Ingredients of non-nbsp; mixed The film adaptation of the classic story about Father Brown is one of those texts with which acquaintance with this immortal character usually begins. Common sense - against fabrications with a claim to mysticism and romanticism, knowledge of people - the most important addition to the accounting of material evidence, not aggressive, but clearly spelled out, logically linked to the plot ethical message: everything characteristic of Brownian cycle is concentrated in the plot about the "damned book".
The main meaning of the Chesterton plot is adequately conveyed. I think it is correct that the form of the cartoon was chosen for its implementation. There is hardly anyone here who has not read the literary basis, but I do not want to spoil it, so I will say this. The intrigue of the story is created by the fact that we do not see what is happening with our own eyes, but only read the exposition of the impressions and experiences of Professor Openshaw; if this is filmed and shown to the viewer with normal vision, a little more attentive than the professor, he, in theory, will immediately catch the catch; but the mystery for the time being is partly saved by the convention and stylization of dolls fashioned deliberately rudely.
The weak side of the cartoon for me is the heterogeneity of the emotional atmosphere. The general background is the dull cold tones of the video series and the spirit of degradation spilled in the air, the foreboding of catastrophe - war. This is not from the book, but rather from the time when the film adaptation was created, and yet I am ready to accept the director’s right to the author’s interpretation. Let's take it for granted. But why in addition to that bring — again, not from the text — moments of strained farce? (The emphasis on Englishness is a splash of English words in a conversation; a pure cartoon trap in Dr. Hanky's apartment; a completely phantasmagorical morality in the finale - allegedly the professor could not notice that the whole country around him is preparing for war.)
Of course, in my mind I understand why the above was done. The director obviously wanted to say that we were playing art here, in a pseudo-foreign puppet theater, while we had to look out the window and be horrified where the country was going. This idea differs from the one laid down by the author in the story, but at least does not enter into dissonance with it.
My complaint is that on an emotional level the farce and the general despondency, foreign to G. K. Chesterton, remained even more alien to each other, did not give in the mixture something whole and coherent. And this claim is quite serious, because it is because of it that I do not see who the cartoon can be addressed to. Separate episodes are for school-age children, other fragments are for adults who at the moment want to speculate about serious issues, the third pieces are for adults who decided to remember their childhood, and all together – for no one in particular (and even for the notorious “broad audience”). So, in fact, the work of art did not take place - a coherent statement that is always addressed to someone.
I must say that I watched The Cursed Book along with other film adaptations, for a while imbued with interest in the series about Father Brown and his various interpretations. I have no regrets about watching this tape, and I can even recommend it to those who were as interested as I was at the time. I probably won’t go back to it.
4 out of 10