According to director George Yungvald-Khilkevich, when he was just starting to produce the film “D'Artagnan and the Three Musketeers,” he planned a completely different image of Milady - she had to be more feminine and languid. That is why for this role he invited Helen Nightingale. And when she was forced to abandon the role - invited childhood friend Maragarita Terekhova
But by inviting Terekhov, he decided to completely redo her role, turning Milady into "a sort of James Bond in a skirt." That's exactly what I thought was a mistake. Reading Dumas' novel, Milady seemed very feminine, but extremely insidious. But it was the femininity in Milady Terekhova that was very small. Despite the fact that the actress could brilliantly portray her on the screen - something really, and the charm of Terekhova does not hold.
But for some reason the director decided to go from the opposite and instead of a beautiful woman in lavish 17th century toilets flaunts the entire film in a leather pantsuit, which of course emphasizes the brilliant figure of the actress, but, I think, doesn’t fit in with the image of the beauty of those years, the feet of which the men fell like ripe fruit from a branch. But it was one of the most effective weapons insidious beauty
In the image of the lady of high society for the entire film, if I am not mistaken, I saw her only a couple of times - in Richelieu’s office, when she sang “Lilon-lila” in Rochefort, and in the town hall, when they lost their case with pendants. And that's all. After that, the whole film she plays is more likely not a lady from the 17th century, but a revolutionary young lady from the Soviet isternas, famously jumping on horseback, and brilliantly owning all known types of weapons.
I do not know about you, but for me it was Khilkevich’s mistake
The article is based on materials .
Comments
Post a Comment