While watching as a lover of history sorted out anger, that the plot is built on unconfirmed hypotheses and facts and they are not just involved in the plot, and it is built on them. But at the end of the review I read the reviews and it is already written. On the other hand, no one knows exactly what was there. We know the story from the records that have come down to us and our predecessors (and this is not the level of reality fixation that we have now). Elizabeth herself (not the performer, but the texture of the heroine) did not like, but perhaps this was the idea and disclosure on the contrast will continue. Yes, it resonates with the Gardemarines (especially Leaf here and there), but to say that it is worse - I will not take it, because in those films we grew up, they are part of us, otherwise this film is seen by my teenage son and he is more likely to like this film. I doubt that a new generation, even at our age, will sit down to watch the Three Musketeers, the Gardemarine or the Diamond Arm... these are not their films, not their format... after Marvels, Hobbits, Avatars and Potters (many of us watch Hollywood classics or our old screen adaptations?). And yet I watched it, despite the internal dissonances. People tried and thank them for it. Probably the only one at the beginning is still a voice to make a remark that the characters are not fictional, but assumptions (for example, a will) are still the hypothesis of historians (for those who do not reach the study of books and immersion, so as not to breed misconceptions). I also noticed the temporary blunders. And probably 12 episodes per hour is a lot. I will not reconsider, I did not learn anything new, I did not penetrate the heroes (I did not fall in love, unless Anna Ioanovna is disgustingly beautiful) - but colorfully, entourageously, easily - in the evening to relax. Thanks.
First, I fully support the filming of TV series about Russian historical figures. And somehow too many Tudors, Borgia and Medici divorced recently.
That's where the pros end. Some strange costumes: crooked and oblique. Elizabeth has been wearing the same cloak for years. She could change it several times a day! Where are the wigs? Half the people are also missing.
Some weird characters. Elizabeth Fire was, judging by the memories of his contemporaries. What kind of pale thing is that? At least it's pretty bread. Clearly not far away and not adapted to life, although she grew up at the court, and not with her grandmother in the village. I'd have to figure it out. I have to know the people I meet for the first time in the film. Anna Petrovna was an intelligent and well-read lady, with a calm character. She's obviously more stupid than her sister and jealous of her. Stresses portrait dissimilarity: Anna Petrovna is a dark-eyed brunette in all portraits. I can’t help but say that I came up with some strange story with a will. I washed her all season. I read that Peter the Great wanted to write a will in favor of one of his daughters. Only this daughter was Anna, not Elizabeth.
I really missed the characters. Where are you people? Where are all the Menshikov households? Where's the Dolgoruki crowd? Where are all the courtiers? Where are Elizabeth's lovers? Where is the crowd that has always surrounded her? She is the soul of the company, not the weeping creature who dreams of family comfort. Osterman turned out to be the main villain, although in fact there were a lot of people with a lot of interests, and the villain was some frail. All the characters are weak, well, not court intriguers, but actors in amateur theater. I don’t even remember a lot of people.
But they made up some pages. Did you want to go under the guards? Of course, I understand that Druzhinina set a high bar for films about the era of Elizabeth Petrovna, but if you take something, take it with dignity!
It's a strange story. Some strange conflict between mother and daughter. Events are compressed in time, then run with an arrow.
And after all, probably, the continuation will be removed, because the Empress has not yet ascended the throne. It would be better not to shoot what has already happened. You shouldn't have. Funny, empty and stupid. More precisely, so stupid and empty that it is funny and I want to cry.
On the one hand, as an adventure film on a historical theme, it's a cross between The Guardians and The Secrets of Palace Upheavals in the worst, most recent series. That is, it is quite tolerable and acceptable.
On the other hand, as a historical film, it is a deliberate distortion of facts, which is completely unacceptable even in this form. It is clear that this is a fictional fairy tale in the historical entourage, in which you can fantasize about what you want, even about a lost will. It's normal. But why deliberately defame historically famous people, could just invent their own.
The first love of Elizabeth Baturin / Baturlin, who in reality by the end of his life became a field marshal, they became a traitor and a small businessman.
Mavra Shepeleva-Shuvalova was Elizabeth’s closest friend throughout her life. And in many ways, thanks to her marriage, Shuvalov became known. They became a traitor and informant.
In fact, in the film, all known personalities are traitors or criminals - and Catherine, and Menshikov, and Osterman, Dolgoruky, Yusupov, Lestock and others.
I liked how Agranovich and Steklova, Osterman and Ekaterina play. I'm not sure it's close to history, but it's convincing.
I did not expect to like Svetlana Smirnova by Anna Ioanovna so much. I thought in advance that after Churikova nothing good will work out, and I was wrong.
In general, as a soap opera / adventure - quite good.
As a historical film, nothing at all.
In Russia, historical TV series are not bad – I enjoyed watching both versions of Catherine, for example. That's why I was waiting for the premiere of Elizabeth. Bad. It turned out a series on a historical theme in the spirit of soap operas of the TV channel Russia.
What's wrong with the series:
- Timekeeping jumps to suit the plot. Some historical details and stories are reduced to ... 1-2 series.
- actors overdo it. Especially the young ones. It looks a little caricatured. The only ones you can admire in terms of acting are Agranovich, Steklova and Baluev (we already realized that this is the best Peter, thank you).
Elizabeth is shown as a frivolous girl who is devoted to the family, loves loved ones, pages. I don’t believe this is the correct interpretation. Elizabeth was brought up at court, in a world of intrigue. She was an heiress. Here we have the heiress all the time playing the fool and follows the heart. This is a romantic line for women.
historical inaccuracies.
I do not know what they wanted to shoot and show, but the film is clearly weaker than all previous historical series and more like Poor Nastya - a soap opera in historical scenery.
The series is relatively simple and simple. Costumes are squalid, the locations are monotonous, the characters are superficial, the historical truth is none. The attempt to shoot something in the style of D’Artagnan and the Three Musketeers, Gardemarinov is useless and groundless, in Soviet times there was a completely different level of education, professionalism, and most importantly - completely different ideas, logic and worldview! Even as a prequel to the series “Ekaterina” (2014), the project is difficult to accept, primarily because of the monstrous dissonance of images with their performers. In the not too successful Catherine, the cast was much better and somehow more solid. Here, the quality of adaptation of actors to roles is below all assumptions! The impression is that this is a costumed party of the “golden youth” in Ibiza and is about to ring a mobile phone... In the USSR, although filmed "for 3 kopecks", but always carefully worked out types, so that, without going into details of plausibility, it was possible to follow only the skill of original personalities!
In the directorial track record of Dmitry Iosifov (All-Union Buratina) there are not so many films that deserve the recognition of the audience. Of course, he is not a beginner, but he is a specific director, with a fierce desire for mass culture and simplification. However, there is a certain ability to get the actors to try in the frame. Another thing is that one effort is not enough. Especially for historical films.
In general, for me, the project incredibly acutely exposed the problem of lack of diversity in the young adult, who connects his life with the art of cinema. There is neither the gift of acting, nor emotional tear, nor the desire to plunge into the era, nor penetration into the psychology of time. All of them successfully portray the modernity, the moment, but pathetic in trying to imagine something deeper, gone. None of them have read history books. They probably didn’t know anything about Peter’s time.
I am not inclined to overestimate the importance of such paintings. Probably, they are needed, first of all, for young people, in order to somehow awaken interest in history and knowledge. In any case, you need to start from something: it will be a comic book, an entreprise or a pseudo-historical TV project - it does not matter. The only bad thing is that for the majority of those who have not reached the real sources of information about events, such versions will become an ersatz replacement and the basis for the formation of a “new” idea of Russia, turning history into folklore.
I've finally seen the whole series. Yeah, like an adventure, it'll do. A series like the Gardemarines. The characters are taken from history, and Buturlin, the batterer of Peter I, and Shubin are said to have been Elizabeth's lovers. But about Buturlin wrote only Lestock, her doctor and supporter of France, who also had views for the position of lover. Only all the events that happened for other reasons, in the film take place with the participation of Elizabeth. This is neither for nor against the sources. It's a writer's idea. The Shuvalovs were close to Elizabeth already under the Empress, one of them was her favorite. The one who protected Lomonosov. The series is dashing, costume, love. It's hard to say anything about acting, especially young people. But it's professionally done. There is no one to praise, even Yulia Khlynin. As the director said, so played. She was most likely selected for being very similar to the historical Elizabeth. It was written somewhere that writers studied many books to recreate the era. They succeeded. It was said that only speech failed to recreate the 18th century, there were no examples. That's not true. Sources are full – speeches of statesmen, documents, letters, literature, poetry.
Despite some invented events of the story, the plot looks interesting. A purely commercial project.
Maybe the people will be interested in the real story of Elizabeth, and the fact that it was under her that Russian troops occupied Koenigsberg, completely defeated the troops of the “invincible” Frederick the Great at Kunersdorf and entered Berlin. It was the first capture of Berlin almost 200 years before the second. There are many books on the history of Elizabeth, but the most interesting (as the novel is read) is Walishevsky’s book “Daughter of Peter the Great”. As a historical addition to the series.
Careless Caesar Elizabeth will bequeath the throne. Realizing the gravity of government, Elizabeth hesitates to be empress and leaves Chancellor Osterman a will with a request to transfer the reins of government to her mother. Catherine herself is misled by Menshikov and Osterman. She begins to compete with her daughter for power.
Actors: I started watching this historical series because of the great cast. I'll be brief. Writing the entire series is incredibly difficult. And judging historical inaccuracies is even harder until the viewer looks at the history textbook.
Julia Khlynina is amazingly coping with her role as Elizabeth. From 1-4, the series shows itself frivolous. For her friends (Princess Yusupova, Pages), she remained a naive child, but for the rest she acts decisively and sanely. Subsequently, we – the audience – understand that no secret intrigue was conducted behind her back (unlike the young Petrusha). For him, there is one Friday night a week. The heroine endures the trials that fall on her shoulders. Despite the thirty-year age of the actress, it can be confused with the same Lyapina, who recently turned twenty.
Alexander Baluev did not fail. The last time he played the legendary role (unless he was raised from the grave and made the backstory of the character with flashbacks flying into his youth, but this is nonsense). Although he was already a ghost in one of the episodes (and only a vision) in the moment with a drunk Catherine, decided to sew a button on him.
Valentina Lyapina played a small role of Natalia, the sister of Peter’s nephew. If it weren’t for The Young Man in which she played a role, I wouldn’t have watched the series (but I would have killed time for The Old Man). Valya appears as he ends his role - spectacularly and as believable as possible. Proved she could play a sister who protects her brother from danger.
Angelica Poplavskaya beautifully joined the role of Princess Yusupova. Her character tries to find a way to justify her father’s misdeed, but for the time being. Then she fully realizes that there is a struggle for power.
Everything else: the premiere of the series was postponed. Since June 18, it has been released on the online platform Watch. Actors can be praised. In accordance with the era, they will protect (this applies to the pages of Elizabeth) the honor of Elizabeth and not let her abyss. The composition of Frolov-Bagreev is full of naive heroism and allows you to show the appearance of the characters more militant than they are.
Everything else: a beautiful script by Zuya, Stepanov and others. Director Dmitry Iosifov did a great job in compiling this historical adventure after the death of Peter.
Impressions: Learning from the post of Vali Lyapina about the series (yes, exactly so) decided to spend a day and a half on eight episodes. I do not know how the events of the series (although the viewer will not know, because it is too lazy to look at the history book) will be historically accurate. But, the series copes with the adventure part.
Don’t think that I’m happy to praise one in five who will make a Russian series in accordance with tradition. I just wanted to share what I saw. And if you don't like my opinion and you want "bue" from my words, then throw tomatoes.