The Turkish Gambit (2005) User Reviews

Good Adaptation of the Book - Except the ending

[ulnoyman · 7/10 · 14 March 2005]

Turetskii Gambit / Turkish Gambit is a good movie, a loyal adaptation of the book by Boris Akunin (Although the makers chose to change the identity of the Turkish spy at the end - obviously to shock the audience already familiar with the book. Worked on me.) The acting, direction and cinematography are all praise-worthy. Close-ups, camera movements, and pans are all cleverly done. Special effects add to the pace of the movie, and the director succeeds in smoothly integrating high-tech tools with traditional storytelling methods. The one thing disappointed me was the omission of a large part of the story describing and narrating the siege of Plevne. The production somewhat fails to emulate the book in that sense, as the siege, related battles and their effects on the Russian army were not portrayed effectively.

As a Turk with an interest in Russian history, I particularly enjoyed the film. The costumes, equipment and places looked very authentic. It was the most accurate depiction of Turkey and Turks in a non-Turkish film so far. I thank the gods that it was not a Hollywood movie.

(SPOILER) I think, changing the identity of the Turkish Spy is a wise choice for the surprise effect, but it definitely weakens the plot of the story. Original spy (D'Hevrais) had a better background story, better reasons, and a better plan.

different point of view to 1877-1878 Ottoman-Russian(Plevne) War

[isaseker · 8/10 · 8 March 2005]

cool movie; it keeps you in eye contact and bounds to its subject. I do not know how accurate it is historically but the film was more objective than I accepted. I was a bit prejudiced about the film at the beginning but as the movie continued I realized that I am wrong. I felt some exaggeration also.It shows turks as perfect warriors technically and very mysterious killers The figurine turks used in the backgrounds had actually a comic Azerbaijan accent and spoke very unrelated words in fight scenes I think the director used them since they knew Russian

, so it would be more economic. there were many replicas copied from Hollywood film-making also such as focusing camera on objects very fast and too much mise-en scene.But usage of maps as a very dynamic part of film was very original and entertaining. The character Enver Bey who was a spy of Ottoman Pasha have been chosen as a person who looked like a Russian and spoke perfect Russian language but hiding him till the end of the film was not interesting and new enough for such a box office one in Russian Federation but I think it is worth for watching, good film

Definitely worth seeing

[shotlandka · 8/10 · 28 March 2005]

Lots has already been said - including the huge advertising campaign (centring on a poster, supposedly of a scene in the beginning of the film but as a painting, not a movie still. The entertaining bit is when you realise that the costume that Varvara is wearing is all wrong for this moment in the film! Think about it!). The beginning of a run on Fandorin films, with Statskii Sovetnik coming out in May, the trailer for which was showed with TG (as for Sovetnik - as far as casting goes I've heard it discussed as the Russian Ocean's Twelve)! Though the cast list for TG is certainly nothing to sniff at either! And I have to say, the cast do themselves proud, very good acting, costumes, scenery etc. You are led right into their world. I found the computer special effects annoying, overused, and frankly distracting, but the rest of the film was great. I had not read Akunin before, and went right out and bought the book - and am now reading Statskii Sovetnik to prepare for May. I had worked out who the spy was, though I did that in the book straight off too, but it was well done, there are plenty of false trails to keep you guessing. I have to say I liked the ending, especially that they stayed true to Akunin's ending to the relationship between Fandorin and Varvara - rather than coming over all Hollywood and having them riding off into the sunset.

.

[yandrey · 7/10 · 20 March 2005]

I have to disagree with some of the comments on this movie, judging the movie by some different criteria.

Firstly, the plot line idea of this motion picture is not as irrational as it may appear to some of us. this film was based on a novel that served a purpose to provide its readers a war-romance-conspiracy adventure. It is not very much different from the American "Patriot" story where a greater salad has been composed, with pretty trite issues thrown around. Beside that, to support the illusive reality of the Turkish war presented in this film - we are not very familiar with the general atmosphere during the 19th century wars, but there are things that simply called: War routine. Of course there is blood and gore and death on the front lines of the battles. Surely there is a lot of strategy going on behind the scenes. But even during these climax moments, and mostly in-between those there was always a place for some dramatic drawbacks, singing in the club and even relationships between young Russian soldiers and coffee drinking in Plevna. Wars are not always fought in face to face battles. And a very large part in deciding who wins the fight is the strategy and the information you gather about your enemy. Which was what the story concentrated on. The spies.

Moreover, I did not like the acting. Sometimes it was exaggerated and underplayed in some places. The best acting in this movie on my scale was that of the "Gusar" officer - so typically presenting the character. The leading roles could have been performed better.

And lastly: the sound. What is it with the Russian cinema that I can never get a normal sound feature? They put the theme on top of the dialogues, the battle effects lack intensity, the speech is incomprehensible. When Turkish is spoken, the Russian translation starts after a little delay, which makes it really difficult to hear. They don't mute the environment when it is needed, and the explosion sounds still have the usual echo-shrieking effect. Alas! indeed.

Overall, once the viewer can get himself to connect to the plot, to enter the minds of both the Turkish and the Russian combatants and to merge with the general 19th war atmosphere - it is possible to simply sit back and enjoy this movie as another spy-adventure. Was tempted to give it an 8, but settled on 7.

This movie is OK, but there is an excess of visual effects which makes it look bad

[euro4evr · 7/10 · 18 July 2005]

I am Russian and I just checked this movie out because i heard so much about it. I find this movie OK. It's not a masterpiece. But it's much better than the other Russian blockbuster Night Watch. However, both of these films have something bad in common and it's the immature obsession of excessive cheesy visual effects. When watching these high budget movies you start thinking the filmmakers forget that it's not the visual effects that make movie a good movie. Those parts in the movie, where they show the dark abyss all the time and then this LOTR style map pops up with a wheel falling down - it just doesn't look good, it looks totally tasteless. I mean the producers spent so much resources to make all those costumes and setups, but when you see something like this, it just ruins the whole point. Bad bad taste. Hopefully, in future Russian filmmakers will grow out this unhealthy obsession and start making great and stylish movies.

Pleven Siege

[dely84 · 10/10 · 29 May 2007]

Yes, it is true that most of the people think that this movie contains too many visual effects, but this is not completely true. It seems so, because most of the watcher actually do not expect that from a Russian movie. But let me clarify where did they get the effects from. Most of the strange and a little bit animation scenes are taken from the Panorama of the Pleven Epopee - this is a monument of the Pleven Siege, which is the overturn in the Russo-Turks War(1877-1878). And about the monument - in there are the battle scenes and everything is made from wax and seems pretty much real. Because about 10 000 soldiers and citizens of Pleven have died in a small valley - about 2 square km surface. So, I see this movie as a modern admission of what had been done before - and of course paying salute to the tremendous people, who have been fighting for ideas.

An Impressive Epic

[coopea · 9/10 · 9 March 2005]

Folks, this is the epic to look out for at international movie festivals! I have had the opportunity to see this on big screen, in full sound- and was blown away! Though I couldn't understand everything, the action within the film was clear enough to make the general plot understood. Though it is not an American film- it has authentic period costume, fantastic cinematography, and in my opinion has met or surpassed special effects of such films as the Braveheart, Lord of the Rings, and the Matrix. Of course, it probably won't get the recognition it deserves in North America, as it isn't a home-grown... but it is well worth the trip to the theatre to see it if is ever in town... I'm going to see it for at least another 2 times if possible! The only disappointment was the pop-type music for the closing credits... everything else: SUPERB!

Not as impressive as "Azazel"

[Galina_movie_fan · 5/10 · 18 December 2006]

"Turkish gambit" is the adaptation of the second novel by Boris Akunis in his enormously popular among the Russian speaking audiences series of twelve novels that describe the adventures of a young detective and later, State Councillor, Erast Fandorin. The genre of the novels can be described as historical mysteries set in the Imperial Russia. By the time "Turkish gambit" opens, still very young, Fandorin has gone thru tragic personal loss while investigating a very dangerous global conspiracy (the first novel "Azazel" and the movie of the same title).

"Turkish Gambit" takes place in 1877 during the Russian -Turkish War. After running out from the captivity, Fandorin hurries to the Russian troops to report very important information about the planning attack of enemy. Along the road he meets and becomes acquainted with Barbara, a young girl who travels in a man's clothes to see her fiancé. According to Fandorin's information there is a very dangerous Turkish spy Anvar among the Russian officers who heads a secret operation. Everyone is under Fandorin's suspicion...

Filled with many dynamic action scenes, "Turkish Gambit" is not as elegant and visually interesting as "Azazel" and it lacks the good acting from two young actors playing main characters. I should add that the book itself was not as good as excellent "Azazel" – that's probably why "Turkish Gambit", the movie is rather un-impressive and forgettable entry in the series.

5.5/10

Excellent Film!

[russian_chica · 10/10 · 26 August 2005]

It is rare to see a Russian movie made so tasteful and visually appealing. I agree that some special effects were overdone and unnecessary, taking away from the overall appeal of the film, but I really hope an English version could come out so I can see it with the rest of my family. While other users complain of the historical inaccuracies of this movie I do not think this is something people should dwell on too much. This movie is for someone who enjoys a movie with beautiful scenery and gripping effects (when they are appropriate). This is truly the best Russian movie that I have ever seen.

Awful and Disgusting

[hussonmez · 2/10 · 27 December 2006]

I gave 2 points out of ten, and those 2 points for visual effects, technique and colorful costumes. The rest? Crap. I don't know how to describe it...maybe like 1960s' James Bond movies, childish. What they call "historic events" is just a plot, a scene for the movie, nothing to do with real historic events as the movie does not have such a purpose....The maps are just a decoration, which really look good, but again unreal. That is OK, but why do they try so hard in the advertisements and so on to show it as a "historic movie" And if the movie is really an action movie, why do they depict Turks not only as villains, but also ugly and stupid? In many scenes Turks stumble and fall! They cannot run, they cannot hold a gun properly and fire! If we were in 1930s maybe we would laugh....But now, it felt disgusting. Heyy, look around guys, finance is just a prerequisite for making films, it shouldn't be the film itself. (((

great film

[lezgi · 9/10 · 24 May 2005]

Turetskii gambit contains all of the elements of a great film. The acting is underplayed. The cinematography is perfection itself. The colors are muted in concert with the drama itself. One can only desire an extension of the romantic relationship with Yegor Beroyev himself and his lovely sweetheart. There are very dramatic moments including the duel on the pier. The snow scenes are reminiscent of "Dr. Zhivago". I can highly recommend this picture for those romantics at heart. Alexander Pushkin would be proud to see this serious play in cinematic form. It is now in DVD format with excellent soundtrack and special features. This is one not to miss.

An excellent film with only a few disappointing parts...

[mister_nameless · 8/10 · 5 May 2005]

...Personally, I'm one of Akunin fans... I read almost all his books... And I find the "Adventures of Erast Fandorin" series really worth reading... The story is always interesting, the suspense is on the highest level and the action is truly unique...

So "Turetskiy Gambit" is out... And I saw it some time ago... And I must say, that it IS really an instant classic... The film has its pros, but also unfortunately (IMHO) several cons... My explanations will follow...

*Spoiler Alert*

...The beginning seemed a bit strange for me... Why is Fandorin running and shooting Turks? Hey, this bit wasn't even in the book! Besides, I have never seen this Beroyev guy, so I didn't even recognize him, as Fandorin... I even thought, that I had a wrong film handed to me... Fortunately, things arranged quite fast and I started watched... My interest grew fast... However, I didn't understand, why wasn't Fandorin able to pick up the dynamite and throw it back to the Turks? Was it fear? Strange, he was never a coward in the book... He was colder there... Oh, well...

Anyway, let's continue... Eh, what's this? Fandorin is spying on Anvar-effendi - another bit not to be featured in the book... Hmmm... I liked the part, where colonel Ismail-Bei appears on the stage... Personally, I like Kutsenko very much (his performance in "Antikiller" and its sequel was remarkable) and I enjoyed his performance in the movie... He was pretty cool, as a brave and smart Turkish Forces Commander... It was a shame, he was killed later... Of course, the question of existence of this character in the movie remains a puzzle to me, for the book never featured such a person... But I think, that this addition didn't really spoil the film...

The rest of the film follows the book closely, but some changes to the story do occur sometimes... I liked the big air balloon scene - it was a brilliant novelty, as for me... The gay duo scene was hilarious in the beginning - watch Fandorin yell at those poor guys... "It's an army, not a bordello for Christ's sake!" Kinda reminds me of the operator (Tolik) character from "Nochnoy Dozor" and his menacing yell: "THAT'S NOT HER MOTHER!!!" lol But the rest of the scene turns out to be rather bloody... Well, it's a good twist however...

*Global Spoiler Alert*

But the ending... Oh no, how could it be? Why did Akunin simplify the story to this point in the script? Yes, it was pretty predictable, who the spy really was from the beginning given the strange circumstances of his introduction... But in the book it was no more than a distraction... The real spy thing was much better developed in the book... So, I don't understand, why was Perepelkin ("Kazanova" from "Menty") made the main villain (Anvar), rather than d'Hevrais (and yes, it's d'Hevrais, not D'Evre, as it's written in the "Cast" section here), who was the villain in the book... As for me, I think, that this simplification was totally unnecessary... For an Akunin fan, like me, it's a disappointment...

Also, the ending action sequence with Fandorin fighting Anvar was a bit lame... Varya killed Anvar, not the great Fandorin... And _he_ was so weak - he didn't even manage to wound the spy seriously... That's a major disappointment for me...

*Global Spoiler Alert ends here*

*Spoiler Alert ends here*

Now, I will explain the major pros and cons: Pros: The casting is fairly good... The only disappointment I found was the main role... I don't know - somehow Beroyev gives a bit wooden performance (IMHO)... Viktor Verzhibitskiy is great as Lucan, the Romanian colonel... Great and charismatic... Olga Krasko (Varya) was just as I imagined her while reading the book - a beautiful, but extremely naive young woman... Baluyev (general Sobolev) is in his usual war-hero-and-great-master-and-commander role... It suits him well... Kazanzaki (he is credited as Kazinaki on IMDb - LOL) was also, as I imagined him... Mizinov (Savelich from "Russkiy bunt" and Gryaznov from "Marsh Turetskogo" - sorry for the pun here) is great too... Zurov is a bit strange here - somehow I think it's not a role for Pevtsov (IMHO again)... McLaughlin was too, as I imagined him... Petya reminded me, of course, of Tolik from "Nochnoy Dozor"... Now I don't even know, who is funnier... But the actor I liked the most, was Didier Bienaime (d'Hevrais)... Boy, was he cool! His smile, his calm way of speaking - it was just perfect... What a shame this actor died... *sigh* Memory eternal...

The general atmosphere of a spy thriller...

The costumes and the decors...

The special effects (although, I didn't understand, what were these falls from the suddenly appeared mountains in the beginning)...

The changes to the story (except the ending)...

The action (although sometimes the camera moves way too fast, like in "Antikiller 2")...

The suspense...

Cons: The battles... Way too short... *sigh*

The war atmosphere... That's what I find the most disappointing (it's #2, the ending was #1)... In my opinion it wasn't well recreated...

Beroyev's acting...

The ending and the identity of the real spy...

...Anyway, that's it... "Gambit" is a good movie, even an excellent one, but it could have been much much better...

I hope to see "Statskiy Sovetnik" soon... People say, it's even better...

Mister Nameless.

P. S. The last strange thing - why do they make a film on "Statskiy Sovetnik" (the 6th book) after "Turetskiy Gambit" instead of "Leviafan", which is supposed to be the 3rd book in the series? This question still bugs me...

"Turkish Gambit" - I expected better!

[AKalinoff · 3/10 · 23 April 2006]

First I have to ask. Why Studio Tritey loves to hate Russians? I know it is in Russia, but each movie is about horrifying deaths of Russians. This self-hate is not healthy.

Russians have to be the biggest idiots in the whole movie, except for Fandorin and Suvorova every other Russian character is either a traitor or an idiot. In reality Russian Forces were far more intelligent and imaginative during the Russo-Turkish War then the movie suggests. The Russian Army outsmarted the Turkish Army when it crossed the Danube at night catching the enemy with their guard down and seizing Russia's 1st victory of the war.

Do the writers wish the Turks won the war? Do they sympathize with the Ottoman Empire? If not, then why do the Turks seem like Military geniuses while the Russians look like morons? Osman Pasha's Envoy carries out deadly raids into Russian camps without much opposition. I was very disappointed. I hope 1st Channel never puts its name next to Studio Tritey again.

Russian-Turkish war. Taking part in

[soperedi · 8/10 · 7 May 2005]

This film is the following step of the Russian cinema forward, after " Night Patrol ". The substantial party has provided Boris Akunin under which same book film has been taken off. And here the entertainment part, special effects, statement, game of actors, dynamics - is higher than any praises. I am the admirer of Hollywood, but I look with interest and behind development of Russian of cinema. And me sees, that it has very iridescent prospects. Film is obligatory to viewing for all. It has very much liked me. Simply very good and qualitative cinema. Here its summary: 1877, Russian-Turkish war. Taking part in military actions as the Serbian volunteer titular counsel Erast Fandorin makes the way in a general staff of Russian command with the important confidential message. On a way he gets acquainted with charming young lady, Varvaroi Andreevnoi Suvorovoi, going in an arrangement of Russian armies to see groom Petej Yablokov - cryptographer the Joint Staff. Having reached the, Fandorin informs general Sobolevu on the artful flank maneuver conceived by Turks. From him follows, that it is necessary to occupy with Russian urgently Plevna for the case there goes Osmanli turk - plough. At general - aide-de-camp Mizinova, former chief Fandorina, the order of the commander-in-chief is already prepared on this account, which Peter Yablokov urgently ciphers and sends. Besides at Mizinov there is for Fandorin one more task not from simple. The question is Anvar - Efendi, the secretary of sultan Abdul-Gamida. This interesting Turk personally heads confidential operation against Russian. Mister desperate, with adventurous bent. Can quite appear itself in the Russian rate and leave for due to the European appearance and faultless possession of several languages. In the evening of the same day it becomes known, that Russian armies have occupied Nikopol. And hardly arrest Petju Yablokov later: in the encryption sent by him instead of a word "Plevna" the word "Nikopol" has appeared. Result of this disinformation was the capture Turkish armies of the unprotected Plevna. Shocked Cooking begs Fandorin to help the groom. Erast Petrovich it is confident: to get out Petyu it is possible, only finding the true originator happened. Similar, Anvar's free working in the Russian rate this handwork. It is necessary to calculate the Turk urgently. But how? In fact all are suspected...

anachronism!!!

[defego · 5/10 · 2 September 2006]

how could have the Russians made a mistake like that. Enver pasha was the famous general of the Turkish forces in Balkans and east front of the Türkiye. He was not just the spy. Anyway, i suggest that if the Russians want to improve the knowledge of their history in detailed they have to learn more about the Turkish history. Also Turkish historians act like this. In fact, only this fault enough to not watch this film. Also i wonder if the same fault made by Turkish, what reaction does the Russians shows. These historical films are very important for nations honor. Turkish republic is so sensitive for this event. We want to see an excuse and correction of the text..

Anacronism 1st class

[drago_nbg · 3/10 · 16 December 2008]

in actors play there are several anachronisms 1. on these epoch women impossible to be such a leader! Sawing, kids or something - yes but spy - no way! 2. Fandorin acts like Rambo (shooting Turks in beginning) - no such tactics is possible in these days - they fight very different 3. soldiers - in these days Russian army was full of hard mans - not geeks and so on. Stupid but soldiers. In the movie they are gay, geeks, and non stop talking 4. Bulgarians playing dice - not at all.They drink "rakia", but not such plays dice - i think. 5. Women in these days is imaginary to say her own thought - but in the movie girl acts like emancipating ones.

I don't like this movie - good idea but it is ridiculous...

What a Disappointment!

[Killa_Cam · 2/10 · 12 March 2005]

The advertising campaign for this movie in Russia was huge! Even more tremendous than for another Russian blockbuster - Nochnoi Dozor. But wait a second... What was the fuss all about? I really wanted to like this one, but... alas! I couldn't.

I was looking forward to see a really epic movie with the matching atmosphere, but what I got was nothing, but some kind of a pretty weird interpretation of the war. The disappointment from this film is very similar to the one after watching Cold Mountain.

The acting was good & deserves nothing, but praise. But what the hell is with the story? The whole Russian camp looks like a circus, some scenes are absolutely irrelevant, reminding me some stuff from dumb Wild Wild West movie & the scene with the air-balloon is one of the most ridiculous ever! But the main problem is... predictability! I knew who the spy was long before the end of the film! To tell you the truth, I really wanted to leave, but decided to stay & see if I was right in my guessing. Needles to say, I was.

Monstrosity

[harryplinkett14 · 1/10 · 16 March 2019]

The worst film I've seen in a long time. So confusing, so boring, so irritating.. It is the definition of unwatchable. And the editor should be shot for what he did with this already crappy material. Things happen in this film, but one stops caring after about half an hour. It's just terrible beyond belief. I hate this thing. It abused me.

Unrealistic movie and poor sound

[igor-ch75 · 4/10 · 9 July 2009]

I enjoyed the acting and the plot... but the rest kept reminding me that I should not spend much time in front of a TV. Perhaps it's a big step for modern Russian movie industry, but am I wrong for desiring a movie that is _done_ better?

I agree with those who commented that movie looks unrealistic and sound is barely comprehensible. What are those colorful costumes in so perfect clean/ironed/etc condition every day for both Russian and Turkish soldiers? Is that a war or a parade?

Now the sound - it's mostly muffled and is quite colorless. I'm feeling really bad for those who spent their energy playing there.

A few things look odd in the context of the war story. Maybe it's just my personal perception. Harry-Potter-like effects when Fandorin goes into his memories, looks plain over-done to me. The way the machine (which looks like a train) is shown reminds me about some comedy, and not so much about a war story - again, odd in the context. I'm OK to have bright and fun side in a war move... but not to the level of comics.

Unfortunately, these things take away a lot from the overall feeling of otherwise great movie.