NOTE IMDb
6,2/10
819
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA writer and his assistant are working on a biblical story about Pontius Pilate who convicted Jesus of Nazereth, while the Satan (here called Woland) and his lieutenants are harassing the wr... Tout lireA writer and his assistant are working on a biblical story about Pontius Pilate who convicted Jesus of Nazereth, while the Satan (here called Woland) and his lieutenants are harassing the writer duo in various ways.A writer and his assistant are working on a biblical story about Pontius Pilate who convicted Jesus of Nazereth, while the Satan (here called Woland) and his lieutenants are harassing the writer duo in various ways.
- Récompenses
- 3 victoires et 1 nomination au total
Velimir 'Bata' Zivojinovic
- Korovjev
- (as Bata Zivojinovic)
Pavle Vuisic
- Azazelo
- (as Pavle Vujisic)
Danilo 'Bata' Stojkovic
- Bobov
- (as Danilo Stojkovic)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAs of 2016 it was included in the #100 Serbian movies list (1911-1999) and protected as cultural heritage of great importance.
- Versions alternativesThere are several subtle differences between the Italian and Serbian language cuts of the film. The dubbed French version is based on the Serbian Cut. Removed from the Serbian Cut: Ennio Morricone's theme that plays throughout the Italian Cut is missing from the Serbian Cut. In Nikolai's play, Pontius Pilate orders the assassination of Judas Iscariot. Nikolai encounters a friend at a train station who asks him if he has withdrawn the play. Nikolai replies that he hasn't. The friend goes on to complain that he had only been given 20 pieces of paper to write his novel. Nikolai replies that it's not a problem for him as he writes his plays on his wall. After burning his play, Nikolai enters the theatre office, asking if the play will be rehearsed today. An attendant informs him there will not be a rehearsal that day. Added to the Serbian Cut: A shot of Nikolai walking in the street before entering the Café. He is being watched by Korovjev. After Margarita and Nikolai first meet and get into a car, Margarita looks out the car window and a POV-shot of the street (similar to the opening credits) is seen. After Rimski leaves Nikolai's apartment and Nikolai lights a cigarette, he looks up and sees Margarita with a small photo of Nikolai in front of her left eye. She smiles and cries. The scene then moves to Oskar Danilovic outside the house looking at a parade of soldiers. The Italian Cut resumes when Danilovic continues walking down the street. A shot of Nikolai walking up the stairs before entering the dance hall to confront Rimski. More footage of Nikolai looking at the asylum inmates in courtyard.
- ConnexionsRemade as Le maître et Marguerite (2023)
Commentaire à la une
I wonder if the current obsession with CGI wouldn't help with an adaptation of Bulgakov's more-or-less unfilmable novel. That said, this version isn't really all that, or really all that bad, or good either, but I believe can't truly be viewed as a 'faithful' filming of the book.
Bulgakov's book is, in many ways (but not exclusively) a desperate plea to Stalin to be left to create. Bulgakov wrote that book as a weird, confused and twisted confession of his fear, loathing, respect and honor of a terrible man who controlled his destiny and existence. Because of the kaleidescope of visions and ideas in the book, it's almost more of a mood piece than anything else, but most of all, a record of The Terror and Bulgakov's reaction to it.
In fact, by all accounts, Stalin liked the book and for that reason allowed Bulgakov to live, but considered the work too much for the masses and kept such things suppressed despite his own personal regard for the author. I bring this point up because without understanding WHY the book was written the supposed failure of the Yugoslav adaptation makes no sense.
This movie is not a faithful version of the book as it essentially uses the characters, features, and settings of the book for a totally different end; in the book, Bulgakov was using caricatures of various 'evil' personages to flatter Stalin; the end effect is to honor a great and powerful figure. In this Yugoslav version the ideas of The Devil are economic and ideological, not really artistic or aesthetic, and bluntly presented. It's extremely difficult, VERY difficult, to not see Tito in the character of The Devil.
I wasn't paying too much attention, to be honest, until the staged scenes of 'Black Magic', and when that got going I almost fell out of my chair. At that point I watched the entire movie again.
I'm unsurprised this film was suppressed. Holy Moley.
Anyway, as an adaptation of Bulgakov's famous (infamous?) novel, this movie doesn't work; as a seminal and very important piece of Yugoslav dissident filmmaking, it's pretty close to a masterpiece. Watch it for what it is.
Bulgakov's book is, in many ways (but not exclusively) a desperate plea to Stalin to be left to create. Bulgakov wrote that book as a weird, confused and twisted confession of his fear, loathing, respect and honor of a terrible man who controlled his destiny and existence. Because of the kaleidescope of visions and ideas in the book, it's almost more of a mood piece than anything else, but most of all, a record of The Terror and Bulgakov's reaction to it.
In fact, by all accounts, Stalin liked the book and for that reason allowed Bulgakov to live, but considered the work too much for the masses and kept such things suppressed despite his own personal regard for the author. I bring this point up because without understanding WHY the book was written the supposed failure of the Yugoslav adaptation makes no sense.
This movie is not a faithful version of the book as it essentially uses the characters, features, and settings of the book for a totally different end; in the book, Bulgakov was using caricatures of various 'evil' personages to flatter Stalin; the end effect is to honor a great and powerful figure. In this Yugoslav version the ideas of The Devil are economic and ideological, not really artistic or aesthetic, and bluntly presented. It's extremely difficult, VERY difficult, to not see Tito in the character of The Devil.
I wasn't paying too much attention, to be honest, until the staged scenes of 'Black Magic', and when that got going I almost fell out of my chair. At that point I watched the entire movie again.
I'm unsurprised this film was suppressed. Holy Moley.
Anyway, as an adaptation of Bulgakov's famous (infamous?) novel, this movie doesn't work; as a seminal and very important piece of Yugoslav dissident filmmaking, it's pretty close to a masterpiece. Watch it for what it is.
- effigiebronze
- 25 juil. 2010
- Permalien
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Master and Margaret?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 35 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Le maître et Marguerite (1972) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre