Loved the military man. Has rushed under a steam locomotive
Solovevsky “ Anna Karenina “ - one of long-term constructions of Russian cinema. Sergey Aleksandrovich was engaged in this project from the middle 90 - h. Financial problems there was a set. As it was expressed Nightingales, “ Karenina “ got under all steam locomotives of new Russian history “ since crisis of 1998.
“ Karenina “ have already despaired to wait - as suddenly the director declared that the picture is ready. The premiere has taken place in Hunts - Mansijske, at festival opening “ Spirit of fire “. The place is chosen not casually - Nightingales completed a picture in many respects on jugorskie money; it has found at the same time the film editor in Siberia and the sound producer.
That in it good?
Nightingales has collected perfect actors. That it is much more important, he is able to work with them.
Sergey Garmash (Levin) - Slightly timid, touching clodhopper in whom it is simply impossible to identify Garmasha from “ Dandies “ “ Morphine “ or “ 12 “ (besides that all special make-up in this case is reduced to a careless small beard). Yaroslav Bojko was very successfully entered in a role well-fad, well-cared, poshlovatenkogo Vronsky. Oleg Yankovsky transforms Alexey Karenina`s history into the tragedy comparable to tragedy of Anna. Steve Oblonskij forces to remember, what actually the remarkable actor was Alexander Abdulov and as it is ruthless its talent was translated on nepropechennyh serial heroes.
Well and, certainly, Tatyana Drubich. This woman is capable so to look from the screen that seems, as if it a hand has climbed to you in a thorax and has squeezed heart. and Drubich is very far from professional actresses like Garbos or Vivien Li considering “ Karenina “ first of all as the benefit performance and aspiring to lay out on consideration of the spectator all got by the work years the actor`s technics. Drubich it is not spoilt absolutely not by actor`s education and the hypertrophied vanity; it works on pure intuition, congenital talent, well, and any words which to it spoke Nightingales. Its Karenina is amazingly natural - and leaves sensation of a being from other world. It is absolutely not similar to Tolstoy`s heroine and is simultaneously limiting to it is close.
In a reasoning of atmosphere it on a broader scale, probably, most authentic film version “ Karenina “ - even more authentic, than Alexander Zarhi`s magnificent film. Over it two magnificent operators (Yury Klimenko and Sergey Astakhov) worked, capable anew to think up XIX-th century atmosphere, to force the spectator to forget that all it acted in film in modern Russia.
That in it bad?
Sergey Aleksandrovich worked over “ Anna Karenina “ about fifteen years. It has grown up this film as the person. Large enough viable copy has turned out: the televersion occupies five series, and to it, apparently, the big claims will not be.
But it is terrible enough to look, how the person thrust in a press and start to compress, that took less places. Blood exudes, fragments of bones from everywhere stick out - but desired rolling timing is observed at two o`clock.
In it, the reduced kind solovevskaja “ Karenina “ happens simply it is intolerable. 800 close pages of Tolstoi are flattened in the digest, almost a commercial - and the director of it, apparently, does not notice. Heroes skip on scenery as grasshoppers; first one and a half minutes Abdulov - Oblonskij is in time in hysterical rate, without transitions, to replace some interiors, to say some office phrases and srulit on a skating rink. I read good, smooth solovevsky the scenario of the televersion a day before display “ Karenina “. When this text was materialised on the screen in pokromsannom a kind, a set of remarks and gestures, truth it was unpleasant.
Installation here to hell; one scenery suddenly sinks in the dark, on change to it another comes. The hero only has time to speak whence - nibud from a corner “ Should you tell that... “ - as suddenly it appears on the middle of a room and continues: “ But, nevertheless... “
At such rate and such skomkannosti really uneasy to understand: from what Anna has decided, what Vronsky it does not love, from what the beginnings handfuls vsuhomjatku to chew morfin why eventually has rushed under a steam locomotive? From - for morfina? In solovevskoj versions it turns out approximately so - thus that hardly probable Sergey Aleksandrovich seriously aspired to make from “ Karenina “ own “ the Requiem mass on dream “.
Soon there should be an album with hundreds the photos made on a set. But the film and itself looks such album, the collection of moving illustrations to the novel of Tolstoi. These illustrations are excellent. in “ Karenina “ set of perfectly removed and played scenes which are difficult for forgetting. It simply does not have breath to become a film.
It directly prokljate any: cinematographers are capable or to retell distinctly a melodramatic plot “ Karenina “ having emasculated sense and intonation (the Hollywood screen versions see), or save all magic of Tolstoi, but start up under a knife distinctness of a plot. The third, probably, it is not given. “ Anna Karenina “ - the novel, of course, good, but painfully thick. And by definition as it is difficult to cinema to chew it, as poor to Anna - the next portion of the favourite drug.
Look a photo gallery: film festival Opening “ Spirit of fire “ in Hunts - Mansijske
Author Denis Korsakov waits for your responses!