CLASSICS

Success requires the alignment of several favourable elements, but it all starts with the script and the director’s deep understanding of the opportunities afforded by the material.

The Original Novel And Place In Estonian History

The Misadventures of the New Satan is the last novel by Anton Hansen Tammsaare, the greatest classic of Estonian literature. It was written in the summer of 1939, just before the outbreak of World War II when Europe trembled in fear of war and different ideologies clashed – capitalism against communism and national socialism. The work is considered to be the author’s most multi-layered novel as it contains political, folkloric, theological and intertextual layers,2 which become the basis for an exciting and original film.

The

film, which does justice

to the combination of satirical symbols and deeper meaning of the original work, premiered on June 15, 1964 and the leading film critic of the time, Valdeko Tobro, was full of praise: “Müür and Kromanov’s The Misadventures of the New Satan is the best Estonian film ever made. It lays the groundwork for the screen adaptations of not only Tammsaare’s work but also our other literary classics.”3 It is a film that is still written about 55 years after its premiere: “The Misadventures of the New Satan is the first total hit of Soviet Estonian film art and still often called one of the best Estonian films of all time.”4 But how was such an exceptional and original film even made?

The Shooting And The Extensive Production

In 1955, Estonian Jüri Müür went to Moscow to study feature film di- recting at the Gerasimov Institute of Cinematography (VGIK) (where his course instructor was Aleksandr Dovzhenko). Only a couple years later, he was already infected with the Satan bug and got VGIK screenwriting student Gennadi Koleda involved to thoroughly work through the material and write many versions of the script. Müür had a definite plan to make his graduate film a full-length feature, and that it had to be The Misadventures of the New Satan (the script’s working title at the time was Earthbound). “Dovzhenko told us that you have to choose your first script like you choose your bride. I’ve also been eyeing my bride for the last four years,” said Jüri Müür at the VGIK Study Council where they were discussing producing the script together with Koleda on March 24, 1960.5

Unfortunately, the film was not given the green light at the time and Müür received his diploma for directing the film Men from the Fisherman’s Village (1961), which is also an important work in Estonian film history, as it is the first full-length feature film in So -

Estonian theatre legend Ants Eskola, who portrayed Clever Ants, a role worthy of his talents7 and Heino Mandri and Kaarel Karm’s performances were even named the best supporting roles in Estonian cinema.8

The film’s production designer Rein Raamat remembers the shoot: “Grigori Kromanov was a director who was masterful in his work with actors. His background was in acting so he understood scenes and knew how to play them out through the performances. Kromanov always had a lot of rehearsals with the actors to get the characters working precisely. He also worked through the contrasts in the characters of the Satan and his wife and the Satan and Clever Ants. Once Kromanov had finished the prep work with the actors, Jüri Müür arrived on set and took over. Müür determined the technical di- viet Estonia made with a creative crew composed entirely of Estonians. During the shooting period for the film, he met Grigori Kromanov, who was working as the second director whose job was to direct the actors. For a debut film, Men from the Fisherman’s Village was quite an achievement and, more importantly, it opened the door for Müür to start work on his passion project.

7 Õie Orav. Tallinnfilm I. Mängufilmid 1947-1976. Eesti Entsüklopeediakirjastus, 2003, lk 312.

8 Valdeko Tobro. “Alus on rajatud –mõttemõlgutusi esimese Tammsaarefilmi puhul”. Edasi, 28.06.1964.

With The Misadventures of the New Satan, Müür and Kromanov were equals as director in the film hierarchy even though they still had quite different roles to play, which probably only benefited the film. Kromanov continued to focus on working with the actors, deliberately staging the dialogue scenes in an uncharacteristically static manner similar to other well-known directors of the same era like Ingmar Bergman or Luchino Visconti.6 The result finally gave