same nonsense about exploits 10 times. Kolobok in the film is not needed, for the entire timekeeping said a couple of phrases that do not affect what is happening on the screen. Koschei - 'Look how funny it is to hit him on the head, beloved gag with physical violence' Varvara, who was revealed the whole first film, was simply erased from the plot at the end of the film, as was erased by Ilya Muromets, simply pierced with a branch. The viewer does not even have time to realize that the strong hero was simply deleted from the plot, and immediately a crying scene with a conversation between father and son arises. Isn't that stupid? The Disney short made me more emotional than any regrettable scene on the screen.
The plot of the film is incredibly long and terribly stupid, the audience of 6+ would not understand anything from the film except the endless terribly long beatings of everyone without getting hit. But the audience of older, of course conservative views, appreciated a loud burst of laughter the whole scene dedicated to the joke about feminism, where a kind of strong feminist exposed a thick and terrible troll. The family film really needed this scene for the plot.
The second part ' Bogatyr' should not have been released. This picture is violence, even the rape of classic Russian fairy tales. Unfortunately, we are waiting for the same mediocre raw continuation at the end of the coming year, because because of the significant windows in the movie rental at the blockbuster on the New Year holidays, 20 sessions per day.
2 out of 10
Our industry is in search of domestic ' superheroes', and it seems to me ' The last hero: The root of evil' the furthest advanced in this goal. Agree that for people brought up in our culture, it is natural to expect superpowers from a hero, frog princess or Baba Yaga.
The film is similar to the first one, and for those who came first - I recommend - you will not regret it. More jokes, gags, references - superhero movies have taught us to pay attention to small things. More attention is paid to the world of Belogorye - economics, worldview, mythology - the authors expanded and gave volume to the world of Belogorye. What is important for me personally - children in a modern form are introduced to the world of ancient Russia - heroes, evil spirits, Kolobok, hut-on-chicken legs. Children will do well battles, of which there are many in the film, but they are bloodless, although the main character and his team are vulnerable to opponents.
There is, of course, an abundance of clichés inherent in Disney films, but for the audience tired of meeting NG - this is also a plus - the brain is not overloaded. There are several unexpected plot twists that add interest and emotion to the plot.
Of the disadvantages - the film is long and young children can get tired by the end of the session, complex relationships in negative characters, some of the actions of villains are not explained.
We can immediately say that the second part is inferior to the first, but it still has its own charm. This applies both to the characters and gags associated with them, and to breaking some established patterns. The plot is a classic for a fairy tale - the struggle between good and evil. And if you delve a little deeper into the nuances, it turns out that this is a story about how Ivan is torn between the two worlds, is experiencing because of the lack of strength of the heroic, and at this time danger is looming on Belogorye - an ancient evil, ready to awaken at any moment.
Watching The Root of Evil sometimes feels like you’ve seen it somewhere. And indeed, even without considering the film in a magnifying glass, you can notice various references to popular films. For example, one of the main ideas of the picture, which is that love and friendship are the main values in life and an effective weapon in the fight against evil, is clearly borrowed from Potteriana, and played in a similar way, and the character of Valyushkina is very similar to Hela from Thor: Ragnarok. Coincidence? I don't think. But the most unconventional and unexpected reference was to “Moving Up.” Apparently, having Kirill Zaitsev and Kolobka in stock, the creators could not resist. I wonder when it was invented – at the stage of preparation or already in the process of shooting?
If we talk in general, the continuation of “The Last hero” turned out to be a good example of postmodernism with memorable heroes, a beautiful picture, an arsenal of humor and jokes of varying degrees of success and a pleasant atmosphere. Even managed to very successfully ridicule the heroic machismo. And the most important thing is that the film can give a good mood, both adults and children. This is exactly what we need after this difficult year.