I liked the show. Rasputin is a bright personality, and the attitude towards him was twofold. We all know how to turn any fact inside out, and the director in the series shows that sometimes people make mistakes and judge others by some rumors, subjective opinions. Rasputin is a convenient figure in this regard because of his position in society.
In general, the series makes you think that we all tend to judge others rather than justify them. No matter what a person does, we see in his actions a secret intention, personal gain. What if there is no personal gain? What if a person simply acts according to the dictates of the soul? And we are lost in this case, for how is it so – without profit?
The director shows that Rasputin frightened and angered people precisely by seeing through them and highlighting their sins and dark sides. That's why they hated him for his crooked reflection.
A non-standard version of the life of the “Holy Elder” Rasputin. The classic image of Rasputin looks like this - a half-mad demi-demon, a mystifier with the skills of suggestion and even hypnosis, using church mysticism for his tricks and attaching himself to Orthodoxy, a lustful dog and debauchery, bathed in luxury and fornication, subdued the queen, prone to mysticism, and through her influenced the weak-willed Tsar Nicholas II. His influence was so strong and hindered the state that the court brethren decided to finish him off, which was very difficult.
In the same series, everything is turned upside down. Or put on your feet, who knows? Mashkov plays a really holy elder (or rather, a strong peasant with mad eyes), who is overshadowed by God’s grace to heal and even resurrect, but at the same time he dies every time, giving his strength. He is unselfish and pious, but in a special way. To bring someone to repentance, he must throw him to the bottom of vice. That is why he forces the nobles to wash him in the bath, drinks as if not in himself, because only in this way can he support his strength. He's almost chaste. He sincerely loves the Tsarina and the Tsar, tears his soul for the sake of the royal family and the Russian state. He provokes people to make huge bribes to understand whether this or that person is worthy of public office. He is exhausted with despair, because the king does not listen to him and leads the country to war. He foresees everything - and the death of Stolypin, and the death of the king, and his death. He even knows who will kill him and when. Here, the conspiracy against Rasputin is not an act of saving the state by the nobles, but an act of petty revenge by an imaginary cuckold, a homosexual, whom R upset his marriage to the tsar’s daughter and a political fanatic Purishkevich.
Mashkov is brilliant, no bazaar. And if Rasputin’s rabid pressure and energy to play was not so difficult – to give madness and expression even for an average artist – a task for three. But how Mashkov played Rasputin's fortune before he went to a meeting where he knows he feels he's going to be killed was amazing. Fear, despair, humility, readiness and yet hope are such an unbearable mixture of emotions. Brilliant, short.
The series itself cannot be called genius. Maximum, not bad. Only Mashkov plays really well. The rest are on four. Klimova is terribly overplaying, and the way she portrays a limp with a stick, just chills. Even a few years after her injury, she walks like her leg broke yesterday and holds a stick for the first time. Koshevoy in the role of Felix Yusupov is too similar to theatrical Piero and cosplay Vertinsky. From Nicholas II made some misunderstanding, he is not at all similar. The others don't have much to play. Camorzin in the role of a spike is hilarious as always, but absolutely not surprising. He's always like that. The wife of Rasputin and the chief of police in the homeland of Grigory R.
The rest of the story is bright and amazing. Facts are not twisted, but simply interpreted differently. This is not a lie, but an opposite assessment. This is not Caramora-style fiction. And it's interesting. Moreover, it is impossible to say exactly how it was in reality, because the image of Rasputin, known to us, is also an interpretation. We're just used to it. Not this one.
Andrey Malyukov’s eight-part project “Grigory R.” collected in 2013 the entire color of the Russian actor class and is worthy of viewing for this unparalleled maximalism. However, it is unparalleled rather by modern standards, whereas back in 1981, the famous dissident from the director Elem Klimov attracted an equally star cast for his two-part historical drama Agony. That tape shakes the power of the artistic effect and now, but whether a similar creative immortality version of Malyukov is a debatable question. The director very carefully treated the factology, the scenario of the picture plus or minus coincides with the information given in the standard history textbook for the 10th grade. At the same time, the mood for refutation is felt from the first series - as a kind of response to the absurd desire of the head of the Provisional Government of Kerensky to present Rasputin as a formable incarnation of hell, the only undisputed culprit of the disasters that have fallen on Russia.
In the footsteps of an ordinary peasant of the Tobolsk province, who managed to become a figure of a world scale, whose popularity was second only to Stalin, is the investigator Heinrich Svitten - another detective hero of Andrei Smolyakov, and he has to distinguish myths from the truth. It turns out to be difficult: despite the interesting approach and colorfully designed reflections of the detective, it does not help to understand who the infamous “elder” from the village was actually. At the same time, if we rely on purely external impressions, then Vladimir Mashkov in the role of Rasputin is unimaginably good. The power of the actor’s charisma is such that he, with all his desire, would not portray a disgusting villain, as the aristocrats close to the dynastic family considered him. Even the one-sided performance of the hero does not prevent Gregory from being the only sympathetic character in the series. Sweeten? Well, he simply exists, acts as a narrator, helps the viewer to understand the vicissitudes of the then stunted province and the gloomy capital of Petrograd, although the need for such work tends to zero - the creators undertook to film too well-known events. The rest of the figures - who to a lesser extent, who to a greater extent - in the film are spinless adapters, pathetic mummels and feeble weaklings.
From the point of view of historical authenticity to the series do not dig, it is clear that the budget went to its intended purpose, not only for fees. The picture of Gregory R. is close to perfect, and this impression is not spoiled by outdated interruptions between events taking place in two time layers. Another thing is that the plot of this decision does not justify itself: betting on eyewitness accounts of miracles that Rasputin began to perform in his native village of Pokrovskoe does not bring him closer to understanding what was more in the “old man”: saint or devilish. Character would be enough for both hypostases - there can be no doubt about this. In contrast to those who at different periods of his life became his opponent, Gregory looks like the only real man. If the authors did not clear his reputation, they certainly added human nature. It is significant how tortured the plot of the princes against Rasputin is shown on the screen. These smears can not agree on anything, always follow the principle of “only after you”, and apparently such insignificances, according to the creators of the series, are responsible for the collapse of the country and the collapse of the monarchy.
It is natural that the imperial couple in the ribbon exists for proforma. It is pleasant to see the famous performers, and it is very pleasant to see Ekaterina Klimov in the role of maid of honor Anna Vyrubova, but in general these are not historical figures, unless they were originally conceived as people who accidentally found themselves in the whirlpool of terrible events. It is not surprising that Mashkov easily soloed in each scene – he simply has no rivals. Although Vladimir Lvovich embodied a kind of collective image of Rasputin, the hero of countless crooked interpretations, rather than a paradoxical personality, he is still the central figure of the project, an idol and a symbol. The series doesn't rehabilitate the man the august couple respectfully referred to as "Our Friend," and it doesn't look like that was the goal of the crew at all. Criticism of Orthodoxy is this good in the picture with abundance. Starting with the first series again, when the rector of St. Nicholas Monastery appears on the screen. The priest is shown as an unclean manager, whose Christian faith is primarily a profitable job, not a spiritual vocation. It is not surprising that the conspiracy against Rasputin its inspirers call “a holy deed”, then all as holiness remained in the walls of the Antoniev Monastery involved in the filming.
If you leave aside ideological nagging, then in artistic terms, the series was successful. Still, skilled filmmakers took up the job, and talented actors dressed in historical clothes. “Grigory R.” should appeal to fans of costumed dramas, and it is impossible to say that the authors have crossed the line somewhere and now deserve ostracism. No, this is at least in some places a daring, but rather neat attempt to show the legendary figure first of all a man and only then a mythological character. One thing is clear: neither before dynastic times nor before the traditions of centuries ago, the creative group does not experience the slightest piety, and shows events with a superficiality familiar to our time. It is obvious that Rasputin is also interesting as a colorful figure, with the help of which you can engage in ridiculing ancestors, and only then someone bothered to search for the notorious truth. In addition, it is not the fact that someone now needs it, disputes will continue around the personality of the “holy devil”, which means that the tsarist friend will be alive again – in one capacity or another.
In the series, the viewer sees a greatly simplified and fairly starched image of Elder G. E. Rasputin.
Yes, we see the same irrepressible energy, inexhaustible willpower, Characterism, but something is missing in it.
Some dimensions of Rasputin’s personality were deliberately hidden from the mass viewer as being capable of defaming the main character if misinterpreted.
And the mass viewer is not too sophisticated in penetrating the secrets of the soul of other elders.
Therefore, Rasputin looks convincing, but one-dimensional.
Especially unnatural looks attracted by the ears "chemistry" between him and Taneyeva (pardon, Vyrubova). And his absolutely human love for Princess Irina Alexandrovna.
And so many events from the life of Rasputin were left behind.
More objective inaccuracies: on the night of the murder, some “left” composition plays, not Yankee Doodle (by the way, the recently released British TV series The Last Czars used the correct melody). Prince Yusupov, for some reason, walks in his wedding costume with old photos. Although there was a war at the time, he probably wore the uniform of the Page Corps (somewhere I saw a description of him in a simple gymnast). I do not yet know why it was necessary to invent an attempt by Matryona Rasputina to seduce the investigator. I think it’s a bit more dramatic.
As a result: the series amazes with scale, scenery, excellent acting. But he fakes and does not fall into notes, and therefore rather cuts the hearing of a person who is well acquainted with other events.
And, yes, I think the attempt to humanize Rasputin has succeeded.
When another series is shot, with claims to historicality, the first and main question is why? Well, what is this topic, does it require any interpretation, a fresh look, the disclosure of secrets?
The trouble is that too much is known about Rasputin, and it is impossible to poetize this character by definition. A dirty man, a drunkard, a debauchery and an intriguer who shamed the last Russian emperors - well, how to make a candy here? It's very easy to lie without blinking. The whole series is false from the first to the last frame.
Here and the “divine” light emanating from the palms of Mashkov, and wisdom, and healing, and foresight – everything is flooded with such sweet oil that the cheekbones reduce.
The writers of the series just lied about our story, and it’s a shame that good actors agreed to participate in this. In this mix of “Battle of psychics” and political agitation in the spirit of “Orthodoxy is our everything”, “monarchy is our historical choice”, etc.
The circle is closed - why shoot this?
... about this movie. In some places he is brilliant, but in some places such blunders! In this case, the description says that consulted with experts.
Probably this is the case when figuratively speaking, they built a house, consulted with designers and, like, it was beautiful inside. But the foundation is curved and the roof is about to collapse. So is this movie.
The actors play amazingly, such complex multifaceted characters. But! Not like the originals.
Some events seem to be simply invented. They would say that “all coincidences are accidental.” .
The most incorrect character is Taneyeva (Vyrubova). This feeling decided to make the opposite character. There was clumsiness, greed, and a narrow mind—grace, generosity, and sudden analytical ability.
Dmitry Pavlovich hardly had such terrible manners. Did he make such faces? ) Judging by his memories and photographs, he was a man of harmonious character, well-mannered and reserved. And most likely he was a little shorter than Felix height, but this is a remark to the side.
G.E. Rasputin. Mashkov played him amazingly, but he was not at all like that!
Mashkov is not suitable for this role because no one is suitable for it at all. And it is better not even to make films about Rasputin, in any case you will misrepresent. Here you need a rare mixture of primitiveness / uncouthness and a special kind of mystical sublimity, which some are afraid, and some are ready to die for it.
Here Mashkov makes such harsh eyes and tries to look either contemptuously or weightily. But you open Rasputin's picture right now, because his eyes weren't heavy. His eyes are clear, light like glass. People were terrified of his look because he's hypnotic and they kind of drill you. And almost all the actors who played it tried to replace this hypnotism (it is understandable, because they do not have it!) with heaviness and severity in the eye.
But here I am pleased:
Felix. It's brilliant. Especially hand choreography, so to speak. Even more languor and mercuristic than in Yusupov himself.
Rasputin's matrena. Also a great hit. But it is not so noticeable in the film as a whole.
About invented facts and incomprehensible where the scenes came from, I am generally silent. Rasputin and Yusupov met for the first time in a restaurant, right? It's not Yankee Doodle playing on the day of the murder, it's some Nazi march. Why didn't Rasputin suspect anything? Perhaps because the answer lies in Rasputin's book Why? - his daughter.
In general, I would still write in capital letters at the beginning of the film that this is an adaptation, “based on motives” and everything so as not to mislead honest people.
I really like Vladimir Mashkov as an actor and he is almost always in high-quality films and TV series. And the “holy devil” of Grigory Rasputin, he played well, so to speak, “with his soul”, clearly giving his all. However, in the most paradoxical way, in the peak of a beautiful game, he did not get into the image, and did not get, most likely, through the fault of the writers. But more on that later.
Somewhere in the middle of the second series, I began to feel a sense of déjà vu. I’ve seen this kind of storytelling before. Okay. Historical events... Murder... The investigation... The investigator's thoughts... Ba, Yesenin! Well, almost exactly, it remains happy that even though Rasputin did not play Bezrukov. At the same time, in contrast to Yesenin, in Gregory R., such a structure looks inappropriate and boring. “Modern” inserts are not very interesting, very tight and there are too many of them. The investigation is presented as perhaps the most important case for the winners of February 1917, tense and difficult. Plus, all the events of the “investigation” shown on the screen, all the interpersonal relationships and dialogues look fictional (and something tells me that this is the case and the investigation was completely different). And modern frames processed by “sepia”, which try to seem archival, are not convinced of the opposite.
As for the image of Rasputin, he is again completely unconvincing. First, appearance. Judging by the surviving photographs of Rasputin, he could not be called not only “beautiful”, but simply “pretty”, while Mashkov remains Mashkov, with large sad eyes and strong-willed features under his beard. Second, behavior and lifestyle. Numerous recollections describe Rasputin as an uncouth hillbilly, a rude man, a drunkard and a womanizer who, for reasons still unknown, fascinated the high society of St. Petersburg and the royal family. In the series, we see a right-wing peasant, a man in the good sense of the word. Rude? Well, a little. Drunk? As they say, “Who doesn’t drink?” A womanizer? You hang yourself! And so on. The entire historical image of Rasputin is expressed in the series with a shaggy beard, black peasant robe and ineradicable “village” talk, but this is catastrophically small for the biographical drama.
After watching Grigory R., it seemed that the authors and screenwriters of the film deliberately changed the minus sign to the plus sign in all the facts and evidence relating to Rasputin’s life path, and all the mysterious phenomena around him were given grotesque forms. Widely known is the story of how a drunken Rasputin boasted of his silk shirt in a restaurant, shouting that it was “Sashka embroidered”, that is, the empress. In the series, this plot is turned in such a way that you just want to tear down the torment of the soul and the nobility of “Holy Father Gregory”. “Predictions” Rasputin, which in all, absolutely all the memories of his contemporaries wore completely allegorical forms (in other words, “understand as you like”) in the mouth of the “serial” Gregory R. chewed to a state of puree, he does not tell the exact time of the expected event. And like a ringed dull melody, two main Rasputin axioms are constantly repeated that one should not start a war, and after his death the royal family will be killed. Over and over again.
It is no secret that most of the historical films and TV series broadcast on television today have a political and ideological color. In most cases, this is understandable and does not raise questions. But as much as I tried, I could not figure out who and why today it is necessary to whitewash Grigory Rasputin, who is very difficult (and simply impossible) to call a positive person; who was not loved by the politicians of the Russian Empire, completely forgotten by the politicians of the USSR, and the Church despised both in tsarist times and now.
But the series “Gregory R.” does exactly that.
After the helpless crafts about Rasputin with Gerard Depardieu, I pledged to watch films on this topic. I do not watch domestic TV series at all: the quality often leaves much to be desired. But I was attracted to this series by the comment of a historian I know: “It’s almost not wrong there.” I watched in one breath and had a lot of fun.
The first thing that caught my eye was not a serial play of actors. No one overplays, overplays or overworks anywhere. Actors do not “play” the people of that era, but literally become them. Mashkov cannot be called an actor who will play anyone, but Grishka Rasputin is a person of the type that he always succeeds. Let me remind you that in a pathetic film with Depardieu Mashkov played Nicholas II, and it was the greatest miscasting. Here Mashkov is not just persuasive, he is this uncouth man, cocky, prone to partying, by chance found himself at court.
As for the content, this is a rare case when the script of the series is written by a man with brains, knowledge of the material and restraint (so as not to stuff some ridiculous storylines). In particular, debunked all these Gothic jokes about the murder of Rasputin from Soviet textbooks, based on the memoirs of the participants in the murder.
Many people are hindered by leftist views, the series casts a shadow on the creators of the February revolution. But the series presents at least a point of view, far from philistine. Which already gives him value.
The biggest claim to this film is showing on the central channels in prime time.
I don’t know what the people who write “this is our story” reviews are based on, but it’s some kind of parallel reality story.
I can understand the historical flaws in costumes—often many filmmakers deliberately deviate from the historical accuracy of costumes, weapons, music, or buildings in a city to give aesthetics and vision to a picture. One can forgive that Vyrubova was not at all like the pretty Klimova, but this gave even more emphasis on the difference between the peasant from the village and the cronies of the emperor. You can close your eyes to the fact that the lady-in-waiting could not sit in the presence of the Empress while she is standing – this is not a too obvious sin for the viewer. Of course, it is strange that in the scene of getting rid of the corpse, they did not throw it from the bridge into the water, although it is clearly visible that there is no ice, and dragged along the ground to the hole, where women wash their laundry, but you can also give up on this, because there are quite blatant flaws.
How can you distort history so much? Of course, there are things that can be interpreted in two ways. Rasputin slept with many noble ladies, promising them healing. Rasputin in this case, of course, is not a saint, but even women looked where they went, going to bed with the elder, having husbands.
But when absolutely every page of Grigory’s biography is interpreted as “substituted, slandered, told”, distort the facts, trying to whitewash the image of Rasputin – it is unclear who needs it. Even if we omit the events in the life of the elder “to St. Petersburg”, why is it shown that Stolypin remained in a pleasant impression from the meeting with Rasputin? In the memoirs of his daughter, Mary, it is written that Stolypin had a terrible opinion about the elder and tried to expel him from the capital with all his might. By the way, Rasputin did not treat or heal the sick legs of another daughter of Stolypin – Natalia – here the merit of doctors, which is also historically documented.
Moreover, the reason for the murder of the elder is completely incomprehensible. Did Felix get along with British intelligence? Why didn't he flee to England when the revolution took place? How could British intelligence motivate Yusupov? The fact that he was bisexual – and so the whole of Petersburg knew – is clearly not the subject of blackmail. Money? The Yusupovs were richer than the imperial family, why would he need more money? If you decided to show the version about the intervention of England, then at least explain the more logical reasons for such cooperation Felix with them.
Even more egregious detail in the series - Rasputin never knew Irina Yusupova. The Yusupovs even sued (and won) the film company Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and proved that she had never seen him in the eye, and certainly did not go to some orphans (as shown in the "miracle" series Grigory R.). Why did Prince Dmitri suddenly become gay? He had a wife in America, and then after the divorce, he and Coco Chanel had a relationship.
But even these rewritings of history could be forgiven if the series did not go on prime time in Russia, and then on the First. If it came out only on the Internet, only people interested in history would watch it, and they would spit, and try to forget it as soon as possible, like a terrible dream. But a lot of people watched it, from the history of distant people, thus forming an opinion about a person, and in general Russia of that time, completely incorrect. As one reviewer wrote here - "now you can not dig into the books - the series told everything." But the show told a lie! And she's stuck in the minds of millions. This is how history is rewritten over time.
The worst part is the attitude of the actors. Gwyneth Peltrow once admitted that there were films in which she starred for the soul, and there were – which for money, and she is a little ashamed of it. And if the actors of this series honestly said that it was all for money – okay, life will make, the acting age is quite short, you need to grab any job. But when Mashkov gives an interview, “there were holy people in Russia... some inner light emanated from him...” After these words about Rasputin, I was terribly disappointed in Mashkov. Playing well what the director says is one thing. To preach in the news that a licentious man was a saint and sincerely convince people of this is already disgusting and unworthy.
Grigory Rasputin is one of the most controversial figures in Russian history. This image stirred the minds of contemporaries and still (December 30, the hundredth anniversary of his murder) excites the hearts of people. Some see him as a saint, others as a demonic person. But no one is indifferent. The mystery of his life and death, deeds and prophecies attracts everyone, and his earthly path has influenced many spheres - from politics to religion, from healing to economy.
The creators of the series came up with an original and intriguing plot canvas: the investigator Henry Sweeten on behalf of the Chairman of the Provisional Government Alexander Kerensky investigates the circumstances of the death of Grigory Rasputin, and his task is to collect factual material that would certainly compromise both the elder and the royal family.
I'm going through hard times. It's terrible what they say, God! Give patience and cover the lips of enemies! Or give the help of heaven, that is, prepare the eternal joy of your bliss.
The German takes up the case thoroughly, thoughtfully, methodically, without missing any details, critically considering all available information, interviewing witnesses and acquaintances of the “accused”. Such a narrative framework allows not only to depict the life of Grigory Efimovich in retrospect, but also, on the basis of analysis, to check the veracity of the labels attached by people to the object of research: a horse thief, a murderer, a sectarian, a lecher or a saint, a healer?
As the case progresses, Sweeten comes to the conclusion that even negative fragments from Rasputin’s biography are not able to denigrate him enough to pass for the true incarnation of hell. And the viewer willingly agrees with the investigator, falling under the natural charm of Grishka, like the secular ladies of that era.
As long as I live, there will be a dynasty.
Probably, such an interpretation of the image of Rasputin as an elder, a martyr, is somewhat attracted, contrived, as, indeed, all attempts to present Grigory Efimovich as an exceptionally complete debauchery, a stupid, uncouth and dangerous peasant, or someone’s agent, spy and traitor. The truth is somewhere in the middle. In this sense, the investigator Svitten gives a stunningly concise and at the same time voluminous and, perhaps, the most accurate assessment of Rasputin, answering Kerensky’s question. Who is he?: The Russian man.
This film history of Rasputin raises a lot of questions: why / why / why / why / why the elder, who foresaw his death, and after it the death of the Romanovs, actually voluntarily surrendered to the conspirators? whether the story could go on a different path, staying alive? whether he gave himself to be killed, so that everything that was destined to happen to Russia?
Everyone knows who killed the Son of God, but why did he go to the execution?
Clings not only the historical material itself and its presentation, but also the acting out (and in some cases living) of roles by actors. Vladimir Mashkov has always been one of my favorite Russian lyceums, and this eternal inner flame of his sooner or later was bound to lead him to Rasputin. Excellent hit in the image. Andrey Smolyakov, surprisingly deftly getting used to the images of various kinds of detectives, and here is organic, stately, noble. Ekaterina Klimov, even if she looks little like lady-in-waiting Vyrubova, bribes with her soft radiant light. It is on these three whales that the acting ensemble keeps, and the rest very skillfully accompany them.
God is joy and joy.
Many have tried to unravel the mystery of Rasputin, and the version of Andrey Malyukov is perhaps closer to the rest of me, if only for the reason that I desperately want to believe in a miracle, that sometimes some higher grace descends on our Earth.
9 out of 10
A series that breaks the rumors and hearts of historians
So, two years later, I gathered my spirit and watched the series “Grigory R.”.
The day before, I read V. Pikul’s wonderful work “Unclean Power”, built mainly on documents and facts, and this is in addition to the fact that I was also separately interested in the personality of Rasputin and other significant figures of the early XX century. From the first minute I started laughing from the heart. It’s not funny, but you can’t sit still. It’s either to cry or to laugh.
The series implies something that refutes the stupid “rumors” and judgments that then went about Rasputin among the people. But the fact is that all these “rumors” have long been proven not by one person or one document. So, it turns out that Gregory was not a horse thief. He saved his own horse from the whip. But hell knows. Maybe it was, I'm not picking on it. Because the life of Rasputin in those years was very little known, apart from the testimony of his fellow villagers (honest peasants would not lie, I think, well, come on). Then Rasputin becomes a wanderer, helps build a temple. Again, according to peasant testimony, Rasputin was the first parasite in the village. It is noteworthy, by the way, that the house in which Parashka lives is still the same. It turns out that he did not even buy a new house for himself and did not bring royal gifts there. Well, holy old man, what to take from him.
Mostly I was struck by Vyrubov! Fat, ugly, lame - in the film adaptation a real beauty. It's not even peculiar. Beauty and that's it. She, by the way, should not be married yet when her husband is mentioned in the film.
So, it turns out that Rasputin was dragged to St. Petersburg by the women, not the clergy. Well, this can be allowed, but again, this is a distortion of the facts.
The second disproved “rumor” is Grishka’s belonging to the Whips. That's really funny. He said to God, “Sin and repent, repent.”
And Chionia in our series was a sectarian. Oh, what a bad woman, it turns out!
I can't believe he went to orphanages. I haven't read it anywhere, I haven't heard it, but here you go. Not only does he treat people, but he also helps orphans. That’s how you watch the series and think: “Why did everyone die so diligently, he helped Stolypin, and he hated him?”
Oh, yeah. Stolypin!! When I saw him, I almost had a heart attack. Squeezed, sad, with a soft voice, insecure, looks bad. Yes, the prime minister has changed a lot in recent months, but what we are being shown is not the last months. And everyone knows that the king was a rag. And then he is right around Peter Arkadyevich, forcing him to invite Grishka to visit. And he calls! Yes, he does. And Rasputin supports him, not urges him to the king because he kicked him out of his house. “He only needs such people,” says Rasputin. I'd say that in my life, darling. And then the Prime Minister runs after the carriage aki court lady, stopping Rasputin and asking him a question. I'm not talking about height. The emperor stood on a par with Rasputin. That's really funny.
It's about history. .
In general, the series looks presentable. If I didn’t know anything about Rasputin, I would have felt it and wanted to know more. A kind of holy elder who supports faith and patriotism in people. Good image. There was no such person. But the image is good, you can't say anything. Mashkov is good, as always, no complaints, perfectly played what he was entrusted with. The atmosphere of the series is not bad again, but the other actors ... well, not hooked. Although I recognized Iliodor immediately. Well-chosen actor.
In general, the feeling of the series is mixed. Mostly, of course, negative emotions.
Holy or not, it's not up to us. What happened? But what was probably a long time from memory. As a passionate amateur (I emphasize an amateur, not a professional) I am very fond of interesting and contradictory personalities. Studying the archives and documents, analyzing how many years the image of Rasputin was presented in the press and in the cinema, I came to the conclusion that he was a wonderful man who carried the Spirit of God in himself (I am not religious, if you do not think that I here in fiery ecstasy splashing saliva). Do you know which people are most praised in history? Strangely enough, to a greater extent scammers or made one single, but someone very profitable action. Who's being scolded for what the light is worth? Who's being taken out of history? Who's being classified? People they hate and fear.
And now finally for the series.
Thank you to the creators for this view of Grigory Rasputin. I tried to watch films about Rasputin before – nothing but a feeling of abomination I could not stand: the script is obsessive, the actors are somehow not at all like their prototypes. Of course, we should not forget that any film, whether it is fiction or not, is trying to give rise to some idea in us. And in this series finally tried to put a good idea.
I started watching this series with such fear and disbelief. I remember Mashkov from Liquidation and Orphan of Kazan, where he played (and played talentedly) not the most positive characters. And this actor, who is ingrained in memory as a master of characteristic negative characters, should play Grigory Efimovich? Well, then it was scary that I would waste time and spoil my nerves, watching another Shyderva on the likeness of Disney Anastasia (Who remembers this thrash with Rasputin-zombie-sorcerer?) Who doesn’t know, don’t even watch, well, or as a farcical comedy about how Americans see Russian history.
But... from the first series I was struck that Rasputin for the first time decided not to show a libertine, not to concentrate on his fucking role in the destruction of the Russian Empire (before him stood many hundreds of years, and then suddenly took one and collapsed). Like the story of the wolf and the pig houses. It blew and became the Empire.
In terms of nuances, what he was doing in the bath with women: thinking, not thinking. I do not care at all, and, however, if you watch the series carefully, such thoughts there sound constantly from the lips of a variety of characters, as if casually. Does it really matter how much Rasputin drank and who he slept with? Could it be more important that he really tried to save Russia at the most difficult moment?
This series was a revelation to me. I review it and think a lot. The essence of this mini-series is very good, and the thoughts are expressed correctly.
As for acting. I like someone, I don't like someone. Taste and color markers are different. Mashkov's good. He was convincing. Playing ambiguous roles of ambiguous people is extremely difficult. You will be judged anyway.
I am not afraid to say that I am simply admiring such a character of Russian history as Grigory Rasputin. And I definitely recommend the series “Grigory R.” to those who are looking for something in this life. Looking for something not material or superficial.
This wonderful series is more like a documentary. The creators have done a phenomenal job: you do not have to read anything now, go somewhere in a closed archive, look for rare notes and articles - everything is already done - and submitted in an elegant art form.
Only an ignorant person today can think of this great man as a low, cunning, mean and depraved person. But here everyone makes a choice for himself - as the investigator makes in the cinema - a man of honor, good heart and justice. Not enough is German! Incredibly organically, this character fits into this picture. This figure challenges all of us -- here's the facts, here's the reality -- let's sort it out. And it should be noted that even in times of trouble, when ungodly personalities fall into power, it is possible and even necessary to remain a Man.
It is difficult to imagine in the role of Grigory not Mashkov. It is definitely made for such characters. One look, one word, makes it goosebump. It’s just one of those “Idiots.” The images of all these complex characters beyond the limits of talent - interesting, of course - was this how Elder Gregory really was? According to archival records and descriptions of contemporaries - very similar to the truth - here the authors perfectly conveyed his appearance. A powerful role, and that is the least that can be said. What can we talk about here? The silence of Mashkov’s characters is more eloquent than anything in the world.
The only weak point, in my opinion, is the role of the Emperor - he turned out somehow unnatural, somehow he stands out from the overall picture. At least to the appearance and to the game itself, I have personal complaints - with all due respect to the actor. But authors know better. In addition, the last of our Sovereign is a separate movie, there is nothing in common with what we were given to eat in the textbooks – and what actually happened – almost nothing. I hope that someday someone will have the courage to make something like this picture about Rasputin.
I highly appreciate this work, despite the fact that there are artistic improvements of the writers, in general, it was possible to preserve a real objective picture of the life of one of the greatest people in the history of the Russian state.
Working on Mistakes in Two Previous Rasputin Films
Probably, the authors of this mini-series were also in shock from the movies of 2011 and 2013, dubbing each other in everything and showing the same incompetence, and decided that it should not be left that way. If the viewer is dissatisfied, it is necessary to submit to his court a more worthwhile film on this topic. Let it be a TV mini-series, unlike the 2013 theatrical film, but it will show a more detailed story about this man, and this story will be interesting and intriguing. And they did it!
In fact, the new mini-series about such a mysterious person came out, if not chic, as it seemed on the first two series (we watched in one breath), then just a good multi-part film that shows not a primitive plot, how the films of 2011 and 2013 differed, but a twisted story, although shot in cheap scenery, but not to be bored. If the whole mini-series was in the spirit of those first two episodes, it would be just great. It’s a pity that the film began to “take”, starting with the third series, and the seventh seemed worthless. But in general, this project can be praised for the non-standard scenario . It begins with what, in fact, the story of Rasputin ended with his murder. It was not necessary to make intrigue out of this - everyone already knows that Rasputin was killed. The first scene of the first series turned out to be quite unpleasant - not in every historical film you will see such a creep. Then the whole plot is built on the investigation of an experienced police officer who is tasked with proving that Grigory Rasputin was a fraud, charlatan and moral debauchery. The policeman himself believes that, but the facts he collects suggest otherwise. Roughly two-thirds of the miniseries features eye-catching scenes filled with impressive dialogues between the main character and those who knew Rasputin. This is not a primitive plot of the films of 2011 and 2013: he healed the heir to the throne, led a depraved life, and was killed. They're going to show you something incredible.
Finally, the selection of actors here is also more successful than in the two previous films about Rasputin. Vladimir Mashkov Believe more than Gerard Depardieu, despite all his talent. Well, if again about the film, then, judging by the finale of this work, it turns out that the authors of this mini-series do not consider Rasputin what the authorities tried to represent him in the film. They're on his side, that's their business, but don't forget it's just a movie, and it's best to keep believing that this man's secret hasn't been solved. A saint or a messenger of hell? Who knows. The whole movie came out.
Arthur's opinion. The series "Gregory R." or How from Rasputin sculpt a saint.
Here are less reviews, more on the ideology of the series.
I watched "Gregory R." and had some opinion.
The series is in line with current trends. We noticed how now on each channel are broadcasts with psychics. So, Gregory R. is the full embodiment of these trends. Here, the great and terrible Grigory Rasputin does not appear in the image of a gloomy, mysterious elder who influenced the royal family and state affairs, and was sharply criticized by the Romanovs’ entourage for ambiguous antics. Here Rasputin is a holy martyr, a prophet and an Orthodox man, in all his senses.
I am personally skeptical of Rasputin’s superpowers. Yes, he was an excellent psychologist and, as his contemporaries write, had the skills of hypnosis. And here he is walking Vanga, sees everything, foresees everything, treats everyone. In addition, the creators of the series are trying to clean all the dark spots of Rasputin.
It is known that Rasputin in St. Petersburg lived luxuriously, spent money, walked in elite restaurants with gypsies, often saw how he went to the bath with noble and not very ladies. And here - and walked with the women in the bath, but they really washed there! Even when in the series he gets money for treatment, he refuses them and gives them to everyone who came around ... or to orphanages!
Rasputin gives advice to everyone in the series. Even Stolypin here he considers a good person, because Stolypin considers Putin good (you understand the hint – an attempt to rebuild history under the ideology of the current government). I don’t think Rasputin and Stolypin had a good relationship. In general, washed Rasputin everywhere, and where not washed, there lies his holiness!
All 4 episodes I saw the directors of Rasputin turn into a saint. Directly on points clear all the backyards of the personality of the Siberian elder, adding to this his psychic abilities, as an excuse for his eccentricity. Rasputin in Gregory R. is an unrecognized prophet who was destroyed by the conspirators.
Was Rasputin shown as an excellent intriguer who perfectly manipulated the queen who manipulated the weak-willed Nicholas (who is also a saint today)? Nope! Here - only bad uncles blame Rasputin for all the sins. Well, it happens that Rasputin jacked up money somewhere, but only for the sake of orphanages, so that children can be distributed! Rasputin sent all the money to the children. And I didn't drink at all -- well, a little bit. He's a man of God!!! He did not have any money, he was poor, and the fact that he rebuilt a chic mansion in his native Prokhorovka and lived in a huge apartment on the Moika, it's just... We're not gonna show that in the show! And in general, Rasputin here appears as a victim of circumstances, just like Nikolai. And everyone who interfered with him, that is, did not like Russia.
Guys, in short, what do we see... We see a direct attempt to transfer Rasputin from the black corner of the room to the white. In my opinion, it should be in the center.
Now no one even wants to hear the story that Nicholas II was well ... not a very good politician, and with his role as Tsar he coped lousy. Now Nicholas is a saint, and the whole imperial squabbling happened because there were only traitors around him. Now Rasputin is a candidate for saints. That is how the people are treated. I would show him a contradictory figure so that the viewer could decide what to think. Ask yourself, why do you need to whitewash Rasputin? But look, Nicholas Romanov is now almost officially presented as the Tsar-Martyr, who died for Russia devoted and slandered. Even in the documentary drama The Romanovs, the last Russian emperor was shown very carefully, bypassing all the sharp corners of his reign. He is a controversial and controversial figure in Russian history. As a result, after Nicholas was made a saint, one black spot remains in his biography - Rasputin. We must not allow the day of the “holy devil” to fall on the holy King. Then we must make Rasputin a saint. That’s the algorithm, apparently, acted the creators of “Gregory R.”.
“Rasputin is a Russian man, in every Russian there is Rasputin” – these words summed up the main character of the series, which led the investigation into the case of Rasputin.
The series has excellent attention to the details of history, although there are liberties, but this is a feature film, not a documentary, the series has excellent scenery and costumes, no less excellent actors, but Grigory R. has a bad main goal - to sanctify Rasputin.
I will not mention the fact that I did not like the weak presentation of the plot, the complete lack of intrigue and tension that reigned in that era, but it is clear that the directors tried and they lacked the ability to create historical series of the Western type, when you know the story, but it is still interesting to look at it!
6 out of 10
I waited quite a long time for this series, first of all, to compare with “Rasputin” performed by Depardieu. But after looking... No matter how comical and exaggerated the picture with Depardieu looked, and this series surpassed it.
First, the plot itself is designed to whitewash the image of the elder at all costs! Any scandalous case to turn in his favor was not understood. Let's say. This can be called a new reading, a vision of the author, if you will. After all, Rasputin’s identity is scandalous and controversial. Historians still do not agree to praise him or scold him. But his so-called “miracles” in this series are performed very implausibly. What does the axe scene cost?
Secondly actors. Everyone understands that it is impossible to find an exact copy of Gregory, Nicholas II, Alexandra Fedorovna, Vyrubova, etc. We were looking for good actors, not copies. V. Mashkov is not very similar to the cold-hearted person who looks at us from photographs, and his eternal “sudden” appearances at the most tense moment look stupid; V. Dyagtyar and I. Dapkunaite are simply not similar, although this is not critical; and here is the main thing - Vyrubova - E. Klimova!! I didn’t like Ekaterina Klimova, but this role is not hers! From my point of view, the pretty, beautiful actress was taken to this role with one goal - to show the image of the sufferer, which will further highlight Grigory R. In the photos, and in his memoirs, A. Vyrubov is a completely different person. At the same time, Klimova played well, what she was asked to play.
But the main thing that surprised me: Felix and Dmitry (V. Kosheva and N. Efremov). Honestly, I admire their game! The best duet of the series and the best Felix and Dmitry! Episode 7 was the most memorable, watched with true pleasure. And here it is important to say that I have no positive attitude towards such relations between men, but the way they played captivated me. Incredibly charismatic! I think it's the best thing to do.
And thirdly, and thirdly. The actual murder of Rasputin. What can I say? Nonsense! Where did this version come from? How about the logic of events? From the entire murder scene, only the moment when the “dead” elder grabs Felix is remembered. And in general... it was kind of sad... It's a depressing fiction. Was it worth coming up with something strange and boring, if one could perform one of the real versions of the murder of Rasputin, which would not cause melancholy? There are a lot of stories from that night.
P.S. For those of you who are familiar with history, I want to have a good laugh. It is foolish to take such “historical” films seriously. People far from history might like it.
I just didn’t expect such outright nonsense from Channel One. The film is extremely boring, hulkingly staged, replete with historical blunders and frank screenwriters' cut-offs and, most importantly, there are stunningly ridiculous cardboard dialogues written by people who have no idea about the era they are designed to embody on the screen.
Of the actors except Mashkov (who plays really well, but this does not save the picture) to single out absolutely no one. Smolyakov, such a feeling, has already grown into the role of a “man from organs”, this is the third film in my memory, in which he “conducts an investigation” (after “Vysotsky” and “Zonnentau”) and the feeling that he was just fed up with it. I personally just wanted to strangle Klimov with every appearance on the screen: firstly, because of her replicas, and secondly, the authors of this shydevr at least glanced at the photo of the real Vyrubova and at least glimpsed her memories. And then compare it with the character Klimova and killed themselves. Total inconsistency with the real person on all counts! About the love couple Dmitry-Yusupov is better to keep silent. As well as about the “stunning” scenario moves throughout the length of the picture.
The only thing I want to say is about the scene of the murder of the “elder”. I have read enough of Rasputin’s literature, there are several versions of what happened that night, all of which contradict each other to some degree. But what is shown in the film is not in any source known to me. Where did the authors get this? Again, drew inspiration from the source under the double name "finger-ceiling"? Yes, even in the memoirs of Yusupov everything looks much more logical and consistent than in this nonsense.
To sum up, this is one of the worst historical (or pseudo-historical) films I’ve ever seen. For dialogue – definitely a nomination for “Cranberries of the Year”. History lovers have nothing to watch here (if only to mock the idiocy taking place on the screen), and people who are “out of topic” will be frankly bored.
1 out of 10
I have been waiting a long time for this series to come out. I really wanted to see the point of view of Andrei Malyukov, about Rasputin. So this series came out. After watching it from beginning to end, I realized that it was a series in the style of Russia, which we lost. Only the famous song of the group “White Eagle” in the screensaver was missing.
Rasputin is shown here simply as a saint. Apparently, the screenwriters are supporters of the canonization of Grigory Efimovich. Here he works such miracles that you just do not cease to be surprised. And how they portrayed Rasputin's killers. He was killed by the homosex lobby of England and Russia. Think about it yourself, dear viewers. Even in the film with Depardieu, the motivation of the killers is shown more clearly. It also struck me that the writers mixed the sanctities and wonders of Rasputin with his alcoholism. I wanted to say that all people have shortcomings, but it turned out to be unclear what. I personally did not understand what Rasputin is represented here, because, due to the mixture of drunkenness and miracles, the hero turned out to be completely indistinct and it is impossible to understand his actions. It is also not very clear how Vyrubova, after a severe railway accident, is already walking with a stick a few months later. In fact, she still about 2 years went in a wheelchair, and then began to walk.
Now for acting. Mashkov bundles his eyes, tries to portray a rural dialect, but it all looks fake and wild, and somehow resembles his role as David Gotsman in Liquidation. Smolyakov has nothing to play here. Sit at your desk, dryly ask questions and draw pictures. That’s what he did in all eight episodes. I liked the duo of Koshevoy and the younger Efremov. They played homosexuals well. Shakunov also liked the role of Iliodor, but the role is very small, literally for five minutes of all screen time.
2 out of 10
Fortunately, or unfortunately, I have some weakness for historical film adaptations. If my ear or gaze hears news about the appearance on the screens of a fresh film based on a historical work, or based on the life of an iconic historical figure, my inquiring to historical facts mind immediately requires viewing this film. In most cases, my mind remains extremely upset and sometimes even outraged by the absence of those very facts in the work presented. And only in rare cases comes “mental satisfaction” from what you see. In the case of Gregory R., if not to say satisfaction, then certainly not disappointment. Next in order.
When writing reviews for historical screen adaptations, it seems advisable to go from the main idea of the work. In this case, I consider it appropriate to start with the image of the main character, since it is quite obvious that the series aims to reveal the identity, or rather the secret of the personality of Grigory Rasputin. The opinion of the director and screenwriters to the personality of the main character is very transparent. They see Rasputin as a great martyr and “holy elder” with healing power and assign him a significant role in the fate of the Russian state. Their opinion is very appropriate, since there is no clear idea of Rasputin and never will be. Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that the role of Rasputin in life, or rather in the death of the empire, is somewhat exaggerated. Needless to say, the figure was necessary. Had he not been created, he would have been created or created. Monarchists – to justify their powerlessness before the revolution, Bolsheviks – to denigrate the Romanov dynasty, contemporaries – to conduct pointless disputes. However, the main thing is not to forget that the character presented in the series is just an image created by the authors.
The plot of the work is quite well thought out. The chronology raises almost no questions. The creators resorted to a fairly common, but quite a winning technique for conducting the plot. Having one fictional, and in my opinion rather a collective image of the investigator against the background of real characters, the authors of the film take us through the vicissitudes of the fate of Elder Gregory with the help of an investigation, which, incidentally, did take place after the first Russian revolution of 1917. This is one of the historical facts I saw in the series. There are few of them that can not but rejoice. The version of the reasons for the murder of Rasputin is quite realistic, and indeed has its place in a series of other, also quite reasonable versions.
One way or another, after analyzing the main idea of the series and the plot, we move on to the cast. To be honest, I have no enthusiasm for the actors. I am not a professional in this matter, so here I am expressing a subjective point of view. For lack of rational evaluation criteria, I turn to my emotions caused by acting. Vladimir Mashkov in the role of Rasputin did not seem very organic to me. The view, which seems to have received a great deal of attention, is undoubtedly delightful. But that's not Rasputin's view. This is the look of Parfen Rogozhin from The Idiot, brilliantly played by Mashkov. Hence, some rejection of the image. Or maybe my vision of Rasputin somewhat does not coincide with the vision of the creators of the series. I do not want to dwell on the other roles in detail, because I did not see anything enchanting, and the general opinion about the acting has already been expressed above.
That’s all I want to say about this series. Against the background of the film with Deperdieu, he certainly looks more than worthy. But still, I would ask the audience not to forget that the film is not a documentary, and therefore the lion’s share of fiction has the right to be present in it.
Thank you very much.
P.S. How interesting it is that time changes public opinion about historical figures and events. But no, time does not change that view. The ruling power, with the help of its simple mechanisms, imposes on us a variant of events that is profitable for it. I wonder what they will say or show about Rasputin in 50 years?
Unlike the Soviet era, Rasputin’s life and role in history are no longer a mystery. The first swallow was Pikul’s novel “Unclean Power”, which has a solid documentary basis. Radzinsky’s book about Rasputin, based on the documents of the investigation of the Extraordinary Commission of the Provisional Government, would seem to have finally put an end to the description of the history of the Holy Devil.
But domestic directors are still tempted to make another film about him.
The first thing that catches the eye is a large number of fictional facts that in reality did not take place, such as Rasputin’s salvation of the life of Grand Duke Dmitry, Rasputin’s “fools”, brutally killing a woman who made attempts on him and others. To Tsar Rasputin in reality addressed not Kolya, and the Pope.
Rasputin performed by Mashkov turned out to be the complete opposite of Rasputin
Petrenko from Agony. Instead of a dashing political adventurer who likes to gully, he appears as a kind of statist, or even a rural intellectual, whose mind is always busy thinking about how to equip Russia. What is the scene where Rasputin scolds a stolen official? All this is aggravated by the fact that Mashkov looks little like a village peasant, not the texture.
Smolyakov, who plays the role of the investigator of the Extraordinary Commission, also looks rather weak. It doesn’t look like a provincial investigator.
As a result, the film turned out to be rather boring, especially against the background of Agony.
Screenshot of a slice of the life of the Mysterious Man of History.
I’m not a big fan of historical TV shows and I’m very skeptical. The series will always be slightly revised, not supplemented and delayed. I’ve been waiting for Rasputin since the beginning of the series. Let the film adaptation with Gerard Deparde turned out unsuccessful.
First of all, the series attracted me with the cast, namely: Vladimir Mashkov, Andrei Smolyakov and Nikita Efremov. All these actors to some extent were captured in great films.
In the second stage of creations about Grigory Rasputin in cinema is very small, and even then it often turned out to be purely scanty or similar films. But when I saw at the helm of the director Andrei Malyukov ("Saboteur, I am a Russian soldier, Kuprin.Duel), I immediately decided that Rasputin would turn out to be a good series, and I was not mistaken!
The story of the plot was a small excerpt from the life of Grigory Rasputin under Tsar Nicholas II. The narration is conducted on behalf of the investigator Heinrich Witten, who arrived specially for the investigation of the murder of the “devil”. During each episode, Sweeten learns more and more amazing and interesting from the life of an ordinary peasant and peasant Grigory Rasputin. The only question before him is, who is Rasputin? Hero or Enemy? It seems to me that each viewer will choose for himself.
The series “Rasputin” turned out to be high-quality, good, exciting and interesting from the first series. Vladimir Mashkov has a big bow, for the role of Gregory. He (unlike Depradier) is really similar to Rasputin, both externally and internally, acting at a height! I also note Andrei Smolyakov, who brilliantly and clearly played the role of a cold and secretive investigator. It is also worth noting the rest of the cast, all were pretty good and fit into the role. Glad. that "Rasputin" is not delayed for 20 episodes, and shot only 8. And this is enough: there is nothing superfluous, nothing more, everything corresponds to the usual mini-series. In addition to the advantages, there are also disadvantages. At first, I did not like the course of the story, the sharp jumps before the death of Gregory and after. It seems that it would be better to see Rasputin’s death at the end than at the beginning.
In general, Rasputin is a solid, wide and worthwhile picture, many thanks to the creators of the series that dared to film such a story. You did quite well. Maybe my grade will be exceeded, but for everything: