Is the 1948 cartoon "The Flower with Seven Colors" suitable for children?

Yes, the film offers simple moral lessons and gentle storytelling, making it a safe pick for kids. Just keep an eye on the slower pacing, which might need a short break.

How closely does the cartoon follow Valentina Katayeva's book?

The adaptation sticks closely to the book's core plot and themes, preserving the original fairy‑tale structure. Fans of the novel will recognize most of the key scenes.

Can I watch the cartoon with English subtitles?

Unfortunately, official releases lack English subtitles, so you’ll need a fan‑made version or a translation overlay if you don’t speak Russian.

What’s the audio quality like on modern streaming platforms?

The original audio is clear but sometimes gets buried under the musical score. It’s decent for nostalgia, but not up to today’s high‑fidelity standards.

Is the animation style appealing to modern viewers?

The hand‑drawn style has a vintage charm, yet it can feel flat compared to contemporary CGI. It works best for those who appreciate classic animation.

How long is the runtime of the cartoon?

The film runs about 45 minutes, which is short enough for a single sitting but may feel stretched if you’re used to faster‑paced modern shorts.

Are there any notable differences between the 1948 version and later adaptations?

Later versions add more dialogue and modern animation techniques, while the 1948 classic keeps a minimalist, story‑first approach.

Where can I legally purchase or stream the 1948 cartoon?

It’s available on a few Russian streaming services and occasionally appears on classic film DVD collections. Check reputable platforms for a legal copy.

The Flower with Seven Colors Review – Classic Yet Flawed

Warning: If you’re a die‑hard fan of this cartoon, my review might sting a bit – I’m being brutally honest, and it’s a little painful.

Intro:

Hey folks, “The Flower with Seven Colors” is a fairy‑tale that’s been glued to our childhoods for generations. Some of us grew up reading Valentina Katayeva’s original book and then watching the 1948 cartoon – my mom and I are in that camp. Others never cracked open the book but know the story from the animation. The tale has been adapted three times on screen, plus a few obscure versions: a 1968 short film with the same title, a 1977 cartoon called “The Last Petal,” and even a 2012 comic strip (issue #281) that riffs on the story. Personally, the only version I really dove into back in my carefree childhood was that first 1948 cartoon; the “Last Petal” is a blur – I only recall its opening. Why? Three possibilities:

I never finished watching it. It just didn’t leave a strong impression. It simply faded from memory.

Back to the point:

In reality, the 1948 cartoon sticks closest to the book and captures its folk‑tale vibe. Lots of people love it; some even call it a “masterpiece.” Funny enough, I couldnn’t find a single positive review on IMDb before I wrote this. I don’t share the hype – it doesn’t earn a spot in my personal collection of favorite Soviet animations. Trust me, I have solid reasons. Visually it’s solid and surprisingly elegant for its era, but there’s a glaring flaw, and the story has several hiccups. Let’s dive in:

Analysis:

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948) An old man walks by, watering the grass with a leaky hose.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948) Kid Zhenya is messing around, stomping on holes (what a rascal), spraying water everywhere, and a stray dog shows up, clearly hungry, snatching at his biscuits.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)At first Zhenya didn’t even notice anyone moving her little doughnut on the sponge—no surprise, no turning her head.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)She only realized the doughnuts were gone when only a couple were left on the sponge.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)She was fiddling with a hose and counting crows, so absorbed that she didn’t notice right away. Yeah, it’s a bit silly and I’m being cheeky—just ignore me.

Info about the main character’s name:

Zhenya isn’t a random pick. The writer used it for the people he loved most—his daughter and his mother, Valentina Petrovich.

Now for the real flaws: there’s a visual glitch where the heroine sports an enormous forehead in one shot.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)Probably the artists were careless, then too lazy to redraw the character with rotoscoping. Aside from that, I wouldn’t be that harsh—this cartoon definitely earns a spot in my favorites.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)Next, as Katayev wrote about the North Pole at minus‑100 °C, you’d expect Zhenya, arriving in a short dress, to start shivering, trembling from the brutal cold, and want to go back.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)But in the cartoon, the moment she slides on the ice toward a walrus, she just stands there calmly and starts a conversation—nothing about the freezing temperature.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)Later she even starts counting seals.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)After she bolts from the polar bear, her first wish is not to go back to Moscow but to see that bear locked up in a cage… Unlike the book, the film never hints that she’s freezing. Is that supposed to be some kind of cold‑resistance? Either way, the realism just falls apart. And that’s only the start.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)So Jenya makes that wish, and suddenly she’s back in Moscow while the bear ends up in a zoo cage.

«Цветик-семицветик». (1948)Logically, she should have stayed at the North Pole with the bear in its cage. In the book, her fourth wish is to go back to her yard in Moscow—not to leave the bear imprisoned. Here’s the passage:

Frightened beyond reason, Jenya clutched the seven‑colored flower with icy fingers, tore off a green petal, flung it and shouted at the top of her lungs:

Fly, fly, little petal, From west to east, From north to south, Come back, make a circle. The moment you touch the ground— That’s how I’m supposed to be.

Supposed to be so I’m instantly back in our yard! And in the same instant she was standing in the yard again.

Notice the difference. It’s baffling why the film skips that whole bit from the book and replaces it with these awkward, ill‑fitted inconsistencies. Everything made sense in the original. Who’s to blame—director or screenwriter? I’ve debated this with my mom countless times; she thinks maybe the director wanted to put his own spin on it. If that’s the case, it just feels unnecessary and flat. The movie does have a nearly gorgeous, eye‑catching visual style, but the story falls apart. By contrast, “The Last Petal” nails the narrative—its visuals are a bit rough, but the plot is solid and logical. I’m still planning a side‑by‑side comparison of three key elements across the three main adaptations:

Additional comparative analysis:

Сравнительная таблица. №1Visual take on Jenya:

1. Jenya from the 1948 cartoon “Цветик‑семицветик”. She’s a brunette with light‑brown hair tied into little ponytails with white ribbons. Even the tiniest details of her hairstyle feel spot‑on. Her dress has nice touches. It’s the most fitting look for the heroine.

2. Jenya from the 1968 live‑action film “Цветик‑семицветик”. She’s a blonde with rubber‑band ponytails and a fluffy fringe. The haircut is cute, but she’d probably look better as a brunette. Her outfit—wide‑strap dress over a sweater—is sweet, though the overall look feels a bit plain.

3. Zhenya from the cartoon “The Last Petal” (1977).

I'll keep it short—she's the weakest portrayal of the heroine.

\n\n\n\n\n\nComparative table. No. 2Visual representation of the Seven‑Petal Flower:

1. The Seven‑Petal Flower from the 1948 cartoon “The Seven‑Petal Flower”.

Petal colors: scarlet, light orange, vanilla, turquoise‑mint, dark azure, light violet and light pink. In plain grandma‑wizard terms: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet and pink. The bloom looks like a lily—hands down the most aesthetically pleasing version.

2. The Seven‑Petal Flower from the 1968 film “The Seven‑Petal Flower”.

Petal colors: bordeaux, a light orange that leans toward yellow, mustard, pale green, pale cornflower, dark blue and pale lilac. The flower feels more like a plastic prop than a real bloom, but the hues match the book pretty closely.

3. The Seven‑Petal Flower from the 1977 cartoon “The Last Petal”.

Petal colors: bordeaux, pumpkin, light yellow, pale green, a pale sky‑blue that looks more like white, blue and light pink. The blossom is more daisy‑like.

Original palette: red, orange, yellow, green, light blue, blue and violet.

\n\n\n\n\n\nComparative table. No. 3How the colored petals were used for wishes:

1. From the 1948 cartoon.

Red leaf — for the doughnuts and getting back home. Green leaf — to fix the vase. Orange leaf — a trip north. Purple leaf — she returned. Yellow leaf — ordered toys. Blue leaf — returned the toys. Pink leaf — health for the boy.

2. From the 1968 film.

Yellow leaf — for the doughnuts and getting back home. Red leaf — to fix the vase (in my opinion, the most beautiful vase of all adaptations). Orange leaf — ordered toys. Green leaf — returned the toys. Blue leaf — a journey to the Polar Star. Purple leaf — she returned. Light‑blue leaf — health for the boy.

Here it sticks closest to the original.

3. From the 1977 cartoon.

Green leaf — for the doughnuts and getting back home. Pink leaf — to fix the vase. Red leaf — a trip north. Light‑blue leaf — she returned. Orange leaf — ordered toys. Blue leaf — returned the toys. Yellow leaf — health for the boy.

Original (book) uses:

Yellow leaf — for the doughnuts and getting back home. Red leaf — to fix the vase. Blue leaf — a trip north. Green leaf — she returned. Orange leaf — ordered toys. Purple leaf — returned the toys. Light‑blue leaf — health for the boy.

Morality of the tale:

“I wrote the story ‘The Seven‑Petal Flower’ thinking about how we should have compassion for people. The author plainly and simply drives home the idea that we must feel sorry for others and always help them.”

Bottom line on the cartoon:

Even with its flaws, I’d say this cartoon is one of those you can safely turn on for kids. Still, it’s only worth a single viewing – the story isn’t that tight or logical. The book beats it hands down; it’s sturdier, and I’d rather have kids read the original than watch this first adaptation. Should adults give it another go? If you’re curious, one more watch for fun won’t hurt. Thanks for sticking with my review to the end. (Honestly, I can already picture the internet hurling tomatoes and stones at me for this opinion.)