"The Good Boy" has a film - a prototype in the Soviet past - Karen Shakhnazarov's painting "The Courier." Good Boy is not a sequel, a prequel, or a remake. It's a tracing. With the proven years of the film removed the main storylines, types of characters, individual scenes. Further along this contour, other colors are poured, allowing to modernize and refresh the classical plot. The plot is different, the plot is similar. At its center is a typical representative of a new generation. Life is just beginning, in the biography, except for two lines about the place of birth and the composition of the family, there is nothing to report. In The Good Boy, this modest biography of Kohl Smirnov is presented in English during the opening credits, in The Courier, Ivan Miroshnikov instead of an absent biography writes a fictional story of a French nobleman in the official application form when applying for a job at the very beginning of the film. The beginning is the same, the reception is the same. Very organic and charming young actor Semyon Treskunov builds a drawing of the role with an eye on Fyodor Dunaevsky. Koli Smirnov has a friend strikingly similar to Miroshnikov's friend - Basin, both in character and purely externally. Miroshnikov has a funny mother - a failed actress (I. Churikov), Koli Smirnov has a frankly eccentric father - a failed scientist (K, Khabensky). The secretary of the magazine “Questions of Knowledge” in the “Courier” dreamed of marrying a Japanese, the English teacher in “The Good Boy” all the forces relies on an affair with the headmaster of the school. 30 years ago, the head of the main character, the editor-in-chief, dreamed that in the Moscow region the pressure never fell below 740 millimeters, since the fish bites better, today’s boss, the headmaster of the school, dreams of finding the key to victory over slot machines. In the portrait of the new generation, both The Courier and The Good Boy are the modern youth dances that 30 years ago and now the films begin and end. Finally, the most important locomotive of the plots in “The Courier” and “The Good Boy” is the subtleties of recognizing and attaching two worlds to each other – the world of adults with established rules and laws and the world of a new generation. These worlds conflict, reconcile, try to understand each other with varying degrees of luck - and this moves the plot three decades ago, and today. Aren't today's adults asking the pathetic questions, "We want to know in whose hands we will hand over the building we built, who will get what we fought for?" So, today’s adults are the same age as Ivan Miroshnikov, who is fed up with these questions from his youth. That is why they are not asked today.
Then begins a more complex interaction. Typical boyish chatter of puberty Vanya Miroshnikov about the billowing breast of physics teacher Nadezhda Ivanovna in the laboratory among cones and retorts, in the new Russian film will gain flesh and blood. In a high school student and an English teacher, the breasts will rise not in boy’s fables, but in reality in the teacher’s apartment. Now “I kissed my teacher and played with the headmaster in the casino” from the category of chatter in the wasteland behind the school goes into the category of real events. What came out of it? The authors sound the alarm about the moral immaturity of modern teachers? Nope. Let's not be hypocritical - these piquant situations turn into a cheerful comedy of situations? Not either! Do fathers and children know each other better? It is. The difference in views on love, relationships, luck, goals and meanings is the most interesting and significant part of the picture. In addition, the authors do not offer unambiguous answers. But this well-designed structure must be well and firmly mounted. But in “The Good Boy”, as in most modern paintings, traditionally not twisted during the assembly. And it's annoying.
The main problem of the picture is style negligence and dirt. What do we still see on the screen - a subtle psychological sketch or a film adaptation of the unrestrained youth fantasy? The film makes a difference to both sides. But instead of grace, you get lameness. In favor of fantasy, prologue. A sun-drenched Moscow suburb, a family breakfast on the balcony, a model of a plane fluttering in the air to the sounds of jazz vocalism a la Bert Bakarach for Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, a school class with a computer sketch of teenage comics. In favor of psychology, Kohli's frighteningly credible dialogues with teachers and the principal. These episodes coexist and alternate, but do not merge, a single tissue does not come out, it is constantly torn. And mainly because of the actor's discord. The Koli family does not unite into one whole simply because Konstantin Khabensky (father), Irina Denisova (mother) and Andrei Karasevich (brother) live in absolutely parallel style realities. What did director Oksana Karas take in her film from animal organics Mikhail Efremov (school director)? Nothing but endless stupid laughter, which the beautiful actor made the seed of his not the best role. Why did this picture need Alexander Pal (teacher) - an artist of a rare sharp-characteristic gift, just to be present at the frame, decorating the title with his name? Probably the best acting work in the film, with the exception of Semyon Treskunov, is an episode of Tatiana Dogileva. And it turned out mainly because, despite the crowd in the frame, Dogileva plays a benefit monologue. Here, the reliance on the Courier begins to crack at the seams. If in Shakhnazarov’s film the acting partnership was aerobatics (remember at least the episode with the Alyabevsky Nightingale, where Basilashvili, Urusov, Evdokimov, Menshov, Nemolyaev and Dunavevsky played a whole symphony of views and relationships), in the film Karas every artist for himself. Someone has more skill - and they are interesting. Someone like Ieva Andreyevite, with a greasy monoplane manner would look much more organic in the series “The Return of Mukhtar”.
What is the most visible brand of the new generation? Fashion and music. It is through clothes, hairstyles, musical idols that the new generation declares its goals, intentions, tastes. It is no coincidence that both the Courier and the Good Boy are framed in episodes of modern dances. To see in these strange movements and unusual rhythms the picture of tomorrow, of tomorrow’s people, of the style of the future is the most tempting moment. And now the main difference between the Soviet original and the Russian tracing. In the finale of the Courier, a demobilized soldier passes by dancing teenagers. He's a little older than the dancers. A medal on the kitel, a scar on the cheek. At the time of the Courier, there was a war in Afghanistan. The soldier looks at his younger brothers and lowers his eyes. In the finale of “The Good Boy”, youth dances on the banks of the Moscow Canal are filmed from somewhere beyond the sky. I am not saying that a veteran of the ATO or a contract sergeant with a Syrian tan should have participated in these dances. But the view is telling. Still, for all the advantages of the film Oksana Karas for a generation, she also looks at some sky-high abstract look. And not even for a generation, but for a group of teenagers from the northern outskirts of our capital.
Karasova Ear. Essential black, covered with a progressive gloss. No heart, no mind. A movie where everything is secondary. A direct reimagining of Western “teenage” films about “life”. In which they are empty, aimless and dirty living as if mature people pass their life “truth” nothing about it, not knowing, but full of “adulthood” and youthful pontifices to the milksuckers. Which, with all their maximalisms, drives her to a cynical grotesque. The entire school and parenting staff is intricately portrayed as mentally survivors and moral omissions. With the cherry as a director, traveling on an expensive foreign car and successfully combining family and position with a constant frank walk through women and casinos. Talentedly, we must give him credit, with the knowledge of the case, played by M. Efremov. And what is the role of a slut and a nymphomaniac hiding in a cute image of an English teacher (however I can not believe and just uncomfortable for a pretty actress), not knowing who she is better to stop at - a male teacher led by an irrepressible director or go to the hands of students, which is still frightening consequences (which here she admits). In the finale of the film, performing under a bravura melody worthy of the award cheerleadingists dance, all cultivated in this way in the “as if school” the younger generation, in slender rows and in close unity intends to go strictly “their”, so unobtrusively open to them – and the film itself, and its age heroes – the way. At least another Maidan. And it's actually happening, as we see around us. “Se la vi”, but still for very good actors by today’s standards, from Dogileva to Khabensky, it is a shame. Playing in such an empty - and dangerous for unstable young souls and minds - "film" (however, they are not used to portray the unknown - see the same Khabensky - "geographer who drank the globe": another thing). I am so sorry for the time I spent on this nonsense.
P.S. The film is a Kinotaur laureate. And this says everything: about the film, about Kinotavr, about the Russian film industry, and about our life in general. However, as the current Western world shows, there is still room to fall.
A simple, children's film with an uncomplicated plot. It looks easy and unstressed, sometimes funny. You can watch with children of younger adolescence, older would be bored.
Simple on-species adult life becomes very complex and ambiguous
Well, try to make a film about children with a non-childish target audience, while targeting teenagers who have one foot in adulthood. But I would be 16-18 years old half of the jokes and did not go, the other half would be “adults”.
This is the movie "Good Boy."
Plot:
Not really. Just a sitcom. There's a romcom and a detective and everything. When they film Dragunsky, then there is no plot as such... more precisely, there are a bunch of short plots, as well as stories about Denis Korabllev: short, capacious.
With this film, it turned out more and more interesting: in 2011, Semyon Treskunov was conceived and tested, five years were looking for money and when they found “the boy grew up”, but the performer was not refused. As a result, the audience grew.
It's good. Almost all the performers coped with the task. Even Dogileva coped with the tiny role of headmaster. And Khabensky in a completely untypical role for him as a healer father.
Well, the current sitter Mikhail Olegovich ... he is, as always, in his own style. I think I got a lot out of my life in the role. His father was more ideal in the role, although the walker was still the same.
And in the end, the film is about how simple-looking adult life becomes very complex and ambiguous.
By chance I saw the trailer and I thought this movie would entertain me.
God, why do popular actors agree to star in low-grade movies? This movie is bad for everyone except familiar faces. Okay. There's nothing more to say. I gave him 4 points just because of the people who gave me pleasure in other films.
What exactly did I not like?
- Bad directing. The way some of the footage is picked up is just disappointing. For example, when classmates were on the roof of the school, instead of showing the overall plan as the headmaster sees them, they show the moment when he appears on the roof. You can’t say otherwise.
- Bad sound engineering. Problems emerged from the beginning. The first shots and voices are almost inaudible against the background of music. About sound transitions and too bright noises I do not say. It's like the student was doing it.
- Weak scenario. Do you think your head is working at all? What motivates the teacher when she pours the student? And don't lie to yourself that she's so upset. Again, the heroes were not really introduced. The exposure is weak.
Actors of the student theater, not counting the deserved, of course. Again, take the teacher with the student. How does she get drunk? Horrible. At first I thought she was just hiding a man, because she blew, because she was weird. Well, that's just sad.
In the 18th minute, I turned the movie off with the backing of tax money. I decided to write a review to save your time. Don't thank me.
A good movie about a good boy and good people. A naive film about a naive boy and naive people. A stupid movie about a stupid boy and stupid people. A good film about a good boy and good people. A positive film about a positive boy and positive people.
Different points of view? Nope. Just a matter of terminology.
Good morning. Naive sur. Stupid sur. Positive Sur.
For some reason spontaneously remembered 'Shirli-myrli' Menshov. But there is pure postmodern, social satire. It's a little different. It's esoteric.
Music. Actors. Khabensky. Efremov. Dogilev. Treskunov. The whole picture.
'You're an Aquarius and I'm a Libra', '12-36', ', 'Bzdanagoga!' and, of course, the key to solving all miracles is the character Oleg Sokolov. Good, naive, stupid, kind, positive magic. Not the mind, but the heart. Consciousness determines being. Take this film literally and simply believe.
The illusionist performed in the circus with an unpretentious trick, but as soon as the viewer learned the secret, all the charm dispelled, like smoke from a burned computer class. This movie doesn't have to be explained. In general, it is not very clear how to review it - you need to choose such words so that the user 'Kinopoisk' quietly nodded to himself: 'Yes, yes, everything is so'. But to do this, you need to catch the general mood and express it in letters, and with intuitive-sensitive films this is an unbearable task.
As empirically caught the pleasure of viewing an easy and unpretentious picture, so empirically you can try to guess who this film might like and who should recommend it! You know for sure: there are people who are much more enjoyable to engage in everyday routine under the unobtrusive information background. Let's say music. Or under the radio. Or another series of 'soap opera' although they are now slowly out of fashion. Or under the worn N + 1 time film, which you know by heart to the last frame and will not be careful to watch, but turn it on ' flashlight ' - the very thing. So, 'Good Boy' is the perfect background film! Especially if you watched it carefully for the first time and not without pleasure looked to the end.
You won’t watch this movie, even if you like it. But if you like to do ' under the TV' your business, then click on some cable channel 'Good boy', you leave him with the words: 'Here! Let him play!' And you will not notice how inspiration will come with you, brightening up an hour and a half of boring everyday life.
After all, this is the artistic and, if you will, embodied message of Koli Smirnov and all. Everyone's weird. Everyone goes crazy in their own way.
For any director or screenwriter involved in film production, the topic of growing up is one of the most difficult and at the same time one of the most popular. In different eras, films of this kind will be different, because they will represent completely different generations of people. The unifying factor will be that only touched on topics such as first love. In a similar format, the domestic comedy “The Good Boy” was filmed.
Synopsis The film describes a few days in the life of an ordinary ninth grader Koli Smirnov and the heap of events that happened to him during this time. One day Kolya suddenly falls in love with his English teacher Alice Denisovna and tries to hit on the daughter of the school principal Ksyusha Dronova. In parallel, someone sets fire to the school annex, and suspicion falls on Kolya. At the same time, Kohli's father announces a sharp change in sleep mode. Now Koli has very little time to solve family problems, understand love affairs and find the culprit of the fire.
Game of actors In fact, the film largely benefits from the star cast, which is mostly involved in secondary roles. Of course, first of all, I would like to note Semyon Treskunov in the role of Koli, an ordinary teenager who learns life through the prism of his environment, while remaining a decent person, ready for daring actions for the happiness of people close to him. Also, it is impossible not to mention Konstantin Khabensky in the unexpected comedic role of Pope Kohli, a “mad” scientist who from idleness sometimes puts experiments on his own family. Finally, it is necessary to highlight Mikhail Efremov in the role of director Dronov, a rather complex person who has dealt with directorial duties, but is not able to understand the personal life in which Kohl is involved.
Directorship To be honest, in this regard, the film caused mixed feelings due to the chaotic development of the action and the accelerated pace. Instead of somehow bringing the viewer to the essence, the director immediately began the story of Kohli, showing the main aspects of his life. Then we see the hero hanging out with his friends, discussing girls. Then we show the wonderful life of his family, where a non-working father-scientist puts insane experiments on his relatives. He is drawn into a romantic story with his English teacher and her secret relationship with the school principal. All together it looks, on the one hand, too confusing and absurd, on the other, with a certain amount of fun.
Scenario As mentioned above, the action of the plot takes several days from the life of the main character of an ordinary schoolboy Kohli. At home, he has some kind of bedlam: the father-scientist decides to transfer the whole family to the 12/36 system, in which they sleep for 12 hours, and 36 are awake, because of which none of the members get enough sleep. At school, there is turmoil when someone sets fire to the school annex, and a tenth-grader Ksyusha decides that this is the work of Koli. But the apogee for the hero is his relationship with Alice Denisovna, who mistakenly kisses the student, thereby provoking his romantic attraction, which is fueled by jealousy for the headmaster, who really hit on the teacher. Such a plotting confusion is a bit discouraging. However, along with all this, as a hero draws useful lessons from all these life situations that will help him to understand his thoughts and feelings.
The result "Good boy" is a kind of movie. On the one hand, the film can confuse with its unusual presentation, chaotic plot development and dramatically changing tone. On the other hand, he disposes of himself thanks to the unsophisticated meaning that was laid in the basis of the plot.
7 out of 10
I want to say thank you to our cinematographer for this beautiful picture. It is good that more and more worthy Russian comedies are coming out on the big screens.
In this film, the whole plot is set so well that the eyes and soul even rejoice that it is a Russian comedy in our time. At first it seemed a little strange to me, but then you understand and penetrate into this atmosphere of various styles. The most important thing is that there is a kind humor in the film that makes this film so easy and not arrogant. In such a short time it was able to show and reveal the history and character of each hero. As it seems to me, actors did not quite play in their usual roles, but they still got used to and coped perfectly, were very stylish and funny. And young actors one hundred percent fit into this story and perfectly coped with the elaboration of each character. I especially want to highlight Semen Treskunov. Very young and talented guy with impeccable charisma.
The movie is kind, funny and not tensing, with good musical accompaniment, which further added the emu of ease in viewing. It was able to accommodate both funny moments and rather serious life situations. Even if there were mistakes in some scenes, the whole atmosphere of the film as a whole easily covered it.
10 out of 10
Indeed, before the premiere of the film, there was no special loud advertising of this film anywhere and in any form. The premiere of the film began quietly and calmly, without loud advertising slogans promising something mega cool and incredible.
I am a lover of life, philosophical films, especially concerning the themes of adolescent children, the period of their growing up and formation, so to speak. That's exactly what this movie is about. Philosophical, deep and complex film. Difficulty in the good sense of the word. This is not a superficial film, where everything is clear and visible as in the palm of your hand, here you need to think, reflect to understand and reveal the meaning and idea of the film.
The cast, in my opinion, was selected very competently, all are in their places and play their role. Everyone knows K. Khabensky, so it is not worth saying that the acting is excellent. Also, the main character, aspiring actor S. Treskunov, is gaining experience and playing more confidently.
The problem of growing up of the generation of children is a very complex and, in my opinion, sensitive and relevant topic at all times, because it is still not fully studied and not disclosed. This topic can be discussed for years. For me, this is the most pressing and interesting topic, so I liked the film completely. I’ll look at it again, maybe even more.
A pleasant light film about a teenager, the beginning of many films is long and tedious, but then the scene unfolds the active roles of a boy. A lot of funny and sentimental moments. I liked the cast and work of Khabensky, amazing music and in general this film can be watched by the whole family. Of course, Khabensky's work here is very good, and professionally he's the boy's dad, and his dad's a little bad with his head. This boy I think played his role well was interesting and a lot of fun.
There comes a point in every person’s life when the rules of their family become questionable, and the world becomes a different place. A good boy turns into a thinking man who realizes that he is the master of his life. The most important thing is to remain a good person. So it happened with Kolya Smirnov, who literally in one week becomes an adult, as with him there are many different events in his life, both love and social. He fell in love with his very beautiful girl, a classmate, and at the same time with a more mature teacher who sees his love and does not cut his mark. How to be a child and a good person?
It's a great movie. Watching events was interesting to me, and the hero was fun from the heart. I definitely recommend watching this movie!
This is a great, kind, with good humor and creative film. The film was able to accommodate both funny moments and quite serious life situations. About how a young man, a high school student enters adulthood, which is almost all built on compromises, deals with himself and others. That we all miss this inner Koli Smirnov from time to time, saying things that we are ashamed and afraid to admit to ourselves. They are eternal values that do not change from generation to generation. The most important quality of this film is its unobtrusive, non-showy sobriety, namely a clever morality about true love and about life, with an interesting combination of funny and important. The acting is amazing. I especially wanted to mention the performance of the magnificent Semyon Treskunov, who has already shown the highest professionalism in the trilogy “Private Pioneer”. You believe him immediately and unconditionally. The picture is super, which means that it can leave a feeling of indelible joy in the soul of any viewer.
This picture falls on the unprepared head of the viewer as a powerful stream of positive emotions. The Good Boy is a hymn to the absurdity of our lives, one of the few films that has taken the liberty of saying that in this world no one is sure of anything, no one understands anything, and no one has actually grown up. Therefore, at the session it is very easy to feel like a teenager again, with all this cosmic confusion in your head and feel that such a state is actually not much different from adult life.
Despite the pretended artlessness and teenage carelessness in building the plot and staging individual scenes, “The Good Boy” is an adult film, sometimes irreconcilably sad and philosophically wise. Oksana Karas did not preach to anyone, and she did not look for exits - she simply offered to live and come to terms with all the strangeness of this life, which still can not be explained. Most importantly, I did it with a smile.
This picture is a ray of light, a heat gun designed to warm the souls of the audience. It revolves around witty dialogues and cinematic tricks of all stripes and cinematic techniques.
This film I would say the triumph of the young actor Treskunov Semyon, who at 16 looks more venerable artist than other actors. And although it is generally difficult to find fault with the cast here, Treskunov eclipses everyone and everything. His original and sincere play you want to watch and observe, he wants to believe more than Khabensky or Efremov – because the freshness and youthful recklessness, the freedom of action that he brings to his work, is one of the great shares of the whole film.
This picture is a sensitive loving instruction for children and adults, a modern parable of unfulfilled growing up and adulthood, an eternal joke about a crazy world and a call to compromise and forgiveness for all. It should be seen by everyone, because it is funny and kind about each of us, and because it is another chance not to miss the return of good Russian cinema to the screens.
Pleasant comedy, good soundtracks, acting, plot, do not break away from the screen - exciting, this is a quality film.
My Saturday night was very enjoyable and fun thanks to this film, which I found by chance and watched by chance, too, without planning. I just felt like I wanted something easy and joyful.
I love our cinema because it shows our realities, our faces and our humor, everything is understandable and native (and this film is no exception). But it is not always possible to find something high-quality, with a good performance of actors and an unbeaten plot. For example, before this film, I included the series 'House on a cold key', this is the standard of pop, fictional plot and strained play of actors, I did not even write a review - how many of them stamped for ' so that something played against the background'! This film is a pleasant exception, it stands out against the background of mass cheapness. Therefore, who also loves, but has long been disappointed in Russian films' - I recommend that you step away from your rules and watch 'Good Boy'!
From the very first minutes I saw the father of our good boy Kohli, I knew that I would definitely watch this movie. Because Colin's father is something inimitable! A domestic tyrant, iron-confident in his rightness, trying his 'genius' ideas on his family, pedantic and obsessed with exact time: 'Ira! It's been seven minutes since my work day ended! And where's my dinner?' In general, a funny and eccentric guy, I liked him the most, and looking at him, I could not help smiling - so cheered up with his matchless game! And his wonderful phrase ' It is hard for you, Kolya, to have in this life!' as if taken from the language of my parents. Surprisingly, Kolinsky’s dad was played by Konstantin Khabensky – he did not expect to see him here and did not deliberately look for films with him.
The main character - Kolya (Semen Treskunov) - played just fine, and in principle there are no actors in this film who played poorly. Everyone's done great. I didn’t want to take off the screen so as not to miss an interesting acting game. The only teacher who liked Kole so much (a young Englishwoman, actress Ieva Andreevei, a beauty just!), as it seemed to me, drunken played not very well, it was more like a drug dope, but not alcoholic. Oh, yeah, the ninth-grader didn't really like the drinking moment, nor did a few vulgar moments, but I think they're within the pale. There's a lot of crap going on, it's okay. I'm glad there was no smoking. In my opinion, this film can be watched by teenagers, just 8-9 grades, as well as the main character, and if you are outraged by some vulgar moments - so in the youth environment and not so ' Tsar and Hello', the teenager will not see and will not learn anything new.
I really liked the moments with the painted elements in the film, it gives it a certain zest. The music is perfectly selected - it is not a dull faceless thing, which is full of the same faceless series & #39; a la melodrama'. I don’t understand why in other reviews people complain about bad soundtracks (or maybe they complain about the quality of the film? pirated screen?).
The film is very pleasant, easy humor without sliding into American and imitating it. This is very pleasing - I still want to see something of my own, and not clutters and attempts. Here we will see the life of an ordinary ninth-grader Koli - school environment, home environment, his first love, attempts to live as his conscience says. I was amazed at how good a boy he really is – he doesn’t want to lie, he doesn’t want to pretend to be someone he isn’t, I think these guys are already rare. This is a kind, resting film, leaving behind a pleasant feeling, to some extent it can even be called soulful - it's not just a torn comedy & #39; to beat'. There's a plot, there's a morality. This movie is great for me. I'm really glad I found him.
Which film brought together the most fashionable actors of four generations, became the main winner of Kinotavr and caused a lot of positive and frankly minimal reviews, without being an absolute masterpiece? The phenomenon of “The Good Boy” is that it almost does not cause polar assessments, but it is equally far from the definitely dull grayness and the radiance of genius. He's just cute and cool. It would seem.
More, it seems, and can not say, but the format of the review suggests details. The main of them usually escapes the attention of at least the mass audience, and this detail is one of the most controversial and informal characters of local show business Mikhail Mestetsky as the author of the script. Mestetsky, we recall, is the person in whom Legend No. 17 coexists, the most crazy film of the Russian cinematographer of recent years, The Raggy Union, and the aesthetic banter of the Shklovsky musical project. In short, such a character could not just write a quality movie about a difficult teenage life.
Good Boy Week Koli Smirnov is the samurai’s path by archetypal teenage markers of success. To make fun with the first beauty of the class, to squirm with the headmaster, to win with a sheet of money, to deal with the main scandal of the year, to humiliate - albeit not quite with their own and not quite hands - the main urban, to draw such an intrigue with the coolest teacher to become a knight for her in shining armor. That's exactly what all gnobby chucks from the 5th to the 11th grade dream about, choking on blood with tears behind garages. Director Oksana Karas very accurately visualizes masterfully rewritten by Mestetsky from the collective teenage unconscious fairy tale about an ugly duckling who becomes a beautiful prince and defeats everyone. Of course, this has little to do with reality in its documentary sense - but to evaluate the "Good Boy" from the point of view of lifelikeness would be the height of naivety, this is exactly what a set of dreams, visions, desires and wishes were made before going to the board of the cherished wishes of school students of all times and peoples.
The collection of myths makes the living heroes warm, and above all – the magnificent four mentioned in the first lines of the text. Brilliantly solo in the lead role, Semyon Treskunov, whose only problem is that the years, alas, do not spare him (unlike the same Khabensky, for example, which we are talking about), which means that soon he will move to another age league, play charismatic-ridiculous teenagers again will be no one, and the new Russian unashamed movie about children will end, barely beginning. Wonderful with his chimpanzee facial expressions, Alexander Pal is verbose, but expressive, as always. Already noted ageless Khabensky in his own, perhaps after the film "Mechanical Suite", antiheroic image for his career - father Kohli, a mad animal farmer-chemist, a parody of everything you can. And, of course, Efremov in the role of the don-jouan director of the school. It seems that he is not quite in his role here - he does not drink at all! - but is important for the semantic connection of generations, because Kolya Smirnov is a clear reincarnation of the same, Mishe-Ephraim Peti Kopeikin from When I Will Be a Giant on a new round of historical development (or immutability?) of such concepts as courage, nobility and trolling. Which in an unpretentious film about a good boy are revealed so easily and simply that you can understand the jury of “Kinotavr” and review this movie more and more.
8 out of 10
'The Good Boy' is another Russian film, another comedy about ninth grader Kola Smirnov, who, like all schoolchildren, is engaged in everyday affairs, calmly learning himself, when he suddenly falls in love with his English teacher.
From this it all begins, through the thorns of trials, through many difficulties, he must understand who he is and what he is capable of. It’s a good movie where you have something to laugh at. The plot is interesting. You never want to look at your watch. The film is more focused on teenagers and schoolchildren, but many adults may also like it.
I’ve been writing reviews for years, no matter what you call it. And over the years of my periodic attempts, I came to the conclusion that a review of the film should be written after the second, or better still the third viewing with a difference of a couple of months, and sometimes years. But today's review will be about a picture I finished watching five minutes ago. Well, I'll try briefly:
In my opinion, Russian contemporary cinema has one very specific feature: in any film, even comedy, there is always a place for a spoonful of tar. The humor is sometimes so black that at the end of viewing, it is difficult to call the sensations pleasant. For example, the famous “bitter!” I personally had a residue on my soul that made me not want to revisit the picture (and not only because of that). But this feature is not a drawback, and the realities of harsh Russian reality, so historically developed. Therefore, I try not to scold Russian cinema, but to watch it very dosed. But right now — that rare moment when a film of domestic production makes me some invisible, inner smile. It is about Oksana Karas’ work “The Good Boy”.
I will say right away, for me this film is built exclusively on the actor who plays the main role - Semyon Treskunov. I remember him from the films Ghost, Mothers and Family Business, but I am sure that in the arsenal of this young talent there are many more paintings that deserve our attention. So, in my opinion, the guy has a huge future. The boy, who does not fall under the standards of modern beauty, seemed to me so charming that he overshadowed Konstantin Khabensky and Mikhail Efremov with his charisma, although at the very beginning of the viewing I assumed somewhere inside myself that these two, I will not be afraid of this word, the magnitude of Russian cinema, willy-nilly will pull the blanket over themselves. Personally, according to my own feelings, this did not happen.
The plot revolves around ninth grader Koli Smirnov. If I understand correctly, during the film we see a week in the life of a guy, but like all events at this age, everything happens so quickly that we see the character from completely different angles, thus gaining the opportunity to evaluate him as a person.
I do not want to talk about the plot, retell it, I will just say that for me Kolya Smirnov is a really good boy: he sympathizes, empathizes, but at the same time remains direct, inquisitive and resourceful.
Despite the turmoil and conflicts in the picture, without which action is in principle impossible, I, so to speak, received a dose of optimism intravenously. Whether the age of the character affected, when you know that at his age everything is absolutely corruptible, or the end unusual in such films played a cruel joke with me, but I am absolutely fascinated by this “Good Boy”. Of course, there are flaws in the film, but I do not want to notice the strange character of Alice Denisovna, which, in my opinion, is not quite adequate. Not a battle, under the influence of certain drugs, nor the soundtrack of a film that I did not remember at all. I don't want to notice!
I want to end with the idea that this is a story of growing up, but seeing characters like Father Kohli and Director of Drones, it seems to me that we never grow up, we simply evaluate any life situation through the prism of our own experience, but in our hearts we continue to be naive and kind. I want to believe that.
Now you will call me a grumpy grandmother, but I could not resist and keep silent.
"Good Boy" - what is this picture about? How difficult it is to be a “good” kid these days? How hard it is not to fall in love with a beautiful teacher? What is it like to grow up as a man and live with your parents? What to do if you have nothing to do? The list goes on, but it will not lead to answers, nor to the construction of a storyline in this movie. In the end: about everything and nothing!
I would like to note that the acting is simply disgusting. Khabensky, beyond criticism, of course. He can't play, he's doing well. The character surprised in the scene of a conversation with his son. It's nice here. But then! Yeva Andreyev, what's wrong with her? In the scene when XM came to her for a CD, it’s not immediately clear what she’s depicting. Directors, have you seen women grieving? And then, those shower scenes? Very uninteresting. The second place in the anti-rating of the acting I would give the “wife” Khabensky. It's a good idea, but we overplayed it. Vasily Butkevich is good, as a character and how he was embodied. Solid five. As for the main character, I never felt his true face. It's faceless.
Best of all, Alexander Pal. Thanks to the scenes with his participation, I laughed from the heart.
I didn’t want to believe any actor during the film. That's bad. It's not interesting. This is not a movie.
The pluses include stylization. All beautiful, young, and elegant.
Which ends up. Some kind of raw five. Pathetic time wasted and unrealized hopes that in the end it will be better.
P.S. Can you tell me why there are dances?
In the film a bunch of frank husks, which is so inherent in our & #39; new & #39; filmmakers. Characters who do not know where to meet, relationships that can never happen, mise-en-scene that thoughtlessly smacked in other films, heroes who do not believe one iota.
Not enough writers of the character-gambler, they make his sex macho, well, to a heap of the headmaster of the school, able to inspire the trust of teenagers (!). If only they tried to reveal this character, they just declared it. You see, we take a folder and throw: wow – the school principal can build a relationship with a student outside the hierarchy, wow – he has a young mistress, and he is not just old, but also sick (at least gambling), wow – and also a showdown with creditors, he took the situation, wow – but he has such a car, wow – and he and drummer can, wow, wow...
According to the same scheme, the father is built - the inventor of the perpetual mobile, he is a dependent tyrant, he is a former athlete, he is also ... a lover of selfies on a simulator, he is a former outsider from classmates with a humiliating nickname, he is still real. . .
I’ll stop a bit and put a line in the direction of the writers. Why do you always hang out with inventors? How many times have I seen them on our screens? Well, make Dad a screenwriter who just watches movies and never leaves the house. Hence, the teenager perceives the world as a movie, hence your borrowing will be conceptual, not banal plagiarism. And the screenwriter, tea is not an unfamiliar physicist.
But writers don't care. What are you thinking?
10 years of a teacher's relationship with a weary principal? Does your wife know that? A teenager in front of whom everyone is almost on his knees, should he move a little? A computer teacher who eavesdrops on the door, unable to stick a webcam in the next office? But playwrights do not think, and hence the relationship between the characters has no chemistry.
But, oddly enough, the film has the beginnings of the atmosphere: such an expectation of a teenage miracle, when just about, a little and all your boobs, and you give advice to adults, and cool peppers spoil your reputation. Let's hope that this is the merit of the director. If only it were supported by the history and revealed characters of the characters. . .
With the hope that the director will find a screenwriter, and not “inventors of the perpetual mobile”:
5 out of 10
The film received the top prize of Kinotavr 2016 and positive reviews in the press, so when I got the opportunity, I got acquainted with it.
I will immediately say that the main prize and reviews of journalists did not raise my hopes for sky-high heights, after all, the Russian film industry does not produce so many films that even the best of them (and not the fact that this is the best) was worthy of the time spent watching.
The Year of Russian Cinema, with the financial support of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the Cinema Foundation – the first shots made me understand that expectations should be lowered a little more, after all, who will shoot something worthwhile for state money? Wide rental and cash fees are not particularly necessary, money is issued from the budget free of charge. With that thought, I pulled myself together and decided not to judge the creators ahead of time. No reason.
At first, my nagging was more technical in nature - at what time does the film take place? On the screen there are clothes from the 80s, gadgets from the 10s and characters from the 90s. Maybe the director wanted to say that the school at all times is the same and nothing fundamentally changes, the same roles pass from generation to generation? Probably not, because such a catavasia happens with all props. For example, the family of a good boy is supposed to be poor, but they have an apartment with a highway and a balcony (at the same time!), in the bathroom a new tile and shower cabin, furniture and clothes straight from the USSR. If the creators do not know how ordinary people live, you can probably go and get acquainted, so that it was a little bit like, because the whole family looks like time travelers, transferred from 1985 to 2016.
Casting also raises questions.
The main love interest of the hero is not attracted to the schoolgirl and ahead of him in age by 4 years in reality (and judging by what is happening on the screen, I would determine their age as a tenth-grader and a third-year student).
The father of the hero (Konstantin Khabensky) - stuck in the past near-scientific freak, sitting on the neck of his wife-accountant, is entirely carved out of some strange plot cardboard, has not changed his clothes and has not glued his mustache since 1985.
The headmaster of the school (Mikhail Efremov) looks like a half-businessman from the 90s with a corresponding car and an incomprehensible source of income, given the situation in his apartment.
Stanislav Ilyich (Alexander Pal) does not look like a downtrodden computer science teacher, this is not his type.
But all these are petty nitpicks, paling before the development of the plot and the dialogue of the characters.
Adults (primarily the headmaster and English teacher) treat the student, who is seen almost for the first time, as a personal psychologist, entrusting him with their heart secrets, devoting him to the secrets and details of their relationships, which people usually guard and hide even from friends and relatives. After that, adults listen to the advice of the student and some of them try to implement with obvious results.
Given these features, as well as the unnatural nature of the characters and the environment, you can listen to dialogue only with your palm to your face. In order not to go into details and not to retell the plot for those who have not seen the film, an accurate idea of the level of material can be obtained by remembering the series for housewives, going in the afternoon on the first and second channels.
In general, what is happening resembles a sweet dream of a teenager - he meets with a teacher, then with the most popular girl in school, and now unmistakably guesses an eagle or tails, wins a jackpot in a casino, puts parents and directors in place.
Time to wake up.
Plus, good actors.
Cons – good actors are not in their places, bearing nonsense, from which I am ashamed for some reason personally, although I am not involved in the script. Screenplay, casting, props. Dancing, strange and out of place interrupting and so limp on both legs action. Strangely justifying the adventures of the Director denouement of the plot (By the way, if he has 10 years in a relationship with an English teacher, when did they begin? In 10-11th grade?
The fattest minus - if you pay taxes, then the film is made with your money.
P.S. The mascot of the film I chose a character nicknamed ' Writing' - he invades the plot in the very first scene, acquainting us with schoolchildren in their natural habitat, extinguishes the fuse of the main villain and draws a line in the description of the lives of the heroes after the end of the film.
2 out of 10
Surprisingly, I will be absolutely intolerant of Russian films, I last year noticed 'The Good Boy' and just yesterday I watched it. The trailer gave hope of something both pleasant and easy. Basically, that's what happened. It's a very good movie. He even marked in the category ' excellent' but, unfortunately, not everything is so perfect.
While watching the film, you get the feeling that reality and something ' not of this world ' are intertwined into one. There is an exceptional character in exceptional circumstances, but the development of events takes place against the background of the most ordinary Russia, in the most ordinary school, in the most ordinary family (with an unusual boy and, of course, his father). All of these perfectly complement the randomness that sets the trigger or provides a whole solution to a huge problem. Thanks to all this, a cozy atmosphere of the film is created.
But, unfortunately, some gaps in the script are very spoiling. For example, the unexpected offer of Stanislav Ilyich to Alisa Denisovna. Why is it so harsh? Maybe not abruptly. What kind of relationship did they have before that he decided to take such a step when she was in a relationship with Dronov for a very long time? A very interesting storyline and no less interesting and original character. The same problem with the scene in the casino, where after winning Kohl lends money to Dronov, and then absolutely unknown & #39; bandits & #39; demand money from the director and it is not clear whether he then returned them back. This scene generally stands alone in the whole narrative, and only somewhere clings to events to somehow smooth everything out, but it turns out, sorry, ' not exactly '.
In general, there was a good comedy about teenagers, watchable by teenagers (tested on their own experience). It’s just that being around this age, most movies (especially Russian ones) can’t be watched at all without at least annoyance, because surprisingly, when grown-up uncles and aunts make an application for a movie about modern teenagers, it’s as if they instantly forget what it’s like to be this teenager. But good news! Ms. Karas did very well.
A comedy that is not ashamed to advise someone to watch.
6.5 out of 10
Pss, kid, don't you want some good Russian comedy?
How long have I been postponing watching The Good Boy & #39, and how much I regret it now? A pleasant and stylish film that does not go beyond vulgarity and without techniques a la “vodka, sex, absurd”.
The film tells about a week in the life of Koli Smirnov. Nothing foreshadowed change, but suddenly there is a series of events, in parallel with which the teenager is trying to understand himself, his feelings and people around.
It seems to be a simple and uncomplicated story, which is hardly surprising, but that is what it is good for. Simplicity in combination with humor generates such films that will be happy to watch in the evening, laugh and relax.
From the first shot you can see that the work was done with the soul. The film shows the style of the 80s: in colors, in clothes and behavior of the characters, in deliberate idealization of reality, in locations. All this seems to send to the past, but every time the viewer is reminded that the 21st century is in the courtyard. Also, the spirit of “the time” flashes in the frames with the bandits, who were transferred to positive characters. The film idealizes reality. The world ' a good boy' this is: a showdown between schoolchildren - without blood, parties - without clubs and alcohol, they are replaced by dance battles. By the way, the dancing in the film is really a lot. And there's no sense of decency. The viewer is shown the balance between sweetness and reality. And this idealization in a good way should repel, because it does not happen. But! When watching, you live each event with Kolya, and believe that it still happens. In addition to adolescence, the film demonstrates that every adult is a child who is also trying to understand himself, his feelings and the people around him. Therefore, the film can not be attributed to a teenage movie, everyone will see themselves in the heroes and laugh at the ridiculous situations from our lives, which, it seems, can never happen to anyone.
It is necessary to note well-written characters, both main and secondary. The writers tried to reveal everyone as much as possible: everyone has an indispensable role in the plot. The actors coped with the images 100%, but my favorite is the duo Efremov + Treskunov. Their dialogue and the development of relationships from the first to the last frames amuses and makes you believe in the friendship between the headmaster and the student. Separately, it is worth noting Khabensky, who, as it turned out, himself prescribed the character of Pope Koli. It may be silly, but if Kohli had a different dad, the film would lose all charm. And Alexander Pal, comical and ridiculous, but charming.
The film was light and a little naive, but as noted above, it only plays a plus. The director and writers got a really good comedy, which did not fall into the abyss of vulgar humor, but retained honor. The picture cannot be called a masterpiece of Russian cinema, but it definitely deserves attention.
8 out of 10
There is such a wonderful film by Vadim Abdrashitov - 'Plumbum or a dangerous game'. Of course, you can’t just look at it, you can’t come up on a lame goat looking for entertainment. Heavy, I would even say lead tape. But it is about growing up, about the world of 15-year-olds, about understanding the meaning of life and cognition of human nature through the mistakes of youth. Deep and accurate film.
Sadly, the creators of 'Good Boy' didn't watch it. With rough play non-professionals - boys and girls, failed and, it would seem, the masters. Another neurasthenia of Khabensky, theatrical tear: 'Lyuyuda, I have seven minutes since the work day ended, and I haven't had dinner yet!'. What's all this nonsense about? It's a tear saturation per film unit. Well, why, if you want to create cute and remarkable people in the frame, then they must necessarily be freaks? We have from time to time, in each of our pictures for family viewing, a handful of crazy people are put under our noses, each of whom has all the qualities of character caricature exaggerated to the extreme.
Beautiful girls took on two main roles and once again proved that beauty and talent in 99.9% of cases go separately. And finding a beautiful and talented actress at the same time is a gift from God.
I don’t even want to look at anything and dig into the story. A good boy is an absolute vacuum, meaningless and merciless. Those who try to tell you a story, you don't believe. The story itself is banal, unnatural. You look and you realize that this is how the story unfolds, not because the characters lead, but because there is a plan. That's one of the basic things about scripting. History should be led by heroes, it should naturally follow from their views on life, from their temper. Apparently, people of all kinds - producers, illuminators, other empathetics, sat down and began to storm - plot hooks to draw. That's where she'll fall in love with him because he set fire to school for her. And this one will kiss him because she's lonely and in love with a married man. Well, it's all about this guy, you know? Why? That's because he's the protagonist. What are the other reasons?
A sick mind, I don’t know if it was the collective mind or the thoughts of a strange screenwriter, gave rest to an unhealthy imagination. The film ' Good Boy' won the Grand Prix at the last Kinotaur. And this tragic fact about Kinotavr, about our tasteless film industry, not about the film itself.
I watched for a long time, but still could not unsubscribe after watching the acclaimed lyrical comedy 'Good Boy'.
I personally liked the film in general. Easy and easy plot with elements of grotesque with all the ensuing consequences. But I can’t see it as a serious movie for serious audiences. After watching it, one gets the impression that this is not just a film, but a kind of sketch of a children's story in which a young man shared with me about his life, not forgetting to embellish everything for persuasiveness, as all teenagers usually do. It seems like a serious story about a serious life, but weird parents and a brother who can not be taken seriously. Only our boy is the smartest and most adequate in the family, but nobody hears him. And the most beautiful teacher falls in love with him, and mixed up with a school beauty, and even got involved with an authoritative person in the face of the headmaster of the school. And all our boy understands, knows, knows, does not forget to mention his superpowers. And everything seems fine, but you realize that all this is not reality, but only harmless fantasies of a young boy. The story itself looks fabulous and fictional, but good with a good ending.
The actors are all good! Of course, instead of Efremov, I would consider other options, but, as they say, it will do. It is a very simple film without frills and nonsense.
I would, of course, remove the provocative scenes of kissing the teacher and her half-naked appearance, but these are the fantasies of a teenager, where without them ...
In general, you can watch, but carefully. Joking!!
When someone advises me to watch a film of Russian production, in particular a comedy, two extremes are immediately in my head - there will be a comedy from the category & #39; all the jokes around the wisp & #39; or will they recruit a cast of actors with minimal experience in cinema or even talentless under the experienced conductorship of the director themselves fill the screen time? Maybe it will be worse, because everything can be from our cinema.
Fortunately, my worst predictions did not come true this time. Oksana Karas, apparently, to fill up her hand in front of a serious serial netlenka called 'Excellent' decided to do the preparatory work in the form of a wide meter on an all-too-distant school theme.
It turns out to be a somewhat confused and not very funny story about the life of the modern Russian intelligentsia against the background of the Moscow River and the schoolyard, about children, but not for children. Quite flat gegas, dance inserts, according to the American template and attempts to stage theatrical dialogues according to Stanislavsky, together make up the bones of the picture. Did the creators succeed in creating? And, yes and no... It’s like understanding the age-old dilemma of the Russian intelligentsia – is it worth wanting the good, if this is the shortest road to hell, on the one hand to look interesting, on the other hand not very smart and not very funny.
Part of the situation is saved by the game of Khabensky, Treskunov and Efremov. I recommend it to anyone who considers their mentality Russian.
High school student Kolya Smirnov is experiencing not the best week in his life. First, he fell in love with an English teacher. Secondly, he fell in love with the daughter of the Director, part-time girl of a local bully. Third, his father, an eccentric lunatic, decides to transfer the whole family to a 12/36 mode, denying everyone the right to sleep at night, and then someone set fire to the school, and an evening with dancing on the nose. In short, life is the key.
I remember how I was recommended to watch this film in conjunction with the film '14+' — they say the theme is the same: problems of adolescence, which from the height of their lives seem not serious, and for the child fills the whole picture of his world, being something really important. And since the tape '14+' I liked very much, then I, of course, watched 'The Good Boy', especially with such a cast, it was impossible to miss the picture. So what happened? Theme, yes, match. But the implementation seemed to me an order of magnitude weaker. If '14+' was a bright, kind and very nostalgic film about my childhood, in every frame of which I recognized myself, then when watching 'The Good Boy' I often, forgive my slang, caught myself thinking: ' What kind of game do they rub me at all? '
Oksana Karas fatally did not coincide with the desire to sit on several chairs at once with the opportunity to qualitatively implement this idea on the screen. Because purely external signs on the one hand 'Good Boy' is a comedy, on the other hand - a touching melodrama about the growing up and conflict of generations, and on the third hand, something action-packed, tied to the arson of the school and the unclean hands of its headmaster. In the end, it turned out not funny, not touching, not exciting. Because it's vinaigrette. The film, however, certainly has noteworthy scenes and dialogue, not to mention acting. Khabensky, Efremov and Dogileva, for example, are able to do absolutely everything in the frame, even despite the lack of a ridge in the plot. But the script of the tape just falls into pieces: you do not know where to laugh, where to cry, and where to indulge in nostalgia. By the way, the authors of the script are three people at once. Coincidence?
In short, I am disappointed. With such a cast, such production support, such a universal marketing hype, which, by the way, eventually brought the film several prestigious awards, it was necessary to try to make such a spineless movie consisting of separate, albeit sometimes successful, storylines. And no Khabensky, even having connected all his incredible acting abilities, is not able to disguise this fact.
6 out of 10
A good boy Kolya Smirnov learns well, argues with a wise father, who is also a pseudoscientist, raving about healthy nutrition and sleep, and generally leads a semi-botanical lifestyle until his problems with the English language lead to a kiss of a young woman ' Englishwomen'. And then the school burned down with a computer class, and the daughter of the director is bullied, and the English schews with the director himself drives... This guy has to clean it up.
A rare film from the genre of comedy education. Who is raising whom is another question. Adults have lost touch and connection with their children. And to restore the connection, according to the authors, the younger ones are capable. It turns out a kind of recast Turgenev. You have never dreamed that moral purity and freedom are also characteristic of teenagers, not their parents. Adults are not monsters, although not angels. The father of the protagonist (Konstantin Khabensky) is a eccentric, trying ' to tyranny' his family 32-hour cycle. Director Dronov (Mikhail Efremov) is an unsuccessful gambler and deceiver. The English teacher is a naive and miserable fool. Strange and infantile computer science teacher. However, the authors prefer, in the end, to cause the viewer not adolescent-maximalist condemnation, which will be at a certain point characteristic of Kohla, and sympathy. And the guy, in the end, also grows up - not one-time sex or a prestigious girl, but seemingly love.
In style - it resembles another Kinotavr winner Anna Melikian - only without the freaks and without the taste of independent cinema. In general, this is the mainstream, which took into account the shortcomings of previous experience - there is another relative of the boy called Ghost. And Semen Treskunov is almost the same, but not the same. It took a different level of acting - more sophisticated. And a step that is not too burdened by complexes is easy and with fewer stamps. It is difficult to say whether there will be a big actor in the future, but so far - the best in his age category.
There is another detail - postmodern writings during the play in the form of children's doodles in an improvised diary. So visual excesses accompany the action, so that everything does not turn into adult tediousness - and it turns out to be a little ironic, sometimes even a funny film about the fact that sometimes, growing up, you can not lose the freshness and pure simplicity of the youthful view of the world (with all the equivocations towards the detective, melodrama about adultery and a teenage almost thriller).
Having run through the eyes of a dozen reviews, I can say categorically: my friends, you scare me. None, not even the red ones, mention the film. And the essence of the film is theft. Citizen Karas, as a notorious repulsed Urkagan, noblely covered the entire subgenre of the Western film about growing up (coming of age) and to a heap carried out the floor counter with teenage comedies. The main inspiration for the criminal Karas is, in my opinion, the British tragicomedy Submarine (2010), which is remarkable in almost all respects, although the prints of the playful fingers of the director (by analogy with the director) will be found on a huge number of films, starting with Roads, Roads Home (this is, in some ways, a remake of the Submarine, so the similarity is expected), continuing with Superbad and ending with some “cool muffins.”
It is clear that domestic reality differs from foreign, so the material needed to be adapted. And, now, wrapping the leaflets from an incomprehensible public shrub, the criminal Karas adapted so zealously that instead of domestic reality she got a mixture of foreign and parallel.
So, for example, remember the episode with the discussion of “pishuna” (this is a nickname): the guys go talking, then stop against the background of a large number of children engaged in what and the topic is so interesting that even those who do not actually hear the conversation, stop their business and gather around the heroes. For better effect, all children do it at the same sluggish speed. The usual move is designed to slightly theatricalize what is happening, which will give comicality, plus focus the viewer’s attention on the conversation, emphasize its importance, which, in fact, of course, is not, there is just some kind of laughter, in the end, everyone is funny. Usually in such scenes, then one of the speakers leaves the frame, and the second is surprised by the crowd.
- He's peeing because he's gone.
- Yeah. Simple! It pees! On people!
That's hilarious. Nope. It's a poor borrowing. It's bad taste at its worst. And the whole movie is full of that. Stupid borrowing from Western cinema that has not even been properly adapted and all people behave so inadequately, as if you are in a parallel reality. Well, at least in the whole town. This is like Moscow, but at the same time populated by hundreds of people: half (yes, I am not exaggerating) of the scenes of the film begins with the fact that GG accidentally meets on the street one of the characters. In Moscow. Outside. Half the scenes, Carl.
It’s like a national school, but there are only 4 teachers. And each teaches 2-3 subjects, which clearly refers to a parallel reality. At the same time, there are a lot of children in the school, in particular, there are “B” classes. Perhaps the fact is that in each class there are only 10 people studying, because during a combined physical education lesson (Ksyusha is older than GG, but they study together), the gym is not crowded. And it may even have 3 classes, or even 4, because I don’t know about you, and in our school, physical training was combined with a parallel “b” class. Here it is also combined with the 10th, and maybe with two tenths. Do you know why there is such nonsense in this movie? Because in Western films, GG often looks at his bum during physical education classes, in parallel with which the more adult of this same bum undergoes training in a support group; or, for example, shivers during a big change, when students traditionally spend time in the backyard of school. We have neither a support group nor a tradition to eat lunch on the street (the climate is not the same). And to insert an episode with a mowing GG I want - not in vain stole the same ... And spoils and spoils everything around the incompetent criminal Karas.
And a stupid mix of genres spoils. Well, the above-mentioned adulthood movies and teen comedies. For example, an eavesdropping computer science teacher who got a door and pretended to do it. You've heard the phrase "get out of class." What do you think will happen next? Someone's coming out. So why do you keep hitting the door? Or did you not hear this phrase, since you do not hear anything at all (doors with soundproofing in the domestic school are a parallel reality again?), then why do you even eavesdrop, moron!? For teenage comedy, such “ridiculous” episodes are common, because in this genre most of the secondary characters are simply collective images, caricatures, and scripts always have a bunch of holes in favor of comicality. But this is unacceptable in films of the genre of growing up, which the viewer takes more seriously. That is, from what he saw in the film, the computer scientist turns out to be an outright moron, but, since he knows how to dance, then let him get a hot (and how else, alkash Efremov praised her the whole film...) young woman, for the fate of which we, in fact, should worry (the viewer, ideally, associates himself with GG, GG is experiencing - so the viewer should). And just like that in Borat's hands. Why? The inept mix of genres requires.
Next. Someone said that “again the domestic film instructs – nivoru, nikuri ...”. Really? Come on. GG and his friend peeled off the drugs, had a great time and looked at half-naked bodies. And they didn't get anything for it. Are drugs cool? Is that the teaching? GG played in an underground casino, basically, broke the law, and won a lot of money, and even proud of himself (" I'm a psychic, Cococo). And he didn't get anything for it. And the most successful man in the film is scum and smeared with vices on all sides, but everyone loves him anyway and by the end of the film nothing changes at all. It’s a great movie, it doesn’t matter...
Next. This film is a leap into youth. Really? When you were a young man, 50 people, you would gather and watch a local gopnik humiliate an omen, and then you'd also suck off your rod? Such an interesting sight? So now you're a fan of let them talk, 146%. Did you discuss other people's boobs with enthusiasm? “Ooh, two seconds of boobs, my mom would sell for that.” Ninth grade, not fifth grade. Really? I suggest you see a psychiatrist. I seriously recommend it.
As a result, I can only once again lament the backwardness of the moviegoer (and not only the domestic one). Take a look at Logan’s scores on IMDb. Another "bitter" was hurried. And, yes, objectively, the 5/10 movie is not the worst. And Russia doesn’t have enough movies about growing up, so you need to make something like that. But only skillfully. Movies about growing up still raise some serious topics. And these films are all the more important, since they affect primarily the younger generation, the not yet fully formed personalities. And this work should be forgotten as a terrible dream and never again allocate stolen (creatively) director money.
Negative
Recently, you can see more and more advertising of Russian cinema – a fact that is undoubtedly pleasant, especially if you exclude the typically Americanized films that do not reach either side.
“The Good Boy” was a pleasant exception. Real Russian cinema with Russian character.
Kind, sometimes naive film about the school life of Koli Smirnov. In some places, you can guess the shades of Soviet life, which does not spoil the overall impression of viewing. Such unmodernity seems touching and familiar (even to a young viewer). It is nice to see recognizable faces in the frame: Tatiana Dogileva, Mikhail Efremov, Konstantin Khabensky.
Humor is not shown in Hollywood at all. Yeah, modern, but it didn't. I will not say that this is rare for cinema, but some pleasant moment to pay attention to.
The film is recommended for family viewing. It’s nice to have sunny school days, shown a little better and kinder than in reality.