Perhaps due to the influence of the war atmosphere, the film has many scary details, which would be completely eliminated in animated films of the 1950s and 60s. Anyway, this was an excellent animated-film in 1945, the only thing was that children at that time could not see the color version.

I'm really glad I could finally bring this one here. I've wanted to do it for a while, but the film is so wordy and the existing translations so problematic that it took longer than I'd hoped.

I think the film has somewhat odd pacing (it feels like the climax comes early, and there's a long "afterword" which explains what happened earlier), and I think the sketchy dream-sections aren't drawn as appealingly as the main part, but it nevertheless is quite funny and brilliant. All of the scenes from the "present-day" with the main villain in particular are excellent.

The director was feeling burned out after he finished it (and no wonder!), but soon found himself writing another "Holmes" script that ended up with perhaps enough material for a feature film. It was to be called "Королевские игрушки" ("King's Toys", or "Royal Toys"). He seemed quite excited about it and production was due to start in 2014.

So what happened? I have to read between the lines a bit, but I suspect the Maidan and the start of the Ukrainian/Russian conflict in 2014 had something to do with it. The first two "Holmes" movies were in Russian, and it seems that the new one was planned to be a major Russian-language project made mostly by a Ukrainian studio. Since 2014, that combination has become untenable on both sides of the border, and even more so since 2022. Aleksandr Bubnov is 65, currently lives in Kyiv/Kiev and is still active on his YouTube channel. People often leave comments praising his Holmes films and asking for a sequel, and he often replies thanking them, but saying that he doubts it will ever get made and that the current situation makes it completely impossible.

On a not-completely-unrelated note, Boris Bubnov is probably his son, and is credited with drawing/animating the dream sequences here.

I've only seen parts of this, but it seems to be a rather "average" example of the sort of commercial animated features that tend to get made in Russia these days. The reviews are mixed, though the English dub seems to have gotten worse reviews than the Russian one.

I immediately recognized the art style, as Sarkisyan had earlier been the art director for Roman Davydov's Shareholders (1963). He was also art director for a number of films in the 1950s, but he wasn't really allowed to develop a personal style yet - there was an enforced "studio style" at that time.

I think the script is quite decent but the narrator is so cheerful that it gets a bit annoying. He was voiced by the same lady who did the voice for the Hare in "Just You Wait" (Nu, pogodi!).

Larisa Malyukova (in her book Сверхкино, p.162) thinks that this film was the prototype for the popular recent "Masha and the Bear" animated series. Olifirenko was one of the few puppet animation directors (and a good one, at that) who kept working at Soyuzmultfilm during the 1990s while the studio was falling apart (most of them left to work at Christmas Films studio on the "Animated Shakespeare" series for the Brits, or at Garri Bardin's "Stayer" studio).

There's a rather detailed (perhaps too detailed) review analysing of the "hidden meaning" of this one over at Kinopoisk.

I think Olifirenko's next film is even better, but rather difficult to translate. Not sure if I'll manage it, though I'd like to try.

Here, its filmstory and diafilm. This film reminds me of Rodamus Qwerck's Delusion (Наваждение Родамуса Кверка).

How interesting ! In the 1898 version of the story, the baby's name means "under the cart" / Ча-поги (車...). A beggar couple accidentally wandered into Kim's mansion. Because they were afraid of him, they hid under the cart. The wife gave birth there and the baby's cry woke Kim up. That's why he adopted this child.

However, in the Russian version of the story, the baby's name was changed to Chepogi/Chilpok (in Korean, B and P are used almost the same way, because Korean people cannot say the letters V-F-Ph so they are an alternative solution ; G and K are identical, because Koreans cannot pronounce Kh either). Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find the original Korean version of the story to compare.

In any case, both of these stories express the autosuggestion of people with too many possessions : The richer they are, the more worried they will be. So what role does the Tiger God play ? Although tigers are very common in Asia, most of them have yellow-black fur. Tigers with white fur are extremely rare and are therefore the target of legends. According to Chinese astronomy, the zodiac has only 4 constellations and is also considered 4 gods : Azure Dragon, Vermilion Bird, White Tiger, Black Tortoise. They all stand around another constellation called the Yellow Dragon or Qilin. Coins from the early twentieth century onwards were minted according to this scheme.

The White Tiger symbolizes Autumn, the West and especially Metal. Metal is 金 (Jin / Kim), which is the surname of the main character in this story. Of course, it also has another meaning which is wealth. In addition, East Asians often hang paintings of white tigers in their homes to pray for the family to have a son. Because the ancient concept always valued boys more than girls. Take me for example, in my horoscope, which the old man in my family wrote when I was just born. That paper said that I should hang a painting of a white tiger so that I could have three sons. That is why Kim was given a lot of wealth by the tiger god and asked to raise a baby named Chilbok.

An earlier animated adaptation with music by Shostakovich and the original author's involvement was made in 1940. Both versions are quite colourful and well-made but very different!

This film style is obviously different from oil-painting animation of Aleksandr Petrov, Dorota Kobiela, since the moments are not smoothly changing, and objects are more real. It is kind of weird, but can be an interesting and attractive way to illustrate fantasy worlds, especially fuzzy dreams.

Thanks for the sharing, I found the director has other amazing works, "Вечные вариации: Демон,Тезей, Фауст" ,"Маленькие трагедии", "Арвентур", "Мелодия струнного дерева", and the upcoming "Щелкунчик, пианино и венок из одуванчиков", treasures!

This is probably my favourite work from the studio in decades. I'm glad that they've finally made it available so that it can appear here.

The IMDB rating is currently 6.4, which I think is unjust - this is a remarkable film, albeit one with a rather narrow potential audience. The reason, I think, is that it is very "outdated" in temperament (though not in technique), and with a rather auteur script and direction. For all its spectacle, it is actually rather complex; very much in the style of some of the less mainstream productions of the late Soviet-era Soyuzmultfilm, but with mainstream production values and talent.

Quite astonishing that it did get made and released, really, when so many other promising big projects started by the great directors of that era didn't.

Here is the most insightful review I found, from Kino-Teatr (the translation is mine):
---

"Hoffmaniada" is a film with a complex and even tragic story. Work on it began in 2001 and was associated primarily with the name of the artist Mikhail Shemyakin, who created truly brilliant puppets. As is often the case with ambitious animated projects, the production dragged on. Feature-length animated films can take 5-6 years to complete even in normal situations, but "Hoffmaniada" set a record: it took 16 years. The reasons included lack of funding, the mess that reigned almost all these years at "Soyuzmultfilm" studio, and certain creative differences (the film did not turn out the way Shemyakin wanted it to - and in the end, the artist practically renounced it).

At one point, it seemed that like many protracted productions, "Hoffmaniada" would remain unfinished; nevertheless, director Stanislav Sokolov brought this incredible work to completion. Although, this too is relative; in the coming months, perhaps right up until its theatrical release, the studio plans to continue working on the film.

Probably, not least because of such a complicated production history, “Hoffmaniada” turned out to be a strange film. It looks a bit like an anachronism, like a not fully completed work of another era, pulled out of storage and presented to the public at last. If even in 2007, when the first part of "Hoffmaniada" was screened, the film looked quite modern, then in 2018, with puppet films back in fashion and the stunning works of Wes Anderson and Laika setting the tone, the picture seems old-fashioned, and the viewer is struck by various imperfections. Finally, due to the fact that different segments were filmed at different times, sometimes there is a feeling that “Hoffmaniada” is not quite a complete piece and is stitched together from rags, as it were. In a word, there are a lot of critiques that could be made about the film, and all of them were made by professional viewers (in particular, at the Suzdal animation festival, in backroom discussions).

And yet, in a strange way, all these shortcomings absolutely do not prevent the film from being outstanding, interesting, integral and authentic. Perhaps, this is mainly due to the fact that the Romantic era, in the spirit of which the film was created, absolutely allows all of this: unfinishedness, incompleteness, fragmentation. A hesitant artist, the gap between ideal and reality, the attempt to capture some subtle matters and lofty feelings, the expression of which sometimes comes to artistic indecency and banality... All these make up the essence and the irresistible charm of the Romantic era, together with terrible visions and the constant presence of something unspeakable that is eager to be expressed yet finds for itself neither images nor words.

The main character of the film is the young Ernst (in fact, Hoffmann himself). By day he serves in the Chancellery, and in the evenings he tries to write his opera "Undine". A dry young man, poring over paperwork, and endlessly dreaming of something more - about great love, about the beautiful country of Atlantis, about events greater and more important than clerical routines. His fantasies are so strong that they literally capture Ernst's life, so that he is almost unable to distinguish reality from fiction. He is in love with the beautiful snakelet Serpentina, is afraid of the insidious Sandman, meets Little Zaches on the street and talks with the Nutcracker. The real difficulties and minor setbacks that he encounters are immediately clothed in fantasy: his father’s angry friend turns into the Sandman who wants to take his eyes, a girl in the window appears to be a clockwork doll created by villains so that Ernst would forget his true love, and Ernst himself in response to a humiliating situation is able to turn into a giant.

It’s difficult to compare “Hoffmaniada” to anything - it is too original and it falls out of the context of our time with its rationalism and positivism. Such an auteur, sincere and completely non market-oriented film probably could have appeared only in the timelessness in which it was filmed, in which the leadership of "Soyuzmultfilm" studio changed every few years, and the director had the highest degree of freedom from the dictates of officials and financiers. Partly chaotic, in many ways illogical, “Hoffmaniada” conveys sharply and precisely the viewpoint of a romantic, artist and poet, locked in everyday reality, but motivated not by that reality, but by a phantom life - veering painfully between two non-existent beautiful girls, fearing fictional monsters. In the modern world, all this seems like banal insanity, as does working 16 years on a picture that obviously and clearly will not have crazy box office numbers. However, "Hoffmaniada" is indeed such an anachronism. It is a reflection of the beautiful era of free artists, incredible fantasies and protracted, wild dreams about something more.