
Another historical film - this time "Admiral" about the fate and love of Alexander Kolchak and Anna Timireva - as usual, causes conflicting assessments. The opinion of the audience, many of whom are delighted with the love story in the settings of the First World War and the Civil War, contrasts with the claims of experts who pay attention to numerous “blunders”. However, now, it seems, not a single film that claims to show historical events “as they really were” can do without the latter. In fact, we are talking about quasi-historical fairy tales, which are watched with pleasure by the viewer who can fall asleep on the twentieth page of the most accurate and scientifically verified monograph.
In this case, there are two types of “blunders”. The first could easily have been avoided with minimal respect for the facts. For example, in one of the “naval” scenes, Kolchak is introduced as a rear admiral and commander of the battleship “Slava” at the same time. However, an officer with the rank of admiral could not command the ship (this is, at most, a position for a captain of the 1st rank), and Kolchak never commanded the Slava. It would be possible to replace “Slava” with a mine division, and the issue would be removed. It is also unclear whether it was necessary to “kill” Rear Admiral Nikolai Podgursky, who died only in 1918, becoming a victim not of mutinous sailors, but of the Spanish flu epidemic. Moreover, in March 17th, many officers, well known to both Timirev and Kolchak, died in the Baltic.

The second type of “blunders” is planned. The real love story of Kolchak and Timireva was significantly different from its cinematic version. There was no months-long separation between the Supreme Ruler and the humble nurse during the civil war. There was, of course, a Supreme Ruler, but there was no nurse - Timireva was officially listed as a translator in the press department in the management of the affairs of the Council of Ministers and the Supreme Ruler, that is, under Kolchak. There was no dramatic meeting at the station in December 19th, at the end of Kolchak’s rule - there was de facto family life in Omsk, happy in its own way, but hardly suitable for showing on a wide screen. It is clear that the filmmakers knew about this, but deliberately replaced the prose of life with a beautiful fairy tale with a sad ending.
Another feature of modern Russian cinema is the secondary nature of many directorial decisions. Only “Admiral” suffers from this, the opening scenes of which are reminiscent of the Oscar-winning “Titanic”. Let's remember the equally famous film "The Ninth Company" - and the obvious parallels with Kubrick's classic film "Full Metal Jacket". In popular culture, such borrowings are possible and even useful, but world-class works of art are not created this way. However, Russian cinema as a producer of blockbusters has previously been uncompetitive at the global level, and the current financial crisis may further reduce its ambitions. This does not mean that he has no prospects at all. Firstly, domestic moviegoers perceive this level of quality. Secondly, there is a segment in cinema that is able to withstand competition with the world’s best examples - this is auteur non-mass cinema, not burdened by high “oil” budgets.

But let's return to the film, many of whose shortcomings are objectively related to its scale. It is very difficult to fit the life of Kolchak, a bright and versatile man, into the framework of an hour and a half action; it takes a whole series to do that. Therefore, there are no polar expeditions, no Port Arthur, no serious passion for oriental teachings and Asian history. Everything without which it is impossible to understand not only the personality of the Supreme Ruler, but also to answer the question of why the young woman left her husband (a completely worthy and brave officer, Knight of St. George) and went to his much more spectacular colleague, Kolchak-Polyarny, as unofficially called the future Supreme Ruler. In the film there is no Kolchak for whose sake it was possible to break established rules and challenge the opinion of society. He has a good, strong-willed naval officer for whom such sacrifices are not made.
Does all of the above mean that we are talking about an absolutely “passable” film that profanes history? It seems not. The film is “stretched out” by Kappel’s scenes, the dramatic Ice March, the heroic and insane attack of the Whites on the positions of the Red Army, shown much more truthfully than the classic plot from the film “Chapaev” (where the authors used the image of the “colored regiments” of Denikin’s army, which are not found in the East of Russia was). These are stark, completely unsentimental, memorable scenes.

Perhaps watching this film will awaken interest in such extraordinary figures as Kappel, Woitsekhovsky and their comrades, who did everything possible and impossible to save not only the Supreme Ruler, but also the honor of the white movement, disgraced by the crimes of the unbridled ataman Semyonov, Kalmykov and other anti-heroes . The first task could not be solved (frightened Bolsheviks shot Kolchak when Voitsekhovsky’s troops had already broken through to the approaches to Irkutsk), the second was completely completed.
In conclusion, a small personal note. For the author of these lines, a pleasant surprise was the image of Kolchak’s Prime Minister Viktor Pepelyaev, who is often portrayed as a caricature, a pathetic coward (especially compared to Kolchak, whose courage his enemies could not deny). The film makes full use of the testimony of contemporaries, who present Pepelyaev as an ordinary person who finds himself in a tragic situation. A little pretentious, like other liberal politicians of his time, absolutely unheroic, religious (his dying prayers, understandable to an Orthodox person, could be mistaken by his enemies for weakness). And able to die with dignity, saying goodbye to his admiral before death.
The author is vice-president of the Center for Political Technologies
Stills from the film from the site www.admiralfilm.ru