This article concerns L.I. Gayday’s film "Ivan Vassilievich Changes His Profession" and provides an analysis of reviews on this cinematic comedy. It is shown that, after the release of "Ivan Vassilievich", the film was perceived as an eccentric and entertaining motion picture. Later, at the turn of the 21st century, the film received a new connotation, when it earned the reputation of a satire with political overtones.
L.I. Gayday’s comedic film "Ivan Vassilievich Changes His Profession" was based on M.A. Bulgakov’s play "Ivan Vasilievich," which in turn was based on a reworking of his pseudo-utopian drama "Bliss." The meaning of the film is therefore impossible to appreciate without a deep analysis of M.A. Bulgakov’s literary work. In this article the author examines the history of the play. She shows the difficulties that the talented Soviet dramatist experienced when he was writing the play; she examines questions about its production in the Moscow Satire Theater; she describes the attitude of the writer’s contemporaries toward "Ivan Vassilievich."
Finally, the author explains the reasons for the play’s censorship in 1936. But the main aim of this article is to show how the attitude towards the play changed within the Soviet philological field. At the turn of twenty first century, Yu.V. Babitcheva, Ya.S. Lur’e and V.I. Losev describe the play in their books, articles and critical reviews as having been a satirical work with political overtones.
This article is about L.I. Gayday's film "Ivan Vassilievich changes his Profession". The author brings to light the similarities and differences between L. I. Gaidai`s film adaptation and the original work: M. A. Bulgakov's play "Ivan Vassilievich" — those two famous works of Soviet literature and art of the 30's and 70's of the 20th century. This article shows that these works are satirical with political overtones. Special attention is given in this article to a comparison of Bulgakov’s vision of Moscow and Soviet citizens in the 1930s and Gayday's Soviet reality in the 1970s. The author demonstrates especially notable differences between Bulgakov's and Gayday's heroes, and considers the attitudes of soviet citizens to the 17th century and the medieval Russian world in which they find themselves. The author gives a wide comparative analysis of the Soviet era and the reign of Ivan the Terrible, primarily through demonstrating the desire of the Soviet censorship board to portray the reign of the medieval autocrat in idyllic tones. The article shows the obstacles faced by the crew of Leonid Gayday in the creation and promotion of the film: the author describes the story lines which were cut from the film by the decision of the Soviet ideological censors. This perfectly showcases the "tastes"of party workers of the Soviet Union. Special focus is given to the reaction of the Soviet viewer to this film, especially at those moments which found wide public response, and reveal the most pressing social problems in the Brezhnev era.