Demons (2014) User Reviews

Demons (aka The Possessed) Russia, 2014

[teeter_mark · 7/10 · 12 October 2020]

Based on a novel by a world-famous writer Feodor Dostoevsky. It is a little awkward, sure, but nobody's going to argue w/ it which is worth noting because any review you'll find that surpasses this 10-word job has or will provoke controversy, raised voices (or pens) and somebody scandalously threatening somebody else. Kind of like the novel, actually. Make that very like.

"Demons" ("The Possessed") was FMD's most overtly political work, and it raised plenty of controversy in its day -- much of it for a depiction of Russia's radical youth of the 1870s that was itself radical: justly unflattering to some readers, simply slanderous to others, everybody had an opinion and everybody was right, dammit.

That said, it was also a novel of luminous characters, engaging philosophizing and memorable scandal scenes topping anything else in the canon of this scandal-loving world-famous writer. Given this very mixed bag of ingredients, what kind of movie could dir. Vl. Khotinenko (or anybody) make of "Demons"? Let's let 3 voices give you some perspectives to chose from.

(1) Khotinenko has made a completely sincere movie which maintains that the enemies of law and order are aesthetes, students and intellectuals. (2) In principle, in the framework set by the (4-part) serial format, Khotinenko has succeeded at the most important thing preserving the encyclopedic character of the novel's narrative. (3) This is a quality film about us.

A nice try

[estebanlopezlimon-11810 · 8/10 · 15 May 2021]

It's exactly how I pictured it to be: Just a thriller. A straightforward downgrade, no doubt about it. But it's hard to make more out of it given the format and the resources.

The thing about "Demons" is that most of the social commentary is conveyed within the narrator's perspective. And the narrator has no real place in the story whatsoever, he's just there to fulfill a "political agenda", we could say; to give us full background on how despicable the characters really are. Going back and forth in time every turn of page. There's so many stories to tell, that the sheer idea of dealing with it on television would give writers nightmares for decades.

What gives the novel its chaotic nature is that character development surpasses the plot. The plot ends up being almost secondary before the monstrous problem that is the psychology of its characters.

So, yeah. I like it. My only issue would be the soundtrack. The music is straight out of a mexican telenovela. And for that, I'll take out a point. My final opinion: a score of 8/10

Also the intro is surprisingly outstanding and the acting... oh, man, the acting: marvelous.

Amazing

[nekodiangelo · 10/10 · 23 December 2021]

Seriously amazing, for a mini series they conveyed Dostoevsky's vision brilliantly. The acting is beyond phenomenal and the cinematography is also highly notable, definitely worth the watch.

It just didn't work

[laduqesa · 3/10 · 29 October 2020]

The wonderful book, one of the best novels ever to have been written, was done a disservice by this mini series. The novel was a cry against and riposte to the fashionable nihilistic and Western tendencies of the times that were taking hold of some of the privileged Russian youth. The series barely conveys this.

The sets are magnificent and are the sole reason I have given three stars. The costumes look authentic. But the series is "based on" rather than an "adaptation of". It was vanishingly unlikely that any director would have been able to convey properly the social, political and emotional currents of those complex and volatile times so the slavish adherence to the book meant that the whole TV project would be a failure unless it had been adapted for modern audiences while retaining and explaining the themes and background.

The most abject let-down was in the dialogue. The book is driven by it and often the characters have long, involved conversations. Unfortunately, these seem to have been lifted from the book and grafted onto the programme. It just doesn't work. What is acceptable, nay riveting, on the page is verbose and unconvincing on the screen. It's not a Shakespeare play that they are filming and thus have to remain true to the text, it's a novel whose internal logic and conventions are completely different to those of screen or stage.

The actors did their best. However, working against such deficiencies they were struggling. It just wasn't real. They didn't sound true to life. I don't speak Russian so I watched with subtitles. They whizzed by, but even I could tell that not all was being translated. How much worse it must have been for people having to take in great gusts of sometimes intricate, convoluted and lengthy dialogue?

I really can't recommend this at all. Read the book instead!