What does it mean to be an artist? I think not every modern stage worker will be able to answer this question. Previously, every favorite of the audience aspired to perfection, looking for worthy songs and words for his repertoire, defended something, could not accept something. Such an artist was Petr Leshchenko, a Romanian chansonnier in the best sense of the word. Although before the series I was not familiar with this name, but here I am enlightened.
Like any biography, the series boasts inaccuracies, but since I did not know this artist, I took the serial image for a real one. And I really liked it, I didn’t even see it as a movie about a particular artist. For me, this film is about a creative person who is in love with his craft, from childhood to death. And then the actors who embodied Peter Leshchenko on the screen tried very hard. Both Ivan Stebunov and Konstantin Khabensky made up an integral image of this passionate, difficult to communicate and talented person. I also liked the actresses who played the role of the singer. Yes, the wife of a man of stage, creativity, oh how difficult it is.
Regarding the political-historical part, I cannot say that I am delighted with the next show of the Soviet military in the role of sniffers. There was everything, there was war and post-war time, it was not so simple. More important to me was the idea of how hard it was for creative people in the first half of the last century. Revolutions, warriors, repressions... and in the midst of this one must find the strength to create, not to bend, not to betray one’s convictions.
At first, the series was not going to watch, got on the footage with gypsy dances and other ai-nane, was not impressed. With the work of Peter Leshchenko was also not particularly familiar, decided to listen, liked. The song "Everything That Happened," which I really like, sounds in my favorite "Liquidation" (female performance). So I decided to look at it and did not regret it.
The biggest plus - the creators of the series managed to make a film about the Artist. Personal life, service in the army, relations with the authorities are given just as much time as necessary. First of all, we were shown a creative personality, a great artist, an idol of millions. For this, the screenwriters retreated from the real biography of Leshchenko, which in this case is forgivable.
Both Stebunov and Khabensky coped with the role. Yes, perhaps Ivan Stebunov is somewhat lost against the background of the incomparable Konstantin Khabensky, but after all, he plays a young boy, a “salaga”, and Khabensky – an already established artist. I am glad that the actors in the film sing with their voices, in a manner close to modern, it turned out charming and natural. A phonogram or a copy of Leshchenko's voice would look fake. Still, the manner of performance of the 30-40s is already outdated and is more suitable for a documentary.
I really liked how they recreated the musical atmosphere of the 10-20s, listened and watched with great pleasure.
The decoration of the series was Victoria Isakova and a couple Alexei Kravchenko – Evgenia Dobrovolskaya.
Unfortunately, the authors to the second half of the series somewhat deflated, began to get out more script, make-up and prop blunders, and the film held only the charisma of Konstantin Khabensky.
For example, the Roma friends and musicians of the ensemble have not changed at all over the years. Let’s say Zlata was 15 years old in 1913, so she should have been 42 in 1940. Imagine what a roaming gypsy looked like at 42. And here the girl is young, only bruises painted. Vasily Zobar, pianist, Danya, Andrey as preserved.
On the way to Odessa, musicians play Chalands. This song was first performed in the film “Two fighters” in 1943, i.e. a year later than the events shown.
And, of course, flowers! In all domestic retro-series, actors are shoved bouquets from the flower stall closest to the shooting site. Where in the occupied Odessa Dutch chrysanthemums of 100 rubles. twig? Is it possible to look at photos of those years and find the right flowers?
Bottom line: a good series about an artist caught in the grind of history. Unfortunately, the film did not escape the problems inherent in most domestic TV series.
7 out of 10
Most of the reviews that appeared in the media after the show were written according to one template - they praise Khabensky a little, scold the plot a lot and accuse the creators of the series of distorting the biography of Peter Leshchenko. Another mandatory item of the program is to kick for the fact that Khabensky sings himself.
All these attacks look unconvincing. First, Konstantin Khabensky should be praised very much, because he once again took the series on himself (although his colleagues helped him or at least tried to help, and did not interfere, as in many other projects). Secondly, he sings well and doubly well that he did not copy the manner of Leshchenko’s performance (this would be a stupid parrot), but found his own, very charming, style. Thirdly, the nagging of the plot is inconclusive. Yeah, Jenny Zakitt didn't sing, she danced. So what does that change from a story point of view? Nothing. Yes, Leshchenko did not have a father, but a stepfather, but what does it matter, in general? Yes, Leshchenko had a son, not a daughter, but since his relationship with the child is not covered in the series at all, what difference does it make what sex the child is? In general, nitpicking is irrelevant. The claim about singing is generally ridiculous. If the original songs sounded, then in the series Leshchenko would speak with a baritone with a good Moscow reprimand, and sang with a tenor with a Bessarabian accent, it would look marasmatic and would produce a completely wild impression.
Any work of art presupposes that the viewer has the ability to fantasize. And when a biopic is shot, it goes without saying that it will be a kind of fantasy on the topic of the biography of a real person, and not an attempt to recreate someone else’s life in the smallest detail (such an attempt is ridiculous and by default a failure, because life has already been lived in the original and is not subject to reconstruction). When people shoot a feature film, they do not have the task to make the highest quality fake for documentary films, these are generally different genres. And all the dissatisfaction with the series boils down to this – why did we see a feature film, and not a documentary? And the documentary, sorry, and was not stated.
In my opinion, the strongest thing about the series is that, in the language of school teachers, the topic is solved. The topic is bitter and heavy - the fate of a talented and therefore doubly defenseless man in a meat grinder of the 20th century. It's hard to watch, but it's impossible to come off. The worst part of the series is the first three episodes. Information about childhood and youth Leshchenko little, had to invent almost everything, and it turned out not very well. To make matters worse, Stebunov is a weak actor, and he cannot save a weak plot with his charisma, as Khabensky often does, because Stebunov has no charisma. As a result, the first three series cause mainly bewilderment, awkwardness and a desire to look at something interesting. Interesting things begin with the appearance of Khabensky and other talented actors - Miriam Sekhon, Elena Lotova, Timofey Tribuntsev, Sergey Bryzgu. Thanks to them, the second part of the series is interesting to watch and want to review, despite the fact that the story itself is very difficult.
I'll be honest. I rarely watch TV on domestic television. For me, television is just football broadcasts. But that's a different story. On the third day, the main emitter of the country showed a serial film “Pyotr Leshchenko”. Everything that happened ....
The plot is built around the biography of the famous singer of Soviet Russia Peter Leshchenko. His Romani romances, folk songs and, of course, the enchanting timbre of his voice have forever entered the history of the national stage of the times of revolutions and two world wars.
There were many cities in his life. Chisinau, Odessa and of course Bucharest. Along such an unpretentious route, the tragic fate of the idol of the gramophone era developed. There were many women in his life. Love flowed like champagne from a shaken bottle. Many of his connections were of foreign origin. But only the former Odessa Vera Belousova became his real muse.
A wild life. Stage success. And then, one after another, war, revolution and Hitler’s appearance in the life of the entire world community. Against this background, Peter Konstantinovich continues to perform, causing envy, ridicule and naked hatred. He didn't follow the lead. He didn't follow the general rules. In fact, Leshchenko remained a favorite nightingale in one large cage. Her name is the USSR.
The image of the singer virtuoso embodied Konstantin Khabensky. Here it is time to talk about the perfect hit in the image of a broken chansonnier. Young Leshchenko was played by Ivan Stebunov. And here's a great hit. The cast was chosen so correctly that you can look at what is happening endlessly.
The film is filled with songs from the repertoire of Peter Leshchenko. The creators paid the main attention to the work of the artist. In fact, before us reveals the psychology of the artist of the first half of the twentieth century. Despite all the sadness, this is an era of great romantics and great artists.
Perhaps, there are no questions here about the image of the bloody Soviet KGB nonsense. The artist was arrested. He was tortured. He was forced to abandon his young wife. The reason is simple. She refused a Soviet passport during the war. This was not forgiven to anyone in the USSR. Leshchenko did not surrender and was executed in a Romanian prison. Until now, the place of his burial, the cause of death remain classified.
Overall, it turned out to be an excellent biographical biopic. The tragedy of the great artist is revealed against the background of the imperfection of the Soviet system. The film was produced by Russia and Ukraine. In 2013, the premiere took place on the Ukrainian television channel Inter. In 2017, it was shown on the first channel.
You have to watch it.
An outstanding personality in the millstones of revolutions, coups and wars
I loved the show. I wasn’t going to watch it, I sat down to the TV for a few minutes, and I couldn’t come off.
I liked everything: the script, despite the fact that it has a lot of discrepancies with the real biography of Leshchenko (so what? the film is something-artistic); and the directing, which differs in quality from the directing of many domestic TV series of the last 2 - 3 years; and the amazing acting. Both Stebunov and Khabensky played the role of the magnificent Pyotr Leshchenko on "Yat". It is very good that in the film they sang themselves, and was not used the voice of the songs by some voice similar to the voice of Leshchenko. This created a fairly integral image of Peter Leshchenko, there is no “gap” between spoken speech and singing.
Scenes of abuse of the hero in the state security agencies (what does it matter what – Romanian, as in reality, or Soviet, as in the film? cruelty is the same everywhere) are interspersed with the memory of his life. This technique emphasizes the horror of revolutions and coups, civil wars and wars between states; all the cynicism of the politicians who stage these coups and wars divide and unite states. And as a result of all this, a specific person, a specific family, suffers, to which these cynics do not care at all: the main thing is to solve global problems, and there “forests are cut – chips fly”, as one notorious statesman used to say. Destinies collapse, a person is deprived of home, relatives, life.
You watch a movie and believe the authors, believe the actors. Played brilliantly, the dialogues are spelled out perfectly, everything is absolutely professional: there is no feeling that this is a product of amateur activity (a similar feeling often arises recently).
I want to talk about women’s roles. I liked all the actresses without exception. And I was starting to worry that I haven't seen any interesting young actresses lately. Of course, Isakov and Dobrovolskaya played well, Miriam Sekhon once again pleased with the talent, for the first time drew attention to the beautiful play of Elena Lotova and Olga Lerman.
In general, thank you to the authors of the film for the excellent work that encourages reflection and analysis, allowing you to make generalizations and conclusions, to extrapolate some situations to date.
Those to whom the name of Pyotr Leshchenko does not mean anything - the film is possible and not worth watching, but Konstantin Khabensky, this name apparently says a lot - so amazingly he played the role of this great Artist, and also artistically and spiritually he himself sang all the songs of Leshchenko in the film.
Also great and absolutely synchronous with Khabensky, the role of the young Leshchenko was played by Ivan Stebunov, and not knowing the details of the casting, I was at first still doubtful - maybe Khabensky makeup what they did (after Bezrukov-Vysotsky you can already expect). I also liked the small, but bright role of the White Guard lieutenant performed by Merzlikin - it is good that he does not fixate on the role of a rogue bandit.
In general, today, the personality of Peter Leshchenko is clearly underestimated - he was not just a chansonnier (in the good, French sense of the word), a performer of gypsy songs and Russian romances, Leshchenko was the most famous non-Argentine tango musician! And thank you to the director for paying tribute to the memory of this great Artist with such respect and talent.
By genre, this film is not a biopic musical, but rather a musical drama, the atmosphere of the film, as well as the fate of Leshchenko himself, is quite tragic, but what else to expect, speaking of a country that devours its geniuses with enviable appetite...