I recently found myself at the movies after a long week of taking care of my six-month-old baby. With my husband usually getting home around 8 pm on weekdays, I have my personal time on weekends. This time, I decided to check out the limited list of movies playing in theaters and bought a ticket for 'Burratino.'
The thing that made me decide on this was that I barely remember the Soviet-era film. If I did see it, it was probably just once, and that was about 30 years ago. Maybe I even saw it in snippets. I did have a book about Burratino as a kid, but I don't really remember it either, since I borrowed it from someone to read. And I didn't re-read it.
So, in my review, there won't be any comparisons. I'm not in the know about what's what. In my head, it's 'I remember this, but not that' based on the original fairy tale. I remember the coins they buried in the ground, but I have no idea who Duremar was. So....
Okay, let's get started.
xa0
Director: Igor Voloshin
Duration: 1 hour 42 minutes
Cast:
Vitaliya KornienkoAleksandr YatsenkoAnastasiya TalyzinaStepan BelozarovMark EidelshteinAleksandr PetrovViktoriya IsakovaRuzil MinkaevI won't say anything about the cast, since I don't know most of them. I only recognize Petrov and Isakova, and maybe Bondarchuk. The rest are in the 'I might have heard the name, but have no idea what they look like' group.
By the way, this is one of the few roles where Petrov doesn't look like himself, doesn't shout, and doesn't overact. The makeup and costume fit him well, and he looks good as Basil in this film)
(All the images are from the trailer)
I have to say, in modern movies, I'm not a huge fan of the abundance of CGI. But what really surprised me about this film is that the town was actually built, rather than being completely computer-generated.
xa0
Shooting started in the fall of 2024 and wrapped up in December. The majority of the shoot took place at the Moskino Cinema Park, where a miniature Italian town from the late 19th to early 20th centuries was built – complete with a town hall square, fountains, a bakery, a pharmacy, and shops.
And that's the first thing that was a real treat for the eyes: the atmosphere of a small 19th-century town. I'm a huge fan of that kind of thing – the whole historical vibe: the streets, the buildings, the costumes, the horses, the carts, the oil lamps, the narrow benches, the creaky doors... Wow! The atmosphere of the era is really well thought out, and I was completely swept up in it. And all those 'signori' and 'buon ser' are a great reminder that you're in 19th-century Italy.
Now you might be thinking, what's the connection to Italy and Pinocchio?
Well, it's a bit of a stretch, but it's there. The story of Pinocchio is actually quite dark, and while it starts off like a typical children's tale, it takes a turn for the worse. And Alexei Tolstoy adapted it into a children's story about Buratino, which is what we're watching here. This new adaptation is based on the original, as mentioned in the credits.
So, we have the story of Buratino, presented in a new light, with a dash of Pinocchio thrown in for good measure.
xa0
Be honest, some parts of the movie still felt familiar.
xa0
Like when Puss in Boots crashes the show at the Theater of the Baron, or when he tries to sell the alphabet to get into the play.
xa0
The film gets slammed for its 'scary Puss', but...
Well, when I first watched the trailer, I thought, yeah, he does look pretty intense. But then I saw the actual movie, and he's just... not that scary. The emotions are all there, his face is open and friendly, and his eyes sparkle.
Nothing in the movie really grated on me or made me nervous.
Seeing the kids laugh at Puss in Boots? That's just life. He's trying to hang with them on their level...
The dark atmosphere? It's not that dark – it's actually pretty vibrant, but it fits the setting and architecture of that small 19th-century town. I guess people were expecting a kids' fairy tale, but they got a family movie instead.
xa0
xa0
Malvina got some flak for being a bit of a mess and... whatever else. If I hadn't read those reviews, I wouldn't have known. She's a fragile but kind girl. Okay, fine, her hands are open, and her dress has a visible corset... But overall, 'Malvina and Co.' is just a supporting cast. Maybe in the original story, she's a more independent character.
xa0
You can find plenty of themes hidden in the plot.
When Donkey Skin told the gang, 'You want to leave? Go ahead, then – where will you go?'... And in the end, his theater collapsed without any performers.
xa0
That immediately reminded me of some bosses I've had. Back when I worked at a company 10 years ago, the management's big thing was how we should be grateful to work at such a big organization, get paid a decent salary with a full benefits package, and be happy about it, because who needs us, anyway? We're the ones who might take a maternity leave someday.
xa0
What I liked:
I loved the 19th-century atmosphere, the whole 'retro vibe', and how they styled the setting to be in Italy. Even Alice and Basilio sang a little ditty in Italian (I'm guessing they meant 'an Italian tune'?). The movie's got a warm, heartwarming feel to it. I've always pictured 'Papa Carlo' as just some old guy who works himself to the bone 24/7, but here he's portrayed as a fully fleshed-out character, a caring and lonely man who once dreamed of having a son and loves Bambolona just the way he is.
What I didn't like:
Okay, I guess one thing that bugged me was that, just like in The Letter to Father Frost, there's no non-stop fantasy adventure or hilarious humor. But there are moments where you might get a little misty-eyed. Maybe I'm just getting old and sentimental, or maybe my hormones are still all over the place after having kids. I mean, on the one hand, the movie's heartwarming quality is a testament to the writers and actors' hard work, but on the other...I've been on a positive movie kick for a while now, and I've found myself getting a little teary-eyed during both of these films.
Maybe that's why not everyone's a fan.
Some folks said the movie doesn't reveal the story's meaning.
Well, I'd say it doesn't follow the original fairy tale's plot, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The story's got its own moral and message – it's about the relationships between kids and their parents, if you simplify it to two words.
I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. I think it's because I couldn't compare it to the previous version and had no expectations. In the end, I didn't regret choosing to watch this film, even though I'd read some terrible reviews and thought I'd be watching it just because I'd paid for it.
And yeah, let's talk about the rating. Unfortunately, 90% of people get it wrong when they see those censors with a 6+ or 12+ rating and so on. For some reason, everyone thinks 6+ is a 'movie/book for six-year-olds'. In reality, it's 'allowed to be shown to children from six years old'.
Allowed because
the content might already contain some scenes of antisocial behavior, diseases, accidents, crashes, and deaths. However, these scenes are depicted unnaturally and briefly.
The next threshold is already 12+
This
might include scenes of violence or murder, descriptions of diseases, catastrophes, but without details. The use of alcohol, tobacco, and narcotics might be present, but it should be condemned.
So, based on this, children's movies are marked as 6+, although many of them would be better understood by kids older than 9-10 years old. It's always recommended to check the content for the child, the description of the book or movie, and so on.
My colleague's 10-year-old daughter watched 'Burratino' and loved it. I'm sure five- to seven-year-olds would prefer a fairy tale with dragons and princesses. This is a life-like fairy tale, by the way. There were several parents with kids aged 5-7 in the theater with me, but I didn't ask for their opinion.
xa0
But that's not the point.
I have to admit, I'm still a bit confused about all the hate for Prostokvashino - people are saying it's 90% a copy of the Soviet cartoon, and then there's Buratino getting slammed for not copying the Soviet version, but doing the same thing in a different way. I guess it's up to personal preference, as they say.
But honestly, I get why people are upset. If you're a huge fan of the Soviet adaptation or cartoon, or you've seen them recently, or you're always re-watching them, then this movie is gonna rub you the wrong way because it's 'not like the original' and 'looks like a cheap knockoff.'
That's pretty much the secret.
As for me, I just don't remember the original very well, don't have anything to compare it to, and I watched the new adaptation as a standalone film.
And to wrap things up
The final musical scene took two days to film. Before that, the whole cast, dancers, and extras had a full dress rehearsal. There were over 200 people involved in the final scene, including 35 professional dancers.
xa0
I'd recommend the film based on everything I've said.
I was torn between giving it four or five stars, but in the end, I didn't have any major complaints.
xa0
Thanks for reading.