Commentaire par hof-4

Fact: In 1902 theater director and actor Konstantin Stanislavsky put on stage in the Moscow Art Theater two plays by Maxim Gorky whose scenarios were slums. As part of the preparation for the actors, he took the company to the Khitrov Market in Moscow. At that time, the Khitrov was a rather dangerous place teeming with thieves, prostitutes and murderers and approached with caution even by the police.

The movie takes this episode as starting point, although shows Stanislavsky in the Kitrov without the theater troupe, in the only company of journalist Vladimir Gilyarovsky who is familiar with the slum (as Stanislavsky, Gilyarovsky is a real life character and the script is partly based on his writings).

At this point, the film transitions into a rather free version of Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novella The Sign of Four, with Stanislavsky as a version of Holmes and Gilyarovsky as Dr Watson. There are also counterparts of Professor Moriarty and Inspector Lestrade. The last part of the film introduces some comedic elements. There is a little name dropping; Count Tolstoy is mentioned and playwright Anton Chekhov is given a conversation with Stanislavsky in a luxury restaurant. There is a nice plot twist near the end. The literal translation of the Russian title is Cunning: The Sign of Four.

I didn't find the idea of Stanislavsky as an amateur detective particularly compelling. The film is generally entertaining, but its strong point is the reconstruction of the Kitrov at that time; set and costume design are outstanding and cinematography is excellent both depicting the slums and the aristocratic/intellectual milieu where Stanislavsky lived and worked. All in all, not an outstanding work but an entertaining tale.