sonnyschlaegel

There are two Russian adaptations of this fairy tale by Hans Christian Andersen, made within less than ten years, the animated version of 1957 and this live-action movie of 1966. The first version is nearer to the original tale most of the time. In the second version, some chapters have been left out. In the fourth chapter, much has been changed and much was added that is not in the tale. This version is apparently based on an adaptation (for the stage) by Yevgeni Shvarts (or "Yevgheny Schwartz"), which probably explains the higher number of changes.

In both versions, a narrator has been added, in this version the fairy story teller Andersen, played by Valeri Nikitenko, in the older version a character from another tale by Hans Christian Andersen, Ole Luk-Oie. The end has also been changed more or less in both adaptations, and both leave out those parts of the story that (directly) have to do with Christianity, for example Gerda's prayer and the song lines "Roses bloom and cease to be / But we shall the Christ-child see". This is probably due to the fact that Russia was a communist country back then. But the core and the basic message of the story are there in both versions: Kay is robbed of his feelings and abducted by the Snow Queen to her palace in the far north. But without feelings a human being isn't really human any more. Gerda misses her best friend Kay and has to try to get to the Queen's palace and make his heart of ice become warm again. At this point the live-action version is nearer to the original than the animated version, which leaves out the Snow Queen's promise to Kay: if in "the icy game of reason" he manages to form the word "eternity" out of some pieces of ice "you shall be your own master, and I will give you the whole world and a new pair of skates". The outcome of this game is probably an important part of the message of the story - it probably means that pure reason, cold logic, can not lead to eternity - only love can.

The adaptation for the screen makes a good impression overall, for example the actors' performances and the music by Nadezhda Simonyan. The special effects, though, are not very good, for example they inserted animated shots (which were not taken from the '57 version) in some sequences that would have been difficult to do as live-action.

There are lots of adaptations of this story, animated and live-action, filmed stage adaptations, episodes from fairy tale series. I have seen one when I was a child, but which one was it? This one, or perhaps another one? It's too long ago to remember. But I remember that the story really impressed me. The Snow Queen gave me a proper scare. A woman who can turn a small boy's heart into a lump of ice. How easily one can become immersed in the imaginary world of a movie as a child. Everything seems to be practically as real as reality. Even if the special effects are bad. As an adult, one is not - unfortunately? luckily? - as easily impressed by a movie. But the Snow Queen in this adaptation, played by Natalya Klimova, is I think awe-inspiring enough for today's children also to be able to have an exciting time watching this movie. As to this I think the scene in which the Snow Queen is looking at Kay and Gerda through the window is particularly well done. Her white over-sized face makes her look like a menacing giant and her appearing is accompanied by dramatic music.

Conclusion: I think it wouldn't have been a bad idea to stay closer to the original tale, and, as I've mentioned before, the special effects could have been better. And the robber girl's cute animated rabbits in the '57 version, which I haven't mentioned before, are of course missing from this version, there's only a female robber chief who looks like Brezhnev. Still I think that it is an all in all good adaptation of the fairy tale that will probably be fun to watch for children and that grown up fans of fairy tale movies will probably also like. Fans of animated movies will probably prefer the '57 version. I think it is about as good as the live-action version (7 out of 10 points for each). But the later version also includes the Snow Queen's promise to Kay (see above) and I liked the music better, so I think it's slightly preferable. Dosvidanye.

Hans: "Well, it's a kind of light, a light, you know, well, a light just as a light is a light, yes, at night when the moon doesn't shine."

A soldier called Hans fought in a war and sustained a leg injury. He has been sent away by the king without pay. The blue light is a crystal that (you've guessed it correctly ;) shines blue. Will Hans be able to use it to take revenge on the king?

I've read two versions of the fairy tale that this movie from the former GDR is based on: the version published in the first edition of 'Grimm's Fairy Tales' (1815) and the version from the seventh (the final edition approved by the authors). I liked the first version better. It's sparser; not every detail is spelled out, so you have to use your own imagination to flesh out the story. Also, it's a little more brutal. The later version seems to have been bowdlerized a bit. If you're fluent in German, you might want to try to find it online; both versions are (currently) available at Wikisource. An English translation of 'Grimm's Fairy Tales' is (currently) available at Project Gutenberg.

The movie is a quite free adaptation of the tale. It could have been nearer to the original but at least it's stated in the main titles that it is a free adaptation. I think it's good that the filmmakers are honest about that. In the movie, Hans is a young soldier, not an old one like in the tale. It's not specified in the original story what the blue light is; probably it's a kind of will-o'-the-wisp. In the movie it's a crystal. There are some additions to the plot, which are necessary to have enough material for a feature film. Most of these additions are thought out well in my opinion. For example, the passage in the king's castle is much longer, and they added some little jokes to it that I liked. The final passage, though, could have been closer to the original. I think they wanted it to be less brutal to make it more suitable for young children. But I didn't mind that very much, seeing that young children are obviously the target audience. The ending has been changed, probably to make the story look less monarchistic. This is probably due to the fact that the movie was made in the (back then) communist part of Germany. But I didn't mind this change very much, either. To my taste the ending is still good.

Anyway, the core of the tale is there, and that's what's most important in my opinion. Hans wants to get revenge because the king has wronged him. The king owes him his pay, and some respect. But Hans must not rely solely on the magic powers of the blue light and he must not exaggerate his revenge. He has to be careful and he has to use his brains if he wants to get what's due to him.

Apart from the plot: I didn't like the music very much. I think it could have been better. But I liked the sets and the costumes, and the actors did a good job, too.

Conclusion: there are fairy tale movies from the former communist bloc that I liked better than this one, especially 'Tri orísky pro Popelku' (1973). (I think that it's more charming and that the music is much better.) And 'The Blue Light' could have been closer to the original fairy tale. But I still enjoyed this adaptation. If you like the genre, see for yourself if you enjoy it, too.

There's not a single comment (so far) for 'Tatort'? That's really hard to believe, since it's a very long running and popular series here in Germany. I have seen some episodes, but not enough to consider myself an expert on the series. If you are an expert, please go ahead and add another comment.

Normally I always include a rating for the titles I comment on, but I think it would be unfair to do so in this case. I don't think I have seen any of the episodes from the 70s except for 'Reifezeugnis', and I haven't seen many of those of later years. I don't consider myself an avid fan of the series.

So what can I tell you about 'Tatort' ('crime scene')? The basic idea is interesting. There are about 35 episodes per year (at least nowadays). But you don't get to see the same team of detectives in every episode. There are different teams from different parts of Germany; that's what makes it interesting. (Some episodes even feature teams from other countries, namely Austria and Switzerland.)

But I think that, at least nowadays, too many episodes suffer from bad scripts. Often the cases are too confusing because they cram too much into the 90 minutes running time. If you are interested in examples, go to the user comments page for the episode 'Das Böse'. I have written a comment on it. There's also a somewhat similar comment for 'Der Kormorankrieg', titled 'Execrable' and written by a user called 'moabitnik'. (Please keep in mind that user comments are subject to change and deletion. Though it's unlikely, a comment might be different or gone tomorrow. I only refer to other comments because I think it would be redundant to repeat information that can be read elsewhere.) And I think that in many scripts there's too much 'political correctness', for example there are too many iffy 'power women' among the detectives.

Some more information that might be of interest:

Some episodes were only shown in Austria. They are listed as a spin-off on the 'movie connections' page for 'Tatort'.

'Reifezeugnis' is perhaps the most famous episode. It was directed by Wolfgang Petersen of 'Das Boot' fame and stars a young Nastassja Kinski.

I guess Schimanski, played by Götz George, is the most popular 'Tatort'-detective. He got a spin-off series and two theatrical movies were made with him.

The German experimental rock band Tangerine Dream wrote the title track for 'Das Mädchen auf der Treppe' and scored a hit with it in Germany.

Some episodes are no longer shown as reruns because their content is deemed too controversial. Some episodes have been edited after their original airing, for example because of unwanted product placement.

Every German who has a TV set is required by law to pay fees for the station that produces 'Tatort'. Believe it or not, you have to pay for it even if you don't watch it. So the makers don't have to try hard to get funding for the next episodes. I guess the quality of the series might improve if they had to try harder.

Based on the episodes I have seen in the last few years, I would give 'Tatort' a rating of four points out of ten. But, as I have mentioned above, I might be wrong, since I haven't watched many of the episodes, so I won't rate it.

Edit / addition (27th August 2008): In the last months, I have seen some reruns of old episodes from the 70s and 80s, and some new episodes. There were a lot of good episodes among both of these, so I would now give the series a rating of six points out of ten, because I now guess that the ratio of bad episodes is lower than I had thought before.