"The Attack on Rio Bravo" is the most long-awaited picture for me personally this year. At first I wanted to write that one of the two most long-awaited, along with "Avatar: the way of water", but it would still be cunning: after all, the work of A. Nevsky is perceived much closer, more native than D. Cameron, and the duration of "Avatar-2" in 3 + hours loses compared to vigorous 80 minutes of "Attack".
This time Alexander Nevsky, with his characteristic determination, went to master a new genre for himself - western. When it first became known that Alexander was preparing a film about the times of the Wild West, it caused some confusion, because usually in his films the action takes place in modern times, and traditionally, Alexander's hero has Russian roots, regardless of the place of action, be it Manila, Los Angeles or Vegas. It seemed that this time the tradition would be interrupted, but it was not there. The prudent Alexander picked up a historical prototype in the person of a brigadier general of the army of the Northerners of Russian (!) origin Ivan Turchaninov, which was a pleasant surprise.
Unfortunately, it cannot be said that the storyline was pleased with surprises. The scenario turned out to be very typical for the genre - a clash of law enforcement officers with bandits, replete with shooting, ending with the defeat of the latter. The absence of unexpected twists is all the more surprising because the author of the script was Craig Heymann, the screenwriter of Quentin Tarantino, who had previously performed well in conjunction with Alexander when working on the "Showdown in Manila". In addition to the generally straightforward plot, the line of the main villain also limps, who sits in the camera for almost the entire film and is released only for the final duel with the hero of Nevsky. Due to the absence of any obvious background, the game of nerves before shooting looks far-fetched. It should be said that in terms of choosing an actor for the role of the main antagonist, Alexander is true to himself again - the villain is played by the audience's favorite "bad guy" from "Manila", "Maximum Impact" and "Black Rose" Matthias Hughes. In general, it is very gratifying that Nevsky finds roles for his old acquaintances, this time Hughes and Olivier Gruner were noted. It's a pity that I couldn't see other regulars Robert Madrid and Andrew Divoff on the screen, but Joe Cornet, who made his debut at Nevsky, turned out to be a real find, was very convincing in the role of the sheriff, and, as it seems, generally played the best of all.
Camerawork in places leaves much to be desired, especially shooting indoors, but the views are great, and in combination with voice acting, they make you remember episodes of Red Dead Redemption at all. Also, analogies with RDR suggested themselves when the hero of Nevsky demonstrated accurate shooting at bandits alternately from a revolver, from a gun, again from a revolver, with a phenomenal speed of changing weapons and the ability to hide rifles unknown where.
By the way, in addition to introducing the Russian hero into the plot and inviting regulars to the supporting roles, A. Nevsky managed to observe another of his signature features, namely, to curtsy towards his prototype Arnold Schwarzenegger. In the episode when the hero of Nevsky is asked "Where did you study?", there was a complete illusion that he would answer "At the police school in Kiev" in the voice of Schwartz - Ivan Danko from "Red Heat". Actually, he almost answered like that: "In a military school." We hope Arnold will appreciate the next creation of his main Russian popularizer.
It is impossible not to note the improvements in the game of Nevsky himself. This was partially facilitated by a decrease in the number of hand-to-hand fights and in general, moments where the hero needs to show emotions, but it's not just that, it's clear that Alexander is working on himself. Of course, he is not destined to be Marlon Brando, but at least it is possible to approach Dwayne Johnson. Also, the legendary "hodbaaa" is practically absent in the film, except for the senseless fight between a bandit and a Pinkertons agent, one can recall from the moments of delaying the timing.
Summarizing, the audience was presented with a primitive, but dynamic western, which could be called with all grounds an absolutely passing film, if not for the personality of its creator and the performer of the main role. Life demonstrates amazing paradoxes - not so long ago, Evgeny Bazhenov's reviews and his subscribers smeared Nevsky's films into mush, but now the same subscribers were looking forward to the release of "Attack" and, it seems, sincerely supported Alexander. This is a significant merit of E. Bazhenov himself, who, after all the mockery of Nevsky, clearly demonstrated what a really crappy movie is (see Kakha), compared to which Alexander's paintings seem like masterpieces.
And undoubtedly, many viewers simply sincerely missed Alexander, his "Galywood blockbusters", his accent, his simple plots, his typical clumsy roles, and most importantly, those carefree times when his next film could be discussed with pleasure for weeks and months.
This time Alexander Nevsky, with his characteristic determination, went to master a new genre for himself - western. When it first became known that Alexander was preparing a film about the times of the Wild West, it caused some confusion, because usually in his films the action takes place in modern times, and traditionally, Alexander's hero has Russian roots, regardless of the place of action, be it Manila, Los Angeles or Vegas. It seemed that this time the tradition would be interrupted, but it was not there. The prudent Alexander picked up a historical prototype in the person of a brigadier general of the army of the Northerners of Russian (!) origin Ivan Turchaninov, which was a pleasant surprise.
Unfortunately, it cannot be said that the storyline was pleased with surprises. The scenario turned out to be very typical for the genre - a clash of law enforcement officers with bandits, replete with shooting, ending with the defeat of the latter. The absence of unexpected twists is all the more surprising because the author of the script was Craig Heymann, the screenwriter of Quentin Tarantino, who had previously performed well in conjunction with Alexander when working on the "Showdown in Manila". In addition to the generally straightforward plot, the line of the main villain also limps, who sits in the camera for almost the entire film and is released only for the final duel with the hero of Nevsky. Due to the absence of any obvious background, the game of nerves before shooting looks far-fetched. It should be said that in terms of choosing an actor for the role of the main antagonist, Alexander is true to himself again - the villain is played by the audience's favorite "bad guy" from "Manila", "Maximum Impact" and "Black Rose" Matthias Hughes. In general, it is very gratifying that Nevsky finds roles for his old acquaintances, this time Hughes and Olivier Gruner were noted. It's a pity that I couldn't see other regulars Robert Madrid and Andrew Divoff on the screen, but Joe Cornet, who made his debut at Nevsky, turned out to be a real find, was very convincing in the role of the sheriff, and, as it seems, generally played the best of all.
Camerawork in places leaves much to be desired, especially shooting indoors, but the views are great, and in combination with voice acting, they make you remember episodes of Red Dead Redemption at all. Also, analogies with RDR suggested themselves when the hero of Nevsky demonstrated accurate shooting at bandits alternately from a revolver, from a gun, again from a revolver, with a phenomenal speed of changing weapons and the ability to hide rifles unknown where.
By the way, in addition to introducing the Russian hero into the plot and inviting regulars to the supporting roles, A. Nevsky managed to observe another of his signature features, namely, to curtsy towards his prototype Arnold Schwarzenegger. In the episode when the hero of Nevsky is asked "Where did you study?", there was a complete illusion that he would answer "At the police school in Kiev" in the voice of Schwartz - Ivan Danko from "Red Heat". Actually, he almost answered like that: "In a military school." We hope Arnold will appreciate the next creation of his main Russian popularizer.
It is impossible not to note the improvements in the game of Nevsky himself. This was partially facilitated by a decrease in the number of hand-to-hand fights and in general, moments where the hero needs to show emotions, but it's not just that, it's clear that Alexander is working on himself. Of course, he is not destined to be Marlon Brando, but at least it is possible to approach Dwayne Johnson. Also, the legendary "hodbaaa" is practically absent in the film, except for the senseless fight between a bandit and a Pinkertons agent, one can recall from the moments of delaying the timing.
Summarizing, the audience was presented with a primitive, but dynamic western, which could be called with all grounds an absolutely passing film, if not for the personality of its creator and the performer of the main role. Life demonstrates amazing paradoxes - not so long ago, Evgeny Bazhenov's reviews and his subscribers smeared Nevsky's films into mush, but now the same subscribers were looking forward to the release of "Attack" and, it seems, sincerely supported Alexander. This is a significant merit of E. Bazhenov himself, who, after all the mockery of Nevsky, clearly demonstrated what a really crappy movie is (see Kakha), compared to which Alexander's paintings seem like masterpieces.
And undoubtedly, many viewers simply sincerely missed Alexander, his "Galywood blockbusters", his accent, his simple plots, his typical clumsy roles, and most importantly, those carefree times when his next film could be discussed with pleasure for weeks and months.