First, thank you for the links on your replies about the films :) Now I have drown for self a common picture that was formed in the chat...
///Or is this a crass Western readig of the production?///
No, it is not, of course I think you are going on right way to ask these questions. Your intuition doesn't lie you...
It's nesseccary to draw a some universal system of coordinate regarding these two movies - 'The Meeting...' and 'Sherlock Holmes'. Both productions were screen in 1979, but they had a some different social accents. 'Sherlock Holmes' was a attempt of aesthetic escapism from the Soviet Stagnation to very far Old Good Victorian England (Victorian England was received as a tale like, for example, mysterian India for Victorian readers of Kipling's books).
A seven years ago before it, Film director Igor Maslennikov wanted to screen historical-social epic drama about heroic cultivation of Kazakhstan steps after WWII. But Ministery of Culture was against this film project...
So, Igor Maslennikov went away in another film genre.
However, LenFilm's Holmes series are not escapism in absolute sense. In these series there is a very true and clear base of real gentlemenism and male frienship for opposition to Evil (in any form - criminal or war).
The same moral base have been in 'The Meeting...', in my view. Another question is that we see there different social and hystorical situation. The times of after World War II (about 1945) were the short era of hope on some liberisation of everyday life.
Yes, Zsheglov as the novel's character is not quite same as in the movie. Vladimir Vysotsky transformed his into more complex man. In my view, it was true idea.
Film director Stanislav Govorukhin screened 'The Meeting...' as if the document of the postwar times. In 1979 many viewers yet remembered an athmosthere of those time. It was not "a far fictional country", it was their life in some sense. At least, it was not very far past times.
Indeed, there are many sub-texts/culture-social codes in film "The Meeting...' Zsheglov is not ordinary man, of course. He seems as complete power individuality. But do you can forecast his life/fate in 1950s, may be - in 1960s? If I'm not mistaken, writer Julian Semyonov killed his hero - Zsheglov was shot somewhere in ending of 1940s. Why?
Let's see Sharapov... The same question is - do you can forecast his life/fate in 1950s, may be - in 1960s? Who will be? Colonel of Police, an alcoholic or he will learn architecture scinces and became as an engeneer? Questions, questions...
?
By the way, I have found quite interesting dissertation about Russian/Soviet TV movies:
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Sherlock Holmes and Prince Florizel
Date: 2008-11-28 06:35 pm (UTC)Now I have drown for self a common picture that was formed in the chat...
///Or is this a crass Western readig of the production?///
No, it is not, of course
I think you are going on right way to ask these questions. Your intuition doesn't lie you...
It's nesseccary to draw a some universal system of coordinate regarding these two movies - 'The Meeting...' and 'Sherlock Holmes'. Both productions were screen in 1979, but they had a some different social accents.
'Sherlock Holmes' was a attempt of aesthetic escapism from the Soviet Stagnation to very far Old Good Victorian England (Victorian England was received as a tale like, for example, mysterian India for Victorian readers of Kipling's books).
A seven years ago before it, Film director Igor Maslennikov wanted to screen historical-social epic drama about heroic cultivation of Kazakhstan steps after WWII. But Ministery of Culture was against this film project...
So, Igor Maslennikov went away in another film genre.
However, LenFilm's Holmes series are not escapism in absolute sense. In these series there is a very true and clear base of real gentlemenism and male frienship for opposition to Evil (in any form - criminal or war).
The same moral base have been in 'The Meeting...', in my view. Another question is that we see there different social and hystorical situation. The times of after World War II (about 1945) were the short era of hope on some liberisation of everyday life.
Yes, Zsheglov as the novel's character is not quite same as in the movie. Vladimir Vysotsky transformed his into more complex man. In my view, it was true idea.
Film director Stanislav Govorukhin screened 'The Meeting...' as if the document of the postwar times. In 1979 many viewers yet remembered an athmosthere of those time. It was not "a far fictional country", it was their life in some sense. At least, it was not very far past times.
Indeed, there are many sub-texts/culture-social codes in film "The Meeting...'
Zsheglov is not ordinary man, of course. He seems as complete power individuality. But do you can forecast his life/fate in 1950s, may be - in 1960s?
If I'm not mistaken, writer Julian Semyonov killed his hero - Zsheglov was shot somewhere in ending of 1940s. Why?
Let's see Sharapov... The same question is - do you can forecast his life/fate in 1950s, may be - in 1960s? Who will be? Colonel of Police, an alcoholic or he will learn architecture scinces and became as an engeneer? Questions, questions...
?
By the way, I have found quite interesting dissertation about Russian/Soviet TV movies:
http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-06062003-164753/unrestricted/prokhorova_etd2003.pdf
here is the chapter about LenFilm's Sherlock Holmes too...
True, in my taste, this text is a bit too overloaded with social-bureaucratic allusions...