Humpbacked noses on well-known actors cause laughter, irritation and a barrier to perception of what they are trying to convey to us.
The music is particularly irritating. One long clip from the category of New Year programs 'songs about the main thing '. For my composer, I didn’t care what happened in the frame. Music is one of the biggest challenges!
And the authors here decided to surprise us with how they talk characters. Ooh! You shouldn't! We should know what they're saying now. Not only does the music get in the way, but it also gets in the way of the tribe of less than chö jön tien eh! I can only guess what I mean.
We should not forget about the atmosphere! You just can't! It feels like Don's gone! It would be possible to listen to the authors of this series and they would hear the constant chirping of birds in the fields, the chirping of grasshoppers and many other sounds that help the viewer plunge into this world.
Come on, guys! I paint this only because I am a great admirer of Gerasimov’s work and, in principle, of a literary work. And the rest of it is a cardboard cheap (made probably not for cheap), designed to annoy!
I watched the whole show. I can't say that I didn't like S. Ursuliak's work. Of course, to distance herself from the film Gerasimov had, although it was not easy, but tried to watch, as if again. What you like. I really liked the music, i.e. the brilliant work of the composer (Krasavina), the magnificent performance of musical material by the symphonic orchestra and the excellent, skillful, creative work of the conductor. Good field shots. The disclosure of the image of Grigory Melikhov, the accents in the script canvas, a new vision and understanding of certain historical problems, more significantly and actively placed by the director, conquered. I liked (for the most part) the acting work of actor Tkachuk (except for certain scenes in the film, where he absolutely does not have any emotions, for example: at ' rucka' Sailor's checker or the departure of Natalia), produced a good acting work Efremov. But, in general, the work associated with the selection of the cast, as it seems to me, is done on '3'.The fact that Aksinya, Natalia are completely feminine not attractive (both externally and temperamentally - this is not a Cossack), but even Daria (Vedenskaya) has nothing to do with the Cossack, with the recklessly vulgar essence of the image that was stunningly created by Khityaeva - this is a fact! Makovetsky tried very hard and in many ways, he succeeded, but still, emotionally, he was not enough. The role played by actress Zaitseva is generally past. She did not approach this image in any way (not even enough work was done on the conversation), there is neither the temperament of the Cossack, nor external roll-calls - nothing. I watched and did not understand: almost all the images of the Cossacks shown (as a selection) are red, then blond, then whitish, with a lack of hair on women's heads and so seemingly faceless that there is no similarity with the Cossacks. Images of representatives of officers of the Russian army, in my opinion, also picked up unsuccessfully; there is no external nobility, upbringing and mannerism, which then so successfully showed in his game actor Igor Dmitriev and his father & #39; (from the film). Of course, Gerasimov’s skill is in everything and in every little thing, and there is nothing to say. And still, everything, of course, is known in comparison and if you watch, for example, the film by S. Bondarchuk, the series by S. Ursuliak is the film No. 2 (after Gerasimov) in accordance with the novel, gratitude and perception. Bondarchuk did not succeed at all.
Classic and classic that acquires new meanings over time and does not lose relevance.
It may not be a popular point of view, but the new film seems to me much more interesting than the creation of Gerasimov.
Instead of picturesque, landscape images, living characters appeared, yes, maybe slightly smeared with a long chronology of the narrative, but do we now have that epic photographic imagery as in our warring grandfathers? In this sense, the series only reflects the time in which we live and us in it, and this is the first vocation of the narrative of the classic story.
The character of Gregory in the new film is much more understandable. He is the character of today’s Russia, with its incomprehensible present and uncertain future.
Cinematic scenes are insanely strong, for example, the Cossacks, who received the news of the war and instantly jump barefoot into the saddle and fly away to war.
Gregory saving Koshevo from the massacre. We must give credit to the fact that not much was lost in the new film and key scenes with the execution of officers and the gallows of the Commissioner.
The image of Natalia is brighter and clearer, she is not an extra in the new film, as it was in the previous one.
There are many more cathartic moments, especially at the end of the film.
And the big question is, what are we doing to ourselves and to our country? How much more humanity is left on earth?
This is a very good movie for me.
'Oh, what are you, Quiet Don, mud-nehonek leaking? . . -
For me, the novel by M. Sholokhov ' Quiet Don' is a special novel that to some extent influenced my worldview, my views on the historical events of the first half of the XX century. I read it for the first time when I was under 16 years old, but since I loved and read the classics from an early age, it was not premature for me, only the language was heavy and, of course, military scenes. . . But soon I got used to the military scenes, especially since in the book they are described with logical sequence, and even historical, and along with the classics, I also love the history of Russia. .
But it's not about that! I really wanted to write a review of the next film adaptation of this masterpiece of world literature.
I watched the screen adaptation of Gerasimov 5 times, and now I like to review the first series, I remember their movements, facial expressions, lines by heart, but, Oh God!, how they used to play! They didn’t play, they played their part!
I also watched the film adaptation of Bondarchuk, although not quite Bondarchuk, but jointly with foreigners, so it turned out to be ... well, not Cossack. . .
What Happens to Ursulak's Economization
When I watched some scenes, especially the female ones, I couldn’t get into it at all, I didn’t believe absolutely, terrible & #39; not Cossack' women play, not in the spirit of the time. . .
I didn't really like any of the women. Aksinya the whole series seems to be somewhere in the wrong place, everything is in the clouds. And it’s all about the show—extremely long scenes, silences, glances...just sometimes it’s appropriate, and sometimes it’s just ridiculous! Especially when it's not done well. . .
No, Aksinya in the series - well, not Aksinya at all, the character is not disclosed, from my point of view, of course. There is such a contrast with the book, the film adaptation of Gerasimov, but his Aksinya did not work. . .
Natalia, Daria, Dunyasha... I didn’t believe looking at them that they were Cossacks. They're very modern. . For the roles, the actors get fat, lose weight, get their hair done, or somehow try to reincarnate, and here, it seems, they studied at the university in the morning or on their own business, and in the afternoon they wore dresses, and here they play Cossacks. . .
Even for some reason, I didn’t like the female images of the older generation. .
But the male actors were more pleased! Melekhov, of course, in some scenes, indeed, resembles a Makhnovist more than a Cossack, but there is a development of the hero throughout the series - this is evident, Tkachuk tried, like Makovetsky in the performance of Panteleich.
I liked Korshunov performed by Efremov, Kosheva, Miron, Peter Melekhov (in this series he is even better revealed than Gerasimov).
I can’t say anything about military scenes, because I’m not an expert in this! As in the camera work, but many landscapes I liked!
Ursuliak and the whole team tried very hard - it is seen and felt. But the depths of the novel, its unique diversity to convey, in my opinion, failed.
I would recommend watching this version, after all, something in this series managed to convey. But for those who want to watch the film adaptation of this novel after the book - of course, only Gerasimov.
Overall, I can say that I liked the film. Because I wanted to read a novel, read a real, not at the level of the school program.
The whole movie was emotional.
Yes, there are drawbacks, the characters of some heroes, such as Aksinya, Natalia, are not disclosed. There is no sense of great love in heroes. And a lot of smaller and bigger flaws. BUT! there are advantages that overcome these shortcomings!
This is, first of all, the high emotionality of the film, this is the play of some actors (one Makovetsky is worth it!), this is the camera work -10 points, this is music!
I was pleased, even surprised, Tkachuk (Grigory), I was afraid that the Japanese would break through, and no. He did it all.
Sergey Ursuliak and the Well done team!
And about the comparison with Gerasimov’s Quiet Don, well, yes, actors, yes, Gerasimov, but there, a lot of imposed ' from the outside', censorship, idealization. It doesn’t matter, I don’t think it’s worth comparing! Both options are good, as it seems to me, each takes its own.
And yes, it is risky to reshoot a previously successful thing, but I succeeded, because many wanted to read, re-read, revise the old film ... and many thought about life, values, great, peace ... about war, and even at such a time!
8.5 out of 10
Ursuliac or how oranges will not be born from aspen
I did not thoroughly study the filmography of Mr. Ursuliak, but I had enough impressions from his “film novels”. I will not analyze in detail “Liquidation” and “Life is destiny” – there will be comparisons along the way.
Operational work
She's great and highly professional. Many shots are worthy of National geografic and other related channels and publications. My respects to Mikhail Suslov for the beautiful picture, picturesque film frame and juiciness.
Music
Another plus. It perfectly complements the visual range and increases tension.
Actors
But it's not perfect here. For example, Tkachuk texture is similar to Melekhov, but he lacks acting talent, because the image came out a little superficial. Polina Ursuliak got into the picture clearly on the principle of nepotism - with acting she is even worse than Tkachuk. The rest of the actors played quite smoothly, and Chernshev is very good. It was a shame that the composition was not Vladimir Mashkov, who would certainly strengthen the picture and fit perfectly (for example, in the role of Pantelei Melekhov or Miron Korshunov), but alas.
Sholokhov, problems and atmosphere
This is the 4th film adaptation of the famous novel and I think the most detailed is that the longest this fact. It is difficult to say bad and good due to the fact that many topics are not disclosed at all: for example, the civil war is shown by total fratricide, but the motivations of the characters are vague, the drama is lame and a lot of emotions and screams. Yes, it is total emotionality (sometimes turning into outright hysteria) that buzzes a lot just at the root. And somehow it does not fit very well with the prostrations of some characters. War. It's a separate, huge file. The battle scenes are chambered and terribly staged - no dynamics, the fights look like a scuffle of drunken sloths. Ursuliak’s favorite reception with the insertion of the chronicle here also completely failed – in the prayer scene it is completely out of place and spoils the impression from it, and next time it was clearly put on the principle of “how God will put on his soul.”
And globally, the sense of epicity is completely absent! There are hints of the tragedy of the people, families, the horrors of war, the troubled times. But very casual and unconvincing.
6 out of 10
From the point of view of Sholokhov’s film adaptation, the series is inferior to Gerasimov’s film – catastrophically and in everything. But at the same time, it cannot be called the worst, crumbling the film adaptation of Bondarchuk. She has a right to life. But for viewing schoolchildren passing the “Quiet Don” in literature, I would not recommend it.
Unlike his previous works, Ursuliak did not fall into controversial topics, but overstepped the stick with lyricism and lost all the tragic pathos of the original source.
Don't compare the film adaptations! Everyone has their own vision of Quiet Don.
A new film adaptation of the famous novel by Mikhail Sholokhov “The Quiet Don” the creator succeeded. The beautiful music of Yuri Krasavin, it very well conveys what is happening on the screen: the experiences of the heroes, the state of nature. To date, it is difficult for me to imagine Quiet Don without this music, it is presented to us so that we can feel the moment.
The film was shot for about two years, it turned out to be a high-quality, serious, full-fledged cinematic picture. I read a couple of reviews, I see that the audience is nostalgic for the picture of Sergey Gerasimov and believe that the roles there were deeper and more successfully played, but let’s not forget that at that time they played theatrically, but now it is vital and it pleases.
I liked the acting: Evgeny Tkachuk, Polina Chernyshova, Daria Ursuliak, and about the game of Sergei Makovetsky and Lyudmila Zaitseva can only be spoken with admiration.
And what landscapes - it is not to convey words, only emotions.
Someone did not like how the Cossack life was transmitted, allegedly in the new film adaptation it is worse than that of Sergei Gerasimov, but when Gerasimov was filmed and when Ursuliak was filmed.
I really liked the ending, it was heartwarming and emotional, just like the whole movie. Gregory remains alone, so alone - that from mental devastation he returns to his native farm, to the land for which he so longed during his wanderings.
10 out of 10
When I found out that a new adaptation of the epic novel “The Quiet Don” was coming out, which, moreover, is being filmed by the famous Russian director Sergey Ursuliak, an unprecedented excitement woke up in me. I waited a long time for the release of the series, followed the latest news, watched interviews with actors and directors, which further fueled interest in the film. Finally, the series comes out.
What can I say? First of all, I am a person of a very young generation (I only recently began to belong to the category “18-24” in the polls on KinoPoisk), so I have not read such a huge work as “The Quiet Don”, which carries a huge, colossal power. Or rather, I know him in part. I know what he's talking about, I know who he's talking about. I know pretty much everything. However, the novel has not yet been read by me. Yes, and will not be read in the near future, because I believe that it is necessary to grow to such a work. Still, I knew that there was a cult adaptation of Mikhail Sholokhov’s wonderful novel in our country. The main roles in the film in 1958 are performed by Peter Glebov and Eleanor Bystritskaya. And what a surprise I was when I saw this film adaptation, which was spinning in the summer First channel. You know, I did. All three episodes. I saw it. Are there a lot of young people these days who watch these pictures? Think about it, 1958! It was a long time ago... I can safely say that half of my friends, acquaintances of the same age, do not even know about this film adaptation, do not even remember about such a novel as Quiet Don. And I saw the very famous film adaptation of Sergei Gerasimov.
It's not for me to judge her. She can only be judged by people close to that time, my parents, uncles, aunts, grandparents. This is where the movie was made. I'll tell you, it's a great movie. I watched it in the wild, how interesting it was to watch this film without reading the original novel. Everything was done perfectly within the framework of that time. Sergey Appolinarievich created a beautiful picture, with his atmosphere, with his dialogues, with his scenes. I liked everything about her. Bravo! But let's move on to the work of Sergei Ursuliak.
When I learned that the new film adaptation will be staged by the person who directed “Liquidation”, it is not surprising that, firstly, I wanted to watch this series even more, and secondly, I stopped worrying and worrying about what will be the new reframing of the famous story about Grigory Melekhov, his fate, the fate of his family and the fate of the entire Don Cossacks. No wonder, because Ursuliak is almost the most competent serial director in our country. I love everything I see, his work. In our time, in the era of remakes (and absolutely everyone who removes the remake in any case does not say that it is a remake!), which involuntarily cause us a gag reflex, the attitude to the new work of Ursuliak can be different. It's a private matter. But if you suddenly start comparing this series to Gerasimov’s film, you will make a big mistake. A huge amount of time has passed (57 years have passed) since the release of the classic film adaptation of the novel. During this time, man made a flight into space, set foot on the moon, created a computer, we almost witnessed the Third World War, but most importantly, there was no big country called the Soviet Union, during which this man-made masterpiece was written and during the creation of the legendary production of Sergei Gerasimov. During this time, man has changed so much that it became more difficult for him than ever before to dive into past times, to try to reproduce that time, to show it. For the fact that at least Sergey Ursuliak tried to do this, I will thank him!
He tried, and he succeeded. I'll tell this series I believe!
From the very beginning, the director said that the main thing for him is people, their lives, their fate. Whoever wins a fratricidal war, white or red, will neither get better nor worse. They just have to be allowed to live. Live life the way they want to. Looking forward without looking back at what is going on. Ursuliak started from this and he wanted to convey this to us. The only question is whether we will understand or not. All persons involved in the production of the series have done a tremendous job: production artists, operators, decorators, costume designers. The director in each shot tried to show us the quiet Don; these places that saw a lot, who experienced a lot; this huge Don, who became a witness of bloody wars: from the inevitable world war to the unnecessarily civilian.
Why are we talking about actors? Can they show us everything that happened then, can they experience and pass through what Sholokhov wrote about? Of course not. But believe me, they did it with honor. Approaching everything with a big soul, with a big heart. They tried to show us how it was. And I think they did. Thank you for that.
I tell you this as someone who represents, to some extent, the modern generation of youth. Discard all your skepticism, all attempts to compare the new series with the old, all the cries that the actors play implausibly and do not compare to them with the great Glebov and Bystritskaya. No match! Alas, we live in a different time. This series, like every aspect of it, has a right to life. No one in our time could better film “The Quiet Don”, as did Sergey Ursuliak.
In the quiet on the Don,
In the lights and in the ringing,
A green garden is blooming.
There are birds flying over there.
Shining horns,
There are lights standing there,
They're burning.
For someone who hasn’t seen an old movie or read a book, this movie is wonderful. I can't judge how much worse or better the characters are than the ones in the previous film adaptation. I also don’t know how much the film fits the book. But to be honest, I can’t take my eyes off the screen while watching. Perhaps this is the criterion for assessing cinema as good or bad, whether it is captivating or not, without any prejudices and comparisons. Very beautiful shooting and music, a very good and high-quality performance of actors, especially, in my opinion, the actor who played Grigory Melekhov. I also want to note that this film really has some kind of “Russian spirit”. Recently, the scripts of our films, I think, as if written in the image and likeness of the scripts of American films, Russian directors are trying to make their creations as similar as possible to Hollywood cinema. It's not here. Here Russia is in every word, in every scene.
It’s great to have such a good movie. Here is my personal opinion that just as a generation is judged by its best, not the worst representatives, so our domestic cinema would be more correct to judge such films as Quiet Don, and not dubious projects like Vasilisa with a claim to something worthwhile, or even comedy club production.
Take and review the scenes of Gerasimov and Ursuliak. It is to compare, and unfounded cries that the film Gerasimov can not be surpassed, that the actors there were filmed unsurpassed, ' watched 10 minutes and realized that not so & #39; Rethink it. Our man, a conservative in fact, and most of the ' experts' at an age who in his youth and grass seemed greener and movies more colorful and juicier. Gerasimov’s text is minimal, and the scenes are stretched, everything is immediately assembled and dynamic.
Quiet don of 2015. Panoramic frames take for the soul, sunsets, dawns, what strength and peace in them, tranquility. Against the background of the scattering beauty of Cossack nature, human passions are boiling, fates are intertwined and collapsing. It is well shown that the main thing is transferred to the special speech of the Cossacks. Songs flow throughout the film. A Cossack without a song is not a Cossack.
The actors live, see the changes in their emotions, just stunning: Evgeny Tkachuk (Grigory) - great, the film shows how he turns from a boy into a man. Polina Chernysheva (Aksinya) is, of course, a middle-Russian person, but who said that the Cossacks took only Cossacks as wives? A very attractive girl, with character, the actress’s play is very much liked. Daria Ursulak (Natalia) as in the book calm, compliant girl, what more do you want, gentlemen? Makovetsky (Pantelei Prokofievich) just joined the role, very organic.
The result: excellent acting, excellent panoramic shooting, an abundance of songs, everyday life, the film will be shot strictly according to the book.
Be objective and if you have already begun to compare, review the film of Gerasimov and Ursuliak, even at least at the same meeting in the sunflowers of Gregory and Aksigny. Discard unfoundedness.
It's been a while since I laughed. Thank you for the wonderful travesty of the Quiet Don.
What did the director smoke? First, temporary shifts. Everyone mows and mows. And, by nature, it is not clear when and what they mow. Especially impressive are the women who rake and wilami shrug in uncut grass. Bushka goes with a ripe sunflower, and then with Axinya tumbling into the immature. Well, that's okay. In time, trouble. Space is a problem. A shell explodes in front of Grishka in a clean field, and, apparently, the explosion threw it into the nearest dense forest. With huge fallen trees (explosion fell?). And so he crawls, he is poor, along with the colonel in the forest, crawling, so ... tadam, in the hospital in a clean field. And the sky at sunset, the sky at sunrise. And everyone smokes, smokes. I don’t think Natasha smoked (my dad was embarrassed). Therefore, her painful and pulls to do something with yourself. Whether the director smoked something, or in the editing room smoked. Or is it all together...
There is such a genre of film parody. That’s why I thought this film was made in this genre. At the wedding of Natalia and Gregory I wanted to say ' Shas I will sing...', so the scene repeated the familiar scene from the favorite cartoon. I liked it.
The first series was compared to the work of Gerasimov. To compare with the work of Bondarchuk does not make sense. In the middle of the second series with the match, Grishka stopped comparing and completely immersed himself in the film.
Chic as usual honed dialogues of Sergei Ursuliak. Although without watching the series, he ironically compared it to the chic liquidation. About the dialogues and that Sergey will reveal them so that it will be a little out of time communication events like Liquidation. Israel has not spoken a rural dialect for a long time. No, not figuratively. These jokes were akin to the twisting of words in the Russian countryside. They were and have been for a long time.
The author tries to show in many films if this local argo remained in the early 20th century, then only in remote places, but not in Odessa. The most educated nation in the world has long since departed from the language of boroughs. How, however, Zhvanetsky is trying to do this by citing some fictional dialogues of Israel in Odessa.
On the show next. How accurate is the sparkling direction. The Gerasimov series has short quotes and long scenes. At Ursuliak everything is compressed dynamically, but absolutely more saturated and I repeat about the staging of chic dialogues. Everything is perfected so that it is no longer possible to repeat.
Characters. Incredibly accurate. Melekhov with the beginning of the novel is only 18-19 years old. Axinje 24 seems. Magnificent Bystritskaya with Glebov is still older. The genotype of the Don Cossack, albeit with an admixture of grandmother ' Turks' accurate. You can talk all you want. For example, Leszczynskie are as accurate. And more understandable are the actions and the plot. Gerasimov circumcised everything on 'Melekhov's son?, accept' The son is more accurate for the Cossack nobility. And so on. Here, scene after scene can be discussed with admiration.
Thank you for not spat on Russia as it has become. The film is gentle, with love. The novel already seems bland. Scenes and dialogue can not be opened in the head reading a novel. I hope there will be awards and awards. Event of Russian, Russian culture. The screen adaptation not only succeeded, but also merged with the novel there that the novel sparkled even more.
Ursuliak took on a heavy burden, perhaps he has never taken such a series before. I should have known that they would compare him with Gerasimov and that they would go through his work and the source.
And walked... Mostly those who have not read the novel!! No wonder in one review here the woman writes that this is her favorite novel, and she cannot understand where Daria has a child. You can see right away: I haven't read... This is not a car, but a caravan of carts.
The latter say that the actors are nothing, in comparison with the old. And it is clear, Bystritskaya, Glebov, Ilchenko and Khityaeva. You can't put that back together.
IMHO. This film is closer to the novel than Gerasimov. Because it's much longer. In the old film adaptation, it was because of timekeeping that a lot was lost. But the movie was still very good.
Actor's selection. In my opinion, many have forgotten that 'Cossacks' - people like everyone else, they have two arms and two legs, the height and weight is basically the same as everyone else. But we are used to ' monumental' heroes and want to see a knight under 2.5 meters tall, jumping on a huge stallion, famously chopping the enemy at 100 goals per swing!
Grigory - Excellent, I did not expect from the actor, thank you Eugene. I think he perfectly showed the transition from a stray boy to a tired soldier who does not understand what is happening, where to go and how to live in his relatively young years at the end of the novel. Sorry, but Glebov was 43, when he played Gregory, and this caused rejection of him as an actor for the role, he could not give that transition, it was always clear that he is ready for everything and in general does not doubt and knows that yes, his suffering was not clear with such figurativeness.
Pantelei - Makovetsky is good as always, but here is the trouble with him, this is Makovetsky. He is so Makovetsky that I think he should have been voiced, but even then it would have been wrong.
Aksinya - Well, it will not be for you Bystritskaya, calm down already, everything is fine with her and the actress copes well with the role.
ALL:
The only thing missing from the show was funding. There is a lack of much bigger battles. Though after 'Life and Destiny' I thought it would be all right. The scale of some scenes was lacking. This is where the first movie wins.
In general, this is a worthy series, worse than the fact that you will watch it for sure you will not, you need to understand that many characters are revealed not in the first or even in the second series.
You can shout as much as you want that it is not what you want, but then take and remove one!
Looking forward to completion!!! Thanks to Ursuliak and the whole team for a great new series, which is not disgusting to watch against the background of all the slag that is being removed.
On the basis of negative feedback here on the film:
People, I understand that everyone has the right to their own opinion, but when you begin to discuss something, you at least get acquainted with the source, history and way of life of the characters. If you don’t know anything about it, don’t talk about others. Or do you walk around and drink from the water? As for the pure form of soldiers, etc., everything is also very natural and good, the only thing that is not enough. And those who think that if the soldiers, so they must necessarily sit in the mud and chew, sorry, also do not know anything, if everyone fought as you imagine, then even before the front line from fleas, typhus and dysentery would rest, well, there would be no one to fight.
The weakest, in my opinion, is the musical accompaniment. Completely Chekhov, sometimes transferred to the "Marriage of Balzaminov" roulades, turn the Cossacks into a crowd of drunken officials from the numbers. Actually, there is nothing more to say about music, it falls out of the video so much that there is nowhere else. Cossack folklore, of course, is a thing in itself, but it is still a movie, a certain convention, so unnecessary documentaryism in the series, I think, is inappropriate.
Heroes.
I will immediately say that I remember the images of the second plan most of all - Nikita Efremov is simply chic in the role of Mitka Korshunov, reminds Gary Oldman from the Fifth Element, a one hundred percent "gentle killer", who is increasingly beastly. Stepan Astakhov, Peter Melekhov are also very convincing and, in their own way, interesting. I agree that Makovetsky tried very hard, to the point of self-denial, but the bar is very high, did not reach it. The same goes for the other actors in the lead roles - they tried, they turned out in places. Gregory ruins the “similarity” of Glebov. It is necessary to compare, and here alas. Axinya liked it, the devil is present, everything is normal. Natalia has a Middle Russian appearance, and asks for “Three Sisters” or “Dark Alleys”, a young lady, not a Cossack.
The film is watchable, if you forget about the epic of Gerasimov or even Bondarchuk, you need to take into account the serial scale, and does not pretend to be epic. So in Russia at the beginning of the twenty-first century understand “quiet Don”. Let him.
This time Ursuliak disappointed me! Daughter (Natalia) - no, Gregory even worse, some underdeveloped with a sarcastic voice, such can not like, no core, charm. Aksinya does so, behaves like a whore, and the novel describes LOVE, in the first series Aksinya hugs Grishka with painted nails, Daria has a child from somewhere, in the film all the characters go in brand new clean identical coats and caps, doubles from TSUM (?), everything is so unconvincing, Zaitseva does not pull on his heroine, the rest of the characters are all the same, you will not understand who is who, this despite the fact that I personally read my favorite novel many times, and who does not read anything at all. We passed in the film by the most important, where the heroes are tormented in their homeland, in their native land, where the Cossack gatherings, where those moments when they were divided into white and red, too much with bed scenes, this good on the air and so in bulk. Cossacks on horses with sabers look ridiculous in the film. Makovetsky also disappointed me for the first time. Sholokhov and Gerasimov were not up to your teeth.
With fanfare announced by Brilev and Kiselev, the fourth film adaptation of “Don”, designed once again to answer the age-old question of the beautiful marquise “how it all happened” and to clarify to the ignorant where there were demons in 2 volumes, was another serial empty. A wasteland that is hopeless and unviable. A flat multi-colored picture, just like in cheap digital cartoons, well, does not pull on the director’s stated attempt to transfer the classics to modern cinema. I repeat, this is not a film language, but the language of Russian TV series of recent years. They have neither plausibility, nor depth of images, nor acting, but there is a vague post-production with a change of filters of varying degrees of grayness (symbolizes the Bolshevik infection) / yellowness (symbolizes the unbearable ease of being of the pre-revolutionary era). This same magical game of light and shadow, in the spirit of Arkhip Ivanovich Kuindzhi, distinguished our Nikita Sergeevich in “Sunstroke”, which, as I understand, was the reason for conversations about “modern film language”.
However, to hell with all this aesthetic reasoning, let us descend from heaven to earth and look at Ursuliac’s Quiet Don impartially. What do we see? Empty buckets of Axiny, dangling on the trough like pendulums; Transformer axinu (in the sense that its forms sometimes appear, then suddenly evaporate); synthetic non-frequent shirts of Cossacks; changing seasons in the same scene and other trifles, annoyingly creeping into the eyes. Well, we can forgive this, and we will not find fault with the props.
It is better to stick not to what we see, but what we hear. The situation here is even more hopeless (if at all possible). The words of the South Russian dialect in the mouths of glossy, out of advertising cosmetics and shampoos, actors and actors sound highly comical. Coupled with a two-note synthesizer (maybe it is an orchestra, but it sounds like a casio of the late 80s), it all listens to and looks exactly like a “village of fools” in the ever-memorable television magazine “Calambur”. Well, the bear and the bees are somewhat lacking, but they are successfully replaced by hilariously evil sketchy communes created in the image and likeness of the Earthling and co. of the aforementioned N. S.
All this would be ridiculous if it were not a sacred duty to empathize with the suffering of heroes. That's not what I want. Moreover, the serial lengthening of the scenes to the complete impossibility of normal perception makes you not wait for the denouement of the episode, but turn on the rewind (oh, horror! the operator of my zombie box does not have such a possibility). In the shooting scene, which, probably, was supposed to convey the whole complex range of feelings of the characters, I want to exclaim: “Yes, kill him already, as long as you can pull this gum!”
In general, it would be possible to estimate and 4 - exactly on a disposable craft this film adaptation and pulls, but something interferes. This is probably why I put a subjective (?) two.
In this film adaptation ' Quiet Don' very much failed: the selection of actors, chosen a terrible nature, the insertion of songs, etc.
The film is repulsive from the first seconds, you do not believe the greasy, light-skinned actors who play Cossacks with Turkish blood.
Grigory Melikhov is a stocky man who has gone through several wars and who could lead people to death. You can't see that in Yevgeny Tkachuk.
Aksinya is a cheerful woman, bursting with health, not closed in herself.
And Gregory’s father is a rather thin man, very energetic, trying to survive in turbulent times. All these people are taken from life and can be seen on the Don. It's not even close here.
I don't know where they found these old, non-whitewashed houses. The Cossacks lived very well before the revolution, why such devastation is shown.
I would advise the director to remove 'Virgin Raised', the story itself is simpler, there is no depth, and ' Quiet Don' do not touch.
Why it is interesting to see: a good artistic and historical reconstruction with good props and consultants, filmed on the Don, in the "very" places with the participation of local residents - descendants of Cossacks and Cossacks.
What did not work out: there is no artistic integrity, won “seriality” as a set of plots with an inexpressive and simple camera work, with some artificiality of scenes and inexpressive acting.
And, of course, the main failure of the director is the main characters.
E. Tkachuk (played by Grigory Melekhov) is well suited to the role of the Odessa bandit in the series about Misha Yaponchik, can also successfully play the role of any other courtyard punk or market crook, but, as the first viewers have already correctly written, this plunging image, crooked fussiness and habits - this is not a Cossack. Especially not Cossack with a capital letter, prominent and with charisma, in which a married woman falls madly in love, will spit on everything and everyone and leave her husband, for whom the Cossacks will go into battle. This should be Grigory Melekhov, but he is not here.
As for Aksinya - also, an ordinary woman, a gray mouse, without a bright appearance, look and character, which are a dozen on the village and on top, do not lose their heads from such. Unconvincing.
Pantelei Prokofievich (Makovetsky) is good. Natalia (Ursuliak) - maybe, why not. Others seem to be less so too.
Frankly speaking, I did not expect something masterpiece from the new film adaptation. For a long time we have not put a movie (about series, especially based on classics, generally silent), which can be watched for more than 10 minutes. Even more, I was waiting for some epochal failure - the trailer did not impress me at all, but still Ursuljak put “Elimination”, so I decided to give the series a 10-minute chance.
Since I will not watch any more, my review will affect only the first three episodes (yes, I overpowered them, which already says a lot). I don’t think there will be an unexpected breakthrough, but it’s not likely.
First, I have to say that the production is better than expected (myself). The life of the Cossacks is well conveyed. Let’s close our eyes to all sorts of trifles like the fact that Daria is so thoughtful walking around with a child in her arms during suffering, Ilyinichna is sitting in black at her son’s wedding. It's the little things of life. The acting, in general, is also decent. But that's it. Nothing more remarkable. Let’s not compare with other versions, let’s not harshly judge how Sholokhov’s ideas are conveyed – no one can do art of this scale today. It may not be possible for the viewer...
Let’s take a look at the actors.
The focus of all three series is only Aksinya, Grishka and Pantelei, all the other actors represent some slurred mass. Although the episodes seem to be well-written, by the end of the third series, I did not understand who exactly from the Cossacks on the screen – they are all like one white and mustache. It's just clones. Female imagery is a problem. Ilyinichna, Daria, even Natalia - these are some statisticians. Daria did not even have a replica for three series, just flashes somewhere in the background. As for Natalia, I think this is a failure. Modern actors do not know how to convey with their eyes the inexpressible spiritual world of a person, so you have to turn around. Patience, humility, external closure Sholokhov Natalia degenerates in Ursuluk in her rejection of the Cossack world. This is some kind of librarian, it is incomprehensible how she got to the stove (to imagine her with a horse in her hands or with a 10-vedere cast iron on her grasp is simply wild). In the second episode, she knits, so it’s just a comedy. The actress was not even taught to hold spokes in her hands. Like all Cossacks, Natalia is thin and flat, but still has a rat tail instead of a braid. The actress plays frankly weakly, despite the father-director, but, again, maybe it’s not her fault, just the image is not written out at all, but it’s the most difficult, and it’s not enough to smile like a doll to lift it.
Pantelei-Makovetsky is not bad. But no more. This is a strong actor, but here imho he is underweight, then pulls. Especially ridiculous director's decision to make the actor constantly fall when he runs somewhere.
Axinha will go. Also skinny, but plays on a solid "4", although she failed the scene with Panteleeus - apparently, so this scene is played out behind the scenes in the form of the sound of falling buckets. Probably not at all.
Grigory - well, it's not clear yet. In the sense that this is one of the most tragic images of Russian literature, and it will be revealed further. Who will watch the series, will know if the actor will be able to such a depth of image, but to be honest, I did not particularly see it. This is just a serial hero-lover, in general, also played on a solid “4”.
Like I said, Ilyinich is nothing, it's just creepy. Some black skinny shadow in the background. Daria was at least given a “scene of dipping her husband in a pebble with water” – at least one character is shown, and Ilyinichna has zero. Maybe then the actress will reveal, but the director’s skill consists in not taking much screen time to show the viewer in detail and deeply even episodic images, not to mention the main ones. I think I want a lot of things.
I’m not saying I didn’t like the series. You can watch, especially the younger generation, who will like both the lubricated Cossacks and the usual Hollywood love scenes (Aksignyi clothes scattered around the field are, of course, a strong move. Poor Sholokhov), although many of them are frankly drawn out. But I pass. Maybe I take on a lot, but I think I belong to a generation that is used to movies, where real people live, not average actors.
