Mifster, these two surnames — Fomenko and Bender — should not be in the same sentence at all. Never. Not in any universe. Fomenko is a good actor, maybe "compared to ..." if he tries hard, and if he plays "his" type, as, for example, in "The Orphan of Kazan." But his type doesn't fit in with my Ostap Bender type at all.
Not a very successful film adaptation. The film cannot be called frankly bad only because of the powerful original created by Ilf and Petrov. But the director's work leaves much to be desired: many moments were artificially delayed, many fragments important for the harmony of the plot were removed for some reason, but at the same time all the side episodes were included in the film. The line of Fyodor's father was simply drained. The main characters (in my opinion, the taste) turned out to be unconvincing: Ostap is overly pretentious, Vorobyaninov is too inadequate. It seems that Zakharov was trying to make a film JUST NOT LIKE GAIDAI's. But Gaidai, by the way, was really talented at filming "12 chairs," so I would recommend his version to everyone.
Perhaps if I hadn't seen Gaidai's version, I would have said that it was very suitable, but unfortunately, the direction is inferior to the previous picture. Somehow Gaidai had more dynamism, and Vorobyanov looked better compared to Zakharov's mumbles. And anyway, there are a lot of different things. But it's quite watchable, if you don't take into account the earlier version.
The series is quite nothing, but as a separate work in general. Unfortunately, it is very far from the book. And Mironov is playing Mironov again. No, I love him, but still, it's not Bender.
In general, Zakharov is immediately visible, he is always recognizable. But his fairy tales are still much better.
The poster is wonderful, in my opinion, the talent is visible, even though Bender is not a realist, not a realist))) I knew that in the end there would be no diamonds in any chair. But I didn't expect the murder, I didn't even believe it right away, I was waiting for some kind of explanation... In general, I liked Bender, almost all the female characters too, but I wasn't impressed with the series itself.
For me personally, only Mironov is the perfect Bender. When I read the book, I imagined Mironov. Gaidai is cool, of course, but not in the setting of the Twelve Chairs. Zakharov's version, for all its length and theatricality, is the best. Even the reference one. That's exactly how it should be. Danelia might have shot Zakharov better, but not Gaidai. This is a cult, complex, multi-layered satirical work of the 20s, a masterpiece of Soviet literature. With all due respect to Leonid Gaidai, this is not his format.
With all due respect to the talent of Mironov and the rest of the actors, I consider this film adaptation to be unsuccessful. And I don't really like the image of Bender here, and the theatrical picture itself. The film adaptation of Gaidai, imho, is much stronger and more beloved :)
I liked this episode the most. The rest is like , "Archil Mikhailovich, they're going to show a criminal offense on TV today," Leonid Gaidai said over the phone to Archil Gomiashvili, who played Bender for him. I don't think so. Bender, performed by Mironov, came out interesting, with his own tricks. Vorobyaninov in this version looks similar to Pavel Milyukov (the image was copied from him in the book) than in the previous one. As for the rest, I do not know. In episode 4, I just started really laughing. Before that, he had only been grinning (okay, he had been laughing since Fyodor's father) It's too long-winded, too theatrical for a TV series/movie. The scenery is fake But again, someone likes this version better. Someone loved this version in childhood and that's it, no one will ever take away this love. But it was Gaidai's film that I fell in love with as a child. Maybe this is the main factor explaining why I don't like Mark Zakharov's version.
IT is very much overrated. 8.5 on Kinopoisk is even higher than the reference version of Gaidai (8.3).
I really don't like too much chamber narration. It is clear that there were a lot of restrictions, because the whole film was shot at the pavilion. And they tried to cover all these specific slack spots in the script with dancing songs. It didn't work out that well.
I was interested in why Father Fyodor did not pay attention to the fact that Engineer Bruns had other chairs that did not look like the first one that Father Fyodor and Ippolit Matveevich tore up. But here it can be explained, I think, by the condition in which Father Fyodor got to Bruns. He was already on the verge of madness there, or had already gone crazy, so he didn't notice the difference at all.
Discussion: Season 1, Episode 4 Join the Discussion
15The film cannot be called frankly bad only because of the powerful original created by Ilf and Petrov. But the director's work leaves much to be desired: many moments were artificially delayed, many fragments important for the harmony of the plot were removed for some reason, but at the same time all the side episodes were included in the film. The line of Fyodor's father was simply drained.
The main characters (in my opinion, the taste) turned out to be unconvincing: Ostap is overly pretentious, Vorobyaninov is too inadequate.
It seems that Zakharov was trying to make a film JUST NOT LIKE GAIDAI's. But Gaidai, by the way, was really talented at filming "12 chairs," so I would recommend his version to everyone.
But it's quite watchable, if you don't take into account the earlier version.
And Mironov is playing Mironov again. No, I love him, but still, it's not Bender.
In general, Zakharov is immediately visible, he is always recognizable. But his fairy tales are still much better.
I knew that in the end there would be no diamonds in any chair. But I didn't expect the murder, I didn't even believe it right away, I was waiting for some kind of explanation...
In general, I liked Bender, almost all the female characters too, but I wasn't impressed with the series itself.
Zakharov's version, for all its length and theatricality, is the best. Even the reference one. That's exactly how it should be. Danelia might have shot Zakharov better, but not Gaidai. This is a cult, complex, multi-layered satirical work of the 20s, a masterpiece of Soviet literature. With all due respect to Leonid Gaidai, this is not his format.
The film adaptation of Gaidai, imho, is much stronger and more beloved :)
, "Archil Mikhailovich, they're going to show a criminal offense on TV today," Leonid Gaidai said over the phone to Archil Gomiashvili, who played Bender for him.
I don't think so. Bender, performed by Mironov, came out interesting, with his own tricks. Vorobyaninov in this version looks similar to Pavel Milyukov (the image was copied from him in the book) than in the previous one.
As for the rest, I do not know.
In episode 4, I just started really laughing. Before that, he had only been grinning (okay, he had been laughing since Fyodor's father)
It's too long-winded, too theatrical for a TV series/movie. The scenery is fake
But again, someone likes this version better. Someone loved this version in childhood and that's it, no one will ever take away this love.
But it was Gaidai's film that I fell in love with as a child. Maybe this is the main factor explaining why I don't like Mark Zakharov's version.
I really don't like too much chamber narration. It is clear that there were a lot of restrictions, because the whole film was shot at the pavilion. And they tried to cover all these specific slack spots in the script with dancing songs. It didn't work out that well.