The battle of two examinations

During the last “straight line”, Vladimir Putin to the question of actor Sergei Bezrukov about the scandal around the film by Alexei Matilda, who has been inflated by deputy Natalya Poklonskaya for almost a year, answered almost directly: “You said that they are trying to ban. No one is trying to ban. She has a position, she is trying to protect this position, turns to various authorities, but there are no decisions on this subject, as you know, there are no forbidden. ” In a language that is understandable to any official, this is a signal - the teacher cannot be touched, nothing threatens the film. Evidence of this is the reaction of Nikita Mikhalkov, the master read the signals of the authorities. A few days after the “Direct Line”, he called attempts to ban the film “madness”, and Poklonskaya also responded about Natalya Poklonskaya.

The film was promised to show the deputies in order to remove all questions, but Poklonskaya refused to watch Matilda. She is a pupil of another political culture, does not know how to deal with signals and continues her crusade. In the fresh (dated June 23) interview with the “Agency of Federal Information”, which specializes mainly in the news from self -proclaimed LPR and the DPR, Poklonskaya once again stated that the ban of the film was required by “40 thousand Christians and Muslims” and that it was excommunicated in some monasteries (although she did not tell who and why it arranges through the monasteries of the monasteries not yet a finished film). In addition, at the end of June, the book “Matilda’s False”, prepared, according to the abstract, by order of the deputy Natalia Poklonskaya, appeared in the bookstores of Yekaterinburg.

The creators of the film ordered an independent examination designed to answer the question: are there any signs of "insulting the feelings of believers." The text of an expert opinion prepared by specialists of St. Petersburg State University is at the disposal of The New Times.

Protection of the director

The authors of the examination ordered by the creative and production association “Rock” by Alexei Teacher, unlike all the critics of “Matilda”, saw the film and reacted quite critically to him, in particular-noted several specific episodes in which Matilda authors dispersed with historical reality. Without documentary accuracy in the film, an episode of acquaintance of the heir to the Russian throne with the ballerina, an episode of the collapse of the tsarist train in the sides on October 17, 1888, “complemented by the facts of artistic reality”, the episodes associated with the coronation of Nicholas II, was displayed. However, despite the liberties of the directorial interpretations, no attempts on the feelings of believers are able to find here.

But almost on the main point of Poklonskaya’s accusations, which repeatedly insisted that the plot of the film is entirely fictitious, historians from the Center for Expertise of St. Petersburg State University cause an irresistible blow: “The close relations between Nikolai Romanov and Matilda Kshesinskaya are established by a reliable historical fact. This, in particular, writes M. Kshesinskaya in his memoirs. " Quotes from the diaries of Nikolai himself are also given: “According to the frank diaries of Nicholas II, this connection was clearly of the love aspect. The recording “at 12 o’clock went to MK, who had up to 4 hours at 12 o’clock. They chatted well, laughed and tinker. ”

“According to the frank diaries of Nicholas II, this connection was clearly a love aspect. The recording “at 12 o’clock went to MK, who had up to 4 hours at 12 o’clock. They chatted well, laughed and tinker "

It is emphasized that there are no attempts to belittle the image of Empress Alexandra Fedorovna (before marriage - Princess Alice Hesse) in Matilda there is: "Alice Hesse is shown in the film as a smart woman who is confident in his abilities and charm." The same applies to the future emperor: “In the film, the character Nicholas II is shown on both sides, from one as a young man who is passionate about the Mariinsky Theater by Matilda Kshesinskaya, on the other, as the heir to the Russian throne who understands his debt to the country (“ Like the heir, I should always be ready ”).

Also, experts in detail, according to points, consider possible accusations that the creators of the film can be brought from the point of view of the “law on protecting the feelings of believers”, and claim: “We can conclude that there are no signs of insulting, humiliating characteristics in the presented materials in relation to any group. The materials did not reveal signs of the justification of the need for a hated, hostile attitude towards someone, no signs of an appeal or justification of the need to commit unlawful actions against anyone. ”

The text of the examination ends with a characteristic reservation: “The film cannot be characterized as historical or biographical, since it contains the mentioned discrepancies between the facts of artistic reality and historical facts. In our opinion, an indication that the film is not a direct biographical or historical one can be additionally contained in the titers of the film. ” This, of course, is an invitation of opponents to dialogue, an attempt to find a compromise.

The attack of the deputy

But Poklonskaya is not ready for any compromises. She also ordered the examination of the film (she was engaged in proven experts, already attracted earlier to identify thoughts). Specialists who worked for Poklonskaya - Viktor Slobodchikov, Igor Pinkin, Vsevolod Troitsky, Alexander Evdokimov (psychologist, lawyer, literary critic and specialist in the disposal of lubricants, respectively) - did not see the film and dealt only with the script and trailers.

Natalya Poklonskaya published the results of their work back in April. The document was immediately pulled out in quotes. Here are some fragments: “For explanation of the negative individual psychological and socio-psychological choice of the actor with a porn unit for the role of Nicholas II, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church and religiously revered by believers of the Russian Orthodox Church, we give an example of approximately the same psychological impact: an invitation (in a certain hypothetical film) to play the role of any of the creators of the film or his relative (for example, a father) of some famous porn actor who also starred in an extremely insulting for the Judaists and exciting hatred for the film. ” In Matilda, the role of Nikolai is played by Lars Idinger, who starred with Peter Greenai in the film Goltsius and Pelicani Company. For some reason, experts from Poklonskaya considered the classic of world cinema pornographic.

Here's also: “The use by the creators of the film“ Matilda ”(identified in it and described above) is aimed at the formation of quite definite, extremely offensive to the Orthodox Christians - believers of the Russian Orthodox Church, mockingly devalued (lithotized) and penalizing and dysforically denigigory images of the canonized Russian Orthodox Church as saints (royal Passioner) Nicholas II (Romanova) and his spouse Fedorovna. ”

“The photographs known to her are clearly visible: the protruding crooked teeth, an elongated face shape extended forward, making it outwardly similar to a mouse or rat, an absurd figure”

And, perhaps, the most famous passage: “It enhances the negative image of the character“ Nicholas II ”to attribute him a choice in favor of a disgusting, completely ugly (from the point of view of classical European and, in particular, Russian ideas about female beauty) in appearance and other physical data of the Kshesinskaya matilda (the shocking crooked teeth, extended by the shape of the face, making it that makes it made of the face that makes it that makes it that makes it a form Outwardly, similar to a mouse or rat, an awkward figure). ”

Also contrary to well -known facts, backed up by abundant evidence of contemporaries, as well as the lovers themselves - Nikolai and Matilda, experts prove that there was never any novel between the heir and ballerina at all.

The word of the sovereign

The clash of two examinations could serve as a reason for a serious public discussion. An attempt (alas, no longer the first) put into practice the “Law on the Protection of the Feelings of Believers” (that is, Article 148 of the Criminal Code) allows you to recall once again that it most likely contradicts Article 29 of the Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech and thought and prohibits censorship. But there will be no discussion - an intelligent party will be satisfied that thanks to the intervention of the first person, by one of his word, the film will be released. Poklonskaya will receive the opportunity to once again state his non -trivial views on the history, religion and the limits of creative freedom in the sympathetic business of the cultivation of publications.

However, one should not forget about the lower movement of those who seriously perceived the propaganda of recent years, endless discussions about our special path, spiritual scrapings and rotting the West. It is not without reason that at the beginning of the year the general public is not very well -known, but in the circles of radical Orthodox Christians a rather popular leader of the Christian State - Holy Rus', Alexander Kalinin, sent a letter of warning to a thousand cinemas: a cinema that risked showing Matilda, can burn out.