Why was it so depressing? A weak attempt to film the great work of a brilliant writer of our time. Anyone who has watched only the film without reading the story can praise the content, the actors’ play, artistic value, etc. But in comparison with the content of the original, all this pales hopelessly.
It is clear that during the filming of the film, there are no technical opportunities to realize the incredible fantasies of the characters, because they were not in the film. Oh, come on. At the time, it was far from within the reach of many Western film companies. But let's move on. . .
Aitmatov described the land in which the heroes lived, incredibly colorful, almost symbolic. Oh, how Aitmatov described Pego Dog Running on the Edge of the Sea! Instead, in the film, we see a languishing settlement on an inconspicuous coast. People in torn clothes, finishing a faint picture of the director's work.
Chingiz Aitmatov very much described the heroes of the story, both main and secondary. Their personal and different stories, their inner spiritual world, their worldview, dreams and fantasies. Instead, the director considered it necessary to show the butchering of the whale carcass by the settlement, which is not in the work itself. What is most disgusting is the shooting of the scenes in the boat itself. A fog of putrid color, the play of actors, although sometimes quite bright, but little coincides with the content and essence of what is happening. Especially, scenes ' cheerful' games before the death of the boy's uncle and father. The only one, perhaps, who most Aitmatovskiy came out in the picture is - Grandfather.
I can’t say anything about the end of the film, I couldn’t stand to see it, alas.
Read the story!