The first and main Bulgakov scholar in Russia, Anatoly Mironovich Smelyansky, once told the following story. While collecting material about Mikhail Bulgakov, he met his widow and main love, Elena Sergeevna, and visited her at her home. There, in the first half of the 60s, he showed him the draft of “The Master and Margarita” and left him alone with the book, and when he returned, he found the young man completely stunned, could only say: “Elena Sergeyevna, but this will never be published!” To which he calmly replied: “They will definitely raid it.”
As a matter of fact, it was published in Moscow magazine in 1966. With abbreviations, of course. They then published it many times, in various editions, with different covers, in different languages. People start reading this novel in the eighth grade and, as a rule, return to it in one way or another throughout their lives – it has such magnetic and prophetic power. It turned out that Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova was right.
They have been trying to make this novel into a movie for many years. Let’s say in 1972 there was a little-known Yugoslav-Italian film, in the same year Polish director Andrzej Wajda shot the film “Pilate and Others”, our viewers know the work of Vladimir Bortko – many hopes for a series. Unfair, of course.
He had no luck with film adaptations of the novel; There was one significant problem – the level of cinematographic technology did not reach the scale of the great writer’s plan. Let’s say, how to portray the Hippo Cat? Bortko said, as if saying “Good night, boys!” He made her a huge plush doll, as if she had escaped from her programming, and this instantly ruined the whole impression, negating the sinister spell of both the text and the picture.
But then it happened. “The Master and Margarita” was directed by Mikhail Lokshin, the director of the movie “Silver Skates”. And it should be noted that it turned out to be a real heroic blockbuster. Everything flies with him, appears out of nowhere, speaks and even explodes if necessary.
It is worth noting that this film will surely make someone jealous, and many connoisseurs of the novel will certainly say the cliché phrase: “Well, the book is better!” There is no need to compare. Cinema is a separate art, and film is a separate work of art.
Lokshin creates worlds parallel to both text and history. The action takes place in Moscow, designed according to the drafts of Stalin’s General Plan. There’s the House of Soviets and the People’s Commissariat of Heavy Industry, with a giant Lenin, and even the Patriarch’s Ponds look more like a modern set in the GES-2 area.
The master – Evgeny Tsyganov – depicted from Bulgakov’s photographs. From the dandy early periods, when the writer is in a hat and bow tie, to the very last, when the sick, emaciated Bulgakov looks somewhere at the sky in the cold – this is approximately how we see Master Tsyganov in a psychiatric hospital.
Woland is played by German August Diehl and this one hundred percent hits the character; a rich palette from wild fun to demonic restraint, from destructive anger to proud kindness.
Margarita in Lokshin – Yulia Snigir – an actress of iconographic beauty, every frame of which can be turned into a museum canvas.
And Lokshin films the rest of the characters in such a way that those who, apparently, would not have suited their roles under other circumstances, look quite organic. Let’s say Koroviev – Yuri Kolokolnikov – enjoys playing the Joker, but this does not look like a ridiculous exaggeration, it rather causes shock. Alexey Rozin in the image of Azazello looks like an extraterrestrial crime boss, and the simulated Cat, for the first time in the history of world cinema, organically and convincingly pronounces his statement about Primus, blowing it up all over Moscow.
Overall, the film seems to continue to produce layers, inheriting the traditions of the novel. The master is, of course, Bulgakov himself, who wrote an aborted play about Pilate or his own novel. Text within text, action within action, theater within theater.
Perhaps only the scene of Satan’s ball can be called relatively weak: there Woland himself is not impressive enough, and the audience is pale and few in number. Otherwise, we must accept that this movie will go down in history. Of course, not least because of the greatness of the concept of the novel, but also as a work of cinema in its own right.
In fact, why do we love this book so much, why do we return to it years later? Because by gaining a new life experience, we discover new layers of content in this work – everyday, funny, biblical, universal, romantic, etc. Lokshin’s new film added another cinematic layer to The Master and Margarita.
The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the position of the editors.
What are you thinking?
Source: Gazeta
Dolores Johnson is a voice of reason at “Social Bites”. As an opinion writer, she provides her readers with insightful commentary on the most pressing issues of the day. With her well-informed perspectives and clear writing style, Dolores helps readers navigate the complex world of news and politics, providing a balanced and thoughtful view on the most important topics of the moment.