Animatsiya in English

Andrey Kuznetsov (akuaku), when not working in his day job as director at Pilot Animation Studio, has been making fantastic paintings based on the world-famous Cheburashka cartoons. His recent ones, in line with current cinematic trends, are even in 3-D (cross your eyes and look at the third image that appears in the centre).


Parody of Dali's "Dream Caused by the Flight of a Bee"
Direct link to image, if the ad is blocking it:
http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/a/k/akuaku/son-stereo1.jpg

( Warning: MANY images )

What does traditional Japanese poetry have in common with animation? Quite a lot, it turns out! Please read this, it's a fascinating thing...

Two years ago, I posted a translation of the first part of a wonderful interview that Yuriy Norshteyn gave to Tatyana Iensen for the sophisticated Kino-Art magazine in 2004. Now, I finally finished translating the second part (originally published in Russian, Kino-Art 2004, 4th issue).

Note: translation of verses are taken from various places; some from the internet, some my own translation of the Russian translations.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What can you say about the condition in which your characters find themselves, in relation to life philosophy?

Both Basho and Chikusai are in that condition of having no fear of anything. One may say that they are in a state of total harmony. And so in the second half of this small film, there has to be an intersection of the beginning of terror and the humorous start. Not by accident does the wind rise and rip the kimono, and the hat fly above the trees with the leaves, in the finale of the film.

Sketch of Basho going against the wind

I was filming this little scene (Basho going against the wind) and thinking of King Lear. Why not film Lear in animation? The construction, clearness and fantastical conception of this story make it very suitable for animation. The construction is almost ballet-like; it is very natural for animation. Basically, the phenomenon of animation is based on how well you can find in a simple composition - not so much details and embellishments, but complex relationships which you will see as both the question and the answer to life, and maybe even as inculcation into as yet unknown territory. It seems to me, that in this sense "The Overcoat" is also very much a story-focused thing; clear and precise, like folklore that is molded into a parable-shaped state. The story of "King Lear" is parable-shaped, so you are freed of unneeded dramaturgical confusion (by the way, the Fool in this sense adds a lot to the composition). As soon as you begin to inquire into the details in Shakespeare, it all vanishes. I think that this is the precise reason for why when you are dealing with Japanese poetry, in which the action is clearly and unambiguously written in three lines, you are free; you do not need to rediscover the already disclosed action, but to find in it that which is hidden between the lines.
( Read more... )
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For myself, I find that Norshteyn's words help me understand not specifically animation, but the essence of art itself.

Also, I may get quite a verbal bruising for saying this, but does anyone else see the similarities between traditional Japanese poetry and LOLcats? I'm seeing a connection between the old and the new; people, after all, don't really change much. Both forms strive for economy of expression, both are extremely simple on the surface, both can be humorous, both are or were very popular with the general public, and both are similarly light-footed and rely heavily on the listener/viewer making connections that are not self-evident if one looks at merely the obvious.

This was done in a rush, so you'll have to excuse me if there are some awkward spots in the translation (note: "film fund" means something like "film archive" - I forgot the usual English term). Please ask me if anything here's unclear or if you're having trouble finding more information about something that is mentioned here.

Original interview in Russian.

My comments at the bottom.

The 73rd anniversary of Soyuzmultfilm's founding was 5 days ago.

If you're curious about Akop Kirakosyan's animation credentials, I recommend watching this film that he directed in 1992. There are some others that he made, but they're not so good.

----------

Press Conference: Akop Korakosyan, Director of "Soyuzmultfilm" (June 2, 2009)

What will happen to Soyuzmultfilm and its film funds?

The government of Russia has decided to privatize Soyuzmultfilm studio in the year 2009. Throughout the 70-year existence of this studio, many masterpieces of national animation were created, including "You just Wait!", "Winnie-the-Pooh", "Boy and Karlson", "Cheburashka and Gena the Crocodile" and "Hedgehog in the Fog". Many scandals have flamed up around the film funds of Soyuzmultfilm. What is the current situation regarding the defence of the studio's copyrights to its works? What will happen to the film funds after privatization? What does the future hold for Russian animation? The questions of the readers of Lenta.ru were answered by the director of Soyuzmultfilm, Akop Gurgenovuch Kirakosyan.


Akop Kirakosyan, image from radiorus.ru

( LONG INTERVIEW )

The most quotable thing in the interview is probably Kirakosyan's opinion about anime. The most noteworthy is probably the talk about creating an animation union.

Also, I must say that for all the complaining about the copyright deal made in the early 1990s, it has to be said that Oleg Vidov and his wife and their American company Films by Jove, despite their occasional mistakes (the English voice-overs and redone music were usually horrible) did a far better job of promoting Russian animation abroad than Soyuzmultfilm did since they got the rights back two years ago. In short, they actually did something and worked at promoting them, whereas the Soyuzmultfilm Film Fund seems to be doing absolutely nothing at all, other than authorizing horrible new Russian re-dubbings of the classic soundtracks to their best films (instead of restoring the originals). Films by Jove only owned the international copyrights, and a great deal of original film negatives. Copyrights within Russia for the films never belonged to them, and the market within Russia for them is far greater.

"Rubik's Cube" is a collection of three short films from Ecran Studio in 1985. The text in the beginning suggests that this was meant to become an ongoing project, but this was the only one that was ever completed. However, the idea is very similar to the five "Lift" films that were made by Pilot Studio at the end of the 1980s. In fact, I was surprised to learn that the directors of the first two films, Vladlen Barbè ("The Box of Pencil Crayons") and Aleksandr Fedulov ("Did You See the Hare?"), did not end up working for Pilot Studio later, as the films are very similar in spirit to that studio's early production. The last film "Rubik's Cube: Clownery" was directed by Aleksandr Tatarskiy and Igor Kovalyov, who would found Pilot Studio three years later.


My favourite of these three films is "The Box of Pencil Crayons", for the enchanting, dynamic animation. It is the sort of animation where every new frame is drawn anew, and I've always found that films made in this technique look fantastic and alive. The fashion nowadays is to avoid that kind of animation and to reuse elements as much as possible (which technologies like Flash encourage), but in the late 1980s and early 1990s in Russia, many films used this animation style at least some of the time. Maybe it was part of the macro-cultural aesthetic of that time of reinventing the wheel. I don't know. But I love it. Another great example is the first film of Lift 5.

In Russia, this animation style actually has a name. It is called "total animation". There is a even a lengthy article in the Russian Wikipedia with a list of all films in which total animation is used (usually only for small lengths of time).

( Some notes regarding the translation )

This article originally appeared in OG.ru on Feb. 6, 2009. I translated it because people in the know say that it is a pretty good summation of what's been happening over the past while. Almost all animated projects have been shut down, including some very worthy ones, such as Pilot Studio's feature film Mad Hair and their "Mountain of Gems" series.

After several years of comfort, our animation has found itself on the brink of a new terrifying crisis. Projects are frozen, studios are closing, directors are looking for jobs outside of the profession and thinking about going abroad. This crisis could become fatal for our animation - if today we take «Oscar» nominations for granted, then in a couple of years we will be talking about the good traditions of our school and the victories of our animated films at prestigious film festivals in the past tense. A conversation about how to avoid this catastrophe was held recently at a "round table" called "State policy to support animation".

In recent years - and even until very recently - our fellow citizens have become accustomed to the idea that a lot of animated films are made in Russia, and that these animated films are highly valued worldwide. Oscar laureate Aleksandr Petrov with his «animated paintings» has been the subject of national pride, STV Film studio and Melnitsa Animation Studio with their «Bogatyr trilogy» have learned how to fill seats in cinemas, and Pilot Animation Studio's huge project "The Mountain of Gems" has won a collection of prizes from all film festivals of the world.

But soon these glorious times will be left in the past. For animation, the economic crisis began earlier than for other industries, and hit harder. The first freezing of funds coincided with the presidential election of 2008, after which public funding for animated films was suspended for a time. The difficulties were explained as being caused by reorganizations in the Ministry of Culture and it was promised that they would end very, very soon, but this situation lasted for the entire year.

All this time, for better or for worse, the studios continued to work, and may have been able to keep afloat for a long time yet, but, alas, the world financial crisis added more heat.

The strongest blow came to big studios making auteur films. Today, almost all of them have either suspended work, or stopped it altogether. Thus, Pilot Animation Studio is on the verge of closure. While the general public celebrated the 20th anniversary of the first independent, and today, the most important Russian studio, Pilot's film directors were already not being paid, and were gradually gathering their belongings, preparing to leave their jobs. After the New Year, most of the rooms had been cleared for rent to other organizations, and Pilot's staff is now looking for work on other projects.

Unfortunately, these searches are almost doomed to failure. Most animated productions are now frozen. The situation is so tragic that, in making forecasts for the year ahead, experts are sure: even if government funding were to resume immediately, there would still be only 10-20 applications to the 2010 Open Russian Festival for Animated Film (compared to 100-150 works in the last few years) .

If the money does not appear, the only option for people in the animation profession would be a change of profession or endemic emigration. The risk of massive departures of directors and animators has also existed in previous years, as good professionals are in far more demand abroad. Suffice it to say that while our government gives studios 8.5 thousand dollars per minute of animation, Western series ("South Park", "The Simpsons") are made for 30-50 thousand dollars a minute. Wages correspond to this reality - even on modest projects abroad, good specialists are paid 3-5 thousand dollars a month, while in our studios, directors with names known around the world make do with 1 thousand.

Now that even this modest amount of money is out of reach, and opportunities to earn money on advertising have been reduced to a minimum, going abroad becomes for many an obvious step. Feeling this, Western producers, who now have the possibility of attracting Russian specialists "on the cheap", have begun to act - and the directors have recently begun to receive armfuls of invitations from foreign countries with promises of a salary of 5 thousand dollars a month.

The new wave of animation emigration will be comparable in strength to that seen in the 1990s, when dozens of fine specialists left for America, Hungary, France and Canada (among them, actually, was Aleksander Petrov, who then returned home only due to his personal patriotism and the government's offer of public funding). Alas, the results of the current emigration will be even more devastating. Back then, the masters left in the country were able to patch the gaps and educate a new generation of animators. Today, many masters of the Soviet past have left us, while others are losing their strengths before our eyes. If the younger generation were to emigrate now, the traditions of Russian animation would be disrupted, and the glorious Russian school would become a scorched field.

This past Wednesday's "round table" was an emergency measure - a desperate attempt by the animation community to break the stalemate. After much debate, directors, producers and film critics have crafted a proposal for the Russian government, to save our animation from almost imminent death. Its main idea is to restore worthy government funding.

COMMENTS

Aleksander Petrov, Oscar-winning director: - I am still not feeling the crisis myself, because I'm not working yet; I'm living on the last of my previously-earned money. But I do not doubt that I, too, will have to face difficulties. I receive much of the money for my films from the government, and I think that this is a gift of fate, that there remains government funding in Russia. For experimental, auteur animation, this is a necessary condition. If there were to be no state support, many projects would die. I am always, in such cases, citing the example of Canada, where the government is very sensitive to auteur animation. There exists a remarkable organization called The National Film Board of Canada. This studio not only gives money to films, but also follows their further fate: it makes sure that the films are shown at festivals, awarded prizes and eventually make their way to Los Angeles. And it is rare for the films of this studio to not be nominated for an Oscar.

Sergey Selyanov, producer of the «Bogatyr trilogy»: - If we are to talk about the world financial crisis, it is difficult to say whether it brought more good or bad things. Because before the crisis, animated feature films had "inflated" budgets. Lets say, a budget for a 3D project could amount to 5 million dollars - the price was clearly too high in relation to our market, and arose because of the costs for advertising, and through looking at the U.S. (even modest American feature films have budgets in the region of 50 million dollars) . In this sense, the crisis can put everything in its place. But at the same time, unfortunately, government support is a requirement for animation. We have a small market, and it is very difficult to return an investment on movies. Individual projects can break through, but this is two or three films a year at most (counting both live-action and animated films). If you make a movie that is a little more serious, a little more lyrical than it is comical, your chances of getting into this tiny percentage of projects successful with audiences become much smaller. And public funding becomes the only hope. If were to be removed, the number of feature-length animation projects would be drastically reduced. It may even be reduced to zero.

Yuriy Norshteyn, director of «Hedgehog in the Fog», «Tale of Tales»: It has always been difficult for an artist, but today is doubly difficult. Always difficult, because the artist, in general, is a person who finds it difficult to live with himself. Today is doubly hard, because the lack of money and the constant attention to the question of "how to get money" kills art by half. But it is also obvious that it is very difficult without a community. If we lose each other, then we will all be worth one kopek, and it is unlikely that we are individually worth something and can do something. I, of course, am talking about my own experiences at «Soyuzmultfilm». And although we did not have ideal relations, though we argued with each other, we were still a community, and our only desire, emotional and mental, was to make a film be as good as possible. The last thing we thought about was the market, what would sell ... If you remember, say, the Renaissance, an artist back then sought primarily to make something. This is why the artist must be at the head of everything.

"Bald Mountain". This name has survived among the people as an echo of ancient mythical notions. It is a mountain where witches and evil spirits gather to cook magical herbs and make spells. And this "mountain" is none other than the sky itself.

This was the ONLY film that Soyuzmultfilm released in 1998, and in 1999 they released no films at all. At the time that this film was being made, the once-mighty studio was in its death throes. Its management had become tied to organized crime and the studio's assets were deliberately being sold to enrich the bosses. Hired thugs were being used to keep the employees in line and the police didn't dare interfere. It was a regular occurrence for animators to come to their desk only to find all of the materials gone, sold to the highest bidder. These events are described in more detail in Georgiy Borodin's 2003 article. That was the environment in which Galina Shakitskaya directed this impressive film, her debut as director (before that, she had worked as an art director at the studio since 1977).

The animation was made with paint-on-celluloid, a technique also used by Vladimir Samsonov. And like most of Samsonov's films from the early-to-mid 1980s, it is a nearly wordless symphonic poem.


A few words: The film contains some pretty frightening Satanic imagery, but it also optimistically contains two characters that are obviously meant for children to sympathize with: a little elf-like-girl and her lamb who live among the multitude of naked witches and demons. It feels a little strange. I suppose it's possible that some children would be fine watching this; like a good scary story. But I suspect that this was a product of inertia more than anything; Soyuzmultfilm had been making films for children for so long that it was hard to let go.

Though I doubt that this was widely seen by anyone when it came out. It did screen at the 4th Open Russian Festival of Animated Film, where it won 8th place in the audience voting.

Here is Vladimir Samsonov's film "The Bread's Light" (1983), which has some similar stylistic features (same animation technique, for example). These two films are both structured around fairly long orchestral musical compositions, and both are about storms.

If I may, I would just like talk about Igor Kovalyov for a bit.

I recently finished watching all of the films in which he was the real director; meaning not co-director with Aleksandr Tatarskiy in the 1980s, and not working on dreary corporate properties such as his commercial work in the 1990s and 2000s.

I will say this: many people don't like Kovalyov's films because they don't understand them. Also, many people (though fewer in number; mostly you see their type at certain film festivals) like Kovalyov's films precisely because they don't understand them. Me personally, I just don't understand them. I generally like the artistic direction and what you might call the "acting", but I have little of intelligence to say one way or the other about the films themselves. I wouldn't know whether an illustrated novel written in Inuktitut was any good, either.

The most understandable of them for me is probably "Bird in the Window", but that's because the entire film is summed up in the first minute. All that follows is the details.

But usually, I'm stuck wondering what is meant to be real and what is meant to be a metaphor, and trying to remember the little details seen for a fraction of a second that must mean something symbolic (because I can't help but notice that those little repeating symbols are very meticulously arranged). Often, I'm just trying to figure out what the heck is REALLY going on. For example, in "Flying Nansen", is there really a woman or is that just Nansen's delirium? And why are there planes flying overhead? In "His Wife is a Hen", what is the caterpillar-like pet with the face of the main character supposed to represent? And what exactly is the man with the black mask? In Andrey Svislotskiy, what exactly is the film about? At the very end, there is text that says "This all happened within 30km of the city of Kiev in the town of Bucha. I was the only witness of these events. - Andrey Svislotskiy". Andrey Svislotskiy was actually a coworker of Kovalyov at Pilot Studio. He made a brilliant surreal film in 1992 called Hypnerotomachia (based on Francesco Colonna's 1499 Romance Hypnerotomachia Poliphili), before leaving with Kovalyov for America to work at Klasky Csupo and never directing another film again.

The contrast between these films and the rest of Kovalyov's work is striking. The films that he co-directed with Aleksandr Tatarskiy in the 1970s and 1980s (such as Plasticine Crow and The Koloboks Investigate) are very different in tone. I frankly cannot find Kovalyov's stamp in them. They are very much like the films that Tatarskiy later directed solo; full of quick-thinking clownery.

The commercial work that Kovalyov worked (and works) on in America, also, seems to have no distinguishing features; it seems to generally be untarnished by vision or artistic skill, and could have been made by anyone. His latest work on The Drinky Crow Show is a good example. Probably it pays in Hollywood to be so subservient to those who hire you that none of your own personality shows in the work that you do. In "The Rugrats Movie" for example, Kovalyov said in an interview that he basically had no creative freedom. But I wonder how he can stand it, and whether he likes any of his commercial work.

Chris Robinson wrote a long article about Igor Kovalyov a while ago. If you can get past the sometimes vulgar language, it is a pretty informative read (though for interest, compare Kovalyov's version of his beginning in the 1970s and 1980s with his colleague Tatarskiy's. Kovalyov mentions hating every minute of working at "Ecran" studio, while Tatarskiy writes nothing of the sort). The films "His Wife is a Hen" and "Bird in the Window" are explained better in the article, while the explanations of "Andrey Svislotskiy" and "Flying Nansen" make it seem like the films don't really HAVE a clear point.

Kovalyov's latest film, Milch, is the only one that I actually dislike (though the incomprehensible and aimless "Flying Nansen" comes close). I watched it once but got nothing from it except a bad feeling. The art direction and animation, which in Kovalyov's earlier films is ugly but also interesting, here is just ugly, being more sharp and angular and less organic than his earlier work. The story was, to me, completely incomprehensible. And yet, this film has won some big festival awards, beginning with winning the Grand Prix at KROK (the story behind that is that the whole jury except for Yuriy Norshteyn, who was the head of the jury that year, wanted to give the Grand Prix to another American film. But Norshteyn argued for a long time that "Milch" deserved the award, and eventually brought the others around. In the audience rating, however, "Milch" didn't enter the top 10)

Most of Kovalyov's movies can be seen on Youtube, while "Flying Nansen" I think can only be seen on Global Tantrum.

( Read more... )

In a February 18 interview, director Sergei Seryogin said that when they were just beginning to make their feature film, they posted their art designs on an "Alice Seleznyova" fan site.

"They caused a commotion. A lot of criticism came my way. [...] This project has been open from the outset; we read and listened with interest to what people thought about it. [...] After discussions about the sketches, changes were made to the appearance of at least one of the main characters. The arguments of our opponents were so convincing that I said to our artist Sergei Gavrilov, that I had nothing to add to them - Professor Rrr can not stay the way we drew him. He agreed, and something changed thanks solely to the online audience."

Those early discussions and concept art from 5 (!) years ago can still be found online over at Mielofon.ru and the accompanying forum. The main discussion (15 pages long) is here. There are also two "announcements from the director", on June 27, 2005 and September 18, 2005.

In case the website ever goes offline, I'm reposting the images here. They're all drawn by the film's art director Sergei Gavrilov. "Alice's Birthday" is his first credit in this role.
( Read more... )

In an earlier entry, I mentioned the Russian sci-fi animated feature "Alice's Birthday" (Wikipedia article is here). Here is a scene from the film:

День рождения Алисы, отрывок

"Professor, where is your star?"
"Over there. Malakashta."
"And our sun?"
"You can't see it from here. It is too far."

Work on this film began in 2004. After premiering on February 12 in Star City in Russia, "Alice's Birthday" went into "wide" release on February 19 ("wide" because 200 theatres is very little, even in Russia). So how did it do? Mixed. The box-office results were very poor. The small number of theatres, lack of almost any afternoon screenings, ineffective advertising and perhaps the unusual graphical style (which is deliberately neither Disney nor anime) contributed to a terrible debut in 9th place with $130,000, $650/theatre and 66,700 viewers (source). This is not nearly enough to cover the film's 60 million-ruble budget ($1.5 million US by current exchange rates, $2.5 million by the average exchange rates from the past two years). It probably didn't help that the buzz leading up to its release was very negative because people were outraged that the classic characters from The Mystery of the Third Planet were being given a makeover (never mind that the film was never meant to be a direct sequel). Russian journalists wrote things such as "look at this clip, and see for yourself - never has any Russian children's cartoon been drawn so poorly."

(screenshots can be found here, here and here)

Upon the release of the film, the consensus of professional Russian reviewers hasn't changed; they don't like the film and critique just about everything about it (though most admit that the voice-acting is great). But a funny thing - on animation forums such as prodisney.ru and Russian IMDB-like sites such as Afisha, KinoAfisha and KinoPoisk, most reviews are positive and the average ratings go from 6.3-7.7/10. I've read comments from some very skeptical people who expected little and ended up being pleasantly surprised. pilot-pirks' review sums it up nicely. Also, journalists who describe the reactions of children say that they loved the film.

The reaction from Western journalists has been much more positive. Also, the film has been selected to be screened at the 35th Seattle International Film Festival.

So I don't know what to think right now. I must say that personally, I've mostly liked what I've seen since I first heard of the project. But I'll give my thoughts once I've seen the film. Until then, here's an interesting Feb. 18 interview with the creators of the film from Proficinima.ru, translated by myself. Subjects covered include artistic challenges and the commercial situation in Russia.

( Read the interview )

Very little information seems to exist about "Mystery-Bouffe" (Мистерия-буфф), a 60-minute animated feature made in 1969 at Kievnauchfilm studio (the first-ever Ukrainian animated feature, but one that saw only a very limited release and was banned outside of Ukraine). The image above is the only screenshot from the film that I've been able to find.

It was directed by David Cherkasskiy, who is most famous for the 1980s "Treasure Island" feature and Doctor Aybolit series (funny anecdote related by Cherkasskiy: "My passport says, rather amusingly, 'Cherkasskiy, of Cherkasskiy region, Cherkasskiy oblast, city of Cherkassy'. And when I travel out-of-country, nobody who looks at this believes it. They think that I'm a spy, but probably not a very clever one from a poor country.")

This blog post is my attempt to gather and translate all the information that I could find about the film "Mystery-Bouffe".

It was based on a political play of the same name by the great Russian poet and playwright Mayakovsky that was first written in 1918 for the anniversary of the Revolution (Wikipedia article here). Mayakovsky wrote in the preface to the second 1921 edition that "in the future, all persons performing, presenting, reading or publishing Mystery-Bouffe should change the content, making it contemporary, immediate, up-to-the-minute."

This quote by Petri Liukkonen describes its content fairly well:

In Mystery-Bouffe (1918), a religious mystery play which mocked religion, the poet described a struggle between two groups, the "Unclean" working class and the "Clean" upper class. The earth has been destroyed by a flood, the survivors seek refuge at the North Pole. The "Unclean" defeat the "Clean" and create a workers' paradise on Earth, where people "will live in warmth / and light, having hade electricity / move in waves." When Mayakovsky later tried to make a film of the play, the project was rejected by the Moscow Soviet because of its "incomprehensible language for the broad masses."
-http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/majakovs.htm
(this was in the 1920s; Cherkasskiy's film came much later)

----

Interview by Svobodanews.ru (2007):
David Cherkasskiy: I have one political film

Viktor Shenderovich: Which one?

David Cherkasskiy: "Mystery Bouffe", which I worked on with great delight. But not because it was political, but because it was based on a work by Mayakovsky, whom I adored then and adore now.

----

Arkadiy Gartsman, August 19-25, 1995
There are legends circling about Cherkasskiy, but here is a true story told to me by the famous humourist and stage dramatist Robert Vikkers: "In the year 1949-50, on the name day of a [female] school friend, I was introduced to a very active young man who declared that he was a director. "Here," proclaimed my cameraman, "is a young director, you will write a screenplay for us. We'll meet in a week..." They met only after 20 years, when working on the first Ukrainian animated feature, "Mystery-Bouffe". So Vikkers did, after all, write a screenplay for the director Cherkasskiy.

----

Natalia Venzher in the book "Our Animated Films" (2006):
The third directorial work of the young master [Cherkasskiy] became a real event, not only for Ukrainian, but for all Soviet animation; it was new in thought and in execution, but was half-forbidden then and, unfortunately, underrated. The feature-length adaptation of Mayakovsky's "Mystery Bouffe" was a daring project, both in thought and in realization. I would very much like for lovers of animation to see this film, and for art historians to remember it. The method of combining actors with cut-out and drawn animation was later used by Cherkasskiy in the feature film "Treasure Island" (1986-1988).

----

Maxim Deputatov writing for major Russian DVD company "Krupnyy Plan" (2006):
In his next, this time feature-length film, [Cherkasskiy] adapted one of the most free-thinking and underrated works of Vladimir Mayakovsky - "Mystery Bouffe". This work became trully revolutionary - Cherkasskiy for the first time used a technique that later became one of his favourites: the combination of live actors with drawn and cut-out animation. Besides this, in the live-action portions of the film, which took the form of visual pantomime - a rare and inventive genre for Soviet theatre - the actors were those of the Moscow Taganka theatre, which at that time attracted the most intense attention of audiences and the government alike. As a result, Ukrainian bureacrats accepted the film, but the USSR State Committee for Cinematography did not.

----

Smekhov Veniamin, "Theatre of My Memory", Chapter 15:
David Cherkasskiy (today a famous film director) made an animated film called "Mystery-Bouffe". The film was excellently-made, rich in genre, music, art, with smart and clown-like humour. It needed to be voiced. Mikhail Davydovich Volpin suggested to David (who was inexperienced back then) to turn to me. After my work with Y.Lyubimov's production about Mayakovsky, both Erdman and Volpin came to trust in my "Mayakoknowledge". I recruited our actors, and a joyful recording of the voices for the animated film commenced. Of which I informed Lily and Vasily, adding that I did not know why "Mystery-Bouffe" became banned in Moscow. "I do know why," said Lily. "It created a furor in Kiev. In Moscow, they gave it to [award-winning Soviet film director Sergei Yutkevich to watch, and Yutkevich reacted very negatively. And Yutkevich, as you know, is a very influential figure". This arbitrariness seriously angered me back then: an enormous work, an original interpretation, success among colleagues in the director's "place of registration" in Kiev, and to suddenly squash him like a fly... I shared my consternations with L.Y. Maybe master Yutkevich should not single-handedly decide problems of artistic merit relating to Mayakovsky, considering that his own film version of "Bath" was, to say the least, not the biggest contribution to culture?

----

Lana Kuybine, "Focus" No.7, March 6, 2008:
With Censureship and Without

The studio [Kievnauchfilm] was considered an ideological organization, and so animators suffered from censorship no less than cinematographers. When a screenplay was ready, the film was sent to Moscow for approval, and only then did filming begin. Basically, a 10-minute cartoon passed through [many trials]. The bureacrats of the Soviet Ministry of Culture decided how many copies of the film were to be made: the maximum distribution was 1500 theatres. This number guaranteed that the whole population of the USSR would become familiar with the film. If the ruling bureacrats noticed dissent, the film was either released in limited, local, Ukrainian distribution, or put on the shelf. Yevgeniy Sivokon's films "Good Name", based on a screenplay by Felix Krivin, and Tale About the Kind Rhinocerous, based on the poem by Boris Zakhoder, suffered this unfortunate fate, as well as David Cherkasskiy's film "Mystery-Bouffe", based on Mayakovsky's play. The director [Cherkasskiy] cannot figure out to this day what the reason for the censoring was. Animated films had to strictly follow the class ideology; everything else, in the best-case-scenario, was asked to be edited.

----

David Cherkasskiy, August 19-25, 1995:
Say what you will, but I could have gotten a Guinness certificate. I'm not even talking here about the amount of films that I have made, but the amount of parts. A normal director will make about 10 parts in his whole career. Maybe 15. Maybe even 20, though it's unlikely. But not 45! (one part = about 10 minutes - A.K.) Our "Mystery Bouffe" was 5 parts, "Vrungel" was 13, "Treasure Island" was 11. "Mystery" was our first multi-part film. Taganka Theatre voiced it. The recording was all done in Moscow. After that, I became friends with all of the actors, especially with Shapovalov, Smekhov and Dykhovichny. I always tend to like the actors with whom I work. All, or almost all of my films, are voiced by Kievian artists such as Eugene Paperny, Zhora Kishko, Boris Voznyuk, Vlad Zadniprovskiy, Dodik Babayev, Vitya Andriyenko, Valera Chiglyayev... not even mentioning Zinoviy Yefimovich Gerdt and Armen Borisovich Dzhigarkhanyan. It is easy for me to work with actors. I don't give them any difficult tasks or have hidden layers. Animation, in general, should be simple, like mask theatre. Although a director like Norshteyn does have hidden layers. And also, for some reason everyone loves me. This is probably a bad thing. They say that if the conductor hates the musicians, and the musicians hate the conductor, that this is excellent. But with me, it's the opposite.

----

Mark Tsybulskiy, "The Voice of Vysotskiy" (2002-2006):
For a long time, it was considered that Vysotskiy took part in the creation of the animated film "Mystery-Bouffe", filmed at the Kiev studio in 1969. This opinion was eventually contradiction by the film's own director, D.Cherkasskiy, who said in a conversation that "the script for this film was acted by all the actors of the Taganka Theatre, except for Vysotskiy, who was out of town at that time."

----

P.S. Animator.ru translates the title for the film into "Buff's Mystery", and this has been picked up by BCDB as well. This is absolute nonsense; not a single scholar translates the title of Mayakovsky's play that way. Animator.ru title translations are like that; sometimes they're good, and sometimes they're ridiculous. Different people translate them; it's a big job that isn't all that easy (translating films is easier than translating titles). I translated the ones from 2005-2008, so any errors in those are my fault.

namastescop has posted many pictures from a gallery exhibition dedicated to Fyodor Khitruk (creator of the Russian Winnie-the-Pooh films) that opened recently in Moscow.


From left to right: Naum Kleyman, Yuriy Norshteyn, Vladimir Zuykov, Eduard Nazarov, Boris Pavlov, Mikhail Aldashin (aldashin), Pavel Shvedov (tea_elf).

Fyodor Khitruk himself could not come, on account of being 91 years old.

Click here for many more photos of interesting things, such as original production art, as well as an audio recording of the speeches for those who understand Russian.

UPDATE 09/02/09: Mikhail Aldashin has posted a video on Youtube of Yuriy Norshteyn and Eduard Nazarov talking at the event:

Previously:
Our Masha in the Strawberry Country (Dec. 18, 2008) (who knows?)
The New Adventures of Alyonushka and Yeryoma (Dec. 25, 2008)
The Tale of Fedot the Strelets (Jan. 1, 2009) (Dec. 18, 2008)
Ivan Tsarevich and Grey Wolf (Feb. 1, 2009)
Alice's Birthday (Feb. 19, 2009)
Star Dogs: Belka and Strelka (Dec. 31, 2009)
Alien Pile (likely 2009)
A Room and a Half, or A Sentimental Journey to the Homeland (likely 2009)
Little Muk and the Pirates of the Caspian Sea (maybe 2009)
Kin-dza-dza-dza! (2010)
The Ugly Duckling (~2011)
Blue Beard (????)
New Buttermilk Village (????)
Mad Hair (????)
Gofmaniada (maybe 2009)
Sapsan (possibly March 19, 2009)
The Pirates of Treasure Island (maybe 2010)

Cheburashka
Чебурашка
Release date: Maybe 2009
Director: Makoto Nakamura (unofficial information)
Studio: Ffango Entertoyment
Budget: ?
75 minutes

This upcoming feature film features the famous Russian literary and cartoon character Cheburashka, and the plan is apparently to "remake the original shorts as a feature film".

This is not really a Russian film, although an unidentified Russian company is working on the art direction, and the language to be used within the film itself is Russian (an English version is being made simultaneously). Funding is being provided by the Japanese companies Tokyo TV Broadband and Frontier Work, with the unidentified director also being Japanese. The actual work is being done in South Korea at the Ffango Entertoyment studio, and an extremely large number of pictures from its production can be seen on their website.

Here are some of them:


Personally, I have mixed feelings. The original shorts are classics, so is there really a point in remaking them? The puppets do look nice, but what is Cheburashka doing with what looks like a cigarette in his mouth?

----

The history of this project actually seems to have begun with Aleksandr Tatarskiy and Pilot Studio, believe it or not. Here is a translation of the relevant segment from a 2004 Russian-language interview with Ivan Maximov:


Does the government participate in the fates of private studios?

- If it participates, it is on the common ground of being an equal business partner. For example, Pilot Studio, one of the biggest studios in the country today, theoretically could be taking money from the government. But there is, as a rule, a kind of tension between them. Simply because of the character of the people working there. Because the government is always a bit like a mafia, which can hurt a man or spit on him. And consequently, one can either enter into this system, or confront it.

And is that what "Pilot" is doing?

- Basically yes. The studio has very rarely received money from Goskino in recent years, because for this you need to enter into the system. As far as I know, they were making a continuation of the adventures of Cheburashka - a feature-length 3D film in the style of Shvartsman's original shorts. The film was like a puppet film, but transferred into the computerized 3D format to make things easier. The screenplay was written with humour and fantasy. But a big project requires reliable resources, and it is currently frozen, because there was not enough money. But a project called "Russian Folk Tales" is being readied - mainly drawn animation, several directors simultaneously working on many different folk tales.

In 2004, Pilot Studio was a very different place, and its main income came from its sub-studio Pilot TV, which mainly produced animated political satire (those projects went off the air as the government closed Russia's independent TV channels). That last project that Maximov talked about became the famous and acclaimed "Mountain of Gems" series, which did manage to receive government support. So the "Cheburashka" project seemed dead, like so many of Pilot's other plans.

----

Then, on April 12, 2006, TV Tokyo Broadband released a press release announcing its intentions.

On May 17, 2007, another article appeared, giving some more details and suggesting that the film would be released in summer of 2008. That obviously did not happen, but judging by the studio's website, production is in full swing right now.

Translation of a recent post by Sergey Kapkov, author of the Encyclopedia of Domestic Animation(all subsequent links go to Russian-language pages).

--------

Friends and colleagues!
A big battle is being planned... though we all want peace and productivity.
On February 4, we shall attempt to decide to fate of our domestic animation at a Round Table.

Governmental Politics Regarding Support of Animation: Problems and Perspectives During and After the Crisis

During the past year, animated production in Russia has practically stopped. Even before the country began talking about a "financial crisis", the Ministry of Culture began a reorganization, and has not yet finished it... Studios are forced to lay off staff, halt projects, and put property up for rent. Animators are leaving the profession.

Those who haven't left have started to write letters to those in power and articles to the "Animatograf" journal. Here are some opinions of respectable people: Sergey Merinov's article (sergey_merinov), Yuriy Norshteyn's article. The journalist Masha Tereshchenko (goododd) has analyzed the international experience of the relationship between animation and the government. As a result, the idea to have a general meeting of professionals and to work out our necessary steps for a renaissance was proposed.

We have invited the following people to speak at the Table: Merinov, Norshteyn, T. Prokhorov, Selyanova, Garri Bardin, and even Zernov. It is as yet unclear who will actually come. But producers and directors will be coming in huge numbers. We all want - I repeat - productivity. That is why we must analyze the situation very soberly and formulate concrete recommendations to the government, the Ministry of Culture, and to Putin's new Film Soviet - and to send them in the form of a letter. Not cries for help, but CONCRETE recommendations. Whether it will actually work is unclear. But we cannot sit on our hands. They'll devour us. They'll kill our hard-won progress.

Journalists, new and old, come as well! Please write, make some waves in the mass media, so that THEY will hear us...

The Round Table will take place on February 4 in the conference hall of the Union of Cinematographers of the Russian Federation at 12:00.
Address: Vesilyevskaya St., house 13

Konstantin Bronzit's short film "Lavatory - Lovestory" (2006) has been nominated for an Oscar. Congratulations!

(the sign at the end of the film says "Worker Urgently Needed")

This makes Bronzit the third Russian animator to have been nominated for an Oscar. Aleksandr Petrov has been nominated 4 times (and won once), and Aleksey Khariditi has also been nominated once for his film "Gagarin". Most recently, Petrov was nominated last year, even though his film was also released in 2006 like Bronzit's. I don't know, Oscar rules are strange.

The first time I saw Mr. Bronzit's work was at a retrospective of his short films at the Ottawa International Animation Festival in 2006. In fact, it was one of the few good things that I saw there. I enjoyed it very much, with my favourites being "Switchcraft" and especially "At the Ends of the Earth" (links go to videos). "Lavatory - Lovestory" was finished or nearly finished at that time, but Bronzit did not bring it to the festival, explaining that it was "psychologically too soon". He considered it to be the best of his films. Now that I have seen it, I wouldn't agree with that, but it is indeed a good film. The strongest moment comes at the very last scene. Bronzit studied under Yuriy Norshteyn and other masters in the late 1980s, and Norshteyn has given high praise to his work.

Yet I must say that this was not my favourite Russian animated film from 2006. Its profile is higher internationally than almost any of the others because Bronzit has one of the largest international profiles of any Russian animator, thanks to his feature film work with Melnitsa and to his past association with Folimage, which aggressively advertised "At the Ends of the Earth" to film festivals around the world in the late 1990s. Most other Russian directors of animation don't have that kind of name recognition, or hide their work from view. Take, for example, Maria Muat's 2006 film "Snow Maiden" (Снегурочка) which won the prestigious Russian Nika Award for best animated film, and now... cannot be found anywhere, neither on DVD, nor online (this is the case for many of her films, unfortunately). And then there's the case of Soyuzmultfilm actively trying to censor and cover-up a potentially groundbreaking work that was produced in their studio because of political reasons (well, that's a topic for another day).

Here are Bronzit's own words on the subject from a Russian-language interview with CGTalk from a number of years ago:

CGTALK: "At the Ends of the Earth" won over 70 awards at various events. How did you manage to organize the distribution of this work to so many festivals?

Konstantin: Here I was very lucky, and managed to avoid any headaches! The distribution of the film to festivals was handled by the studio Folimage, which was the producer of the film. They "bombed" all manner of possible festivals from around the world with the film; that is the reason for such a result. It's like fishing - the more rods are used, the higher the probability of a catch. The festival distribution of films is sometimes handled by the director, but, as a rule - it is usually the producer or the production studio. The only problem is that money is needed for this (shipping costs, videocassettes, printing of additional film copies, and some festivals require an "entry fee"). This is why sometimes, it all depends on the capabilities of the studio. I anticipate a question: why does a studio need any of this? Because if a film is good (even if it's not prize-winning), the studio is noticed. In such a way, a studio can make a name for itself and can land a very profitable long-term commercial order.

Vitaliy Shafirov, a former student of Tatarskiy who left for America and worked at Klascy Csupo studio (now he is in Australia), put up a video about Norshteyn's trip to California, 10 years after the fact:
( Click here for parts 2 and 3 )
Click here to download in better quality:
113MB

(posted to norshtein also)

P.S. I'm working on an article about Norshteyn's "Good Night Children" sequence from 2000. I already posted the video to norshtein, over here, so head on over and take a look if you haven't already.


P.P.S. Just a PSA: Fan-profiles for Yuriy Norshteyn exist on MySpace and Facebook.

All of the films from the series directed by Fyodor Khitruk have now been translated into English.

"Winnie-the-Pooh" (1969) (translated by me; alternate translation by 0xDD is here)


"Winnie-the-Pooh Goes Visiting" (1971) (translated by "Artem, Lesha & Co."; comments can be sent to vinni.puhi at gmail dot com)


"Winnie-the-Pooh and the Day of Worries" (1972) (translated by 0xDD aka. DigitalDude)



P.S. It is possible to learn how to download higher-quality mp4 versions of Youtube videos here, or just use this website.

All of these films are classics beloved by Russian children and adults. I have to say that my personal favourite episode is the second. Pooh comes off as such a wonderfully selfish ass.

Here's a little segment that I translated from Fyodor Khitruk's recently-released Russian-language two-volume book The Profession of Animation (it was sent to me by mail, along with Norshteyn's book, by his grandson Fyodor Khitruk Jr., who is also the webmaster of Animator.ru):

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Profession of Animation (pg. 190-192, vol. 1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, literature serves as a mighty source of ideas. It is much easier to work with a ready-made creation, especially with a creation that has passed the test of time. It is already well-known what precisely in that creation so excites and attracts audiences. The job at hand then becomes attempting to transfer these particular qualities into another language.
So it was with me with "Winnie-the-Pooh". With "Winnie-the-Pooh" we... not we, but me personally. I don't much like using the word "me", because I think that the creation of films is, at least in my experience, after all a collective art. But I really did dream about adapting this work for a long time. Although that's not the right word either. This was, again, like something spinning through the subconscious part of my brain: "Wouldn't it be nice to do Winnie-the-Pooh". At that time, I had not yet seen the Disney film. Maybe if I had seen it, I would not have made my own. What is the sense in repeating? Although I must tell you that I am not very satisfied with the Disney film. And also, in hindsight, I can directly relate to you the words of the author of that American film - Wolfgang Reitherman. He also was not very satisfied with his own "Winnie-the-Pooh".
I was afraid to start working on my dream precisely because each line of that book was precious to me. I read it first in English; a present that I was given. Only after did I get to know Zakhoder's translation. A wonderful translation! Perhaps this is not even a translation, but a second version; so interestingly did he do it. I very much wanted to start on a film, but I was afraid. It sometimes happens that you very much treasure the material and are afraid to ruin it, to do it wrong.
First of all, one had to decide on a visual direction, on the look of these characters. I very much wanted to make them as they are in the original book. I don't remember the last name of the artist. Shepard, I think. I explored this Winnie-the-Pooh for literally several years and thought about how it could be possible to transfer all of the untransferable beauty of the language into another form. For all of that charm, that attractiveness to flow not from the literary material, not from the text, but from the image, from the behaviour of these characters. For example, there are certain places there: "One time, Winnie-the-Pooh, the donkey Eeyore and Piglet were sitting on the porch of the house and listening to what Winnie-the-Pooh was saying" [note: I don't know the original English version of this sentence. Can anyone find it?]. This is a kind of naive absurdity. This naive absurdity contains its own charm. If you like, its own wisdom, its own integrity. There are many such moments there. When I befriended the artist Zuykov in our work on "Film, Film, Film", and after we also made a small sequence for Ryazanov, I, like some character in a Ryazanov film, began to think: "Isn't it time for us to have a go at Milne?" And we had a go; we actually tried to do it.
At first we tried to draw Winnie-the-Pooh. Simply to see if it worked or not. Here he was sitting in a chair. At first nothing came of it. Or rather, something quite interesting came of it, maybe even more interesting that what is currently in the film, but that Winnie-the-Pooh that we thought up required an unbelievable amount of extremely complex work. Because there were such nuances there, that he had to be made of little traits separated into tens of thousands of drawings - a task that was beyond our abilities. Well, somehow we finally found a construction for him. In contrast, work on the screenplay went smoothly and without incident. Because the schema was already there, the dialogue was already there, the scenes were practically almost there; we only had to pack them in, so that they would be comfortable to watch.
The first thing that we did was to remove Robin. All of his actions were spread out among the other characters. And we did the right thing, because he only underlined that there was a person on one side and animals or toys on the other. For us this was a single world - the world of Winnie-the-Pooh. Populated neither by animals nor by people, but by characters dear and beloved to us. I'm saying this because, on one hand, adapting a literary work is always very risky; especially such, and I won't hesitate to use this word, genial works as, let's say, "Alice in Wonderland" or "Winnie-the-Pooh". One needs to gather a lot of courage and pack a lot of baggage in order to have a go at, for example, Tolstoy. Some people have the courage, but this is a big risk. We took that risk. And what was normally the most difficult thing for me - the exposition and development of a story, in other words the screenplay - was in this case amazingly easy. I must say that the first time when I did not curse myself after finishing a film, was after my work on "Winnie-the-Pooh".

I temporarily interrupt my series of posts about Russian animated features series to direct you to this little animated film that I made for the coming Christmas and New Year celebrations (it is my first-ever finished film):

One Quiet Winter Night (Russian title: Однажды тихой зимней ночью). You can watch it on Newgrounds / смотреть здесь. If that version runs slowly, you can also view an AVI version on Vimeo.





The animation style was influenced by the many wonderful Russian films that I've watched over the years, particularly Norshteyn's films, "Mumu", and the more recent Lullabies of the World (such as this one). Which is not to say that it will be worthy of them. Still I hope you like it.

Previously:
Our Masha in the Strawberry Country (Dec. 18, 2008)
The New Adventures of Alyonushka and Yeryoma (Dec. 25, 2008)
The Tale of Fedot the Strelets (Jan. 1, 2009) (Dec. 18, 2008)
Ivan Tsarevich and Grey Wolf (Feb. 1, 2009)
Alice's Birthday (Feb. 19, 2009)
Star Dogs: Belka and Strelka (Dec. 31, 2009)
Alien Pile (likely 2009)
A Room and a Half, or A Sentimental Journey to the Homeland (likely 2009)
Little Muk and the Pirates of the Caspian Sea (maybe 2009)
Kin-dza-dza-dza! (2010)
The Ugly Duckling (~2011)
Blue Beard (????)
New Buttermilk Village (????)
Mad Hair (????)
Gofmaniada (maybe 2009)
Sapsan (possibly March 19, 2009)

The Pirates of Treasure Island (official website, Russian official website)
Пираты острова сокровищ
Release date: Maybe 2010 (source)
Director: David Cherkasskiy
Studio: Babich Design, Star Media (production company)
Budget: $1.7 million according to wild speculation by a newspaper
90 or 95 minutes (different numbers on Russian/English official sites)

A Ukrainian-Russian co-production; the animation will be generally done in Ukraine, while the actors will be Russian.

This one still has a long way to go; the screenplay was just finished on November 18, 2008, and the pre-production period is now beginning. This is a remake, or re-imagining (or whatever) of the 2-part 1988 Soviet animated feature Treasure Island.

This is typical of what happens to animation under capitalism; searching for a sure thing, investors get a 76-year-old veteran to come out of retirement and make again the same popular film that he already made 20 years ago. Now, personally, I don't really see the point. Why not just re-release the original film? That would be the ultimate "sure thing". And it would be a lot cheaper. But if you're going to make a film, why not make something new? Cherkasskiy has a proven track record, after all.

So can anything good possibly come of this?

There are a few precedents that I can think of:

The bad one: Cat City 2 (2007), a poor sequel released 21 years after the original "Cat City", one of the classics of Hungarian animation. Same director for both films.

The not-so-bad one: The Humpbacked Horse (1975 vs. 1947). Ivanov-Vano remade his classic film in 1975 because the 1947 film was in terrible condition and nobody knew how to restore it at that time. The 1975 version generally has better direction (more logical scene constructions), but the animation quality is sometimes a lot worse. So it's questionable which version is better. Most people would probably say 1947 because the brilliant animation sequences are so easy to remember.

Anyway, back to some details about the film:
-It will "probably be made in Flash animation" according to director of the studio Valeriy Babich (the studio previously worked along with 13 other studios on the "Night Watch" films). David Cherkasskiy, despite not understanding how they work, is apparently the one who insisted on using the latest technology to save on time and effort.
-Most of the characters will be the same, but some will be changed into animals, and there may also be some parodying of recent Hollywood blockbusters such as "Pirates of the Caribbean".
-Another quote from Mr. Babich: "There will be a lot of action and lively activity, but the foundation and characters will still be closer to the traditions under which the first two-part "Treasure Island" was made. One of the goals is to not lose the characters which were drawn by David Cherkasskiy"
-A teaser is apparently already produced, though I can't find it anywhere

Still, I must admit that I really like the first of these concept art sketches.

( Read more... )

Previously:
Our Masha in the Strawberry Country (Dec. 18, 2008)
The New Adventures of Alyonushka and Yeryoma (Dec. 25, 2008)
The Tale of Fedot the Strelets (Jan. 1, 2009) (Dec. 18, 2008)
Ivan Tsarevich and Grey Wolf (Feb. 1, 2009)
Alice's Birthday (Feb. 19, 2009)
Star Dogs: Belka and Strelka (Dec. 31, 2009)
Alien Pile (likely 2009)
A Room and a Half, or A Sentimental Journey to the Homeland (likely 2009)
Little Muk and the Pirates of the Caspian Sea (maybe 2009)
Kin-dza-dza-dza! (2010)
The Ugly Duckling (~2011)
Blue Beard (????)
New Buttermilk Village (????)
Mad Hair (????)
Gofmaniada (maybe 2009)

Peregrine or Sapsan
Сапсан
Release date: March 19, 2009 (according to a source from 2007; however, not many places mention this date now)
Directors: Vaksim and Vadim Smeshnikov
Studios: Era Vodoleya, Central Partnership
Budget: $2.5 million "or a little more" (source), or $3 million (source)

First of all, before I write anything else, please watch this teaser. It is very epic and really shows what this film is about. :)


(download here)
(ok, I'm pretty sure that that was a joke...)

Here's a nice English-language article about this film. I'll just quote a section of it:

In March, the Central Partnership group of companies signed an agreement with the Era Vodoleya Producers Center to produce a feature-length 3D animated film with the working title Peregrine (Sapsan). The story is about Mitya, a peregrine falcon nestling. Through a twist of fate, he ends up with a family of pigeons who adopt him as one of their own and instill in him a love of soccer. The soccer matches, which are integral to the plot, feature running commentary by Goose and Duck characters, who are voiced by Viktor Gusev and Vasily Utkin, two well-known sports TV journalists. Mitya and the pigeon Gala are voiced by Konstantin Khabensky and Renata Litvinova respectively. The film is written and directed by the brothers Maxim and Vadim Sveshnikov. Art direction duties went to Artur Mirzoyan. As of this writing, the film is currently in production. It is slated for a late 2008 – early 2009 release. The film’s budget is $2.5 million with Central Partnership contributing more than $1 million.

Apparently, there's also some "Romeo and Juliet" mixed in. "All the voice actors believe that it will be a great success".

According to JHP from the animator.ru forums, this project is currently "in a state of collapse and may not come out", which might explain the lack of any news articles mentioning it from the second half of the year. Well, we'll wait and see.



More images here and here.

Previously:
Our Masha in the Strawberry Country (Dec. 18, 2008)
The New Adventures of Alyonushka and Yeryoma (Dec. 25, 2008)
The Tale of Fedot the Strelets (Jan. 1, 2009) (Dec. 18, 2008)
Ivan Tsarevich and Grey Wolf (Feb. 1, 2009)
Alice's Birthday (Feb. 19, 2009)
Star Dogs: Belka and Strelka (Dec. 31, 2009)
Alien Pile (likely 2009)
A Room and a Half, or A Sentimental Journey to the Homeland (likely 2009)
Little Muk and the Pirates of the Caspian Sea (maybe 2009)
Kin-dza-dza-dza! (2010)
The Ugly Duckling (~2011)
Blue Beard (????)
New Buttermilk Village (????)
Mad Hair (????)

Gofmaniada (Wikipedia, Soyuzmultfilm "new projects" page)
Гофманиада
Release date: Maybe 2009 (source)
Director: Stanislav Sokolov
Studio: Soyuzmultfilm
Budget: ? (in this 2006 interview, Akop Kirakosyan wished for $1.5 million)
78 minutes

A film based around stories by German writer E.T.A. Hoffman, with Hoffman himself as the main character. There already exists a very nice English Wikipedia article, so I would suggest you go there for most information. But to quickly summarize:

This puppet-animated feature is the biggest project that the once-great Soyuzmultfilm studio has taken on since the fall of the Soviet Union. A pilot film of 20 minutes was released in 2006 and got positive reviews. It has a number of very talented people behind it, including veteran director Stanislav Sokolov and well-known sculptor Mikhail Shemyakin making the gorgeous puppets and sets. The actors are also talented people. By the way, Shemyakin doesn't admit it but the Hoffman puppet - with the black hair - is a bit of a caricature of the director. Compare these two images:



There has been (and maybe still is) a major problem with finding funds. The release date was pushed back from 2007 to 2008, and now this month they're saying "2009 if all goes well". Whenever somebody says "if all goes well", this usually means they're doing quite a bit of wishful thinking, particularly in Russia (Melnitsa is the only Russian studio that has been consistently punctual about its announced release dates for features). With such talent behind it, though, it is going to be worth the wait.

Here are some translated words from the former official website (deleted in mid-2007 as part of a conscious effort by Soyuzmultfilm's management to minimize their internet presence - yes, it sounds crazy to me also):

The project is intended as a widescreen movie of 78 minutes.

The wealth of characters (over one hundred), a combination of puppet and drawn animation, the use of modern digital technologies to create virtual special effects, transformations, metamorphoses, the application of new materials for the heads of the characters, extensive decorations, unusual fantastic interiors (a crystal city, Atlantis, mysterious palaces, temples) - all of this will require substantial financial investments, beyond the frame of the usual government financing of standard films.

It is indispensible to have the corresponding technical equipment, the quality record sound system Dolby Stereo, and to attract the top creative forces of Russian animation: artist-animators, artist-constructors , sculptors, painters, decorators, masters of computer graphics, animation and special effects.

Currently work is completed on a 20-minute pilot film whose mission is to test the characters and style of the movie, to allow the project's members to visually imagine the quality and creative direction.

We are confident that the distinctive design of the "Gofmaniada" film will attract to itself demanding aesthetes, who after investing money in the project, will receive pleasure from being involved in the creation of a highly artistic work.

And here's a news report from the 2006 screening of the pilot:


( More pictures in here )

For some more information in Russian and images, go to one of these two links:
http://abbsound.livejournal.com/49621.html (this is a post by the SMF director of marketing, before he left the studio in mid-2007)
http://63koval.livejournal.com/27558.html

Or you can download an 11mb .zip file containing every image related to the film that I've found (some are very large).