This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

The Worst Film Ever

Please don't spend money on this.

I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

The user review first to pop up when one opens the IMDb page is not only unfair, but IMHO idiotic. This is a masterpiece you MUST see. As everybody who has read the novel knows (and I have read it at least four times), Master i Margarita is a 20th century masterpiece, perhaps THE 20th century masterpiece as far as novels are concerned. Theoretically, it is impossible to adapt to film. Yet Vladimir Bortko managed in this mini-series to convey to the viewer all the magical beauty, as well as the penetrating political satire, of the novel. Of all the scenes/themes of the novel, only a single one is missed: the hoarders of hard currency locked in a theater for re-education and recanting. It is an inexplicable omission, however it does not affect the value of the mini-series. Then there are matters where one cannot follow Vladimir Bortko, as for instance the (IMHO) inconsistent alteration between BW and color. But just watch the mini-series, and you are lifted into a world of magic - magic realism for that matter. All actors are accomplished theater actors: close your eyes and you can imagine them playing Chechov on stage. The Russian they speak is seductively beautiful. I do not speak the language, and mini-series like this make me regret it: a friend of mine (native speaker) who watched it together with me was constantly laughing or frowning at parts of the video where the English subtitles gave no clue of anything. And, from a male viewer's perspective (Bulgakov was if anything a skirt chaser), you have to watch it even just for the pleasure of voyeurism. Anna Kovalchuk as Margarita is fragile, beautiful, erotic, daemonic: the woman you had always wished you had loved, and be loved by her in return. Dela the witch/vampiress is extremely seductive. And the eroticism of some scenes, most notable the Spring Ball with all these beautiful women clad only in jewelry, feathers and stiletto high-heels is, I think, impossible to beat. I give it only 9/10, because 10/10 goes to the novel.

This TV-series of 10 episodes, broadcast at the end of 2005 on the Russian Telekanal Rossiia, scored unprecedented ratings.It was the second attempt of director Vladimir Bortko to film Bulgakov's masterpiece. In 2000 he had already been solicited by the Kino-Most film studio, associated with the competing channel NTV, but at the last moment the company did not succeed to come to an agreement with Sergei Shilovsky, grandson of Bulgakov's third wife, and owner of the copyrights. This time, with Rossiia, it worked. And it did not pass unnoticed.This TV-epopee of more than 8 hours was heavily criticized, or at least regarded with much skepticism, before it was shown on screen. Sometimes it was sincere and well-grounded concern about the authenticity, but sometimes it seemed as if the Bulgakov die-hards behaved like modern Latunsky's by reproaching a movie they hadn't seen yet with sacrilege. Or maybe it was because of the gigantic publicity campaign that was launched to promote the series, and that could give reasons to fear an ambitious, but superficial Hollywood-ish production. But fortunately it wasn't the case.In contrast with the earlier screen adaptation of Aleksandar Petrovic in 1972, director Vladimire Bortko (° Moscow, 1946) followed the book meticulously. If you have 10 times 52 minutes available for it, it is of course, easier than when you're supposed to deliver a 90 minutes movie picture. The setting of a TV-series appeared to be an ideal format to elaborate the complicated, multidimensional work with many different characters. Bortko had already shown his talent with his TV-adaptation of Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Idiot in 2003. Besides, he already filmed another novel of Bulgakov before: "Heart of a Dog", in 1988. He followed the dialogues almost word for word because, so he said, Bulgakov wrote the novel almost like a screenplay.Ik was skeptical too when I saw the DVD at дом книги (Dom Knigi or "House of Books") in Moscow. But curiosity was stronger than skepticism and, frankly speaking, I was pleasantly surprised from the first images. Woland's meeting with Ivan and Berlioz, and the first confrontation of Pilate and Yeshua Ha-Notsri are not only beautifully portrayed and well performed, but in addition they matched remarkably well with the images that I had in mind when I first read the book.The three layers of the novel are reflected more than well, with a well manipulated alternation of colour and black-and-white. The actors are casted accurately and they play the characters faithfully to the novel's intentions that even the most convinced skeptics shut their mouths, despite the huge success – on December 29, 2005 more than 80 million people were watching.Must I find demerits? Well... maybe the depiction of Behemoth then. With the existing technologies it could have been done better, but after all I can only conclude that, even though it is "only" TV, this series doesn't disenchant and its main merit is probably the the fact that Bulgakov now found a much bigger audience than he ever could have had with his books.

Back in the 80's they showed the series in Spanish dubbing in Cuba, i remember i missed it cause i was too young, and later i did regret this cause i read the book which i have also in the Spanish version, and now i can't find the series translated, to either English or Spanish. A great movie could be made from this book, if they change some facts, it is an amazing story. Who knows, now the filmmakers are into comic books, eventually someone will decide to make a generous version of the three musketeers for instance, that is just one of the thousands, of great books waiting to be remembered. Excuse my poor English, i can write better in Spanish.

They say Bortko has already established himself as a talented re-teller of greatest masterpieces. He has "Idiot" and "Sobachye Serdtse" to his credit, which have received positive critique of the audiences, their statuses notwithstanding. "Master i Margarita", however, is so far the highlight of his directing career. Yes, it is a TV version and one usually does not expect much from TV serials. But tell me - how is one supposed to fit in a masterpiece into two-three hours of screen time? How can one do this when literally every page of the book contains some new information, an unexpected development, an interesting dialog, or a crazy combination of all three? I can only commend Bortko for doing such a great job of bringing to screen the all time classic of Russian literature (and thank him for not doing the same that some of the Western countries do to their own classics).Now, on to the version itself. The cast was superb and I shall not get tired of stating this. Galibin as Master and Kovalchuk as Margarita match their characters so perfectly it is uncanny even. Galibin truly brings out his talent in this role - the role that is not a very playable one as the character does not go through much action or much visible change. The play here is deeper and had the actor been less talented, the Master would have turned out apathetic and insipid. But that does not happen here and we have a Master we see broken. And we feel his pain, just as well as we feel Margarita's pain and overwhelming desire to do anything to get her life back to happiness it once contained. Woland. If you expect him to be a stylized and sleek version of evil as some of the movies aestheticizing violence show their villains - you will be disappointed. Basilashvili's Woland is monumental and without a shed of light in him. He is not an entertainer, he does not make lighthearted jokes or give out histrionic retorts. He does not lick his lips or give dirty looks as most of villains are stereotyped to do. Woland in this version is the Master of the novel and the planet. He is slightly tired of people's silliness but behind his seeming exhaustion immense power is hidden. Well, what did you expect - he's the Satan himself. Woland's companions match him perfectly as well. Koroviev is dream come true in Abdulov's interpretation, whereas Azazello shows how demons can try to be nice and come out rather fatherly at that. Unfortunately, the naughtiest of the clique, Begemot, is the only weakness of the TV version. He is voiced by one of the talented actors of the new generation of Russian acting school, but the puppet and the cat costume they use for Begemot most of the time seriously leaves much to be desired.Overall, this film deserves a strong 8, and had it had a good animated Begemot, I would have given it 9 as well. The only thing that does not allow me to give it a full 10 is the CGI failure of the film. Where the actors play their roles superbly, the special effects threatened to ruin the impression from the film. Thankfully, the actor performances did not allow for getting distracted with the CGI too much. That, already, does say a bit about the level of acting in the film, no?