The story "Heart of a Dog": history of creation and fate. Interesting facts about the filming of the film "Heart of a Dog" (7 photos)

other meanings

« dog's heart» - story by Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov.

Story

In the USSR in the 1960s it was distributed in samizdat. It was first officially published in the USSR in 1987 in the 6th issue of Znamya magazine. Since then it has been reprinted several times.

Plot

Moscow, 1924. Professor Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky, an outstanding surgeon, achieved excellent results in practical rejuvenation. Continuing his research, he conceived an unprecedented experiment - an operation to transplant a human pituitary gland and testicles with appendages and spermatic cords into a dog. A homeless dog chosen as an experimental animal, accidentally given the nickname “Sharik”, which he picked up on the street, ended up in the professor’s spacious apartment and received excellent food. A man who died in a fight became an organ donor Klim Chugunkin- a thief, an alcoholic and a rowdy.

The results of the operation exceeded expectations. Sharik's limbs elongated, his hair fell out, speech appeared, and he took on a human form. Rumors spread throughout Moscow about miracles happening in the professor’s house. However, Preobrazhensky soon had to regret what he had done. Sharik experienced not only physical but also psychological humanization; he inherited all his bad habits from Chugunkin. Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov, as he called himself, showed an addiction to foul language, drunkenness, theft, fornication, tavern revelry, vanity and discussions about the proletarian idea. For the sake of improving your social status Sharikov on the recommendation of the chairman of the house committee Shvondera, who hoped with his help to save Professor Preobrazhensky from the apartment, gets a job as head of the “subdepartment for cleaning the city of Moscow from stray animals (cats, etc.) in the MKH department.”

The new job pleases Sharikov’s pride, a company car comes for him every day, the servants begin to treat him with servility, and he no longer feels obligated to Preobrazhensky and Bormental, who are still trying to instill norms in him cultural life. He takes pleasure in destroying stray cats, although, according to Preobrazhensky, “cats are temporary.” Sharikov brings to Professor Preobrazhensky’s apartment a young girl he hired, from whom he hid his biography. Having learned the truth from the professor, the girl refuses Sharikov’s advances - and then he threatens to fire her. The doctor stands up for the girl Bormenthal.

Sharikov decides to write a political denunciation of the apartment’s inhabitants, who are far from sympathetic new government and its representatives in own home. However, the paper ends up with one of Preobrazhensky’s former patients, and he returns it to the professor. Preobrazhensky demands that Sharikov get out of his apartment, he refuses and takes out a revolver. Bormenthal disarms Sharikov, together with the professor they carry out new operation, turning Sharikov back into a dog. The dog does not remember anything that happened to him, and remains to live in the professor’s apartment.

“Heart of a Dog” is one of those few films that you can watch at least 100 times in a row. And there is no exaggeration in this.

A masterpiece in all respects, the story of the native Russian writer M. A. Bulgakov experienced a new birth on the Soviet screen. We can talk about this film as something independent and self-sufficient. He lives independent life, despite blood ties with the story. I don’t want to retell the plot of this brilliant film again. And this is understandable - many people know it almost by heart.

I would like to highlight in a separate “loud” line the excellent, impeccable work cast. God himself ordered them to play these roles. But no! This word (play) is not applicable to such brilliant talents - they did not play these roles - they lived them. And direct evidence of this is provided by associations already firmly established in the minds of many people.

Having heard the name “Evstigneev” out of the corner of my ear, the image of a pot-bellied guy in a snow-white robe starched to the point of sneezing, glasses slightly pushed up on his nose, on whose face a smug smile, covered with a haze of irony, immediately pops up in my imagination. And indeed, one cannot approach the things happening in the film without a bit of good-natured humor. I myself don’t understand who was bothered by carpets and flowers in the entrance. Is it really Engels?

Preobrazhensky openly and very caustically laughs at those around him, not allowing them, in turn, to reciprocate this sarcasm. He feels his unattainable elevation above the devastation reigning everywhere, the grayness of the soul, feeble-mindedness and total fermentation of the brain. Making friends with the supreme commanders-in-chief, he allows himself liberalities that are dangerous for mere mortals: he lives in a seven-room apartment and does not even think about compacting it, “wipes” Persian carpets with slippers, and supports domestic servants. The truest bourgeois! He is an unfading luminary of modern medicine, and still has to share rooms with all sorts of “stayers” there. No, no and NO! here is Professor Preobrazhensky’s ironclad answer to all Shvonders, as well as to the pernicious revolutionary reality. I think that Preobrazhensky’s mouth was a kind of mouthpiece for Bulgakov. After all, much of what F. Filipich said was Bulgakov’s simple truth.

From the very moment he appeared on the screen, the image of the intelligent intellectual Bormenthal captivates us with his pervasive charm and truly French charm. His hero is soft, diplomatic, but contrasting and at the same time can easily arrange a cheerful fist benefit for Sharikov. Right hand professors, a sort of Dr. Watson in scientific world, he is infinitely devoted to his helmsman - F. F. Preobrazhensky. After all, it was the latter who gave him a start in life. Once a half-starved student, he was picked up by a professor and taken for training. It was Preobrazhensky who noticed glimpses of Promethean fire in his hungry mind.

In my opinion, the role of Sharikov is one of the most difficult in the series Soviet films. You need to have powerful acting charisma to be able to fully play this role. And V. Tolokonnikov performed this role beyond all expectations. The notorious line echoed in my ears for a long time: “Come, bourgeois, look at your little eye” or “Abyrvalg.” And if Professor Preobrazhensky symbolized the old, outgoing Russia, then Sharikov symbolized the real Russia. Uncertainty, the search for something that is not always better, doubts, suspicions, instigations of the Shvonders, philistinism. Dirty boots, patched trouser legs, a tattered coat - this is what ordinary citizens are wearing, not of Russia, but not yet of the USSR.

At some point it even seemed to me that Sharikov was seeing the light and sincerely repenting (the scene in front of the mirror with a candle in his hand). But it later became clear that it only seemed so.

“I ask that these words be entered into the protocol” pronounced with a bit of restrained malice, this phrase was etched in my memory for a long time. I quote it every chance I get. It was with statements like these that the long and dreary history of the Soviet bureaucracy began. I had to run around all sorts of authorities, foaming at the mouth, to get a piece of paper. And a person without a piece of paper is not a person. And the sower of bureaucracy in the film is the incomparable Shvonder. The image of the house committee is the final stage in the evolution of Sharikov, only already well trained and stuffed with Marx and Engels.

Shvonder is an exemplary product of the unfortunate revolution. And he, in turn, strives to direct everyone to the “true path.” The unlucky Sharikov falls under his experienced hand, and Shvonder, like a potter, “polishes” him. He writes his story on the blank sheet of Sharikov's life. And here are the first successes - P. Poligrafych is already reading Kautsky and Engels, with the learned air of an expert he talks about the current political situation, expresses his hypotheses and in the end proposes to “take everything and divide it.” But Sharikov does not justify Shvonder’s trust; he is already disappearing somewhere, stealing money from the general treasury. This is not what Shvonder dreamed of in his time.

It is impossible to ignore the timid and schoolboy-like shy Zina and the always grumbling Daria Petrovna. And a touching typist who is not enough for cinema.

Requires special attention and musical accompaniment film. The choral chants under Shvonder's direction alone are worth it. I really liked the poignant music that opens and closes the film.

Like a fine wine aged well, this film has stood the test of time. And we can say with confidence that this is... clean water classic. But the classics are not judged by numbers; they are worshiped. Mikhail Bulgakov, Vladimir Bortko I take off my hat and bow in a deep curtsey.

What is the book “Heart of a Dog” about? Bulgakov's ironic story tells about the failed experiment of Professor Preobrazhensky. What is it? In search of an answer to the question of how to “rejuvenate” humanity. Does the hero manage to find the answer he is looking for? No. But he comes to a result that has a higher level of significance for society than the intended experiment.

Kiev resident Bulgakov decided to become a singer of Moscow, its houses and streets. This is how the Moscow chronicles were born. The story was written in Prechistinsky Lanes at the request of the Nedra magazine, which was well acquainted with the writer’s work. The chronology of the writing of the work fits into three months of 1925.

Being a doctor, Mikhail Alexandrovich continued the dynasty of his family, describing in detail in the book an operation to “rejuvenate” a person. Moreover, the famous Moscow doctor N.M. Pokrovsky, the uncle of the author of the story, became the prototype of Professor Preobrazhensky.

The first reading of the typewritten material took place at a meeting of the Nikitsky Subbotniks, which immediately became known to the country’s leadership. In May 1926, a search was carried out at the Bulgakovs’ place, the result of which was not long in coming: the manuscript was confiscated. The writer’s plan to publish his work did not come true. The Soviet reader saw the book only in 1987.

Main problems

It was not for nothing that the book disturbed the vigilant guardians of thought. Bulgakov managed to gracefully and subtly, but still quite clearly reflect the pressing issues of the day - the challenges of new times. The problems in the story “Heart of a Dog” that the author touches on do not leave readers indifferent. The writer discusses the ethics of science, the moral responsibility of a scientist for his experiments, the possibility of the disastrous consequences of scientific adventurism and ignorance. A technical breakthrough could turn into a moral decline.

Problem scientific progress is acutely felt at the moment of his powerlessness before the transformation of the consciousness of a new person. The professor dealt with his body, but could not control his spirit, so Preobrazhensky had to give up his ambitions and correct his mistake - stop competing with the universe and return the dog’s heart to its owner. Artificial people were unable to justify their proud title and become full-fledged members of society. In addition, endless rejuvenation could jeopardize the very idea of ​​progress, because if new generations do not naturally replace the old ones, then the development of the world will stop.

Are attempts to change the country's mentality for the better completely fruitless? The Soviet government tried to eradicate the prejudices of past centuries - it is this process that is behind the metaphor of Sharikov’s creation. Here he is, the proletarian, the new Soviet citizen, his creation is possible. However, its creators face the problem of education: they cannot calm down their creation and teach it to be cultured, educated and moral with a full set of revolutionary consciousness, class hatred and blind faith in the correctness and infallibility of the party. Why? This is impossible: either a pipe or a jug.

Human defenselessness in the whirlwind of events associated with the construction of a socialist society, hatred of violence and hypocrisy, the absence and suppression of the remaining human dignity in all its manifestations - all these are slaps in the face with which the author branded his era, and all because it does not value individuality. Collectivization affected not only the village, but also souls. It became more and more difficult to remain an individual, because the public laid more and more rights on her. General equalization and equalization did not make people happier, but turned them into ranks of meaningless biorobots, where the tone is set by the most dull and mediocre of them. Rudeness and stupidity have become the norm in society, replacing revolutionary consciousness, and in the image of Sharikov we see a verdict on a new type Soviet man. From the rule of the Shvonders and others like them arise the problems of trampling on intelligence and the intelligentsia, the power of dark instincts in the life of an individual, total gross interference in the natural course of things...

Some questions posed in the work remain unanswered to this day.

What is the point of the book?

People have long been looking for answers to the questions: What is a person? What is its social purpose? What role does everyone play in creating an environment that would be “comfortable” for those living on planet Earth? What are the “paths” to this “comfortable community”? Is consensus possible between people of different social origin holding opposing views on certain issues of existence, occupying alternative “steps” in the intellectual and cultural development? And, of course, it is important to understand the simple truth that society develops thanks to unexpected discoveries in one or another branch of science. But can these “discoveries” always be called progressive? Bulgakov answers all these questions with his characteristic irony.

A person is a personality, and the development of personality implies independence, which is denied to a Soviet citizen. The social purpose of people is to do their job masterfully and not interfere with others. However, Bulgakov’s “conscious” heroes only chant slogans, but do not work to translate them into reality. Each of us, in the name of comfort, must be tolerant of dissent and not prevent people from practicing it. And again in the USSR everything is exactly the opposite: Preobrazhensky’s talent is forced to fight to defend his right to help patients, and his point of view is brazenly condemned and persecuted by some nonentities. They can live in peace if everyone minds their own business, but there is no equality in nature and there cannot be, because from birth we are all different from each other. It is impossible to maintain it artificially, since Shvonder cannot begin to operate brilliantly, and the professor cannot begin to play the balalaika. Imposed, unreal equality will only harm people and prevent them from adequately assessing their place in the world and occupying it with dignity.

Humanity needs discoveries, this is understandable. But there is no point in reinventing the wheel - trying to reproduce a person artificially, for example. If the natural method is still possible, why does it need an analogue, and even such a labor-intensive one? People face many other, more significant threats that require the full power of scientific intelligence to be addressed.

Main topics

The story is multifaceted. The author touches upon important topics, characteristic not only of the era of the beginning of the twentieth century, but also being “eternal”: good and evil, science and morality, morality, human destiny, attitude towards animals, building a new state, homeland, sincere human relations. I would especially like to highlight the topic of the creator’s responsibility for his creation. The struggle between ambition and integrity in the professor ended with the victory of humanism over pride. He accepted his mistakes, admitted defeat, and used the experience to correct his mistakes. This is exactly what every creator should do.

Also relevant in the work is the theme of individual freedom and the boundaries that society, like the state, has no right to cross. Bulgakov insists that a full-fledged person is one who has free will and beliefs. Only he can develop the idea of ​​socialism without caricatured forms and branches that disfigure the idea. The crowd is blind and always driven by primitive incentives. But the individual is capable of self-control and self-development; she must be given the will to work and live for the good of society, and not be turned against it by vain attempts at forced merger.

Satire and humor

The book opens with a monologue stray dog, addressed to “citizens” and giving accurate characteristics of Muscovites and the city itself. The population “through the eyes” of a dog is heterogeneous (which is true!): citizens – comrades – gentlemen. “Citizens” shop at the Tsentrokhoz cooperative, and “gentlemen” - at Okhotny Ryad. Why do rich people need a rotten horse? You can only get this “poison” in Mosselprom.

You can “recognize” a person by their eyes: who is “dry in the soul,” who is aggressive, and who is a “lack.” The last one is the nastiest. If you are afraid, you are the one who should be “plucked.” The most vile “scum” are the wipers: they sweep away “human cleaning”.

But the cook is an important object. Nutrition is a serious indicator of the state of society. So, the lordly cook of Count Tolstoy is a real person, and the cooks from the Council of Normal Nutrition do things that are indecent even for a dog. If I became chairman, then I actively steal. Ham, tangerines, wines - these are the “former brothers of Elisha.” The doorman is worse than cats. He lets a stray dog ​​pass, ingratiating himself with the professor.

The education system “presumes” Muscovites to be “educated” and “uneducated.” Why learn to read? “The meat smells a mile away.” But if you have any brains, you will learn to read and write without taking courses, like, for example, stray dog. The beginning of Sharikov’s education was an electrical store where a tramp “tasted” insulated wire.

The techniques of irony, humor and satire are often used in combination with tropes: similes, metaphors and personification. Special satirical device can be considered a way of initially presenting characters based on preliminary descriptive characteristics: “mysterious gentleman”, “rich eccentric” - Professor Preobrazhensky”; “handsome bitten”, “bitten” - Dr. Bormenthal; “someone”, “fruit” - visitor. Sharikov’s inability to communicate with residents and formulate his demands gives rise to humorous situations and questions.

If we talk about the state of the press, then through the mouth of Fyodor Fedorovich the writer discusses the case when, as a result of reading Soviet newspapers before lunch, patients lost weight. The professor’s assessment of the existing system through the “hanger” and “galosh rack” is interesting: until 1917, the front doors were not closed, since dirty shoes and outerwear were left downstairs. After March all the galoshes disappeared.

main idea

In his book M.A. Bulgakov warned that violence is a crime. All life on earth has the right to exist. This is an unwritten law of nature that must be followed to avoid the point of no return. It is necessary to maintain purity of soul and thoughts throughout your life, so as not to indulge internal aggression, not to splash it out. Therefore, the professor’s violent intervention in the natural course of things is condemned by the writer, and therefore leads to such monstrous consequences.

The Civil War hardened society, made it marginal, boorish and vulgar at its core. These are the fruits of violent interference in the life of the country. All of Russia in the 20s was rude and ignorant Sharikov, who did not at all strive for work. His goals are less lofty and more selfish. Bulgakov warned his contemporaries against such a development of events, ridiculing the vices of a new type of people and showing their inconsistency.

The main characters and their characteristics

1. The central figure of the book is Professor Preobrazhensky. Wears glasses with gold frames. Lives in a rich apartment consisting of seven rooms. He's lonely. He devotes all his time to work. Philip Philipovich conducts receptions at home, sometimes he operates here. Patients call him a “magician”, “sorcerer”. He “creates,” often accompanying his actions by singing excerpts from operas. Loves the theater. I am convinced that every person should strive to become a specialist in their field. The professor is an excellent speaker. His judgments are built into a clear logical chain. He says about himself that he is a man of observation and facts. While leading a discussion, he gets carried away, gets excited, and sometimes starts shouting if the problem touches him to the quick. His attitude towards the new system is manifested in his statements about terror, paralyzing nervous system people, about newspapers, about the devastation in the country. Treats animals with care: “I’m hungry, poor thing.” In relation to living beings, he preaches only affection and the impossibility of any violence. Instilling humane truths is the only way to influence all living things. An interesting detail in the interior of the professor’s apartment is a huge owl sitting on the wall, a symbol of wisdom, so necessary not only for a world-famous scientist, but for every person. At the end of the “experiment”, he finds the courage to admit that the experiment rejuvenation failed.
2. Young, handsome Ivan Arnoldovich Bormental, an assistant professor, who fell in love with him and took him in as a promising young man. Philip Philipovich hoped that the doctor would become a talented scientist in the future. During the operation, literally everything flashes in the hands of Ivan Arnoldovich. The doctor is not just scrupulous about his duties. The doctor's diary, as a strict medical report-observation of the patient's condition, reflects the whole gamut of his feelings and experiences about the result of the “experiment”.
3. Shvonder is the chairman of the house committee. All his actions resemble the convulsions of a puppet, which is controlled by someone invisible. The speech is confused, the same words are repeated, which sometimes causes a condescending smile in the readers. Shvonder doesn't even have a name. He sees his task as fulfilling the will of the new government, without thinking about whether it is good or bad. He is capable of taking any step to achieve his goal. Vengeful, he distorts the facts and slanderes many people.
4. Sharikov is a creature, something, the result of an “experiment”. A sloping and low forehead indicates the level of its development. Uses all swear words in his vocabulary. Trying to train him good manners, instilling a taste for beauty was not successful: he gets drunk, steals, mocks women, cynically insults people, strangles cats, “commits bestial acts.” As they say, nature rests on it, because you can’t go against it.

The main motives of Bulgakov's creativity

The versatility of Bulgakov's creativity is amazing. It’s as if you are traveling through the works, encountering familiar motifs. Love, greed, totalitarianism, morality are just parts of one whole, “wandering” from book to book and creating a single thread.

• “Notes on Cuffs” and “Heart of a Dog” convey a belief in human kindness. This motif is central in The Master and Margarita.
• In the story "Diaboliad" the fate of little man, an ordinary cog in the bureaucratic machine. This motif is characteristic of other works by the author. The system suppresses them in people best qualities, and the scary thing is that over time this becomes the norm for the people. In the novel “The Master and Margarita,” writers whose creations did not correspond to the ruling ideology were kept in a “psychiatric hospital.” Professor Preobrazhensky talked about his observations: when he gave patients the Pravda newspaper to read before lunch, they lost weight. It was impossible to find anything that would help broaden one’s horizons and allow one to look at events from opposite angles in the periodical press.
• Selfishness is what most people are motivated by negative characters Bulgakov's books. For example, Sharikov from “Heart of a Dog”. And how many troubles could have been avoided, provided that the “red ray” would have been used for its intended purpose, and not for selfish purposes (story “ Fatal eggs")? The basis of these works are experiments that go against nature. It is noteworthy that Bulgakov identified the experiment with the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union, which is dangerous for society as a whole.
• The main motive of the writer’s creativity is the motive home. The comfort in Philip Philipovich’s apartment (“a lamp under a silk lampshade”) resembles the atmosphere of the Turbins’ house. Home is family, homeland, Russia, about which the writer’s heart ached. With all his creativity, he wished well-being and prosperity for his homeland.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

The literary work represents the final part of a cycle of satirical stories by Bulgakov from the 1920s. The author began writing the story in January 1925, and finished the work in March. And yet, the main content of the masterpiece became available to connoisseurs of literature thanks to the fact that the story was copied by hand and penetrated the masses. In the Soviet Union, the story “Heart of a Dog” was first published in 1987. Plot outline The story is the story of Professor Preobrazhensky's failed attempt to turn a rootless mongrel into a human.

Characteristics of the heroes of “Heart of a Dog”

Main characters

Minor characters

The author's description of two doctors is an autobiographical touch, where the writer sees himself and fellow doctors. The entire list of characters corresponds to the spirit of the times. The characters in the story illustrate the paradoxical nature of what is happening around them.

Work test

, Vladimir Tolokonnikov, Boris Plotnikov And Roman Kartsev starring, film adaptation of the story of the same name Mikhail Bulgakov.

The plot of the film Heart of a Dog

Events of the film dog's heart"takes place in Moscow in the mid-1920s.

Brilliant neurosurgeon professor Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky(Evgeniy Evstigneev) has been researching the possibilities of human rejuvenation for many years, and has successfully applied the results of his experiments in practice.

One winter, the professor picked up a stray mongrel on the street in order to carry out a scientific experiment he had long planned to transplant the human pituitary gland and seminal glands into the dog in order to study their effect on the body.

On the same day that a dog named Ball, To Preobrazhensky guests arrived - new house manager Shvonder(Roman Kartsev) with his assistants. The purpose of their visit was to “densify” the professor by placing other residents in several rooms of his apartment. Nothing came of this venture, because Philip Philipovich turned for help to one of his patients - a high-ranking Soviet official. Leaving with nothing Shvonder harbored a grudge against the obstinate tenant for his failure.

After some time, the professor, with the help of his assistant, a young talented doctor Ivan Arnoldovich Bormental(Boris Plotnikov) performed the long-awaited operation, the results of which exceeded the wildest expectations. The dog began to turn into a man who gradually became aware of himself new personality. Unfortunately, this personality inherited the character traits and habits of the organ donor for transplantation - a rowdy and alcoholic Klima Chugunkina, killed in a pub by his drinking buddies.

Very soon the professor, seeing what kind of monster he had brought to life, turned sweetest dog into a boor, a slacker and a drunkard Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov(Vladimir Tolokonnikov) - this is the name the former chose for himself Ball- bitterly regretted the experiment he carried out.

The history of the film Heart of a Dog

Movie dog's heart was first shown on Central Television Soviet Union November 19, 1988.

The story on which the film was based was written Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov in 1925, but since the book was released in the Soviet Union due to its pronounced satirical orientation, was impossible; it had been distributed in samizdat since the 30s. The story was first published abroad in 1968, and in our country it was published only during perestroika.

Publication " Heart of a Dog"took place in the June issue of the magazine" Banner"for 1987, and already in November next year The television version of the story premiered.

Vladimir Bortko said that the director pushed him into the idea of ​​adapting Bulgakov’s work Sergey Mikaelyan, who then headed the television department" Lenfilm":

“Having met me in the studio corridor that time, Mikaelyan handed out the magazine. I came home, started reading, got to the professor’s monologue and realized that I was going to film and I even knew how. It should be a black and white movie..."

For the right to play a professor Preobrazhensky such venerable actors as Leonid Bronevoy , Mikhail Ulyanov , Yuri Yakovlev , Vladislav Strzhelchik, but won Evgeniy Evstigneev. Although Evgeny Alexandrovich I didn't read the story before working on the painting" dog's heart", he was so natural in the role Philip Philipovich that this work became one of the best in his film career.

Son of an actor, famous cameraman, director and producer Denis Evstigneev recalled:

“This film appeared in my father’s life at the right time and literally saved him. Dad was going through a difficult period when Moscow Art Theater he was sent into retirement. It's hard to accept a job in " Heart of a Dog“, then he simply lived by it. I don’t know what happened on the set, but he constantly talked about his role, played something, showed some scenes... At that moment, the picture became a support for him.”

Of the eight candidates for the role Sharikova, among whom was Nikolay Karachentsov , Vladimir Bortko chose the actor of the Alma-Ata Russian Drama Theater Vladimir Tolokonnikov. At auditions Tolokonnikov played the dinner scene when Sharikov pronounces his later famous phrase: “I wish that’s all!” The actor made a toast and drank so convincingly that the director no longer had any doubts about his candidacy for the role. Poligraf Poligrafovich:

« Volodya killed me the moment I took a sip of vodka. He chuckled so convincingly, his Adam’s apple twitched so predatorily that I approved him without hesitation.”

For the role Shvondera together with Roman Kartsev famous comedian auditioned Semyon Farada .

To these and other wonderful actors who starred in both major and episodic roles - Nina Ruslanova , Boris Plotnikov, Olga Melikhova, Angelica Nevolina , Sergei Filippov , Valentina Kovel and others - managed to embody the images of the characters in the story so vividly on the screen that the film is still rightfully considered the best adaptation Bulgakov's prose. The director's talent certainly contributed to this success. Vladimir Bortko, and high professionalism of the operator Yuri Shaigardanova, and the skill of the set designers, costume designers and make-up artists who worked on the film, and the musical numbers created by the composer Vladimir Dashkevich and poet Julius Kim.

Movie dog's heart in 1989 he was awarded the prize " Golden screen"at the International Film Festival in Warsaw (Poland) and the Grand Prix at International festivals television films in Dushanbe (USSR) and Perugia (Italy). In 1990, the director of the film Vladimir Bortko And Evgeniy Evstigneev, who played the role of the professor Preobrazhensky, became laureates State Prize of the RSFSR named after the Vasiliev brothers.

The filming took place in Leningrad, and the “role” of the streets of Moscow, where the action of the film takes place, was successfully “played” by the streets of the northern capital. Prechistenka, where the fateful incident took place Sharika his meeting with the professor became Borovaya Street, Obukhov Lane, where the house in which he lived is located Preobrazhensky, filmed on Mokhovaya, also filming took place on Preobrazhenskaya Square, on Ryleeva Street, in Degtyarny Lane and in other places in the city on the Neva.

Scenes in the cinematography were filmed in a cinema" Banner", while making the actors-spectators laugh in the frame, a comedy was shown on the screen Yuri Mamin "Neptune Festival".

Interesting facts about the film Heart of a Dog

First " dog's heart"was filmed by Italian and German filmmakers in 1976. In Italian the film is called" Cuore di cane" ("dog's heart"), the German version of the name is " Warum bellt Herr Bobikow?" – translated as " Why is Mr. Bobikov barking?" (surname " Sharikov"the Germans changed it to" Bobikov"). The picture was staged Alberto Lattuada(Alberto Lattuada), the role of the professor Preobrazhensky performed Max von Sydow(Max von Sydow).
- The film contains characters and scenes from other works of Bulgakov. Professor Persikov, which Preobrazhensky invited me to take a look Sharika- hero of the story " Fatal eggs"and the circus soothsayer is a character in the story" Madmazel Jeanne"The story of a janitor who read two volumes of a dictionary Brockhaus And Efron- quote from the story " Gemstone life", an episode with the "stars" of twin sisters Clara And Roses taken from the feuilleton" Golden correspondence of Ferapont Ferapontovich Kaportsev"and the scene with the professor's neighbors engaged in table-turning is from the story" Seance".
- Vladimir Bortko starred in the film in cameo role onlookers in Obukhov Lane, refuting rumors about Martians.
- Role Sharika performed by a mongrel named Karay, which was chosen from 20 applicants for the role. The dog for whom the film Bortko became a film debut, turned out to be talented actor and subsequently starred in the films " Resit", "Rock and roll for the princess", "Forever 19 years old" And " Wedding March".

Film crew of the film Heart of a Dog

Director of the film Heart of a Dog: Vladimir Bortko
Scriptwriters for the film Heart of a Dog: Natalia Bortko, Mikhail Bulgakov (story)
Cast: Vladimir Tolokonnikov, Evgeny Evstigneev, Boris Plotnikov, Roman Kartsev, Nina Ruslanova, Olga Melikhova, Alexey Mironov, Anzhelika Nevolina, Natalya Fomenko, Ivan Ganzha and others
Operator: Yuri Shaigardanov
Composer: Vladimir Dashkevich

Premiere date of the film Heart of a Dog: November 19, 1988
Channel of the premiere of the film Heart of a Dog: Central Television USSR