Obviously a logical continuation of the modern adaptations of Semichev and Kim. The same parade of sitcom gegs, performed mainly by non-actors, based on the plot of a monumental folk comedy. An attempt to replace the incorruptible classics with something conditionally new. In fact, this creation can hardly replace anything.
Probably doing some work on the mistakes this time, the creators invited a little more real actors. And the percentage of successful jokes is not much, but increased.
In general, and in particular, the film turned out to be funnier than mocking the irony of fate. But let’s be honest, the original Ivan Vasilyevich is also funnier than the original Irony. So, the movie didn't really suck, but the non-actors didn't improve, the Spanish shame in bulk and the film turned out to be a passing.
The idea of norms, implementation is weak.
According to the "good old" tradition, every year TNT releases a parody comedy with the participation of media persons and actors. Last year it was ‘Self-Irony of Fate’ and this year it was ‘Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything’. Production has remained at the same level: it is a time-relevant story that will not work after a while, and therefore it must be watched here and now to really “lose” with local humor and sketches.
Yes, first of all, "Ivan ..." should be considered from the point of view of the foreign agenda in the country: after the "naked party Ivleeva" the film was quickly remodeled, as well as acquired additional scenes in order to be in the trend à la script approach at South Park. The main subject of the parody is “Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession” by Leonid Gaidai, to whom I, by the way, have a good attitude. What is the original, what is a fresh "reworking" - from and to social and political films, which in an ironic and satirical manner condemn the social and political system, as well as laugh at the popular currents of time. If Gaidai tried in every possible way to convey to the viewer that socialism does not work, and the people need a totalitarian “tsar” who will restore order, then TNT reject such radical “speeches” and simply parody both trends and a number of science fiction films about time travel in order to make the story more exciting and fascinating.
"Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything" does not lose his grip and continues to be a musical where musical numbers are performed by popular pop. Yes, in some places it is unclear how the writers “cut down” copyright due to sanctions, but this is already the fifth or tenth case. Scenes are funny, the characters are recognizable and colorful, clip editing in muse inserts please the eye. The script and the plot, in general, are good, especially if you understand what you are being shown and what they are telling you.
Acting work is normal: the entire echelon of TNT is in place. It makes no sense to list especially, because you will not miss anyone and will quite find yourself in the frame. The camera work is great: the second time I like how the aspect of the frame changes from 4:3 to 16:9 and vice versa. The sound design is weird, especially the sound montage. First of all, why stereo? Secondly, the floating volume of musical numbers and dialogue scenes (watched the digital release). Post-production ok.
"Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything" is a good and high-quality product of domestic bottling. You don’t have to put it on the list to see it in a couple of years. You will forget all the events of 2023 and just lose some of your emotions when you read them. Funny, rhythmic and with a hand on the pulse. Enjoy your visit.
The parody of the Holy of Holies of our parents, the cult films of the Soviet period, on which we grew up, is always roulette, and their perception depends very much on the mood. You can scold modern Russian show business, stupefying content, conjuncture and obscenity. You can compare it to the great original and blink. You can relax and turn off all negative thoughts. It all depends on the mood.
I haven’t seen a single movie that Bazhenov has dedicated to. I spit on the announcements of every Christmas tree, and facepalmil from Hitler Caput. I don't know what made me press the play button. Perhaps the decision to move away from the ugly duckling syndrome and evaluate the tape impartially. It didn’t make sense.
Pros:
Just an infinite number of references to the meme culture of the Runet, and inserted not from the canard, but organically inscribed in what is happening on the screen. Only Gauguin Solntsev and Gaiazov are worth what. I am not talking about the final dance.
The picture is on conscience, which is manifested in the masterful embodiment of the alternative USSR, and in the costumes of the characters, and even in black Pushkin (well, finally).
Cast. A whole galaxy of stars of Russian humor, show business, Runet and even Duma. Some of the forgotten ones were pleasant to remember. And it became really sad that Kharlamov is not in this picture.
The message at the end of the film does not leave indifferent, and turns the film parody into something meaningful. And the absence of American gags even more adorns her.
Cons:
I kept waiting for the famous "and you will be cured and I will be cured" but I never waited.
The entourage of the 18th century in Russian cinema is already beaten and killed, from all these lush dresses, pants, rococo and baroque is already rippling.
P.S. The "naked party" should have been left. It's creativity. But I can understand the creators, these are the times we live in. I don't think I'll take it down.
TNT "Solyanka" or everything, everything, everything! .
Do not judge this child severely!! .
Of all the distorted, inverted, vulgar, overplayed, prolonged and parasitic at the Holy Soviet Film Fund over the past 20 years, this project at least sometimes evokes sincere laughter and smile! . .
Of course, this is a solid ' Solyanka', ' Vinegret' of all that is possible and unthinkable together: and almost verbatim plagiarism of the Soviet ' Ivan Vasilyevich' and a parody in the spirit of the king of parodies of Leslie Nielsen, and a fierce thrash, and KVN paired with Comedy, and satire, and an improved copy of the best film ' and a frank stalk, and a pile of the war, ' ' from this ##hmazhim, from the future, ' hmazhimazhim; hmazhim, ' from the m#hm; ##hm, hmaz; ##hm; #hmaz; &hmazhim, hmazhim, from the mzhim, #39; &hmazhim;
Timekeeping is stretched...
The stars are down. . .
Stognienko and Kisilev, like Buzova's makeup, are disgusting. . .
..and the famous Soviet artists and Maestro Gaidai no one can beat NEVER! ..
But!
No one has tried and tried to outshine the glory of the Great Comedy! This is an ordinary parasitism, but, to give credit, parasitism is not without its own ideas and good actual humor, which is abundant here! This is both a creative fantasy and ridicule of modern problems and vices and just an easy REALLY funny project, which is obviously for once, but this time - ONE ONE TIME FUN!
. . Of course, neither Kharlamov nor any of the iconic and standing actors of the level of Bezrukov were lacking for solidity. ..
. . However, Batrukha did not fail and was organic, Lagashkin can be taken, Caribides - more or less, but Martiros, Abramov, Permyakov, Svetlakov ... These guys even seconds in the frame - just made my day!! (About Dorokh and Azamat I generally remain silent... these are live ' icons' contemporary Russian humor)
So... All those conservatives who pray for the past and accept only it – of course, do not look at this project. This is bad for your health, I would even say more. blasphemously...
.. Well, all those who look at the world at 360 degrees, try new and different, respect and honor the past, but keep up with the times and give themselves a chance to enjoy life and not be! (Clove, hello!) - all these positive and bright people - we kindly ask for a one-time viewing of a bright-sparkling-funny-satirical-parody film, which is on ' Oscar' clearly does not pull ... but definitely will not let you get bored!
7 out of 10
The generator of pseudo-random media persons worked
The spectacle is sometimes interesting, but for the most part occupies Easter eggs. It can be called funny with some stretch, but it is to whom. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's boring. There are good ideas, it is a pity that the execution is not always happy. The participants are surprisingly incompatible. Who would have thought of putting them together? Quentin Tarantino and Vlad A4! Gauguin Solntsev and Vitaly Milonov! Perhaps the only thing that unites them all is that they are just media personalities, there are no professional actors. Well, maybe there's a couple of real actors, one of whom is Derevyanko. Marina Kravets, as always, is good (at least better Selezneva).
It is very surprising that there are political jokes in the film!
I really liked the individual musical numbers. I am so surprised by the young guys and girls, so good! Success in their work!
In general, this cabbage still captivates with freshness and will do for New Year's Eve.
For a long time, everyone has already known musical films that are broadcast on federal channels on New Year's Eve. Even being small, I remember all sorts of Sleeping beauties, Snow Queens (not bad, in principle, a musical, if you look at the whole line) and other things. Separately, there is a film-musical “Old songs about the main thing”, but today we have on the agenda either a film or a musical from TNT called “Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything.”
As the name implies, the musical is dedicated to the famous film. I would even say that it is not for motives, but practically repeats the old Soviet film. I can bet a plus for really trying on the picture and scenery. Every chair, every other piece of furniture repeats one into one interior from the original film. There was even a moment when the father came into the room - of course old-school, and his phrase was: "Wow, they even put the aquarium, as before." Already at least for this it is still worth encouraging the creators and giving them a score for their efforts. Costumes, scenery, even some gestures for me personally were on top. In terms of production, the musical was quite... interesting. But what about the actors and the music?
I can't say I'm really excited. I will put a score for the original soundtrack in some moments, but the music is memorable, and Ivan Vasilyevich without this is not Ivan Vasilyevich. I can’t call myself a fan of TNT, I know most people only in person, and if I’m not mistaken, Klava Koka (although I may be wrong) in the role of Shurik’s wife looked harmonious. Here, too, noticeably tried, because she even gestures repeat, one at a time. Director Yakin... well, Derevyanko of course tried, juggling, forgive me for such insinuation, but still something was missing. Whether some hidden boast, or the feeling of production.
The actor Shurik also tried, and then it turned out 50/50, it seemed to play well, but it seems somewhere did not reach, somewhere outplayed. But I can't say anything bad either. Here Lagashkin is also a good actor, interesting enough, some kind of game with a cunning, I love him since Beetles, but not his role. And he plays well, and tries to repeat all the movements of the cunning thief-swindler, but somehow does not catch. In fact, he has the main scenes in the apartment of the surgeon and Shurik, and then he somehow recedes into the background and just decorates the screen. Here is the actor Ivan Vasilyevich / Bunshi tried: here and lisp, and grinding, at the same time a formidable king and a choleric housemate.
The rest of the actors/singers are just like a beautiful picture inserted in passing. Honestly, in secret, I'm even glad that Kirkorov and others were not with them, because I'm tired. And so on every screen year after year and 24/7, I wanted something fresher. And although Derevyanko and some of the faces of the Camedi Club are not the first freshness, I'm sorry. still there was a feeling of slight novelty. Contemporary singers and singers also glimmered (although the second half of the film with the appearance of the Gayazov brothers sank, became more confused and somehow was not particularly needed). Paul Will, "the one" Nikita Kologrivyi from the “Word of a Kid” with his famous phrase, modified as “boys from the Universal”, even Gauguin Solntsev lit up! The plot itself is known to everyone, but they added a little of their own, not always I liked it of course, but I listened to a couple of songs, and I also liked Lazarev’s Sweet May in French. It’s a really interesting idea.
The ending is also known to everyone, you can not even describe. Did I like it? More likely than not, but I can definitely call the film disposable. I looked and after a while I forgot. Perhaps, if it becomes completely boring or you want to put something on the background while I go about my business and do not particularly look at the screen... I can put a high enough score for this film due to the visual, a couple of ideas and beautiful dancers in musical pauses. Well, at least some fresh faces in a string of already familiar ones, which you do not want, but remember.
At some point, the traditional “Irony of Fate” for the New Year was replaced by “Trees”, but they eventually cut down the tree clean. But a holy place is never empty. Especially if the great and terrible Comedy Club has his eye on him, ready to change everything but himself. So, with a slight movement, the hands of the tree turn into... "Ivan Vasilyevich." What a pain... Especially when someone does not give rest to the laurels of Soviet cinema.
From the very beginning, it was clear that the remodel will go exclusively on visuals and banter, because the spirit of the good old “Ivan Vasilyevich” Leonid Gaidai will never be recreated by him. And exactly, the newest pun is like one bulky, gaggy clip or a bloating kaleidoscope in the hands of a child with hyperactivity disorder and attention deficit disorder. This can only be seen as a parody of ourselves - modern Russian society stuck somewhere between Ivan the Terrible's rule and attempts to follow the Western path - a la Versailles disco, meaningless and merciless to the Westernized music of "The Sweet May." Here's a mix of French and Nizhny Novgorod in an attempt to turn Comedy Club into Comedy Française. Neither give, nor take, but simply “catch up and overtake the Johnsons”, for nothing that the space race got into the vinaigrette. Our new shootings from the cinema were everywhere. I wanted to go to the Canaries, and I took you beyond the Moscow Ring Road. This line from the unforgettable Gayazovs perfectly demonstrates the differences between Ivan Vasilyevich old and new. Is there life beyond MKAD? Behind the Moscow Ring Road of Russian Cinema?
As the Gayazov brothers sing, “There is nowhere to go, but she has nowhere to go.” In the same way, the new “Ivan Vasilyevich” clings to any opportunity to get likes. Are you laughing at the red girl? As they say, the master will come and judge everyone. Whether it was better to really come or not, Quentin “Antonovich” (according to father) Tarantino came to the raspberry Lade and changed everything.
I put a more or less tolerable assessment only for playing Derevyanko as director Yakin and Garik Martirosyan as a plastic surgeon Shpakyan. They really turned out to be similar to Pugovkin and, accordingly, Etush.
5 out of 10
A great New Year's musical cabbage that understands memes. One time to watch a laugh necessarily, the second - if you want, if not all the memes remember. A masterpiece is not, will be forgotten by the next New Year
If you have anything personal to the Camedi Club, Tick-Took, TNT - don't look. You will only see the abuse of your favorite classics.
Of course, it's not a movie, it's a show. But to see it in between will not work - too many small Easter eggs, jokes and sudden cameos, which are the main tsimes and pleasure. Sleeping Princess under 'Umaturman' and this is 'Vova my' from Anita Tsoi - it's brilliant! The tattoo on the back of the Swedish ambassador is 100 out of 100. The executioner who throws the queen male doodles into the cart is on edge, but fun. If you distract from the screen, be sure to miss something from this funny vinaigrette.
The ending is generally very touching and spirit-lifting. Deepfakes, of course, overdone, but in general, the visual effects are at a height.
No, it's not a boogeyman for an hour and a half, but there's plenty to laugh at. Separately, I want to highlight the acting work of Maxim Kiselev (diak Feofan) - he removed the image of Kramarov from the original. In general, in many scenes, photographer Ekaterina Rozhdestvenskaya was remembered, who came up with the idea to recreate picturesque masterpieces with disguised models, then this genre became very popular during the pandemic. I want to review this craft in the company of people with other cultural backgrounds - it is interesting what they will see in this mess. And how to appreciate those moments that I found frankly failed.
Theater of the Absurd or Genius for the Rise of the Day?
To begin with, I come from the 90s. And everything Soviet does not cause me fanatical delight and lamp nostalgia for the old days, like everything new, does not cause the desire to boast about what used to be better, but now ... and vice versa.
The film is based on, as indicated at the very beginning, the cult picture ' Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession', but is not a remake, a film in a new way, a rethinking or anything else. This picture has an absolutely understandable genre - a parody. Yes, yes, it is a parody, based on ' classic' works. If you take the film as a parody, without unnecessary hypocrisy, you can see the satire and irony of the malice of the day. On how eminent and famous actors ' Demand', to put it slang, over themselves and over what is happening. Geopolitical moments, historical moments are ridiculed and ironicized. References and Easter eggs to released film projects, hype news and other acutely social and discussed moments of 2023. The cinema itself is an allusion to the current situation in the country and in the world. We can laugh at ourselves and realize that everything can be changed. As it was said at the end of the film - we should not try to change the past, we should change the present, rebuild it as we need, as we want!
In the film, there are many references and cameos of famous people in unusual roles, in which there is an irony to themselves. What makes watching a fascinating activity, at least get to know the artist and his role. And the depth of some references is amazing, and it is not always possible to understand them from the first view. Repeatedly reviewed individual episodes, savoring the genius of the allusion. A masterpiece!
At the end. This work is recommended for viewing by persons able to distinguish a parody from a remake. Those who are aware of the news agenda and the situation in the country. Those who have a sense of humor and are able to appreciate the allusion. Otherwise, the cinema will cause a backlash - indignation at the desecration of the Soviet work of cinema and feelings ' believers' as it is fashionable now.
In any case, everyone decides for himself how he relates to this work. Liberum arbitrium.
A film worth considering in a separate paragraph just for the sake of one question - what age category was the film designed for when the script was created? The question is that ' behind the scenes' the film provides a very insignificant return range, which should know (and most importantly - understand) the original film and films of the type ' Back to the Future', ' Guest from the Future' and ' Alien' (let's not talk about the years), learn the melody ' And again the gray night', watch movies 'Kill Bill' and 'Reside Evil', know about the existence of the cathedral' Alien, know only from the Parisian and Vyuzhmazova from... Oh, yes, still know the latest news...
Somehow it seems to me that the writer and director was guided by the range of 35-45 years, and even then, without considering the tastes of the individual. As it is already clear, I happened to fall into this range and, in general, the impression of the film is quite positive (especially glad that the musical ceased to be a set of songs, and became a conscious storyline) and therefore the final words ' Alice' I am very close... And although the song ' Beautiful far & #39; frankly disappointed (here I do not know - the original would be more significant), but the finale of the film is worthy of viewing.
I did not mention the name of Quentin Tarantino in the title of the review. And no, it has nothing to do with the rather amusing ending of the film on the waterfront, where the skilful, deepfake Quentin dances in the director's chair, looking at the singing Yakin.
I put the name of the great director in the title because he has an excellent sense of humor and ability to compile stories. Tarantino is a big fan of cinema, in all his films there are Easter eggs and references to other films, mostly to films that he watched to the holes, working as a young boy in a video rental.
The creators of “Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything” are the same fans of Leonid Iovich Gaidai’s work as Tarantino is a fan of Akira Kurasava. The scenery, costumes, optics on which the film was shot (judging by the softness of the focus - it is the same Soviet one) - all this is a confirmation of the love and pedantry the creators approached.
As for humor, in some places it is brilliant. Sometimes unexpected - what is worth one two-second appearance of Deputy Milonov with the phrase "live to take demons!"
As for the compilation - references to other films - this is also a lot and all this is organically inscribed in the original plot: Instead of a bar with “Chinzano” in the apartment of a dentist Shpak, a bar with a girl doll Barbie in the apartment of a plastic surgeon Shpakyan, Zina leaves Yakin not to the director Budimir Kosom, but to the director Quentin Tarantino, followed by a wonderful clip-fairy tale “Once upon a time there was KILL BILL and 7 heroes”, and finally a time machine that works not on transistors, but on an actual VPN. The latter, by the way, is a competently invented story engine, which explains why Shurik and the Tsar will not get into the time of Grozny, each time missing.
In the end, I would like to add that this film should be treated “without stuffiness” as a New Year’s project. This is definitely not a rental movie! But surprisingly, this is not a TV product in the understanding of TV product. In my thirties with a ponytail, I've never seen anything of this magnitude on television. The creators clearly “turned the game” on TV on New Year’s Eve.
This movie definitely deserves 10 out of 10 for its format.
I have nothing against parodies. I really like the original, it is not even discussed here and the filmmakers very sensitively approached the musical, even filmed from life the same palace in Yaroslavl and identically recreated the interiors from the original film.
To appreciate parody, you need to be in the subject of parodied things, films, songs, personalities, political themes and so on. I liked the film, appreciated the irony of the authors, they were bravo! I think I found all the references. . .
There is an abundance of hidden jokes and Easter eggs, a kind of puzzle for middle-aged people, school students do not understand clearly.
Mavrodi with vouchers, deputy Milonov, Boomer (Ivanushki International), Brigade (Lenin, Stalin, Catherine II and Ivan the Terrible), Challenge, Kill Bill (final battle scene with ' Chinese woman' Anita Tsoi), Back to the future (delorein was converted into deLadein from negligent 'Skolkovsk'); Gayazov Brothers their clip about the time machine and the original inscribed image of the professor and McFly in his red vest), Izmailovo Kremlin on the site of the former Cherkison, Barbie (and our Soviet answer to the Klava doll, she was inserted into the film instead of the cut Anna Asti), the show ' Sweetie' The word of the Kid (and this episode was shot literally 2-3 days before the premiere due to the carved Kirkorov and the scandal with a naked party), actually naked party Ivleeva is also mentioned in the film, similar to the girl, butttashenya from the future, she did not understand it.39
All this is well molded into a single whole on the motif of the well-known film Gaidai.
Separately, I want to note Marina Kravets and Garika Martirosyan and Pasha Volya, they are like 2 drops similar to their prototypes and practically without makeup! I loved it and had a great evening watching. Thanks 7 out of 10.
What can I say? If you don’t expect much, you can have a little dinner. If you briefly describe the essence: this is a musical remake (and in cult scenes - a time-lapse remake of the kidneys), + modern and not very memes superimposed on top of the plot ("velvet cravings" and all that), + for some reason references to "Back to the Future" (although it was funny). Cult phrases are supplemented with topical topics. There is an undisguised product placement (advertising). All the main characters from the original are present, and some have makeup that really look like the originals. The plot is, of course, delusional, even considering that it is fantastic. The film is known for the fact that it was urgently partially reshooted and re-mounted after the scandal with the “naked party” Ivleeva: Kirkorov and Anna Asti were cut out of the film (it must be said, cut seamlessly).
I watched this kinzo with my wife during the New Year holidays. Emotions are as positive as possible.
Yes, cinema is not a masterpiece and it will not become a new classic. In many places shamelessly repeats the original. In some places, jokes are sucked out of the finger and generally past. Maritrosyan is wildly overplaying. Advertising for Sber and other products. But you have to understand something!
It's a TV New Year movie. It's not shown in the movies. You don’t have to pay money to watch it (because there’s advertising in the movie). This is the most honest banter movie. The authors do not hide that they are simply mocking the original, but this does not mean that they wipe their feet about the classics. This is more a tribute to the original film, which was released exactly 50 years ago.
Almost 25 years ago, also on television, we watched 'Old songs about the main 3' in which almost all the actors from the original ' starred. And they also joked in the spirit of the times. Ala ' money should be stored in dollars with such and such inflation' So Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything - a film from the same category. But made much more expensive and professional. In the original entourage, which can be called ' USSR-2023'.
The props very plausibly recreated the interiors and exteriors of different eras, including Shurik’s apartment from an old film.
The costumes of the characters are also nice to watch. Some actors are so similar in appearance and manner of play that you can admire.
At the end of the film, when the characters traveled through different eras of our country, my level of emotions went so high that I could hardly hold back tears. And that's also a sign of a good comedy - at the end. It’s wonderful when comedy can not only make you laugh and awaken a sense of love for your country and its history. I didn't really expect it.
Musical numbers are also not annoying at all - in general all are very relevant and well filmed / decorated - these are full-fledged music videos.
So my opinion is that the film is very good visual, script, actors. Some cameos were so happy that I paused the film to have a good laugh. How much I hate Gauguin Solntsev - his appearance in the film is 10 out of 10. I love the original film. But I never understand people who are like, 'Don't touch the classics! What do you think?' Parody remakes are already an old genre in cinema. Back in the '70s, there was an airplane movie in the United States. Google it.
And I hope that TNT will continue to make films like this, not just for the new year, but more often. And at some point, they're going to make a movie that nobody would dare say bad things about.
On the divisions of TNT never had any hopes. And in the film ' Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything' the channel does not change itself. It felt like it was on my knee in a week. Even the actors don’t understand why they’re involved and who might like it.
At the very beginning, the viewer has the feeling that all this is filmed on the knee. The transitions between frames are some curves, the frame is built incorrectly. In general, watching is elementary unpleasant. The script is written in a hurry, with a bunch of inappropriate jokes and memes, without adequate plot development and any thoughts.
It turned out some kind of New Year’s confusion, which combined clips, inappropriate humor that even the writers themselves do not understand, references to other films, actors from TNT, YouTube, tick current and other resources. It all looks like a terrible kolkhoz, which was removed in order to remove.
The original film from the USSR I love and regularly review, although I know it by heart. Gaidai shot masterpieces that are pleasant to review. They look perfect, despite many shortcomings that have manifested themselves in the future.
I watched the TNT remake with a sense of Spanish shame. Absolutely unaware that they play heroes, delusional jokes that do not correspond to the times shown, a plot that was written, apparently, not quite sober. Writers have not even decided what time it is 'Shurik'. Is this the 21st century or the 20th? What was the clip of Clava Coke in Barbie style? Because the writers wanted to? What was the point of moving to the 19th century, in which Koshchei from the Boy’s Words & #39 played a Gopnik, and Dava was once again shown in a negative light? Why did you need a reference to the film 'Back to the Future'? Why do you want to ironize Buzova again? It all looks like nonsense that the TNT team wrote in a bar on the 30th and filmed the same day.
3 out of 10
On December 31st, I watched the original with excitement. You can watch an unlimited number of times without losing your level of pleasure. This is the irretrievably lost past of the Soviet Renaissance, when in films, brilliant actors are able to convey absolutely everything that the viewer needs to feel with just a sigh and facial expression. The masterpieces of Gaidai are the sacred wealth left to us from honest talented ancestors.
This parody is equivalent to a joke about General Karbyshev, which sounded on the same TNT and, thank God, caused resonance and deserved condemnation. This episode from the life of the channel in general very clearly characterizes their attitude to national culture. K & #39; Ivan Vasilyevich changes profession & #39; should not touch, because, as expected, nothing good and funny did not work out.
But okay, let's talk about humor. There was nothing new or original, not a single joke. Self-irony with Olga Buzova did not work, in general it is not clear her choice for this role. Also do not work modern everyday things, for some reason placed in the era of the film - such as chat, for example, words ' hype', ' subscription'. The theme of the 90s, apparently, is also exhausted in terms of jokes - it feels like watching a selection of Bayanas. Well, Ivanushek's monologues were funny. That's all. Otherwise, jokes over 50 and a lot below the belt - this is not interesting for a long time.
The purpose of literally reshooting the original scenes remains unclear. The use of original music from ' Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession' and the frank ridicule of the scenes of Gaidai's film leaves no doubt that this is not just ' innocent' a parody, but a deliberate corruption and depreciation of the Soviet masterpiece. This has long been the traditional attitude of TNT to our history and culture. They would continue to shoot ' The best movies' as they do with the endless 'Elki' so that people know that you should not watch it.
The acting game is a separate article. Returning to the topic of re-shot scenes, I must say that this fatal mistake of the creators is that it very clearly demonstrates the enormous difference between the quality of the acting game in the original source and the quality of the game of modern artists. They praise Marina Kravets very much. She doesn't look like Seleznev, no. And 1% of the charisma from the source is not collected, although she honestly tried. You shouldn't have sang Vedishcheva - it didn't work out well. Lagashkin is a miscast, read the text, walked in the frame and everything, without even trying to revive it all. Batrutdinov was in his usual activity - apparently, there was no task at all to play back the Tsar. Paul Volya looked the best, but the jokes were not funny.
This film is full of advertising, it often seems that you are watching just a large commercial.
Leonid Gaidai is an outstanding director and front-line soldier, a hero who wished after the horrors of the Second World War to give people something very kind, cheerful and bright. What is called ' Ivan Vasilyevich changes everything', uninteresting, not funny and not even live, not worth the time spent. Moreover, as a New Year’s cabbage for the whole country is not suitable. It would be more appropriate to leave this for the closed corporate party of TNT employees.
Including this film on January 1st, I didn’t expect anything at all, but I was pleasantly surprised. The film, or rather a set of clips / sketches, united by a common storyline, turned out not to be very funny, but at least funny. A couple of times I even chuckled. The creators present to us their vision of the history of Ivan the Terrible in the Soviet era. Don’t try to draw parallels with the original film. They share only some locations and names of heroes. But you can’t say that the film is parasitic on the classics, unlike last year’s “Self-Irony of Fate”. The creators managed to wittyly and in the entourage of the Soviet classics of the New Year cinema to recall the most memorable socio-cultural events of recent years. There is the use of VPN, the departure of brands, and even the infamous “naked party” (which even this film has undergone changes). Every viewer will see something relevant and relevant in this film.
It is also worth noting the work of directors and costume designers. Everything from castles and Soviet shops to costumes looks really cool. The work of choreographers, the staging of dances also do not look ashamed. You can see that you invested in the film, both financially and creatively.
As far as acting is concerned. Lagashkin and Derevyanko, of course, look more solid than their colleagues from the TNT channel, but the latter are not much lost against their background. Experience in miniatures of the Camedi Club still makes itself felt. Well, in the end, this one looks like sketches, so you don't expect any incredible performances. For the same reason, advertising does not look too intrusive, as it was, for example, in “Unprincipled”.
As a result, we have a quite tolerable New Year's film, which can be safely included on holidays. It will definitely dilute Soviet films and blue lights, which everyone has already had enough.
P.S. We all underestimated Maxim Lagashkin’s vocals.
The thirst for TNT to remove the actuary by the date this time remained true to itself - no one knows what it exists for, for whom it is filmed, and who even potentially may like it. However, let’s try to answer these questions. The answers will slip out of our hands, but we will try to find them, hold them and put them into words. This is a difficult task, because this product is so terrible that picking up words and not breaking into abundant fair swearing is a truly gigantic task.
Why does it exist?
In the beginning, the film, through a bad parody of Shurik from the original, plays up the primitiveness of the idea of parasitizing on Soviet classics, while at the same time being this parasite itself. This is postmodern. Postmortemmodern. The periodicity is also specified - the film should be New Year's, because now Ivan Vasilyevich is considered exactly such a film that goes well on holiday. Therefore, the answer to the question will be as follows - this is a kind of New Year's burlesque cabbage from, God forbid, TNT stars, filmed for the New Year. This is a project where each participant of course profited well with minimal creative costs - the actors do not play, but clown, it turns out that it is out of hand bad and nasty, especially comparing with the original characters who also played comedy. And there's comedy and there, but there's a nuance. Not alone. And Talia sees, the capacity for the nuances of this film was very impressive.
The film tries to copy the frames and plot moves of the original, sometimes gets, but it would be better if there were no hits. Here is the local "Shurik" at the very beginning screaming, lying on the black floor, here Derevyanko crookedly and angularly portrays the director Yakin, insecurely and without any charm tapping a cane on his hand, but all this looks both optional and uninteresting.
However, over time, the plot begins to roll into grotesque and psychedelic, finally losing touch with the original comedy of Gaidai, and with something talented in principle. The characters will visit in the 90s, at the court of Peter I, in timelessness having met the deepfake of Alice Selezneva, which will give the viewer a generous portion of the sinister valley. And all this is fertilized with ridiculous grimaces, jokes for 300, references to modern trends and current affairs, naturally bypassing those that cannot be named. Attempts to joke on political topics feel self-censorship, and therefore these attempts feel as tense and clumsy as possible.
If we say that this is a New Year’s product, then it immediately seems that this is an attempt by tnt-shniks to roll out something of their own and at the same time comparable to traditional, as well as some New Year’s musicals (the elements of which are here), or New Year’s lights of other channels. It's not the first attempt, and it would be good if the last.
For whom it is filmed, and who may even potentially like it.
Judging by the themes of jokes and the general content, this is a film for Moscow and St. Petersburg bohemian parties, and maybe a little film for the Russian middle-high urban class, who likes parties, parties, almost-neked parties and other representatives of the ordinary working people. Deliberately slicked, goofy, laxhery pseudo-aesthetic oozes from the screen with viscous slurry. It is all the more disappointing that this substance exploits familiar, really pleasant and talented images. A cavalcade of talentlessness and a vanity fair, restrained references to fashion trends are infinitely far from most viewers of the country, this is not filmed for them. It's a film from within and within. This is a significant difference from the original, which is both an artistic and a talented work that will appeal to the widest viewer. With this parasite, this does not happen, before us a one-day film.
In the potential, it could only please purely fans of individual personalities who participated in this cabbage. For example, all sorts of Olga Buzov and Timurov Batrutdinov, on which it is impossible to look and be in a pleasant mood at the same time. But the person who just wanted to see a good, high-quality comedy here to do simply nothing.
Past years have firmly taught that if there is a remake of a Soviet film, then you can not start watching. This is my first attempt, which cannot be called a failure.
There are no complaints about the musical part. Worked well, the compositions (well, except for a couple) are dressed perfectly, the choreography is at the level and removed pleasantly - it is not a shame to review, although the remakes (and whatever). Tough, right here without stretching - four. Whether the musicians believed in their abilities or gained experience - almost no excessive sweetness and almost ' do not dance' (periodic disruption of rhythm in gimme is striking). And it would seem dragged ' beautiful far', unexpectedly fresh, almost pulled out the overall impression of the film at the end (well, yes, well, a game of nostalgia, a vulgar reception), but then came these guys ... who are trying to joke.
Jokes, the main problem of this film. They are complemented by a general feeling of hulking acting and in sum dryly cover all the efforts of musicians. For the whole tape, Ivan Vasilyevich was real exactly once. In the scene ' the king is not real ' Tellingly, the boyar there also turned out real. It seems that people who carefully watched the movie turned out bad, at that moment somewhere went away, it became possible to do normal and the guys did. And then the older one came back and the actors started to crook again instead of playing. Why did Pavel get the Swedish ambassador (and the whole scene in general) in two minutes of screen time, and the rest did not? It doesn't look like the original, but there is an ambassador. Is Pavel not shy? So Timur has experience of stand-up, well, why Bunsha is so no. And you can not say that there is no acting talent, because once it happened, then it can. Garik is a charismatic guy and Shpak is absolutely, unconditionally cardboard. Was he forced? I don’t remember the others, that’s all.
A miracle happened in the last 20 minutes of the film. Those responsible for poor quality decided that the job was done and left, the average score of impressions steadily creeped up. Timur suddenly played, and Demeshchenko and Basta perfectly sang and it would seem that the game will be able to reduce at least in a draw.
But no, the control department ' unquality' for good reason chews his parmesan. Already at the post-production stage, seeing that they were underworked, villainous neural networks were launched into the case. They masterfully degraded the impression of the last song completely inappropriate special effects in the style 'haha'. So that no one suspected anything, it was done as badly as possible, like ' it's not us, it's hands' Bravo. Bravo. Almost did.
To sum up. The dynamics are there and it is positive. The ' comedians' are already getting episodes and I want to believe that next time there will be a movie at all.
In general, when I began to watch this picture, I did not build high expectations, but I did not want to be too picky. I was just hoping to take a break from the classics once again. And I would have rested if I didn’t have to catch kringe every time.
At the very beginning, there is a feeling that they were filmed just for the sake of filming: without an idea, without any thoughts, without plot design. That is why I began to write a review immediately, during the course of watching the film with great hope that the opinion will change in the end, but no. The further away, the worse.
I like to review Ivan Vasilyevich occasionally, although I know him by heart and at first I thought it interesting that I decided, as they say, to reshoot the classics in order to dilute a little New Year's program. It’s a shame that the authors did that. Literally. Why all these modern words in Soviet times? What hype? What subscription? If the authors decided to add modernity, why not immediately move the story to our days? All this looks so stupid and detached that by 35 minutes it becomes clear that nothing good will have to wait. And that's true.
What was the inset with a Clava Coke song as Barbie? Take time? Why would you want a Barbie? Why Barbie? Does Shpakyan like Barbie or is it for the trend? What. This. At all. Was? Why MP Milokhin in modern glasses in the form of a streltsman? What is the press secretary at Grozny and why does some archer answer the question about him? What is the redirection to the Ministry of Parchments?
And that madness only happens in the first half of the movie. You just get tired of writing or remembering all this nonsense. I must admit that in some places the jokes turned out to be funny and ironic (as, for example, at the very beginning with Buzova and the singer), but they look at the wrong time and from this ridiculous.
It's a pity, another film marked "do not watch."