Already in 'Vivat, Anna!' there are a number of trends indicating that the series 'Secrets of palace coups' should be folded. However, there was a faint hope that this is a bug, not a system, Svetlana Druzhinina will take into account the criticism and next time will please us with a film that is not inferior to the first parts.
A little retreat. It is no secret that problems with the budget were present initially, and therefore initially Druzhinina had to go to a well-known compromise ' Give money, and in return I will remove your girl' But if in the first series 'girl' was on the second roles, then starting with 'Viva ...' was on the first. Well, Alsu was on the pick-up of the brilliant Churikova, but in 'Hunting...' debutante Snezhanna Polezhayeva is already the main character, around whom, in fact, the whole plot is built. She is beautiful and beautiful, but... But you can see that this is a girl from the zero years of the 21st century, who was dressed in a costume ' a la 18th century' - a very modern appearance, and even a manicure French she did not bother to cut. And as for the game, the actress lost & #39; (Badcomedian). And, imagine, we were shown the most successful takes with her participation - and what was in the others? Lola Kochetkova at least tried - and it shows. And then the sponges were inflated, the eyes were bulging, the face was twisted - and here's the acting.
The film looks so shot under Polezhayeva that, it seems, this circumstance did not hide from the director, and as a result, she just scored. All the shortcomings of the previous episode were swollen at times.
Some scenes hint that the director is stuck somewhere in the 60s, and the frame builds and pathetic catches up accordingly. The only thing missing is the picture pressing of the hands to the chest with exhausting 'aah!'. Well, that's fine, but, tree sticks, don't you see that in your places actors do not get into lip movements when voice acting?
Thanks to artistic assumptions, logic does not smell of words at all. Moritz Linar begins his diplomatic work in Russia with the most demonstrative humiliation of the Empress’s favorite and, presumably, their joint children (no, not joint). And Anna's smiling at it! Well, naturally receives a new scavenger in the form of copulation count her heiress. The real Linar was much smarter and more careful, but this is... It's so non-cinematic! And so we will make ' the queen of the fearsome spectator' patient (her favorite was made such initially, and where is only the Biron, before whom they trembled?)
The main intrigue of the film is completely fictional. Biron was not going to marry Anna Leopoldovna with his son, he and the regency was enough. Why would a boy be only twelve? Plays the boy by good tradition, a much older actor (Demegarov Jr.).
A bunch of unnecessary characters. Why is the plot a fictional heroine of Anna Terekhova, who does not move him in any way and does not influence him in any way? Her function ('Come on, Biron, go smack the Empress, she's crazy about you, she'll do anything for you!') could easily have been performed by Bironsha. Well, except that Druzhinina just really wanted to shoot Anna Terekhova. Well, once again to demonstrate the patience of Anna Ioannovna, who for years turned a blind eye to the fact that her sun sprinkles another - yes, the Empress was literally slavishly attached to her hearty friend, but she would not put up with such a thing. It's an awkward love scene.
Oh yes, the shining counts and princes in the opinion of Druzhinina behaved like a finished cattle. ' Will we finish with...ku?' - asks Ushakov at the Empress? No, he's certainly an eighteenth-century Yezhov, but not a brother from the 90s? The queen herself, unable to restrain her passion, enters into an intimate relationship with the bironushka & #39; in the presence of outsiders. In the TV series ' Rome' such moments were clearly played - a slave is not a person like a pet in the room, so why should he be ashamed? This is so bad that I just don’t know.
Anna is again played by a new actress - Natalia Egorova, who played in the first parts '. . ' Catherine 1. Why choose an actress? But I have to say, he plays great. Like Alexander Lazarev Jr. - Birona. The scene of the clash of their characters, when Anna is both a wife and a queen, and Biron is both a husband and a subject – one of the best in the film. The other actors have nothing to play. They're not real people, they're schemes. And their characters do not act, but move according to the plot.
Sadly, when a good director ' shot '. It's doubly sad when he doesn't understand it. And three times when there is no one to explain it to him. 'Gardemarinov' I'm not even waiting.
2 out of 10
(One point - Egorova, the second - Lazarev Junior)
After the previous two films in the series “Secrets of Palace coups”, it is difficult to perceive what is happening on the screen from the point of view of history. History is one thing, artistic comprehension of history is quite another, and often for the sake of brightness historical fact can be neglected. The team is neglecting with all their heart. Yes, the historical canvas is preserved, and all the names in the film are authentic, I mean, the main cast. Andrey Osterman. Ambassador Linar. Anna Ioannovna – all of them were, acted, lived, but, as they say, “the devil is in the details.”
At the ball at the evil queen suddenly appears knight in black. The beautiful swan princess saw the knight, her heart stiffened, but the princess already had a groom, and the evil queen certainly wanted the swan princess to marry this groom and go. She came out. The knight in black married the lady-in-waiting of the Princess, Julia von Mengden.
If we consider everything that happens on the screen as a fairy tale, then yes, according to the canons of the fairy tale, events develop. There is absolute evil. And there is the absolute good, there is their fierce struggle. What do you need for a story?
The film was made sloppy. There is no single picture in it, but there are scraps of the script mounted in haste. The cast - this time there are shortcomings.
Egor doesn't have a thing for Anna. Even Churikova. The closest image was obtained by Nina Ruslanova in the first films. Anna Ioannovna in the description of historians was short, her face was bad, her temper was rude and she spoke with bass. And there is some confusion here.
Hunting itself is hunting and reminds with prey, dogs, drunken hunters.
It is much more interesting - and again - more correct, if they showed the physical destruction of the Dolgoruki, the disgrace of the Supreme Secret Council and its transformation into the Empress's office, where only three sat - Osterman, Artemy Volynsky and Prince Cherkasy, the Ice House, the execution of Volynsky, the confrontation of Osterman and Minich, Kaiserling, the brothers Leuvenvolde. The terrible wedding of Mikhail Golitsin and Kalmyk Buzheninova. But there's nothing but sweet snot. But, sorry, snot gloomy ten-year-old Anna Ioannovna do not display.
2 out of 10
I'm not a prude. I like the sex symbol and the alpha male Biron. I really like the sex symbol and the alpha male Linar. I am pleased to see the erotic ass of Anna Leopoldovna, especially in the scene of the future conception.
But not four episodes!!
Why would you suck all this nonsense out of your finger?
After all, everything seemed simple: she was born in a society far from feminism, and you have a vagina between your legs - endure.
Get married and give birth.
It makes no difference whether you belong to a proletarian family or to a royal family.
Anyway, in the first case, the question of the employee will come forward, in the second - the question of the heir.
It is usually the family that decides.
And at best she will pay attention to such nonsense as love, at worst - very sorry.
Such stories at that time occurred everywhere, so when the director tries to convince the viewer of some special tragedy of the main character, the viewer has the right not to believe him.
It is a tragedy that a girl gets married.
And if the husband, as it turns out, not only did not drink, did not beat, did not drag from the family and did not abandon the children, but also tolerated her squirrels - this is probably called sadism. In relation to the girl.
Given that the question of marriage is decided by the family, the lion’s share of conflicts over the hand of a particular girl, as a rule, disappears. As was historically the case with Linar: where there were all chances to be left without a head, this man did not climb. Since the prospect of hobbling with his "beloved" somewhere on Solovki - in the reign of humane Elizabeth - he somehow did not seduce. And with the inhumane Bironovism and raging in the open Secret Chancellery, he could go along the path of Volynsky - to the next world, with a severed tongue and slightly broken liver and kidneys.
Historically, there was no hunting.
Loved one, he retreated, waiting for the right moment.
And the princess - had to choose from two varieties - as she thought, shit.
The function of the princess was correctly defined.
Linar's motive - to repeat the fate of Biron - was expressed openly and convincingly enough.
The possibility of Elizabethan intrigues was again transparently hinted at.
But all these right things drowned in the endless snotty stori lava.
Elizabeth with some fright was forced to cover the affair of Anna Leopoldovna.
The belly, about which all four series do not cease to go broke, Leopoldovna did not appear. Ivan Antonovich was never born.
The reign of Anna Leopoldovna, where, it would seem, Linar and Juliana could turn again, was not shown.
Another couple of coups with piquant scenes of humiliation first Biron, then Anton and remained behind the scenes.
Sorry. I had to illustrate what was there. Don’t write something that doesn’t exist.
The cycle "Svetlana Druzhinina" for the past series I loved so much that I am ready to forgive the eighth film some (but not all) unpleasant sensations left after watching it, in the hope that this is a momentary misunderstanding, and the next part will not leave my pessimism stone in stone. Strictly speaking, The Princess Hunt is the weakest film of the series. Weak in everything, except maybe the cameraman. The rating he should put so two or three points less, but due to the solid past merits of the director and the great respect for her, I add these three credit points to the tape, in the expectation that the next series will not give the slightest reason for indulgence. Fortunately, the moment of relaxation in "Palace coups..." fell, perhaps, not on the most intriguing of them. The most delicious thing is ahead: this is the ascension to the throne of Elizabeth, and the story of Catherine – Peter III, in which there is still a lot of white spots and therefore it is very interesting to look at the interpretation of events by Druzhinina. The nineteenth century, which began with the assassination of Paul I. So there is more to tell and I hope the upcoming series will reach the previous, habitually high level.
Well, now a little about the eighth film itself and, first of all, about the positive, which consists mainly in the play of individual actors. I can't make any claims against Domogarov Senior . Everything he could fix in his frankly script-incomplete character, he fixed, and it is impossible not to appreciate. Whatever the actor now says about his categorical rejection of the image of the hero-lover on the screen, it (rejection), in my opinion, is not critical, otherwise, firstly, he would not agree to participate in such projects, secondly, he did not play in them with obvious pleasure and great skill attached to him, and thirdly, he would not be engaged in "Palace coups" his son - I think hardly anyone doubts that without an authoritative petition Domogarov senior would get his role. As a result, one of the funniest episodes in the film was dragging one Domogarov by the ears of the second, and it looks extremely funny. Not let down the senior and in general: the questions can only be about what he was given to play, and not how he played.
In addition to Domogarov, the rays of light in this twilight kingdom are the veteran of the series Vladimir Ilyin, as before, practicing Osterman at the highest level, as well as moments Alexander Lazarev Jr. (Biron) and Danila Dunayev (Peter Sumarokov).
Women’s images were completely disappointing. First of all, Natalia Egorova, respected by me, is definitely not Anna Ioannovna, there was a need for an actress of a somewhat different plan, radiating power and iron will, despite all her bodily weakness, as it was wonderfully performed by Natalia Gundareva in the second and third "Gardemarines", and, with some reservations, Elena Tsyplakova, who played Elizabeth in the first. Anna Ioannovna in "...Hunting for a Princess" is some kind of narrow-minded lady, blurring in body and brains, which does not fit at all with my idea of this Russian Empress.
By the way, Ekaterina Nikitina, even if she plays a young Elizabeth, to the aforementioned Tsyplakova and Gundareva is still very far away. Today, the daughter of Peter in her performance is still gray, inexpressive character, beautiful appearance with almost complete absence of internal content. I hope that the situation will change in the future.
But if Nikitina at least minimally, but still gives out a good game in short flashes, then the heroine Anna Terekhova if it takes its place in history, then in the film, where a weak script draws this character extremely indistinct, template and without the slightest imagination, looks completely superfluous. What she was, whatever she was, doesn’t matter. And the acting data of Terekhova Jr. is not particularly impressive for me either.
There is nothing to say about the other actors involved in the film. Nobody remembers anything at all.
Everything would be in ... Hunting for a princess is fundamentally different, if not for an extremely weak scenario, gaping inconsistencies, inconsistencies, finally plot holes, lack of answers and explanations to the seemingly interesting questions posed by the script itself. The presence in the title of the eighth part of the word “hunting” set up a good intrigue, dynamics of action, tension from the first to the last minute (the timekeeping was good enough to turn around), strong drama finally... Largely due to the latter, all previous series look hurried. It's a pity, but none of this in There is no such thing as a princess hunt. The joyless picture is complemented by extremely poorly thought out, meaningless and empty dialogues, in which there are few thoughts, as often, emotions. And you can even see what this sacrificed – a good picture, brilliantly shown interiors and panoramas of my beloved Peterhof and St. Petersburg. I am ready to look at their parks, halls of palaces endlessly, but without semantic content, without characteristic characters, without drama, all this is nothing more than a luxurious parade of visuals. Shooting Anatoly Mukasey, as always, at the highest level, but we still watch not a documentary about St. Petersburg and its suburbs, but a feature film, by definition, implying something more than a beautiful picture, although the importance of the latter is not canceled.
Not very happy with the music Vasily Lebedev. The apotheosis of the weak soundtrack is the final song, which is absolutely not suitable "Palace coups" neither in sound nor content.
It remains to be hoped that Svetlana Druzhinina used her right to error and that the next series of Palace coups will rise up with an interesting dynamic plot, characteristic expressive characters and their impeccable acting performance.
After reading the previous two reviews, I even doubted whether to watch The Hunt for the Princess, but still decided what to watch. And he did it for a reason. As it turned out, the first of the reviews describes “Vivat, Anna!” And the author of the second, who complains about the unmodernity of Druzhinina, perhaps I advise you to watch the very film “Vivat, Anna”, where all this is modern with more than enough.
But still about the movie itself. “Hunting for a Princess” is a classic of the film. Here, unlike the previous part, everything fits into place - and chases, and fights, and palace intrigues enough. Numerous naked bodies were also missing. There were too many of them in the first parts of The Secrets of Palace Coups. Goliath's Fall is even too much. Of course, there is, but everything is in place.
If we talk about the actors, then they all seemed to be covered. To say someone is playing badly, the language doesn't turn. The only drawbacks that can be called the film is that Anna Ioannovna is already playing the third actress. To replace Nina Ruslanova and Inna Churikova, unexpectedly comes Natalia Egorova previously played Catherine I in the same series of films. However, in my opinion, it was Egorova who played Anna Ioannovna best of all. Another disadvantage, not the film, but post-production is that his poster has nothing to do with the footage from the “Hunt for the Princess”.
Perhaps a professional critic will find a lot of shortcomings in the film, but knowing how this picture was shot, a lot can be forgiven. And Druzhinina herself is right, saying that the budget of the film was minimal, but it looks like a high-budget. So, for this, and for the film in general - vivat, Svetlana!
Patience was enough for 10 minutes. Then one day I went off and couldn’t stand it.
The squad is true to its principles - in the first shots, a cross, a dome or a bell for the whole screen and some pathetic and sad speech, short, apparently, should set the viewer on a wave of pride and prepare to contemplate our great history.
It's all out of hand. Some kind of stupid, action-packed chase with supposed passions. A bunch of screaming soldiers walk around Moscow in 1730 and yell to put out the lights. Ugly soldiers' uniforms sewn from modern fabrics look miserable, as if they were removed from the operetta costume theater and given to the actors, without looking at the size. If this is Moscow, then what is the narrowness of Moscow streets and the buildings that are not typical for Moscow? You could take it for Petersburg, but no, it was clearly written-- Moscow, 1730.
Rewinded. Forgive God, help me see what I saw. I thought it came from some 70s German porn movie. A feeble young man in a wig made of pakli and pasted mustache in a bath seduces a young nymph, shyly hiding behind a broom. Under the song "Alsu" (! if anyone remembers such a singer), the couple is closer, and in the rays of the bright light of youthful passion, a flock of pigeons are released on the actors. Shame and shame.