Russian war, English world

Reviews for the new series "BBC" based on Tolstoy's novel

In early January, on the BBC One channel, a show of the 6-episode film “War and Peace” began, launched into production in 2013. The film adaptation of the novel by Leo Tolstoy replaced the Sunday prime-Time series "Abbey Downton", which ended after the sixth season. Medusa talks about the new film and gives the first (and opposite) responses to the film adaptation both in Russia and in the UK.

“War and Peace” directed by Tom Harper (a young Englishman working mainly on television) is the second adaptation of Tolstoy’s novel, shot by the BBC. The first 20-episode film with Anthony Hopkins in the role of Pierre Bezukhov was released back in 1972 and brought the actor BAFTA Award. The script of the new series was written by Andrew Davis, known for the films of Bridget Jones and film adaptations for the BBC, “Vaneslavlia Fair” (1998) and “Pride and Prejudice” with Colin Ferta (1995), as well as for ITV “Dr. Zhivago” with Kira Nitley (2002).

“War and Peace” is the most expensive series “BBC”: the corporation spent two million pounds on only one episode. Numerous team, expensive costumes, shooting in St. Petersburg, near Novgorod and Vilnius. However, despite this, the positive reviews of critics, the audience of the series falls - if 6.3 million people watched the first series of War and Peace, then the second is already a million less.

Even before the release of the first series (after his interview), Davis was immediately filed by several complaints: unsuitable actors, “English”, deviations from the novel - supposedly the screenwriter changed the text of Tolstoy, a little completing (and decorating) some storylines. For example, the relations of Anatoly and Helen Kuragin were complicated-at some point, the brother and sister really find themselves in the same bed and not that they are very innocent there. In this case, Davis needed a rather conscious eroticization in this case so that the audience became clear about the morals of the Kuragin. However, the screenwriter deliberately strengthened the sensory side of the film as a whole - and this was probably done so that the audience simply does not get bored. The emphasis in the new “war and the world” is placed on love and love lines - all the more so since there are many more emotions and frank scenes on the screen in the Tolstoy novel.

Andrew Davis “War and Peace” should be considered as a separate work, and not the reliable adaptation of the epic novel (which the authors and actors, by the way, did not read before the start of filming; not all during work on the series) is also not all ). The novel gave the series a very exciting plot - at which the British looked at a fresh and distant look, cleansing the novel of psychologism and national Russian identity. There you should not look for any "truthfulness" (for a Russian person) of neither persons nor places; Although the shooting partially took place in St. Petersburg, there is no recognition effect. And the point is not that the text is overwhelmed - it is sometimes played very carefully; It’s just that the heroes inhabit someone else's space, and the Russian church choir that sounds behind the scenes does not help.

The world embodied on the screen is too luxurious (to place and out of place) - almost everyone lives in the palaces, look gorgeous. The heroes of the series-especially the older generation-are more reminiscent of the characters of Golsourcy and Austin, the Rostovs are quite caricatured, the characters are shown superficially and are determined mainly by one feature. Natasha Rostova (performed by Lily James), for example, is Zhivchik, and the whole game of the actress obeys this one idea. The main success of the series was Pierre (actor Paul Dano) - an absolutely accurate hit and, probably, the most voluminous hero.

Andrew Davis himself said that his “war and peace” is suitable for those who are not going to read the novel. There is a share of truth in this - knowing nothing about the book, you can get more pleasure from viewing. Another thing is that this film is unlikely to be replaced by a “national epic”.

The Daily Mail (Christopher Stevens): There is no doubt that Davis’s new television adaptation is one hundred percent epic love story told by gallop. On the emotional charge, the series can be compared with the attack of the Napoleonic cavalry. The first episode is a rapid victory. <...> The series has everything that needs an ideal costume drama, and in such quantities that even the most wasteful Russian oligarch would have decided that his money was spent really.

The Daily Telegraph (Serena Davis): “War and Peace” continues a series of extremely complex literary adaptations that our broadcasters make since 2009 - after they stopped, as if to transfer Jane Austin to the screen.

The Guardian (Viv Groscop): What is wrong in the series? Everything is so when the floor is given on the screen (Pierre). It is difficult to imagine someone better for this role. Pierre in a night shirt deserves special mention - it is simply charming. Dano causes incredible sympathy, despite the fact that Pierre (or thanks to this?) - a little idiot.

Alexander Timofeevsky , journalist

I watch the Bibisish “War and the World” in extreme amazement. There are no subtleties and depths there, well, no one was waiting for these nonsense. Pierre is not Pierre, Andrey is not Andrei - the same trifles are ridiculous to even discuss. Natasha Rostova in the first scene, where she is still a child, in the film is good at thirty, she has long and firmly stayed in girls, well, and crayfish. So it is. But respect for the material world, for the house, for the garden, for the chair, for the costume is considered the main virtue of the BBC. Where is she? Who was so cynically abused about her? Pierre, who goes to the Rostovs through the cattle yard, pushing and strictly stroking pigs, can still be explained by artistic chimeras - pah, prose nonsense, Flemish school of a motley SOR. But how to explain the rags stretched on the heroes, all to the single ridiculous and which can not be connected to each other? So the artists would have dressed with Brezhnev-in which God sent and what was preserved in the bins of Ust-Zhopinsky amateur performances. And the interiors are completely matching this, an inconceivably chic and gifts under the Soviet regime, is the Big Gatchinsky Palace, into which the creators of the film drove the Bolkonsky. Alla, cash desk! The bald mountains where they live is a clear meadow near Tula, and not the castle built by Rinaldi near St. Petersburg. But in Gatchina they were allowed to shoot, it was even allowed to decorate. Book luxury is accessible, about which you can agree, in combination with darned poverty, from which you can not get out, this is a classic scoop. Now at the BBC. WelCome to the Club.

Ekaterina Shulman , political scientist

I watched the “war and the world” of the Bibisic, the first series, and liked it. This, of course, is not Anna Karenina, who at one time liked even more-but there the old Stoppard rode under the Christmas tree and ran around, and he knows what he was doing. Here is a much lighter genre, and the Rostov family strongly gives Bennet Family, and Helen is too lively, and Natasha is too clearly painted blonde, and they hug, go all in public in vain, ashamed. But the text is stored very carefully, the interiors, costumes and landscapes are filmed and with respect, chamber scenes are good (the death of old Bezukhov is impressive) and decent military (wound and flight of Nikolai). Severally shot under Jane Austin, yes - but this is such a method of cultural perception, and not the worst. The trouble is that any randomly selected British will be more like the heroes of “war and peace” than anyone, who can now be removed in Russia-where everything was shot, even about the war, even about the classics, is inevitably covered with some rainbow mucus, the Petroleum Film of Liberation, the actors in the mimica itself and the head of the head of a lie and lack of freedom, as if they had a lower way. The jaw paralyzed, and it is written on the face at the same time “I eat well” and “I stand cheap”. This is a bad polemic technique-to praise something one by abandoning something else, but the thought that Pierre would be in the film “Filted with the support of the Ministry of Culture” forces British Pierre with great affection, even though he was too pity and pity with them.

Kirill Rogov , journalist

Pierre is very good, just wonderful. And Helen. We are all used to seeing her marble statue. And so much more interesting. This is me about the first series of War and Peace from BBC. Prince Vasily is also convincing. Of course, the pattern of national physiognomy interferes with us. In our view of the paradigm of human types, there is much more cournosa. But this is not so?

So far, mistakes in the understanding of Tolstoy's logic look quite significant. But this is not fatal, as can be seen in Pierre. Pierre is beautiful. A special fiction is his gait. As if he put it in his pants. But this is so wonderful, so new, so much meaning suddenly opens. At the same time, the authors of the series completely ignore the theme of Bezhov’s rampant bodily bodily.

<...>

Maria Stepanova , poet, journalist

I looked at the bibisic Tolstoy; I had hopes, sad. It seems that in order to make the old world readable, it must certainly be translated into the language of Molla and the dance floor. And so that Helen walk on the point hall with a pass Pretty Woman, and so that no “kiss the doll”, but immediately a blessing, and so that pigs under the windows, as in Mirgorod.

But Bondarchuk well done; Only now I understand to what extent.

Masha Slonim , journalist

English "War & Peace". In general, no. The feeling of mummers. And Natasha, transferred from Downton Abbey, is practically unchanged, at all in any gate. IMHO.

Tatyana Ershova