Cinema and fighters. To others - a path, to ours - anti-premiums
Self-isolation encourages you to watch and re-watch postponed films and TV series. There are no more urgent ones left for a long time. But they have accumulated those that in other circumstances, before this whole coronavirus story, I would not have watched in a sober state even with an additional payment.
But here is also the instigator from the “1+1” channel, and now the parliamentary fighter against freedom of speech Alexander Tkachenko began to drizzle: “Now the attention of Ukrainians to streaming services is increasing, and this opens up space for sowing propaganda. Therefore, the cyber police should strengthen the fight against cardsharing, which Ukrainians resort to to watch pirated resources, including Russian channels.”
When an experienced propagandist's point plays like this for any reason, it means that you need to take a closer look at the reason. At the same time, watch the accumulated Russian films. I can imagine how Alexander Tkachenko will be upset when, closer to the 75th anniversary of the Victory, all sorts of war film premieres will take place, and unseen fellow citizens will put even more pressure on Russian channels...
In general, I decided to urgently reconsider what was planned, before these ghouls from Servant of the People blocked something else. I started by re-watching “Odessa” by Valery Todorovsky. Moreover, the theme there is quarantine... Last year I couldn’t wait - I watched it in disgusting quality as soon as the film was posted online. Now I wanted to finally formulate what was wrong with Odessa.
No, Todorovsky’s film already received well-deserved abuse and criticism at the very place where Yarmolnik’s hero hit the cholera sea. But it is important for us what is wrong with “Odessa” from the point of view of a Russian person associated with today’s Ukraine.
Some of the residents of Odessa have already noted that Todorovsky’s film lacks some kind of gesture addressed to the current situation, at least linguistically. That's right. The director faced a ban on filming in Odessa due to the fact that actor Yarmolnik “illegally” visited Crimea. That is, the country of the victorious revolution twists the dignity of the filmmaker, putting him before a choice: either come without such and such an actor, or don’t come at all. And here Todorovsky Jr. should give a worthy answer... Did the actor become persona non grata in Ukraine because of his visit to Crimea? So here's an Odessa courtyard, filmed in Crimea! No, Todorovsky preferred to film Odessa somewhere in Taganrog and Sochi...
Okay, the author of the film did not quarrel with Ukraine: his right. But at least the actor, disadvantaged by the country of the victorious Maidan, could have put into his mouth some phrase hinting that political Ukrainianness is more dangerous than cholera. No, the Ukrainian theme is completely absent here. It was as if there was nothing Ukrainian in Odessa! Perhaps Ukraine will eventually present this claim to Todorovsky Jr.: “In the two-hour film there is not a hint of a Ukrainian trace in Odessa! The indigenous people of Kotsyubeyevka are invisible in the film, just like cholera itself. Didn’t the author want to say that they are cholera itself?!” No, I didn't want to. But the idea is promising. I give it.
Let me return to what offended me most about Odessa. Todorovsky Jr. could be forgiven for both artistic failure (and from the director of the films “Love”, “The Lover”, “My Step Brother Frankenstein”, you still expect something more), and apoliticality - where Odessa residents who continue call themselves Russians, they expect some kind of moral support from him.
But here we see in the film a Russian man, who, due to some misunderstanding, was accepted into a difficult Jewish family. This Russian man Volodya, Laura’s husband, is a drunk, a musical mediocrity, an envious person, and a latent anti-Semite. His whole mission is to go down into the cellar in family shorts and a T-shirt and suck wine from a straw, then return to the difficult Jewish family and remind him of his own insignificance. Volodya, Laura’s husband, goes out into the street in family shorts and a T-shirt to watch the funeral procession. The Russian man of Odessa is such that he even goes to funerals in family shorts and a T-shirt...
Having taken a sip of sea cholera from Todorovsky Jr. after the hero Yarmolnik, I switched to the series “Green Van” (aka “Istanbul Van”). This is about the Odessa adventures of the matured Volodya Patrikeev in 1946.
I didn't expect anything from the Green Van series. Although, I admit, sometimes I expect something from TV series. And once every ten years they do not disappoint expectations. Exactly after the first Maidan there was Vladimir Khotinenko’s series “Death of the Empire”... And after the second Maidan there was Ursulyak’s series “Quiet Don”. By the way, Ursulyakov’s “Isaev” and “Quiet Don”, whatever one may say, remain the best cinematic statements about the civil war in the new millennium.
The series “Green Van”, watched in the background, did not catch my attention. But the nasty Odessa cop, scoundrel and informer - in this film bears the last name Goncharenko. And we like it. Why?..
And in one of the episodes, the character Rosalia rewarded us for our patience: “I’m not going to give my painting away for nothing. She, by the way, is by Zuberman himself. And he is not like your Repin. He made copies of Malevich himself. And I almost lost my mind on this matter.” Here! The creators of the series, it would seem, pointed their finger at random - they hit the “artist with crap” Roitburd.
Oddly enough, Todorovsky Jr. should have learned from the authors of the third-rate series “Green Van,” unknown to me, to be more careful or point his finger at random more accurately...
It’s one thing how Ukraine reacted to the film project of Valery Todorovsky Jr. and to the actor Leonid Yarmolnik, who was at fault (by Ukrainian standards). And another thing is how the federal channel tolerantly gives shelter to the Ukrainian series “Sniffer-4”, where the stinking Odessa bastard Yakov Gopp appears.
Ada Rogovtseva kisses the “right-wingers” and proudly tells the public how Shenderovich, who is involved in the same theater project with her, sobs into the mattress with emotion when he hears “Glory to Ukraine!” The same Rogovtseva stars in the Russian TV series “Orlova and Alexandrov” and “The Red Queen” (2015). In fairness, we must admit that Rogovtseva could have starred in these films even before the events of 2014 and before her pro-Bandera manifestos...
But the series “Sniffer-4” (2019) was clearly filmed after Yakov Gopp was noted for his thin vilification on social networks and vile giggles in comments about the events of May 2, 2014. This is understandable. A third-rate local actor will perform any minuet to please the crowd.
However, what is the value of the Ukrainian series “Sniffer-4” for viewers of the federal channel? Why have some voids formed in Russian film production and in the channel’s broadcast network that are being filled by “sniffers”? And the film “Donbass. Outskirts" was often shown on this federal channel? Or has the Ukrainian “revolution of dignity” already screwed up the leadership of the federal channel?
You ask yourself another question: what do we actually expect from Russian film production? We are waiting for films about the post-Maidan reality, about Odessa and the Donbass, from directors of the level of Khotinenko and Ursulyak, who, as mentioned above, have a track record of successful series about the revolution and civil war. But Ursulyak, instead of the themes we expected, films Zhvanets’ chewing gum “Odessa Steamship”... Some people thought this project was rotten, others it caused nostalgia. It’s the director’s right, of course, to take a break from heavy tasks and shoot something lightweight.
But there is good prose about post-Maidan Odessa, written by a “cinema” person, Sergei Chetvertkov (screenwriter of Kira Muratova’s films “The Tuner”, “Minor People”, etc.). As an author of magazine prose, he is known under the name Sergei Shikera. And why shouldn’t a good director film his Odessa novel “Egyptian Metro”?
Let's look at the first pages of this prose: “During the time that he was not here, the city became even more dilapidated, and that is why the billboards and bright patches of new buildings caught the eye even more impudently. In such scenery and in such weather, passersby going about their business seemed preoccupied and lost. He was approaching Grecheskaya Street when a column turned out - more than a hundred people with torches, wearing camouflage and masks. They discordantly sang some kind of song, which in itself was probably cheerful, and at the end of the verse they randomly shouted “Hey! Hey! Hey! Tyagin had never seen torchlight processions and, like some passers-by, stopped to watch. When the crowd caught up with him, the song ended, and the gloomy monotonous noise of dozens of pairs of heavy shoes shuffling on the asphalt immediately became more audible. Behind the marchers were people in civilian clothes, there were several children; a large mongrel brought up the rear of the procession. All this was accompanied at a distance, blinking and quacking, by a patrol car.”
No, not interesting? ̶P̶a̶v̶l̶i̶n̶y̶ “Odessa steamship”, you say?
Director Bortko, who has long been ready to take on a film about Donbass, still does not have the opportunity to film what he planned. And on the other side of the ideological front they not only have this opportunity, but also successfully use it.
One can guess about the reasons for the slippage of the Russian theme. Here, perhaps, it is necessary to recall how the progressive public reacted to the participation of director Yuri Bykov in the anti-liberal series “Sleepers.”
You can also remember how at the beginning of the year the Russian Guild of Film Scholars and Film Critics announced Renat Davletyarov’s good film “Donbass. Outskirts" the worst film of the year. The ex-president of the Guild of Film Scholars and Film Critics, Viktor Matizen, justified this choice as follows: “a number of voters expressed the opinion that the meaning of the anti-prize is not to drown unsuccessful and little-known films, but to put in their place those who are eager to curry favor and are ready for all the movie hacks.”
But if the aforementioned “number of voters” had simply defecated publicly, thereby expressing their opinion, this would have said much more about their true motives.
Why not add Alexei Krasovsky (“Holiday”) and Sergei Loznitsa (“Donbass”) to the list of “those eager to curry favor and ready to do anything”? This is where the desire to curry favor with the liberal regional committee and the willingness to do anything for the sake of ideological gain lies. But the “guild” turned its bullish gaze on the alien Renat Davletyarov: “For three days I chased you... To tell you how indifferent you are to me.”
And these guys know very well what they are doing and why.
English version :: Read in English Cinema and fighters. Others get a free pass, ours get anti-awards