It's just that the original story wasn't in Russia,it's like making a version of Aladdin with the story set in Greece or a version of Beauty and the Beast set in Italy.
The original story for Aladdin
(as it was written for Arabian Nights/One Thousand and One Nights
) is set in China, yet a lot of people really enjoy the Disney version set in the Middle-East-Inspired Agrabah.
And some of Shakespeare plays are re-adapted for different locales/time periods. The 1999 film version of A Midsummer Night's Dream
takes place in 19th century England rather than ancient Athens. She's the Man
is a horrible modern re-telling of Twelfth Night
. And Julie Taymor's Titus
is adapted from Titus Andronicus
and is unique in that it constantly jumps to various times and places, while maintaining the same characters.
The new Disney Fairies franchise calls male fairies sparrow men which I think is dumb and they are too afraid of calling boys fairies and letting them like fairies or princesses.
Whoa, seriously? Sparrow Men
? Talk about a huge step backwards in gender equality...
The princess in the Fairy Tale Theater version is wonderful.
It's hard to go wrong when you've got Bernadette Peters.
Still,it didn't happend in the original story.
That's the beauty of adaptations
. They have the original story to work off of, but they don't need
to follow it so closely, and they can add a bit of their own material as well. For example, compare these well-known versions of Beauty and the Beast
-The 1946 Jean Cocteau film (La Belle et la Bête
-The 1984 Faerie Tale Theatre version (with Susan Sarandon)
-The 1987-1990 CBS series
-The 1987 Cannon Group version
-The 1991 Disney Animated Classic
Each one takes the basic tale and adapts it to what the filmmakers envisioned, adding their own touches as well. Should we argue that the 1991 Disney version is bad because it didn't follow the Cocteau version? Will there be endless debates that the CBS series shouldn't even be considered an adaptation since it's so far gone from the original tale?
I guess it's like asking if a female fish should have a different name, and like you call a female fish a fish you need to call a male fairy a fairy.
I do this when it comes to "actor" and "actress". The process of acting is still acting whether someone's a man or a woman, so I use "actor" to cover both, regardless if I'm saying "Dustin Hoffman is an awesome actor" or "I prefer Miley Cyrus's talents as an actor rather than as a singer"