Leoni Haney
Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.
Mehdi Hoffman
There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.
Allissa
.Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
TheLittleSongbird
Wanting a 100% faithful adaptation of Master and Margarita is somewhat of a big ask, a truly brilliant and imaginative book but with material so rich and tangible that anyone adapting it is bound to come up short. This mini-series in comparison to the book is a let-down, but while it's disappointing and could have been much better it is also not that bad.Master and Margarita does benefit from some good performances, with Oleg Basilashvili, Aleksandr Abdulov, Aleksandr Galiban and Karill Lavrov coming out on top. Basilashvili may lack the demonic look, but has the cynical, sarcastically witty and mysterious traits of Woland down pat. Abdulov is exceptional, Galiban pitches Master's reserved and insane traits without a wrong note (true he was dubbed, but quite effectively) and Lavrov plays a hard role with commanding authority. Aleksandr Filippenko similarly excels in his role. In detail, the mini-series is very faithful to the book with all events intact and the dialogue as dialogue on its own is quite literate and clever stuff that really provokes thought.Had very mixed feelings on the music though. Hearing it it is very well-composed and stirring, and sometimes used cleverly and appropriately. Unfortunately, it is also rather repetitive; one does wish that more than two or three major tunes were used. While there are some good performances in the cast, attractive Anna Kovalchuk lacks the vast emotional range for Margarita and often recited her lines as if she were just reading them out aloud. Valentin Gaft's additional character was unnecessary and discordantly out of place, and Gaft plays him rather obnoxiously. While one has to admire that the mini-series of Master and Margarita tried to remain faithful to the book and the prose, the spirit unfortunately gets lost in translation, everything is here but presented in a bland way with the dialogue losing their kick and becoming rambling. The humour isn't sharp enough (apart from the Behemot and Woland in Moscow scenes), there is a general lack of emotion and ambiance and the macabre, bizarreness and mystery is presented with not very imagination on display.The mini-series has a drab colourless look to it, even in scenes that were crying out for colour to bring them to life, and the special effects are laughably amateurish. Direction is correct but a little pedestrian at the same time, and Behemot not only looks cheap and has almost everything stripped that was interesting of him as a character but is played in an over-compensated way sometimes. Overall, disappointing but not bad. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Armand
Superb film for the subtle art to transform the Bulgakov's words in powerful images. For the touching interpretation, science to show the spirit of book, exploration, with grace and precision of a spectacular universe. A slice of Russian art, with the splendid art to describe essences and soul roots, respiration of masterpiece and walls of dreams. A problem of tradition but, more important, discoveries of literary treasure. Piece of an artistic policy, special form of propaganda, reflection of details and nooks of Russian soul, reflection of impressive culture and message of great film's school. Not a version but a great passion for create masterpieces.
Galina
"Master and Margarita", the book and the movie:I have read "Master and Margarita" three times, and I am sure that I will read it again. I was very lucky because all three times I read it in Russian, and even the best translation can not compare to the original. Every time, I found something new in the book; it would turn to me by different facets. "Master and Margarita" is incredibly beautiful, deep, sophisticated yet playful and sparkling book with unforgettable characters. In fact, it is not one novel but three. First, about the adventures of the Devil and his company in 1920's Moscow; second, about Pontius Pilatus and Jesus in Jerusalem of the first century, and the third one, about the Master, the writer who wrote the second novel, and his eternal and true love, Margarita. The story of Master and Margarita is the story of Bulgakov and his wife and muse, Elena. All three stories are interconnected and intertwined. All three end with the exactly same phrase, "...the cruel fifth procurator of Judea, the equestrian Pontius Pilatus."So, what is the book about? Good, evil, betrayal, talent, love, forgiveness? Yes, it is. But it is so much more.I had a lot of doubts before watching the film because as much as I wanted to see "Master and Margarita" on screen I was not sure that it was possible to adapt it and not to lose anything significant - which is everything. I am pleasantly surprised - the film is very good. It is respectful, thoughtful and as close to the spirit of the greatest Russian novel of the last century as possible.The movie is not perfect (and I don't think that the perfect transfer is possible) but the choice of actors, the music score, the visual palette that change as we enter the different eras, places, and dimensions are outstanding. I was initially surprised by some names but almost every actor proved him/herself very capable in bringing to the screen well known and beloved characters. I would say that some of special effects could be ...well, more special - for example, the mischievous talking cat Behemoth could be done more interestingly. I also don't see the exact reason for creating a new character, the man in uniform with the glasses and very recognizable accent who is in charge of investigating the "crimes of the band of powerful hypnotists" - how they call Woland and his entourage. One can argue that the titular couple, the tragic lovers, Master and Margarita are weaker and their story seems pale in the comparison to one of Pilatus(bravo to 80 year old stage and screen legend, Kirill Lavrov who can be remembered as Ivan Karamazov in The Brothers Karamazov (1969) and Ieshua Ha-Notsri (incredible performance by the young bright star, Sergei Bezrukov of "Brigada"'s fame, almost unrecognizable as Ieshua). I think no one can deny that Oleg Basilashvili as powerful, cynical and eternally wise Woland, the part of Power " Which wills forever evil Yet does forever good" IS the true Master of the series. My fascination and admiration belong to Alexander Abdulov on whom I as a young girl had a huge crush in his early film "Obyknovennoye Chudo" . For many years he had been the Russian sex symbol but his enormous comical talent found its match in the part of Woland's assistant/ translator, Koroviev. His and Behemoth's adventures in Moscow are screamingly funny. I think that the film is a successful and enjoyable adaptation of the beloved cult novel and I recommend seeing it. I am going to order the sound track. As I mentioned, the music by Igor Kornelyuk is one of the film's treasures. P.S. I used to work on the street where the last home of Mikhail Bulgakov was. He was taken to the cemetery from there.The famous "Pashkov's House" with the rotunda on the top where Woland and his team gathered together before they left Moscow forever, was in walking distance from my work, and I remember, once, I almost got hit by a car -I walked and looked at that music in stone and could not take my eyes off it.
scyrlin
They say Bortko has already established himself as a talented re-teller of greatest masterpieces. He has "Idiot" and "Sobachye Serdtse" to his credit, which have received positive critique of the audiences, their statuses notwithstanding. "Master i Margarita", however, is so far the highlight of his directing career. Yes, it is a TV version and one usually does not expect much from TV serials. But tell me - how is one supposed to fit in a masterpiece into two-three hours of screen time? How can one do this when literally every page of the book contains some new information, an unexpected development, an interesting dialog, or a crazy combination of all three? I can only commend Bortko for doing such a great job of bringing to screen the all time classic of Russian literature (and thank him for not doing the same that some of the Western countries do to their own classics).Now, on to the version itself. The cast was superb and I shall not get tired of stating this. Galibin as Master and Kovalchuk as Margarita match their characters so perfectly it is uncanny even. Galibin truly brings out his talent in this role - the role that is not a very playable one as the character does not go through much action or much visible change. The play here is deeper and had the actor been less talented, the Master would have turned out apathetic and insipid. But that does not happen here and we have a Master we see broken. And we feel his pain, just as well as we feel Margarita's pain and overwhelming desire to do anything to get her life back to happiness it once contained. Woland. If you expect him to be a stylized and sleek version of evil as some of the movies aestheticizing violence show their villains - you will be disappointed. Basilashvili's Woland is monumental and without a shed of light in him. He is not an entertainer, he does not make lighthearted jokes or give out histrionic retorts. He does not lick his lips or give dirty looks as most of villains are stereotyped to do. Woland in this version is the Master of the novel and the planet. He is slightly tired of people's silliness but behind his seeming exhaustion immense power is hidden. Well, what did you expect - he's the Satan himself. Woland's companions match him perfectly as well. Koroviev is dream come true in Abdulov's interpretation, whereas Azazello shows how demons can try to be nice and come out rather fatherly at that. Unfortunately, the naughtiest of the clique, Begemot, is the only weakness of the TV version. He is voiced by one of the talented actors of the new generation of Russian acting school, but the puppet and the cat costume they use for Begemot most of the time seriously leaves much to be desired.Overall, this film deserves a strong 8, and had it had a good animated Begemot, I would have given it 9 as well. The only thing that does not allow me to give it a full 10 is the CGI failure of the film. Where the actors play their roles superbly, the special effects threatened to ruin the impression from the film. Thankfully, the actor performances did not allow for getting distracted with the CGI too much. That, already, does say a bit about the level of acting in the film, no?
