For a long time I was going to write about this film ... as, indeed, I was going to see.
For me, as for many, ' old ' Quiet Don'' is the standard screen adaptation of this work and compare all subsequent productions we will be with him, whether the directors want it or not, so the audience.
I read the book a year and a half ago, so the memories are fresh.
... The movie was a success!!
Playing actors does not create a dual view of their feelings, thoughts and experiences. And that's really important, because 99.9 percent of the movies don't get obsessed with it, and the directors pick the most in-demand and hyped actors who are almost nothing. Their facial expressions and gaze are almost always the same, whether it is a scene about love or the horror of war. And here, as Stanislavsky would say, I believe! I believe in what they play, believe in the love of Gregory with his eagle look to Aksinya, believe in the experience of Grigory’s mother, who comes to one of the foregrounds in the last series, believe even in Makovetsky, who in his own way well conveyed the image of Pantelei Prokofievich, even debutante Ursuliak looked convincing.
Watching series after series, I plunged deeper and deeper into the Cossack world and life of a hundred years ago and did not want to leave it.
Special thanks to the director for preserving the linguistic features inherent in the Cossacks of that time!
Evgeny Tkachuk - 10 points, Lyudmila Zaitseva - 10 points, Sergey Makovetsky - 9 points, Daria Ursuliak - 9 points.
The only thing I would like to change is the actress for the role of Aksinya. Not that she played badly - no, just Axinya - a very bright character and searing beauty would be welcomed. And for the game she - 10 points - I believe!
I recommend this series to everyone!
I read the novel twenty years ago, but I still remember almost everything in detail. Ursuliak’s film for me is not entirely accurate, but a very real adaptation, heartfelt, touching. His characters are real, you believe them and really care about them.
The series is modern, unlike anything else! All heroes are alive and real! The acting is excellent.
Special thanks to actor Evgeny Tkachuk, who played the role of Grigory Melekhov. I can't even tell when the last time I was so impressed by acting. In the episode of the wedding with Natalia, the guy showed with only his eyes and lips how much he regrets what is happening, as if he had just realized that happiness had just escaped him. And the episode when he cut wood when he left home! "Go away, you disliker." And this laughter with hoarseness, when Pantelei Prokofjic was carrying his son in a sleigh through the farm! "Motherland, Father!"
I wish you, Evgeny, many beautiful roles to the delight of the viewer and you.
To anyone who doesn’t like it, you’ve either read the book or you’ve been very biased.
Until now, Usruljak's films have been considered excellent. Elimination is a masterpiece. But the Quiet Don disappointed him very much.
And it's not even in some "#39; wrong" & #39; vision of the great work of Sholokhov. In the end, the reservation ' for reasons ' it allows. In my opinion, it is all about the elementary wrong selection of actors. Of course, anyone who has seen Gerasimov’s film has the right and will be compared to the actors who played in that film. But I am sure that Ursuliak and his team knew about this. This only makes the impression worse.
Well, does not pull Yevgeny Tkachuk for the role of Grigory Melekhov. There is no Cossack wisdom, Melekhov’s prudence, a constant search for the meaning of his life. Weaver for the role of Melekhov can be described in one word: small, not up to. Everything about Melekhov’s is, in my opinion, more or less a face. Everything else: height, voice, look, manner of holding – everything is wrong and all is wrong. And compared to Glebov, who played this role in the film Gerasimov, he is generally zero. Well, you can not give an actor such a role if, according to all the data, the actor’s role is a pickpocket or an assistant.
Aksinya performed by Polina Chernyshova. Next to Tkachuk, she is perceived as a younger sister. And therefore their love as, sorry for the expression, incest.
Well, she is still young for this role in a pair with such a much older partner of her. It's very noticeable. Besides, it's very refined. You can see the modern city dweller. And in these rural scenes she's just 'eye cuts'. And in dialogues with Gregory, this dissonance cuts the ear: its hypertrophied strong, and its strongly NOT ' Cossack' by pronunciation speech.
Natalia looks like a refined one too.
Daria's no good at all. Beauty and hot Cossack on the novel in the film she is ' gray' and expressionless. Those who saw Khityaeva in this role, I am sure that in shock.
Well, nothing bad can be said about Makovetsky - he is a master in everything. But sometimes he does too well.
In general, the film has some kind of playfulness, theatricality, artificiality. There's no naturalness in it. However, this is probably a scourge of all modern films of such dramatic genres.
There are a lot of complaints about music. Some musical themes do not fit with what is happening on the screen somehow unnaturally their ' amusing' and making it look like something vaudeville.
Sholokhov, Nobel Prize, Quiet Don
9th grade, we were forced to read this "Galimatya" on vacation. Personally, as a "five" in literature, in order to maintain my authority, I bought a "short summary of works" (in my opinion, this manual was called) and then enthusiastically ranted at exams about "female images in Russian literature." It has probably been twenty years since then, and now, in search of new products, I drew attention to the series “Quiet Don”. Before that, naturally read a lot of negative reviews and was ready for a frank “fuck” on the screen, especially after snot about the Sovdepov film (to be honest I did not watch) but... A very unusual feeling: young and unknown to me actors got so used to and perfectly played their roles (even played them in a good way) that I watched the scenes that hooked, and there were many of them. That’s what I expected from modern Russian cinema. Bravo Sergey Ursuliak!
8 out of 10
I watched the series on New Year’s holidays. I didn't regret it. At first, I confess, I was in the camp of those who shouted: “I will not look on principle!!!!” Gerasimov shot better anyway! And that's all fu! After watching the 1st series, there was no hope for the best, but after the 2nd it became clear that the film was worth watching, and I was so excited at first.
The desire to compare with the tape of 1957 in his favor by the 3rd series has gone completely and irrevocably. I just watched and immersed myself in the atmosphere. Picturesque landscapes, nature, music, Cossack talk, and even elementary household accessories like cups-spoons - all this hollowly transports you to the Cossack farm to these people, to their families and makes you empathize with their tragedies. Of course, without acting, everything would be meaningless, but the actors cope.
I will not be original if I mention E. Tkachuk and S. Makovetsky (although his Pantelei Prokofievich turned out to be a wayward grumpy grandfather rather than a tyrant and commander, as in the 1957 tape). P. Chernyshova - thin from her turned Aksinya. However, this is the problem of all female images of this film adaptation. But Chernyshova is convincing. Temperamental, ardent, brazen. The chemistry between her and Tkachuk was felt. Bystritskaya got a slightly different Aksinya, outwardly more colorful, and internally more restrained. Natalia (D. Ursuliak) I liked it. The image of an unhappy loving woman she conveyed. And here is Vedenskaya as Daria... The energy may be the same. But on all counts, Khityaeva wins. It's 100% her role. Her look, her movements, her way of speaking, everything was convincing and there was nothing superfluous. Vedenskaya was missing something. She is petty for this role, not textured and not as royal as Khityaeva. Dunyasha (N. Lumpova) is Dunyasha. In a good way. I liked this beautiful and brave girl. Played correctly.
In addition, impressed N. Efremov. His Korshunov is a violent killer, cutting people more for fun and fun. His crazy maniac look is hard to forget. And, of course, Arthur Ivanov in the role of Peter amazingly revealed the image. I personally felt sorry for his hero more than others. I have a feeling for him.
I actually told you about everyone I wanted. I liked the movie, I got hooked. And that, I think, is a good indicator. There were emotions, there were tears in my eyes. I'll put a strong
At once: I do not agree with either two or dozens. Fair middle work. Medium, no lower, no higher. The main character is the quiet Don himself. Beautiful. Handsome as hell. And in the rays of the summer sun, and in the fog, and under the gray winter sky. And people don't always make it. It is unfortunate that there is no Turkish blood in the Melekhovs. This is not superfluous at all, and Sholokhov emphasized more than once. And even in Eudokia, the main problem is not colorless hair, but colorless temperament. Everything is done, from the director’s words. It's not convincing.
Passion and power in the characters (truly Shakespearean) are hidden deep under the bush and rarely break through. For the 14th episode!
And terrible pauses. Without denying their usefulness (according to Stanislavsky’s teaching), I reproach Ursuliak for being excessive. Too frequent and too long.
Where your heart freezes when reading a novel, you look at the screen almost indifferently. For example, Natalia prayed in the rain for the death of Gregory. I was especially annoyed by the music. It's just a cry!
There was no scream of Daria before her death: 'Goodbye, butterflies!' Why?
And there was no black sun in the black sky after the death of Axinha. Or a frame equal in strength. In my opinion, the final (with a stake of the dead and a hacked Austrian) did not work at all.
Sorry.
I watched the series and want to share my impressions. In my opinion, the film adaptation as a whole turned out very, very good. There are inaccuracies and deviations from the original source (although where are they not?), but they are not annoying.
Grigory - Eugene Tkachuk. Honestly, I imagined this hero quite different. In Sholokhov, Grishka’s appearance is described very vividly, and the image of a dark-eyed black-eyed guy, beautiful with wild Turkish beauty, stands before his eyes. However, I do not see any of the modern actors in the role of Melekhov, perhaps the director should look for a suitable type in provincial theaters or even go to neighboring countries. Tkachuk plays quite unevenly - in some episodes I did not like him at all, in others, on the contrary, he was very convincing. But towards the middle of the film, the actor got so used to the role that I stopped paying attention to the external discrepancy. In my opinion, Tkachuk wonderfully showed the growing up of Grishka, his transformation from a frivolous cheerful guy into a grown man who went through the whole meat grinder of the Civil War.
Aksinya - Polina Chernyshova. At the moment, this is my favorite Axinha. By the way, I didn’t really like her on the promo shots, but when I saw her on the screen, I immediately thought – what an interesting and memorable face. Polina is not at all like serial actresses, there is something special in her, "from that era" - as if she came down from an old photo. Its beauty is not catchy, but very light and watercolor - dark blond hair, deep blue eyes, white skin. The actress plays simply and naturally, I never doubted her sincerity. In this Aksinya, femininity is combined with stubborn and desperate character, and a certain teenage rudeness and sharpness - with touching and tenderness. The image was revealed completely, and although the backstory of the heroine was left behind, I was able to believe in her past and in the terrible tragedy she experienced. But, of course, the canonical Aksinya should be more bright, lively, temperamental, and Chernyshova just lacks this brightness, besides, in some difficult emotional scenes, the young actress did not reach the desired level.
Makovetsky as Pantelei Prokofievich did not impress me at all. According to the book, it was a cruel and domineering man, who was even somewhat afraid of home, in the film we see a completely harmless and even somewhat funny old man - the image turned out to be too comical, this is not Pantelei Prokofievich, but rather grandfather Shchukar. Ilyinichna (Lyudmila Zaitseva) really liked the decent acting work, although I still feel closer to A. Filippova’s play in the old film. Dunya from a slender black-eyed beauty in the film turned into an awkward white-haired teenager (it is interesting that the actress’ hair is naturally dark, she was lightened specifically for the role – that is, I personally do not understand what the director was guided by). However, closer to the second half of the series, I got used to this heroine, Lumpova plays quite decently, and her interpretation of the image of Dunyashi is also very interesting. Petro is quite canonical and good - cheerful, charming, somewhat stupid.
Daria (Anastasia Vedenskaya) deserves special praise - this is just a hit in the top ten. Daria in this film turned out to be bright, life-loving, daring, cunning and unhappy in her own way. Her careless playfulness does not turn into rudeness or vulgarity, and the image as a whole turned out to be very attractive.
Good and Natalia (D. Ursuliak). The girl plays very decently; I know that many people did not like the appearance of Natalia, but I thought this heroine was very pretty. A modest hardworking girl, a faithful wife and a loving mother – this is exactly what Sholokhov’s Natalia should be.
There are deviations from the original source, Shtokman’s line was removed from the film adaptation, events in Petrograd did not show, Bunchuk became an episodic character, Anna Pogudko does not exist at all.
In general, I would like to rate this series at .
6.5 out of 10
However, each of the four adaptations of TD has its pros and cons, probably in the nth number of years we will see the fifth version.
We crawled on bumps from one small town to another. From one office to another. Disgusting way, disgusting order. My roommate had just buried a loved one and was now busy with bureaucratic chores by inheritance. How old was your mother, I asked to start the conversation. One hundred and one, she replied. Wow, I said. No, my companion sighed intermittently, could live more - fell, injured her hip neck, the operation went well, thanks to the surgeon that decided, but the body did not want to live on. Seeing the tears in her eyes flashing, I hurried to change the subject - did you see the new Quiet Don on TV yesterday, asked after a pause. She nodded. So how? I liked it, she said, very much. Then, all the way, we talked only about the movie.
The lady was very knowledgeable. By profession, a doctor (surgery nurse, that's why the surgeon decided), she considered it in the order of things to be aware of the affairs of cinema. I knew that Tkachuk (based on the film Grigory Melekhov) works for Evgeny Mironov in the Theatre of Nations, saw him in the White Studio on the Culture channel (I did not see him). And how do you like the new Gregory and Aksinya? Good, but... still not compared with Glebov and Bystritskaya. I like these, I said. Your will, she replied. It turned out that my neighbor saw the long-suffering “Silent Don” by Sergei Bondarchuk. So how, I asked. Bondarchuk is not to blame, he was imposed the will of foreign producers, forced in the role of Melekhov to remove a gay, she said. You know that, I was surprised. She shrugged. In turn, I said that I was amazed at the language of the novel and how easily it is naturally spoken by modern young artists. But whose language is it and who is the author of Quiet Don? At one time there was a lot of talk that the young Sholokhov got the wrong diary, or the manuscript of the white officer who made the main sketches of the novel. Mikhail Alexandrovich, they say, just brought them to mind, I said. Bullshit, she replied bluntly. I've read it, but I don't believe a word. The author of “The Quiet Don” Sholokhov and only Sholokhov, do not repeat other people’s nonsense. I did not get involved in the discussion, and the time for a conversation has run out - here we are.
Preamble
But when he returned home, he tried to bring together his scattered thoughts on the road. Before the premiere, I was, to put it mildly, against Ursuliak’s (or anyone else’s) intention to reread Quiet Don. Not very successful remakes of recent years (the same "Irony of Fate"), it seemed, had to discourage normal, without mental illness directors (with any name) to encroach on film monuments. It is necessary to have the brains to get to know, so that after Glebov and Bystritskaya to imagine someone in this golden duet, I thought to myself in a rag. You can look around as much as you like, put your hand to the visor and auk in the darkness - in response, there will be silence. There is no one even close to the great shadows of the past (however, Bystritskaya is still alive, God give her health, she is still unusually beautiful even in her “80s”). And yet it is necessary to have in the asset (buy) something more weighty than just an adventurous desire to shoot into the past.
Such an asset for Sergei Ursuliak was the Liquidation. A killer argument against skeptics (including me). A strong card in the director's buyout. I think she decided everything - a) in the office, where they gave the "Open" for the shooting, and b) in another office, where they gave money for this matter, and a lot.
Assets and liabilities
I'll start with music. This is a liability, a flaw, or rather, something that is not to my liking: the work of the composer, especially in the first three series, simply upset and annoyed. When she, this music, was still on hearing, did not go into the background. Well, she doesn't fit in with the folklore of the novel. Salon, waltz, Viennese, not Stanis, not Veshenskaya, not Don - no offense be said. By the end, however, things had settled down, and the rumor already perceived the musical edge of the film even with a certain amount of pleasantness.
But in the asset fresh acting blood. It is even surprising that Ursuliak did not drag the Odessa arba loaded with participants of the Liquidation (except Makovetsky, who, however, being eliminated in the initial series, left a greedy appetite in himself). And naturally appeared in the new film Director. In the charismatic (there is something to cling to, there is something to play) role of the lame old man Melekhov. I must say (as it turns out now), the lame horse did not spoil the furrow.
And yet drew the film, became his main luck the image of Gregory, created by Evgeny Tkachuk. Somehow, the slob “created” and “image” do not even fit in with what happens in the film. It seems that Tkachuk was always like this - with a compressed (not theatrical) voice, with an explosive temperament, with a cunning, not showy leadership (after all, he rose to the ranks of considerable near the hereditary noble officers and did not blunder in the Red Army). From such human material, one must believe, the Motherland is built.
Of the failures – the love of Ursuliak in the image of Gregory (it is noticeable). Because of this, it seems that Aksinya suffered, she receded into the shadows. A particularly sad ending is her death. He passed casually. I remember how the soul acheed in my youth, when I read the novel – and in the film Gerasimov it survived. So the nightingales sang for my beloved heart Davydov - this line from another work of Sholokhov one in one falls on "The Quiet Don", only the author left it at our discretion. Ursuliac, preoccupied with Gregory's fate, ignored her. With the death of Axigny - the only woman of Gregory, his heavenly half - finally (to top off all his troubles) the meaning of life for him disappeared. The world finally collapsed. Remained only ruins - and no strength, no desire to raise all over again,
The movie breathes Don. Hills and ravines, hamlets and villages are not Potemkin villages, everything from the novel, everything is real. It is the series with its ability to suck the details to the brain bone is able to create on the screen the spirit and letter of the great Russian literature. The director is right.
So, sum up. The shot in the past (with some reservations) turned out to be successful, almost at the bull’s eye. No casualties. And Gerasimov's pedestal survived. And Ursuliak's reputation was unaffected. Love.
By the way, Ursuliak, a few minutes before the premiere on the Rossiya TV channel, solemnly promised to completely switch to television series. It's gonna happen. Maybe it will encroach on “War and Peace” (the second largest after “TD” material for the remake) – a series of such 200? Nothing can be ruled out. We live in a strange time, gentlemen.
Recently, more and more movies and TV series appear on the screens of cinemas and televisions, created on the basis of already existing, well-known, old Soviet tapes. Remakes, as such products are called, offer us a look at films of the past, a new look, in the conditions of modern technologies and trends in art. The presence of computer graphics, special effects, as well as the ability to create cinema in a framework free from excessive pressure of censorship and ideology, really opened wide horizons for domestic film production.
I would like to dwell on the recently released new adaptation of the novel – the epic of Mikhail Sholokhov “The Quiet Don”.
The production of Sergei Gerasimov in 1958 is a standard of Soviet cinema, a classic of world cinema. In addition, the author himself - Mikhail Sholokhov - took part in the creation of the film. The selection of actors, the filming process, the development of the script, the imprint of the writer lies on everything. Performers of the main roles - Grigory Melekhov and Aksinya - Glebov and Bystritskaya, gained all-Union fame and love of the audience. In addition to the talented author’s, director’s work, and the actor’s transformation, the very time of the film’s release made a noticeable contribution. 1958. For most contemporaries of that era, the tradition of the 1917 revolution, the civil war, is still fresh. Many of these events affected. If the witnesses of those fateful days were mostly over 40, then the youth remembered this from the stories of older family members. Given the number of dead and participating in the civil war, there was no one who was not affected in one way or another by the horror and terror of those years.
Comparing these details, the film was a successful adaptation of the novel. Positive reviews of critics and sensational popularity among the people, firmly strengthened the "Quiet Don" Gerasimov in the treasury of world cinema.
Sergei Ursuliak’s modern production was met with irony and skepticism at the stage of production. "Evono, where are you going?" Shalesh! - this was the opinion of critics, if you stylize it under the dialect of the heroes of the novel. Remaking a masterpiece is difficult and obviously disastrous. Was anyone going to reshoot? Especially such a talented and intellectual director as Sergey Ursuliak. A new look at the old things, a modern understanding of history, the excitement of interest in the novel of youth, and, finally, the appearance on the screen among the monotonous and worn-out series about love and “cops”, the film adaptation of the classic work – the goals are quite understandable and noble.
And the current production of Quiet Don is not a remake, not a parody, it is a new look at the events read and experienced on those pages. Of course, people who grew up on this film will not be able to free themselves from those emotions and impressions caused by the Soviet film. It was more about young people and middle-aged people. So this is the skill of the director, in the complexity, originality and ambiguity of the work. If in art you do not walk on the edge, then what an art.
Many questions, even before the start of the rental, caused the selection of actors. If Makovetsky and Zaitseva fit into such a serious film adaptation, then unknown names of young actors increased the negative mood of the audience. Tkachuk, Chernyshova, Yatsenko and many other names first appeared in the credits of a big movie.
But there was a positive moment in the filming period, which instilled some optimistic notes. Filming took place on the Don, in the Rostov region in the village of Yelanska, not far from the places where the main events of the novel take place. This fact contributed to the correct perception, and assumed the reflection of a realistic picture of nature and situation from the life of the Don Cossacks.
The film was released in the form of a 14-series film on one of the federal channels of the country.
From the first minutes of the series, it became clear that Ursuliak was not going to “mock” the classics, and worked out the script neatly and painlessly for the original text.
High-quality shooting, beautiful musical accompaniment, the use of modern editing tools, created a pleasant shell for the development of the main events. There are downsides. Color correction was made so that the picture remotely resembled a cartoon, too many bright and yellow tones. And slightly cut the ear stylized accent of the characters. Actors are not very confident and naturally felt when pronouncing Cossack dialectical phrases and sentences. Although, at some point, you stop paying attention to this, as if the performers themselves eventually got used to a new essentially language.
The actors are young and unfamiliar. But that's more of a plus. There is no habituality, and the characters themselves are young and inexperienced, especially in the first volume of the novel. In this vein, even Glebov is rather slightly knocked out by his maturity than Tkachuk, who in the course of the picture really grew and grew up, like Grigory Melekhov himself. One thing can be said about Aksinya, Bystritskaya cannot be repeated or beaten. Polina Chernyshova did not strive for this, she, according to Stanislavsky, tried to completely miss the image through herself. Axinya turned out to be alive, original, but not bright.
Nikita Efremov was invited to the role of Mitka Korshunov. In temperament, the actor and his hero coincide. However, the image of Nikita - a merry man, a shirt-guy, emerging from a cereal establishment somewhere in the Arbat area, prevented him from believing his reincarnation in the Don Cossack.
Makovetsky in the role of Pantelei Prokopyevich, looked as always bright and confident. Actor with a capital letter, according to status. At times, he replayed, sometimes in scenes of rage, the image of a businessman from the equally odious picture “Brother-2” popped up. Overall, the character was successful.
Another good thing is that the actors handle horses very well and skillfully. This indicates a lot of work done in the filming process. Ursuliak demanded complete reincarnation and truthfulness, and what kind of Cossack who does not know how to jump on a horse with one dashing movement and gracefully gallop?
A big mistake that affected the ratings and success of the series was the broadcast within the federal channel. The older generation compared with 1958 and switched in horror to another program, the young, unaware of the existence of the TV, ignored the premiere. Perhaps the format of the series, stretched, to some extent “soapy”, scared off most of the audience. But such epics with one full-length film cannot be removed, the plot of the novel is too wide and eventful.
But one task Ursuliak fulfilled in full. It may be a failure and criticism. There was a new wave of interest in Sholokhov’s great novel. Someone wanted to read for the first time to understand what the hype was about, someone wanted to refresh their memory and re-read it again to calm their nerves and plunge into the original text, which certainly does not cause doubt. But the main thing to remember is that the classics are eternal, and even if, in someone’s opinion, not quite successful films make us re-read books again and again, touch the works of great authors, experience emotions and feelings of heroes, then the main goal of cinema is fulfilled, namely, the education of the highest spiritual values of our soul, our people.
Especially for the release of this series read Quiet Don (ashamed to admit – did not read). I haven’t seen a movie of the Quiet Don yet. After reading it, I looked at both Gerasimovsky and Ursuliak and even tried to watch (but couldn’t) the Bondarchuk version. In general, the mini-series turned out to be good. Good music (symphonic). True, it draws mainly due to the arrangement, not the beauty of the leitmotifs. But at the end of the film, it seems, it begins to touch the soul. The topic of Cossack songs is revealed, this is undoubtedly a plus. Also, the advantages can be attributed to the apolitical position of the film adaptation, which is now rare.
But the types of the main characters were pumped up. Especially women. Aksinya, both in type and in the game (Sholkhov’s Aksinya), was simply not in this film. Natalia is very scary in my opinion. Babs Ursuliak strongly lose to the women of the Quiet Don Gerasimov. Also slightly strained from the first frames the appearance of the two main characters with false noses and without any hint of turret in appearance. That Tkachuk that Makovetsky (actors with light! eyes) played well, but in my opinion, you could look for someone with a more suitable appearance. But very pleased with the image of Peter Melekhov. And the rest of the Cossacks are good (Stepan Astakhov, Korshunov son and father).
The main trump card of the film is its format of the series, because it is impossible in 3-4 episodes to fit at least more or less clearly the entire chain of events of Sholokhov's epic. But strangely enough, this film adaptation seemed to me an attempt to make an “extended version” TD Gerasimov, not Quiet Don Sholokhov. It is clear that 14 episodes will not be enough, but you could try to squeeze some of the events described in the novel into the film. There is such a feature in cool films, when the plot from some point begins to accelerate, rolling like a mountain to the end. And Sholokhov in the last parts of TD it is present, and in the film I did not feel it. And in the last scene, when Gregory returns home, he just falls to the base face to the ground. It’s a tough ending, of course, but I think it was very important to show how he hugged his son, the last man who kept him on this earth.
P.S. I understand that this is a utopia, that everything depends on time, finances, and sometimes talent ... but damn it, sometimes you want to make a film Quiet Don, an epic film (on a scale similar to the Lord of the Rings) without compromise, where there would be real battle scenes, where there would be huge extras (or special effects) of the great retreat to the south of the White Guards and the civilian population, where there would be real dirt, typhus, lice, blood ... that wild naturalism to convey the scale and depth of suffering that fell to the lot of the Cossacks (and the entire Russian people) in those terrible years. Sholokhov's Quiet Don is worth it.
It's a rare time I've been so distressed watching a series. Usually, if I didn’t catch it from the first three episodes, then I don’t look any further. But then the “position obliged”: another adaptation of the great book. So that it did not turn out that “I did not look, but I condemn”, I had to endure.
Casting's bad. A good actor Makovetsky does not fit categorically either externally or in temperament. Vladimir Mashkov would be fine.
Weaver by age to Grigory Melekhov more or less suitable, but looks unconvincing: and the conversation is strange to hear, and confidence is not enough.
Women seemed to deliberately choose the exact opposite of what is described in the book. Black-eyed, dark-haired beauties-Cossacks - Aksinho, Dunyashka played blond blue-eyed girls. Daria Ursuliak tried as hard as she could, but in dramatic scenes she was underweight. Lyudmila Zaitsev for the role of Ilyinichna is not suitable: it should be younger and full.
Nikita Efremov played well. Not bad performers of supporting roles: Natalia's parents, merchant, Peter Zykov.
Most of the novel was not included in the series: it feels like they shortened the script of the Gerasimov film adaptation, and did not want to bring something new from the book. I don't think I've read the book.
The last scenes - all these jogging in the underworld in the village with visions of women and children - generally left in disbelief.
In general, the film of the average level of numerous domestic melodramas, which are so rich channel “Russia-1”. The great book was reduced to a female novel.
I'd rather be drowned in Don than married so early.
A beautiful expanse of fields, horses with a herd, Don is majestic, the Cossacks’ talk, songs and dance, the mowing is wonderful. . . hay smells, and above all this thick, beating in the nostrils, the aroma of the craving of a physical love incredible force, one that for life, for everything it is spread.
And love is sinful – young, married and stanitsa is small for reasoning, shame for male pride, and sweetness is so great.
- At least kill, and Grishka is mine, Aksinya is angry at the reproaches of her father-in-law. And there is no other way, even if the wife is not good, even if it is bad.
- You fool, Axinya. There's nothing to listen to. Well, where I will go from the farm, again to serve me this year ... I will not go anywhere from the ground, Grigory objects in his hearts, tearing himself out of hot hands and boiling water kisses. This is a story about the despair of passion that happened.
Aksinya then, bud freshness, beauty on the rise, oval face untouched by sadness and tender lips, eyes open for happiness and then the shadow of pain ran from an unknown country called Love. Bushka - nose hump, lips tightened, whirlwind, and the soul then breaks, feeling separation.
It's raining outside. A beautiful couple and warmth in the upper room, but the parting is close: the husband, bent on jealousy, walks home on foot both in disgrace and in the mud, lying in a ridiculous clash with Melekhov the elder. Baba is a berry, the beloved wife did not wait for the narrowed and fury the exit is terrible.
Would kill Stepan, the one that honor the man did not observe, but to the cries of Axigny ran Gregory and his brother, and after them and the floor of the village — to separate. Oh, the sunset is bloody over the Don, and the water is in the glimpses of the heavenly fire and even greater trouble is rolling on the Don lands, oh, what a terrible, merciless, most cruel war is a civil war.
About the Cossack-kulak and kul torture, for which it is not terrible to die
From the very beginning, I want to note that the epic series of Ursuliak is not a film based on the Don novel by Sholokhov, but a movie based on the tape of Sergei Gerasimov. Still, you need to be more honest, if you take the book as a basis, so you can at least deduce a prologue - who are the Melekhovs ... And not one-to-one reshooting the Soviet masterpiece of the late 50s, slightly changing the mise-en-scene and shifting the accents “from left to right”, however, with some addition of naturalistic moments (for timekeeping), sculpting an allegedly eternally topical classical tragedy, timed to coincide with its next film adaptation to the anniversary of the late Nobel laureate. The Melekhovs, by the way, if anyone forgot - the Turks, so the relevance, we can say, is more eloquent than anywhere else.
On the other hand, the director admitted in an interview that the ideal viewer of his TV series is a person who not only did not watch the old versions of Quiet Don, but also did not read the book of Mikhail Alexandrovich (probably did not study at school), that is, the events of the work and the drama of the characters are unknown to him at all. In general, the ideal viewer should be like a Cossack - I cannot read and write, but I live with strong emotions and am baptized on all four sides.
Who are the Cossacks – history knows, as already mentioned above – it is largely semi-literate, and even illiterate people, crowded traditionally along the borders (to make it easier to raid the border of Russia state), served at different times to the one who “whistle louder”, from Polish and Ukrainian panoves to bloody “white” Russian tsars. Motherland as such did not have, they valued exclusively private property and only for her native could go to the brutal death. We are Asians, yes, we are Asians.
In his television film, Ursuliak removed a very important phrase, either deliberately noticing, or in order to idealize the Cossacks (perhaps for a "long money" from surrogate Cossack funds) - "Cossack is not Russian." Sholokhov wrote about the tragedy of the Don Cossacks against the background of the alarming reformation of a huge country, and not about Russia, which someone lost there. Therefore, it is necessary to turn a little angle and understand that the Don was the war of the Russians against the Cossacks. Although in the tape in places there were references to the fact that Khokhly, and Jews, and Muscovites – all as one enemy of the orthodox Cossacks.
At the same time, the film is quite spectacular in the picture, the fields artificially planted with wheat are hit not in the eyebrow, but in the eye with Vangog shades of yellow, and the landscapes of a typical Don make it possible for nature to shoot the film itself for the director. Artistically interesting is the finale of the picture, where Gregory wanders around the field past the ghosts of his relatives and friends. As always, the failure was: battle scenes from the series “eight by eight”, or extras were not found, or the Cossack hundred really consisted of fourteen people, a binding musical theme that stretched the scene to melodramatic indecency and squeezed tears even from the dead, and some discrepancy in the appearance and character of the actors type Sholokhov characters.
Here, for example, the artist Tkachuk - Grigory, with a great stretch and squinting eye outwardly can go for Melekhov and of course, although the height is small and the straightening is barefoot, but as soon as he opens his mouth, everything ... - a bullish freier from the film Alien. Chernyshov’s citizen is Aksinya, a gray mouse so inconspicuous that it seems her role in this film of some third plan. Ursuliak – Natalia, here from the series “himself climbed, now her woman drags”, in this case, the daughter. It is difficult to believe that this skinny, stubby Jew is an adorn Don Cossack who gave birth to twins. Makovetsky – Pantelei, here the level of talent is huge, but externally – Sergey Vasilyevich does not look like a lame dry-coupled grandfather. Yatsenko – Koshevoy, the main introvert of the modern Russian art house, is completely inadequate to the image of the “red devil”, as the director of the picture wanted his hero to make. And you can walk through almost every person...
The first series of seven is noticeably better than the subsequent ones, a strange irregularity seems to rise to the desire to be “sculpted” into at least three fragmentary parts. Many scenes should have been completely omitted: well, why these births in the field, these burning farm huts and this naked female breast? Mr. Ursuliak, you are a television director, not a terry actionist, be thinner in taste!
In conclusion, I remembered the famous song of victory – “Cossacks in Berlin” (" Go, go around Berlin, our Cossacks) authored by the brothers Pokrass and Caesar Solodor. It seems to me that it was the children of Mikhail Koshevoy who drove around the German capital, while the children of Grigory Melekhov were in parts of the “Cossack camp”, uniting the Cossacks as part of the Wehrmacht and the SS.
6 out of 10
The whole first series involuntarily passes in comparisons.
But then. Gradually. The film takes the soul and does not let go until the very end.
All in one breath and an impassable lump in the throat.
It's hard to explain. I have never heard of Gerasimov.
And here... Maybe it's a sense of time. Sergei Ursuliak and all of us. It seems that today it is brighter and more painful than in 58, when here — black, here — white, and the best of the Soviet Union is yet to come.
It seems that we feel more acutely today. Timeless. Their pain and fear, and "Is there anything that's lasting and everlasting in a world where everything goes to hell at breakneck speed?" And everything is so human, Lord.
I don't like syllables. It's impossible here. The film was so capacious and piercingly emotional.
Due to constant comparisons and reviews, many advantages of modern interpretations are often overlooked. In advance, you can be sure that the new film adaptation will not like the older generation, who are in love with the Gerasimov film. But I am a man of another generation and I have a very different view.
The main advantage of the new film adaptation is an amazing game of actors. She is incredibly sincere, even if not quite the usual sound of the Cossack dialect can interrupt this feeling, then only for a second, because the acting compensates for everything. They got into their roles as much as they could in a television series. But they did it so talented and excellent that it is difficult not to penetrate.
Gregory seemed to come off the pages of the book - both in appearance and behavior. Perhaps sometimes it was too hard to hear the imitation of the Cossack dialect, but the character – hot-tempered and impulsive in youth, calm and reasonable in adulthood – was transmitted to the end. The same “starry” in the look, well, of course, they tried to bribe with this “kite nose” and dark curly hair. They focused on their relationship with Peter. Gregory in conversations with his brother is shown to be vulnerable and feeling. In relations with other heroes, his firmness (with subordinates, father in some moments) and at the same time softness (with relatives, children, Aksinya) are not missed. The development of the hero at the life stage is very noticeable - it is enough to compare how Evgeny Tkachuk played a frenzied brother Gregory and a desperate man 10 years later, when Aksinya dies - one of the last people close to him.
Aksinya is supposed to be older than Gregory, but they look like one-year-olds. But his acting and attempt to get used to the image managed to perceive the heroine as she should be. At first, she could not believe the fact that she was not automatically associated with Bystritskaya, but then Aksinya was recognized from the book, especially in her conversations with Natalia. Polina Chernysheva created another image of Aksinya, not echoing Bystritskaya’s performance, as much as she could because of experience. And I think she did the job.
In Dunyashka, the liveliness and mobility of the heroine and her relationships with family members - daughters-in-law and brothers, especially with Gregory, are sincere and loving.
Nikita Efremov opened up in this role for me from a completely different side, because before that I saw him in positive images (Misha from Londongrad, Igor from Rehearsals, Romashov in Kuprin.Duel), and here the character is negative. When Korshunov came to Koshevoy’s mother for execution, it was frightening to look at him himself, with his brutal and terrible eyes. As a symbol of all the Bolshevik forces represented in the novel, Kosheva became even more significant and full-fledged, mainly due to visual effects - for example, in the episode where the Red troops enter the village, and from the smoke and fire Kosheva appears as one of the horsemen of the apocalypse.
Prokofievich was clearly conceived as the main humor element of the series. Added to his character even more kindness, simplicity and some childishness. However, the fearfulness and influence of this man on Gregory and at home did not diminish; everything else from the character of the hero is conveyed as accurately and naturally as possible.
About Natalia and spins in the language to say that the role was received for free. Well, it seems very much at the beginning she is faded, timid and silent. Unshared love for Gregory played her wonderfully, but mainly at the level of gestures and facial expressions. Then the play of the actress begins to accelerate and seem natural and similar to her character - in conversations with Aksinya, Dunyashka, Daria, and then with Grigory. And finally manages to calm down, realizing that the daughter of the director still managed to justify her hopes.
The operators did a very high-quality and excellent work. Especially for shooting the views of the Don, fields and steppes. It is through bright, rich in color and serene landscapes that pre-war life on the Quiet Don is transmitted, life is carefree and cheerful. And battle scenes with all their small number are filmed so that they are impressive and look in all eyes. Perhaps, to some extent, because we managed to wean ourselves from the battles on blades. Therefore, the episodes of fighting, cutting people alive with checkers, the murder of an Austrian soldier by Gregory are so spectacular and at the same time incredibly large-scale.
“The Quiet Don” stood out with memorable and peculiar music, where the same motif has several different variations and sounds too often in scenes, managing to get a little nauseous. But the music is still catchy and touching.
Inconsistencies in the book on trifles - the first conversation of Natalia and Aksinya did not pass through the fence, Natalia gave birth to children on her own, Listnitsky returned from the war without an arm and so on. The plot lines of Listnitsky in Petrograd, the Bolsheviks Bunchuk and Shtokman, the participation of historical personalities - Kornilov and Kerensky are omitted. But thanks to this, all attention is focused on the Melekhov family and what is happening in the Cossack village. I was also pleased that the characters often spoke with quotes from the novel. Someone it seems that the screenwriters have no imagination, but here by themselves when viewing phrases from the book were pulled out and they were immediately pronounced by the characters on the screen, which brought even closer to what was happening and reminded of the novel.
I'm not an expert, but I thought the Cossacks and their way of life were plausible. In particular, in the beginning, when we are shown to ride horses Cossacks, who are quite freely and skillfully mastering the technique of riding, that on a horse they are on a level surface - so casually, without difficulty and directly; and also the ceremonies of matchmaking and wedding, in the latter especially the jump from the church on carts, when the Cossacks manage horses as deftly and easily as they ride them. In general, this moment is played perfectly in the film: the relationship between the Cossacks and their horses shows their skillful handling of horses and the fact that horses are an integral part of Cossack life.
The series was shot very well in all criteria - acting, music, camera work, scenery and following the source. This film adaptation is similar to the neat and diligent work of an excellent student - everything is strictly according to the rules, nothing superfluous, no going beyond, and within this framework everything is perfect. The only thing missing was the peppermint itself - such a sense of completeness and staffing. But within a TV series format, this is hardly achievable. A hundredth of the decisive drama was lacking.
Summing up, I want to say that the series was shot specifically for the growing and young generation, who find it difficult to watch Gerasimov’s film due to a different upbringing and trend of the time. But fortunately, it was removed on conscience, with maximum efficiency, sincerely and touching.
10 out of 10
The 1957 film is a good theatrical production. The voiced version of the film Pyryev and in color.
Glebov – Grigory is a tall, age-old artist. That's why I don't like this movie. If you regard it as a theatrical production, then it is great that old people can play in the theater. When I see his Grishka, I look for a remote to switch the TV. Well, I can't see it.
Bystritskaya is the choice of Sholokhov and this is all said. In texture and appearance ideal. But - the next films Bystritskaya and everywhere the manner of playing Aksinya. The ideal for me is in this role of Nonna Mordyukova. This is how I see Axinha. Unfortunately, she wasn't allowed to play. And Bystritsk clone of the first film adaptation - that accepted the standard. I don’t want to write about it anymore.
Stanitsa – I try to understand how the house of the Melikhovs was in the center of the village, but it is impossible to understand. So are the reeds on the Don. Childhood passed on the river Sudost, Desna well, I do not remember on such rivers reeds.
Gerasimov is a beautiful, talented theatrical adaptation to which we have become accustomed over the years.
Now about Chernyshova. I didn't like it much. I decided to finish it. I read her interview and understood what Aksinha should be and understood from the words of Polina. And that happens.
Bystritskaya accuses that the actors playing in the series did not live in the village on the set, did not read the novel, do not know how to talk, carry water. Elina Abramovna's not right. If the artists play on the souffler and do not know how to play it in another film - And the dawns here are quiet Davletyarov. That's where the souffler is the main character. You can play without reading a story. You can see it on the screen.
But back to Aksinya Chernysheva. The first scenes - she does not know how to play, but in the novel it is necessary. In the first chapters of Aksinya it is such an unopened flower of a drunkard. That is how the actress in the film Adjutant of his Excellency was selected for the role of mayor and that is what played. So here Chernysheva blossomed, playing scenes in Yagodny. Which corresponds to the realities of the novel. This is the kind of character that Aksinya should be. Ursulac hit the spot. Yes, outwardly it does not correspond to Aksinya, but after all, Glebov does not correspond to Gregory, but is accepted and considered an ideal.
You should not write about Tkachuk’s game, but watch and enjoy it. As for the conversation — remember Konkin — Sharapov in the meeting place there is the same intonation. That's what people say in the village. Sometimes it seems that the game goes on the verge of a nervous breakdown. This is a complete hit in the image both externally and internally.
Makovetsky takes this from the film 72 meters. Disclosure of the image and getting into the image is complete.
Arthur Ivanov - without comment, from his game received complete pleasure.
Daria Ursuliak is a good game, but sometimes it is unclear why summing up the lips with a black pencil is a spoon of tar in her image.
Staging scenes - here Ursuliak surpassed himself. A scene with pitchforks, a scene with a letter about Grishka's death. You cannot see it or describe it.
All according to Sholokhov, each house in the place where Sholokhov described it. What did not please in some scenes - the bed of the Astakhovs is wooden, and in the film iron. But it's nitpicking.
What was missing was Shtokman, the enmity between nonresidents and Cossacks. Sholokhov did not put all this into the book for nothing. But there is a law on inciting national discord and this must be taken into account when posing. One side of the river is shown. There is no scene with ducklings on the mowing, the scene of the fight between Peter and Stepan is not accurate. No battle scenes. But the newsreel is correctly made - it replaces battle scenes.
According to the accuracy they say Gerasimov did everything exactly - the Cossacks go to the camps, and where the overcoats are, Ursuliak has complete order here.
But that's not the point. All of the above is secondary. The main film makes you think, analyze. I have been waiting for this movie for a long time and this is my film.
And the opponents of the series - the dog barks, and the caravan goes. For me, the most important thing is the hiss that the film was taken by Sholokhov’s daughter, his grandson, that Aksinje was recognized in Veshenskaya Polina at the end of filming.
My score is 9 out of 10 for not showing scenes with Stockman and company. I went to watch the series again.
There was a lot of beautiful talk about the film, the manner of filming, the acting. You can see cultured, read, and most importantly intelligent people. I am interested in one thing, who among you lived or at least was in a Cossack farm, heard the Cossack saying - not modern and not based on films, but the one alive, sparkling, with a squint? And how many of them were riding? I am not asking which of you was on the march or in the battle. What do you judge on? You think you've read the book, you've seen old movies, and you know how people lived at that time. Don Cossacks, until the very last, hated the Soviet power, so until the very last they were enemies and counter. It seems to me that they could not make a true film about the Cossacks in the USSR.
I lived up to 17 years in a farm on the banks of the Don, my wife is a countryman Sholokhov, besides, soon will be 20 years as I am in the army. How close to me is the Cossack spirit - the spirit of ancestors. Why I wrote all this, to the fact that looking at the game Makovetsky I saw my great-grandfather with the same Don character. He clearly noticed the character and arrogance of the old Cossacks. That is how the old people behaved in our farm, with me my father a respected person - the main energy of the state farm, my great-grandfather pulled a crutch, for some joke, and my father did not even think to resist but just ran away, which then made me a boy laugh.
Watching the series, I felt like I was in my childhood. I like that the actors are not afraid of horses and confidently stay in the saddle. Especially the main character. I can't judge actors. I'm not an expert in that. But in many cases in life it happens simply without unnecessary words, pathos, silently. After all, as it happens: first, life is a little embellished by the writer, then the screenwriter, then the director, and at the end still an actor, so it turns out that on stage the actor dies almost 15 minutes, having had time to look at the sky, to convey farewells to his friends, farewells to relatives, and in life - a moment. Whistling. Spank. And silence. ..
I think the film did the main job. He transports the viewer to that era with her grief, betrayal, with the desire to build a better just world, and in spite of everything to live and love.
Only a Cossack's bullet will knock him off his horse. . .
I come from the city of Novocherkassk. Capitals of the Don Cossacks. So all the great scenery in this movie is not graphics. It's our Don! Special thanks to the director, for such a breathtaking display of the atmosphere and background.
You know, there is a category of people, and not a small category, who are skeptical about the so-called reshooting of masterpieces of world cinema. Even I would say biased. They say that some Ursuliak, recruited young actors and decided to equal Gerasimov himself! But let me tell you, this is a profound misconception! First, this is not ' reshoot' this is a new adaptation of the great novel. I love the film adaptation of 1957, but why did you get that film that doesn’t give the right to live new, fresh ideas? Second, many probably expected in the lead roles Bezrukov with Khabensky! But guys, let's see first and then judge!
That looks so good to me! The new colors in the film are wonderfully conveyed, strengthen the feelings. I did not watch the series on TV, I watched the entire Internet at once, capturing several episodes at once, as long as time allowed.
The actors did their best. There were claims against Daria Ursuliak. But I think it's the director's idea. After all, what does Gregory say to his wife Natalia? ' You don't get cold, you don't get hot. ..' She was conceived as a quiet, not particularly emotional character. And against her background, Aksinya from the screen looks the opposite, sensual and hot.
Male roles, in my opinion everything is fine! The only thing, if Yevgeny Tkachuk was a little larger article, it would be even better!
A separate plus is the musical accompaniment. It's always great in Ursuliac's movies! It conveys the spirit.
Anyway, the movie moved me. Don’t listen to those who first watch the Game of Thrones for 25 seasons, and then say that it was necessary to fit a huge and rich novel into 3 episodes. Bravo, everyone who made this movie! After all, the film adaptation of classics requires great courage and risk.
10 out of 10
Oscar Wilde once said that one of the greatest dramas of his life was the death of Lucien de Lubampre. I can say that one of the greatest dramas of my life was the fate of Grigory Melekhov. Therefore, any attempt to interpret the novel makes me relive this story, imbued with the aromas of grass and the bitterness of wormwood.
The dramatic fate of the Cossacks of the Tatar farm is even more overshadowed by the dramatic fate of the book itself and the question of its authorship. The greatness of the novel, its breadth and depth, epicity - all this does not obscure a very human history from me, on the contrary, like a magnifying glass, this Don epic allows us to consider fate, ground in the millstones of history. Perhaps that is why, no matter how difficult it is to relive what happens in the novel, you can not refuse to re-read and revise the film versions.
Perhaps the same thing forced Sergei Ursuliak to take up the film adaptation of Mikhail Sholokhov’s “The Quiet Don”. At the very least, it is hoped that the driving force of this work was the love of the novel, and not other more pragmatic motives. It is quite obvious that the director needed great courage to bring his interpretation of the novel to the court of filmmakers, critics and viewers. To endure, knowing exactly that it is not him to avoid a jealous comparison not only with the novel-source, but also with the film adaptation of Sergei Gerasimov.
Many directorial calculations would be correct if they were carried through, such as betting on young and virtually unknown actors who would be perceived without an associative series of their previous roles. Or the decoration of the painting with the gradual fading of colors as the Melekhov family and the whole life of the Cossack Don collapse. But, not to mention the shortcomings of the series, you just want to understand for yourself what he lacks to stand in a number of big screen versions of Russian literature. Probably, he lacks character - not only in the aesthetic part, but also in the character of the internal - ethnic, epochal, psychological. Quiet Don, in fact, is a reflection on the Cossack character - it manifests itself in every word, every gesture, every hero. And after all, the heroes, having each their own character, all together form the whole picture, as parts of a mosaic. This lack of the main driving force in Ursuliak’s film entails those shortcomings that are visible not only to picky critics, but also to ordinary viewers, all readers who are not indifferent to the novel.
In any case, the appearance of such a film was an important event, if at least someone it led to the novel itself, became a guide to the world of Sholokhov's Cossacks - irreconcilable, proud, harmonious, not knowing love half and devotion to the end, tragic and very bitter period in the life of the quiet Don. The film of Sergei Ursuliak is now part of the fate of a great book, in the history of which there was a great adaptation. Then in 1957 in this film met (and literally and metaphorically) two geniuses — Mikhail Sholokhov and Sergey Gerasimov, but these coincidences happen so rarely that such adaptations can be considered rather exceptions to the usual rules. In this context, any comparison of Ursuliak with Gerasimov will turn against the first, so it is worth considering the new film version independently, and precisely as a version, because it does not claim (and is not able to do so) to be the ultimate truth. But this film, born in the most difficult period of Russian cinema, has the right to exist and discuss.
Multi-series in a lyrical rapid. The oil was too oily for me. Not my genre. I watched 2-3 episodes from the corner of my eyes, but obviously this is not enough to judge the film as a whole. I won't. But since I was familiar with the book, I managed to understand something from what I saw.
I think I understood the main thing: the hero was replaced. GMO product. There are no such things in nature.
Literary Grigory Melekhov is a living character. He was a portrait from life, which the artist (no, not Sholokhov) knew and understood well. The figure turned out to be quite integral - it is impossible to "ungroup" such in Photoshop. But Ursulac is trying. In the end, he draws another.
The director likes to talk about his right to interpret. Seeking artist... Equally inquisitive were the alchemists who once wizarded lead in their quest for gold. They did not know the Periodic Law. I couldn't find out. Directing is a different science. There is much about it in the Book of Life that lies before Sergei Vladimirovich, which has been revealed for 57 years. And if he had not slumbered over the introduction, he would easily have learned from the first chapter that character is fate. But the opposite is true.
The fact that Gregory has a destiny, Ursuliak reacted purely creatively, as an alchemist. I neglected the fact that biography (L-data in psychology) puts the framework of possible interpretations of character no worse than the Mendeleev table.
So, we know that Grigory Melekhov, still being a regular (under the command of two dozen sabers), arbitrarily raises the whole hundred (!), receives the rank of horunge (lieutenant), commands a hundred, and at the end of the division (general position!) This is not an opinion, an attitude or an assessment. These are reinforced concrete facts, past which the passage of any searching-scouring artists is closed. Behind the facts are those features of character that must break through in each episode. Whether it is bathing a horse or hugging on a haywalk.
There is nothing like that in the movie. He is informed of recklessness, but not the qualities of a commander. I am ready to ignore that the film hero is airier than the literary Grishka by about a quarter (that weighed 83 kg). And let him not have such a “gang face” as in the novel. But there are more important things. He does not generate ideas, does not set goals, is not sufficiently involved, does not work for unity, is slow and does not work, is poorly informed, is not able to dominate, avoids judging and is not at all ready to defend his own power. Instead, there are boyish antics, hysterical squeals, eye turns and viscous reasoning. Perhaps this is how the hero looks “human.” Except they won't attack for that. They won't even get up.
The desire to make the hero closer is clear. But the means are not friendly with character, which is the basis of this remarkable epic. The serial Melekhov is rather the future grandfather Shchukar from the incomparably weaker “Virgin Raised”. No, not nice, brothers.
The film did the main thing – hooked, gave the opportunity to remember himself, his story.
The film touched my soul. Through the fate of Gregory, the tragedy of the entire Cossacks is shown. I was very impressed with the film. This is our story. What a tragic life it was at that time. And I'm still complaining about something, I'm feeling sad.
Gregory here is a real hero, thinking, feeling, doubting, brave, looking for his way, his truth, living to the fullest. Both on the side of the Reds and on the side of the Whites, he fights to protect his family, his homeland, the Cossack way of life.
Yes, Gregory is rude, especially at first, he does not think much about the consequences of his actions, about the feelings of other people, driven by a passion for Aksinya. However, it bribes with its directness, integrity of nature.
And the other main characters are bright original personalities. What dignity in these simple farmers, who for several centuries worked mainly for themselves, and were very proud of it. They spoke with arrogance about the “lapotniki” – peasants who had been freed from serfdom for only 50 years.
About the characters can be said in the words of Konchalovsky, who spoke about his heroes in “Siberiad”: their feet walk on the ground, and their heads rest on the sky.
At first, of course, it was strange to see Aksinya performed by the blond-haired Polina Chernysheva, who presented her heroine as a simple beautiful woman, carrying herself with dignity, without the bright colorful colors inherent in the Don Cossack, as I had an idea for the textbook film Gerasimov.
But gradually, getting used to this Aksinya, you begin to believe her, to worry about her. The actress played her love story here, presenting it in a completely different way than it was played by Bystritskaya. This is interesting, because it is played soulfully, talented and ... "just". After all, as they say, this is the most difficult thing to play simply, without theatricality.
I was so excited about the movie that I wanted to read Quiet Don. My husband found both volumes in his parents’ closet, and I started reading. I read the entire novel in a week.
For me, it was a discovery of how strong and deep a book, where, in addition to a vivid love story, the epic of the First World War, the Revolution and the Civil War on the Don is revealed. It is brilliantly shown how the established way of life was ruined, the people were divided into irreconcilable parties that began to fight each other. Elite troops, which were considered Cossacks under the tsarist rule, divided and began to destroy each other. Having mastered military science and practiced in battles with the Germans, the Cossacks now applied their skills in the Civil War. In people on both sides rose to full growth hatred, often unjustified cruelty. The historical brigandish features of the Cossacks, sloppy pride, were also clearly manifested. Cossacks slashed a man in half, and it became common for many not only in battle.
Against the background of all this, although it became customary for Gregory to kill in battle, he still preserves the human, standing up against pouring someone else's blood in vain. It was the massacre of the Reds over the captured Cossacks that drove him away from them.
It is amazing how such a book could be published and recognized in Soviet times. Gregory, who most of the civil war is fighting for the whites, is represented by a hero, and Mishka Kosheva, who became an ideological red, is a scoundrel.
That's how it looks now. It became a little clearer when I watched with my husband the old film of 1957. There, Gregory looks like a lost man, and the same Kosheva, deserter Bunchuk – right-wing fighters for Soviet power. It turns out it all depends on your point of view. The dialogue in both films is very close to the text.
So, bystritskaya really played brilliantly. Axinje believes her unconditionally. And from the other characters, including from Gregory, blows theatrical, visible obvious ideological clichés. In modern eyes, it cuts the eye. And the second series, where mainly military actions and revolutionary conversations, is so uninteresting to watch, because everything is imbued with Soviet ideology.
Gerasimov’s film was an achievement of its time. And Ursuliak’s film is a modern interpretation of our history, and very talented, soulfully shot, touching the living, allowing you to survive with the heroes of that time, feel their love and hatred, at least imagine the unthinkable hardships that the heroes had to endure.
Maybe I will say something pathetic, but involuntarily think about what a great strength of spirit our people, what roots, if he was able to rise after so many wars, repressions and the destruction of original culture.
By the way, in the reviews wrote that the new film was shot strongly “according to motivations”. No, it's just the book. With cuts, of course, because Sholokhov's novel is very voluminous.
As for the film, it is still unknown, but the book was for all time.
8 out of 10
I really liked it! I am a simple spectator and without pretending to be an expert opinion, I evaluate films according to the principle - ' like-dislike', ' believe-don't believe'...
' Quiet Don' I love it very much, I read many times, I remember many dialogues by heart, once even counted how old the heroes are - after another viewing of the Gerasimov film, I thought about the age discrepancy between real heroes and actors. Finally, we picked up actors who fit their heroes in age. Glebov is beautiful, but he is 42 years old, Bystritsoy is 30 years old. Cinema as an art, of course, is not alien to convention, but personally I am very annoyed when, for example, a young man (almost a boy!) D'Artagnana plays a tough 30-year-old Boyarsky! I've always wondered - with so many young talented actors in the country - what, it's so hard to find those whose looks won't shout about what's good for them? . . .
And when they talk about the discrepancy of types - Aksinya ' not a dark-skinned fire beauty' performed by Chernyshova, Grigory is not enough ' Turkovat' - Yes, a reproach is possible, but, in my opinion, is redeemed by the power of their acting.
And everyone compares, they say, Cossacks were not like that! How do we know what they looked like? In the photo of old - there are very even in the mass of whitish people, a lot of browns, with Slavic features, faint.
And, by the way, grandmother Gregory was, apparently, not a Turk, but a Circassian - it was this nationality that the Cossacks called the Turks, with whom they fought at that time.
The acting game, in my opinion, is great for many - Makovetsky (well, he has played a lot of old people where he has already played well - in ' Live and Remember', for example), Tkachuk, actor Arthur Ivanov (Peter) and Nikita Efremov liked how they played, Zavyalov and Vedenskaya (Darya her wonderful!).
A new look at the epochal novel as a whole justified my hopes for the revival of Russian cinema and, I hope, connoisseurs of the work of the Nobel laureate.
The series is monumental and organic with a galaxy of young, interesting actors. Cossackism is still a complex world with its own customs, laws, habits and Ursuliak managed to solve the axiom-actor, must live, living the life of the image played by the actor.
A real Pantelei, a real Grishka Melekhov - better not. The lively beauty of Aksinya is simply getting into the image of the Don Cossack. In my opinion, only the role in the performance of Lyudmila Zaitseva is unclear, as the faceless shadow of her son sitting at the wedding in a mourning black dress, perhaps the idea of the director, although in the last series, when he looks at the photo of his family, these are the eyes of his mother.
Despite the fact that in the first series too great was the temptation to mix “yellow” with the images of Glebov and Bystritskaya, in the subsequent series began to forget and the opinion completely dispelled. Impressed, of course, is the final episode, as the hero enters the cold water—as in the mysterious, sacred River Styx, meeting dead relatives while bowing to the ground. Skin bumps...
For the music separately thank you Yuri Krasavin, who beats completely, no matter how much it sounds.
My verdict series was a success, worth watching, especially young ones. The terrible, tragic history of our country, God forbid, to experience again.
9 out of 10
Bravo! The ball is cut for the show poster. It looks like two lesbians are kissing.
After all, colleagues correctly write: Glebov and Bystritskaya actors are head taller than Zhenya Tkachuk and Polina Chernyshova. The depth of feeling images in Gerasimov is undoubtedly greater. After watching the film in 1957, the heaviness and empathy for the villagers remain on the soul.
But before us is the version of 2015 – instead of going home on the ice, as Mikhail Alexandrovich bequeathed him, Grigory takes off his clothes and swims along the icy Don. It seems wrong, but suddenly a treacherous lump comes to the throat. When all his relatives and acquaintances meet him on a mowing, and the joyful dog runs to him alive, I, who considered myself a callous and indifferent person, understand that tears come to my eyes.
After that, I understand that “Silent Don” for me will be associated only with this film, with this imperfect acting, with this obsessive music that does not stop in my head for the second day, and makes me yearn at the thought that I will not see this old farm and rickety plow farm again.
To the delight of the audience there was a great series - long waited
I was looking forward to the new version of the film with my wife, and the old one was persistently spinning in my head. So I had to look through the prism of what I had previously seen, but after the first series, we began to be dragged along by the great tragedy of the country and the people who found themselves in its whirlpool and already looked on, without stopping - arguing, worrying and crying, and most importantly, not constantly comparing with the creation of Gerasimov.
The series succeeded, it is indisputable and it is watching the series for several days that you feel more deeply the terrible events of those years, the revolutionary plague that infected people with mutual hatred, which led to catastrophic consequences of the country for tens (hundreds?) years.
The director purposefully drew many parallels of the past and the present, made us think again, who are we and what are we?, and where, which way will we go? Or maybe this is the providence of M. Sholokhov, who received the Nobel Prize for the novel. After all, the country still wanders like a fog. . .
Congratulations to E. Tkachuk for a great game. I noticed him as a Japanese Bear. He literally lived the life of Gregory, beginning at ~20 and ending it at ~30. That's the part!
S. Makovetsky another laurel wreath for the conquest of the audience. He is a master in Africa.
Aksinya coped with the role, but it is not as texture as E. Bystritskaya. Same thing about Daria, how far she is from Khityaeva. . .
Very good charismatic A. Yatsenko in the role of M. Koshevoy. We loved it in 'Thaw '. He has a powerful aura and it captivates the viewer. As they say, you cannot take away the gift of God. . .
N. Efremov in the role of Mitka Korshunov is like not an actor, before that he naturally and easily plays it, apparently, genes affect. . .
Natalia. It does not fit into the film - it's more like Anna Karenina or at worst, an institute girl who accidentally got to the Tatar farm, although she played well. It is true that the operator has overdone (?).
I liked Prokhor.
Well done by the operator. The eternity of being in the image of the Don and the great freewoman-steppe, bread fields and haymaking are skillfully shown, and the Don horses simply conquer.
Decorate the film and help a deeper perception Cossack songs and soft minor music.
I think the ending of the film is very unfortunate. All Gregory has left is a son. The son is an extension of life, the heir. He was looking for him. And it is not clear why Gregory sailed through the Don, it is in March that! Deciding to go home, to the land and his son, he did not seek death, he wanted to live a peaceful life of a Cossack. Someone read the book badly...
In conclusion, I would like to say that thanks to the director there was a noticeable and pleasant event in the cultural life of the country. The series deserves its awards, as do the actors. Everyone should look and reflect on the Bolshevik revolution ... the good is ahead of its century.
9 out of 10
With bewilderment and even negative attitude to the re-screening of film masterpieces that have already gained popularity among viewers. I haven’t seen a single successful replay yet.
However, I love Sergei Ursuliak’s films very much, especially ' Liquidation' so I waited with interest and fear for the demonstration of this series. I liked the movie. Wonderfully shown endless Don steppes, majestic Don, fields, farms and villages. I am already many years old, and from 1944 to 1967 I lived on the Don, the sports camp of our institute was on the steep bank of the Don, and in the collective farms we worked in the fields of sunflowers and corn, on endless melons, harnessed horses, etc. The film is so truthfully and soulfully filmed nature that the heart hurts.
The film was very timely released on the screens, reminds of a terrible turning point in the history of people, the nightmare of civil fratricidal war, when a brother kills a brother, a friend; piercingly shows the hopelessness and despair of people in this meat grinder. There are no winners in this war.
I also liked the acting. Especially remarkable Makovetsky, Zaitseva, good and Gregory, Tkachuk well done. Axinha didn't like it. The girl is a good actress, but she did not grow up to this role, in my opinion. Yes, I do not see an actress who could play, or rather live the role of the beautiful Cossack Aksignya, since Elina Bystritskaya, convey her life, love, suffering, excruciating passion, hopelessness and death.
It's a good movie. Talented. Good luck and new good films to its creator Sergey Ursuliak and his actors and assistants.
9 out of 10
The main advantage is that actors play life, not theatrically.
I can’t stand the game in the style 'social realism', which was characteristic of the film adaptation of classics in Soviet times. You watch such films and do not understand from what planet the characters came, before the actors behave implausibly and give out ' poster & #39; emotions. In the same film adaptation, live human emotions are visible. People play like people, not like ' inspired by lofty aspirations' mannequins. You see people, not agitators.
In my opinion, Gregory played well.
The film makes you wonder how difficult and often tragic things are in human life. I can't say that about other screen adaptations. They don't. They're cardboard. Soulless.
Land, love, home, homeland. The rising sun floods the spacious fertile lands, through which a large river flows its waters - live and enjoy life. But no, not to joy. And does not live: accumulated resentment, envy and malice, pride and intolerance, greed, indifference and mistakes, uncorrected immediately, when it is not too late, are drawn into a cruel battle over the Don not for life, but for death.
When the earth suddenly opens under you, you have to jump from your native place to the right or left, to the red or white, to your brother or against him. You jumped, what's the point? The inexorable giant funnel of a hurricane of crazy events begins to suck and push into the abyss many thousands of fates - maiming, cutting and pressing indiscriminately.
Why faults arise and how to prevent them are not questions for Sergei Ursuliak. He is a singer not of the joy of discovery, but of the sorrow of loss, a painter of these faults and hurricanes themselves, an artist of the high genre of frescoes.
A diverse palette of trained talented actors and actresses is used by the director to transfer episodes of the novel to a television picture, repeatedly persistently turning it into a chamber, but piercing canvas, then into a large-scale canvas, then - as the performance of the maximum task - into a fresco.
Aksinya drinks for the health of Gregory; the conversation of Natalia and Aksinya; execution, execution, even execution. From private events and persons to generalizations: the cavalrymen - each side with its huge flag - jump to meet each other; the rider with a torch against the background of burning housing; the final return of Gregory as a fresco of the dome; and - again and again, the Don, the great river with a silent reproach to the distraught villagers-Cossacks and Cossacks.
Neutrality is only a delay. How much Gregory does not run between Natalia and Axinya - you need to choose, and the sooner the better. Indifferently or carelessly late with the choice - they will choose for you. No matter how much you turn away and do not shut up, one day there will be a knock on the door.
What neutrality will not save is clearly visible only when the boiler lid is torn off, and it begins to splash boiling water. And boil - on the remnants will mix a new brew and will again screw the lid and throw firewood - bringing to the boiling temperature.
10 out of 10
I was waiting for this movie to come out with some prejudice. There were a lot of doubts about the choice of actors, I didn’t believe that most of them would do the job. And the film Gerasimov, which I watched relatively recently, also left an imprint.
As I watched the first episodes, I was like, ‘I’m going to sculpt this most anticipated premiere of the year.’ 2 points on Kinopoisk as well as its predecessor (Bondarchuk version) one for nature and for the attempt of Ursuliak and the deal with the end. But I had the strength to look to the end, and there were circumstances that allowed me to increase my assessment.
So,
Grigory Melekhov- a contradictory impression left the game Eugene Tkachuk. I think that it still needed to be voiced, because these squealing exclamations were quite annoying and you don’t want to be transferred to the criminal world of Odessa to the unforgettable Yaponchik Bear. Yes, the voice greatly interfered, but it is clear that the actor tried to show the evolution of Gregory, his growing up, his throwing, emotional experiences, his tragic fate, grinded down by the “terrible machine of great shocks of the beginning of the century”. By the end of the film, I even believed him, but the scene of a conversation with Koshev blurred the impressions after returning home. In Gerasimov’s film, she is one of my favorites – a kind of confession of the main character, which in several sentences showed the tragedy of the Civil War, and here again screams, squeals. It's ambiguous. In the performance of Tkachuk is still not the Grishka, for which you can “pump all the generals” (as Prokhor Zykov said), and put him over the Cossacks.
Aksinya- Polina Chernyshev did not impress absolutely. All I heard was memorized text. There wasn't an image. There's no stature in her, no proper appearance. I did not believe in her frenzied love for Gregory, the bitter woman's share, so beautifully described in the novel.
Natalia- Darya Ursuliak coped with his task a little better. I tried to convey emotions with my eyes: from selfless love, to longing and desperate hopelessness. It often worked. But one of the strongest scenes of the curse of Gregory in the field and the death of Natalia to the actress, in my opinion, failed. A little weak
Pantelei Prokofievich performed by Sergei Makovetsky turned out to be softer in contrast to the same Ilchenko in Gerasimov, at times helpless, frenetic anger I did not see in him; yes, he is an economicsman, the head of the family, who watches how his family and his economy, the foundations of life collapse, and he can not do anything, perhaps from this he is shown more often confused. IllinicLudmila-Lyudmilayanskayatsev, the actor gives himself this way. Peter Melekhov Here the image is revealed, in my opinion, well. It is clear, and played by Arthur Ivanov soundly. But to the performer of the role of the older brother Gregory a priori claims will be less.
Darya — Anastasia Vvedenskaya I liked a little more than other young actresses. Appearance, pitch was good. They tried to make Daria closer to the viewer, but there are inconsistencies with the novel (for example, she drowned herself after the death of Natalia). But in general, female images are a huge drawback of the new film adaptation! .
The Korshunov family impressed, and most of all the Korshunov Mitka . I am not afraid to say that the game Nikita Efremov is one of the few successes of the film. Evil, furious, cynical Mitka turned out to be reliable, that's where I heard the unlearned text! I did! And appearance, and voice, and charisma – all agreed.
It's not bad. But one of the favorite characters Prokhor Zykov did not impress here. I did not see in Timothy Tribuntsevo a devoted Grigory, ironic, kind I beg, able to give everything and at any moment come to the rescue (as it was in the novel and in the film Gerasimov). It is not clear to me why Dunyashka , according to the book appearance and character went to his father, made in this film so blonde, not expressive.
The new version greatly loses the absence of the agitator Shtokman in it, with the appearance of which on the farm and begins the fermentation of the minds of the Cossacks, their demarcation. There is no officer of the Russian army – whole, devoted to his ideals, Esaul Kalmykov, there are no many significant scenes, in connection with which the narrative often acquired a fragmentary, not logical character. For 14 episodes, it was possible to reveal both the First World and Civil. I do not judge how the battle scenes are shot, but in the same film Gerasimov traces the main milestones and turns of military and political history.
And finally the final. I think the creators of the new version emphasized symbolism (purification in the river, return to the native land). But I didn't like that interpretation. What about Mishatka, whom Gregory saw, returning on foot (!) to the base. His son "all that remains in his life, that has so far related him to the earth and to all this vast, shining world under the cold sun."
So, in general, the new version tries to show the tragedy of the Don Cossacks and the country as a whole, there are quite strong episodes in it, there are frank failure scenes, the actors’ play, with rare exceptions, not at the height, there are a lot of departures from the source, beautiful nature, and obsessive music.
5 out of 10
I really enjoyed the movie!!! And the actors were great! What do you compare to Gerasimov’s film? Yes, his film is very good and the actors are legendary, but he is a film of his time - it shows more revolutionary struggle and #39; correct & #39; Bolshevik power. And in the film Ursuliak shows how this struggle went through the lives of people, their souls. As Peter Melekhov says:' They lived like a plow, divided people, some to the left, others to the right. They grinded in the meat grinder of the revolutionary struggle all that was good in man and turned them into beasts that killed each other. My grandmother, born in 1908, was a Cossack from the village of Razdorskaya and their whole family experienced everything that was described in Sholokhov’s novel and collectivization and then the war and told me a lot about this time, about this chaos. Ursuliak made the film closest to the novel, best showed that Cossack life. You write young actresses not that Bystritskaya and Khityaeva, but what they should be; 40-year-olds like in a Gerasimov movie. When Gregory married before the army, he was drafted into the army at the age of 18. We do not know our history and do not remember the way of Cossack life because we do not pass on to our children or tell them. And he did it, and he gave thanks, and he gave thanks. Crying over the movie. I thought I was so sensitive, but my 20-year-old daughter also watched the movie with tears in her eyes - and this is the most important thing that Ursuliak did - reached the younger generation! May God not repeat the mistakes of his ancestors.