"Kings Can Do Everything", 2008
Director : Alexander ChernyaevScenario : Eduard Volodarsky
Operator : Dayan Gaytkulov
Cast : Elena Polyakova, Gosha Kutsenko, Tatiana Vasilieva, Gerard Depardieu, Oscar Kuchera, Nina Usatova and others.
Old good movies. They want to be reviewed again and again. And each time they invariably give joy and warmth. And if you are a fan of the cinema, for example, like me, then you can watch the most favorite tapes, dozens, hundreds, yes there, just an infinite number of times!
But if you are a cynical, prudent, greedy, unprincipled producer, then you do not look at all. You shoot remakes on them. Only once. However, they do not need more. Although ... You can still wash the film with acid. At least then it will be clean. Unlike the film by Alexander Chernyaev, "All Can Kings", a remake of William Weiler's 1953 "Roman Holiday".
The trouble with these remakes. Of course, someone else's mind can not be forbidden to live, but the wave of such opuses that have overwhelmed the national cinema is clearly disturbing. We already started up the "Runaway" "Runaway" Andrew Davis and was "In Motion" "Sweet Life" Fellini, but everything is somehow anonymous. This time the creators of the Vanka did not seem to be lying around - they immediately confessed, but it was no easier for anyone. "All can kings", according to the authors, quite a free variation on the subject.
"Liberty" in the new tape, of course, enough, although the plot remained unchanged - the journalist meets escaped from the care of the most that neither is a real aristocrat, while the tape is transferred to modern Peter, the journalist of the news agency has turned into something amorphous, the middle between paparazzi and private detective (the creators apparently did not decide that it is sweeter for the fragile aristocratic souls), and the princess dropped in rank to a descendant of the Dolgoruky family living in emigration. But all this business usual, a tribute, so to say, time. But the real horror lies in the fact that in the film Chernyaev Gregory Peck suddenly turned into Gosha Kutsenko. This is not liberty. This is a terrible dream. Cinderella with her pumpkin at midnight can forget about this little thing and whistle Bob Marley.
In general, when you write a review for a remake, it is very difficult to avoid direct comparisons, not to get carried away with the original film, and as a result, do not write a review of him. I will try. But I can not promise anything.
What was Wyler's picture about, and why did she get such a success? The novel between the rude and cynical American magazine, ready for anything for the sake of the "roasted" reportage, and the young aristocrat of the royal blood, was an absolutely exact copy of the relationship between America, who unexpectedly found herself the savior of the world from the Nazi plague, and the Old World stricken with war, and the cheerfulness that came to them to the rescue of "ordinary American guys."
This was a mutual study, therefore, Weiler's tape begins with an ironic look at the pompous habits of European aristocrats, and ends with self-irony over the hamovatost and cynicism of Americans and the surprising discovery for them: money can not be all. Beginning as a sitcom, in the finale the picture becomes a real hymn to Europe, recognizing it in love and swearing to study, learn and once again learn manners and upbringing. Americans liked the film because they thought so, and Europeans, obviously, from vanity.
About that film Chernyaev? About the fact that if you are a healthy bald dumpling and ride a nickeled "Harley" for 60 pieces of raccoons, then you are really made to stir up any fifu, even if she is an aristocrat from France. And, as a result, her papik will write you out of the wild Russian tundra, pack it in a white horse, tie up a bouquet of roses and give it to her daughter on March 8. By the way, I take this opportunity to congratulate all women, aristocrats and no, on the occasion.
But we will not retire. Each episode in the "Roman holidays" is subject to a common idea. For example, the famous fragment in the barber shop. Already the one regret with which the Italian hairdresser agreed to cut off the luxurious chestnut curls of Audrey is an Oscar. He shreds them with scissors, and in each of his movements despair and contempt for the client who pushed him to this crime. But his gaze falls on the mirror, and the artist wakes up in it. A few swings with scissors, a little witchcraft with a comb, and before us is the same Audrey Hepburn, before which the world bent. And this hairstyle for another good 20 years will be the standard for fashionistas around the world.
But it was in the "Roman holidays" was a real discovery of Hollywood. And the "Roman holidays" themselves were the opening of Audrey Hepburn. And Rome was the real discovery for narcissistic Americans. In a word, solid "Roman discoveries", directly to the envy of the brave Columbus. So: Audrey in the film is a rough diamond, demonstrating his innocence and acting ignorance, which actor Gregory Pack only skilfully framed with his charisma and experience. The whole film is built on the appearance of the world of an unknown charming actress, which completely corresponded to the plot of the film - the presentation of the company to the heiress of one of the European dynasties. A kind of first ball of Natasha Rostova, whose role, by the way, the actress will play quite naturally after only 3 years after the premiere of the "Roman holidays".
What does this have to do with Elena Polyakova, the performer of the main role in the remake? Yes, the fact of the matter is that no. Straightforward account. I have nothing against the actress, she is talented, but ... It was worse only for Lubov Orlova in "The Starlings and Liras", when the 72-year-old, then former star of Soviet cinema played the role of a 30-year-old scout. I know, I know, modern producers are betting on the "star" composition, and Gerard Depardieu was added. Then explain to me why in 53 the producers made a bet on anyone else who was still unknown to Audrey Hepburn? Fools! It's strange that now we are removing remakes from their films, and not vice versa.
By the way, about Depardieu: he is here as two wafers in ice cream sandwich: in the prologue of the film, and in the finale. In theory, it somehow should shade the taste and make it "well, clean, chic". In fact, to ice cream with the same success could be nailed two veneers - evenly nothing would change. The participation of old Gerard in the plot is zero whole, zero tenth. If you carefully trim the appropriate film, the viewer will not even notice it. In addition, in the ice cream between the waffles is still ice cream. In our case, the product is of a completely different quality.
In general, to find parallels with the old film of the 53rd year is a tricky business. They are almost there. Chernyaev "did his best" everything he could. A loser journalist who perceived work in Rome as a link turned into an arrogant bandit, whose success is nauseating, the princess, who realized that she was born not just a girl, and she has a duty to her own country, has become an ordinary wealthy madcap, who now knows for sure that everything is allowed to her. Even the unfortunate moped and the mini-car "sis-shvo" (6 horsepower!) Suddenly became a Harley-Davidson motorcycle and a Mercedes cabriolet. I would like to see journalists, even the most successful ones, who allow themselves such a "stables". Dorenko?
In general, the ease with which modern film-lovers from the new Russian cinema, "improve" the world's masterpieces, raises serious doubts about their mental health. Instead of the elegant, sad and very light final of the Roman holidays, we were shown the barbic "fraternization" of the pseudo-princess Polyakova and the "bald paparazzi" by Gosha Kutsenko on a white horse. No, I, of course, understand that the prince must always ride on something white, but why do we have two horses at once ?!
So in fact the film still turned out to be an "elevator car". Contrary to all the statements of the creators, and especially the phrase of Gosha Kutsenko at a press conference on how "it's great to star in a simple good movie." I will not argue with Gosha, maybe he really starred in a "simple good movie." So let us now show this film! Because it's clearly not about "All can kings", a picture ridiculous, vulgar and very far from the object of imitation. Instead of irony, Chernyaev uses cynicism, instead of melodrama vulgarity, instead of light sadness - a raucous fun.
And who then to believe? No one. Only me, and only in one statement - like movies.