The singularity of Teriberka

In the wide Russian rental, Zvyagintsevsky “Leviathan” was released on February 5, but managed to do the noise long before that. “Thank you” I must say no long and purely formal St. Petersburg premiere for the Oscar nomination and not even leaked to the Internet copies with English subtitles, but simply to the fact that the film fell into a specific electrified atmosphere of “Russian Spring” as an absolutely necessary element of hatred and adoration, lined up in one row with the subjected herring of musicians dismissed And restored professors, emigrating economists, opposition politicians under house arrest, simple activists-under arresting real, pressed business, chaos of new laws, “stateizers” in the form of large mothers and old women-blockers who died over the oil.

In the usual mosaic of pseudopatriotic hysteria, some new “five-column” Pasternak should have appeared with his inappropriate “Russophobic Nobel”-and they began to sculpt from Andrei Zvyagintsev. But something did not fully grow together-the interest in the gathered a bunch of prestigious prizes was so great that attempts to boycott the rental were replaced by doubled orders of copies of the film, the indignation of clergy and conservative politicians drowned in the approval remarks of fronting intellectuals (even among priests), bossy anger changed, if not for mercy, then let it be for tolerance-let it be to tolerance. goes.

About us about everyone ?

On the screen, the hero of Alexei Serebryakov (who, incidentally, has recently become an emigrant, despite his demand and status of a people's artist) fights for his house and a workshop, on the territory of which a corrupt mayor will dig. The former combat comrade, and now a successful Moscow lawyer (his role was played by Vladimir Vdovichenkov) helps the sufferer, but everything is in vain, worse, their attempt to resist, maintain human dignity leads to both internal breakdowns and betrayals, and to predictable reprisals, substitutions and, ultimately to the prison. And thanks to the “blessing” of the local church, the scum triumphs the final “moral” victory, demonstrating commitment to “traditional values” in the eyes of the authorities and the crowd. Filming was carried out, in particular, in the village of Teriberk on the shores of the Barents Sea, so all these abominations are demonstrated against the backdrop of the greatness and beauty of the harsh northern nature, which, it seems, can only sweeten the viewer with a “pill”, giving uncompromising bitterness.

Judging by the BBC News video, all the same as one, that “this is about our life”, and all the fresh news about the chaos of officials and law enforcement officers carry in their headlines all about the same “Leviathan”, in general, right along Vysotsky: “About us about all, to hell?!” Numerous real savage stories forced those who accused the creators of the film of denoting, right there, as well, the Russian Orthodox Church was not able to make it possible, showing the audience pictures with deputies who line up the patriarch in the Duma, who proposed urgently constituting the Church with the state, prohibit abortion and sodist. In universities, the Law of God in schools (from the second to the ninth grade) and so on. What is not a hyperrealistic reflection of reality from the filmed film?

Well, well, let the creator of the film not be deleted from among the numerous evidence of their talent from among those who make up the “pride of the nation”, although they look at him with suspicion and silence the presentation of the next foreign prize in the state of state. It is appropriate to ask a question: did Zvyagintsev aimed it with his goal of documenting reality and exposing vices - so to speak, call Rus' to the ax? It seems that the situation is still more difficult.

A crack in the surface of our ideas about the world

Despite the fact that the “Leviathan” obviously breaks out of the former role of Zvyagintsev as a chamber-chamber family showdown (of course, quite tough, but going without any connection with the reincarnations of the surrounding society), this is still a typical Zvyagintsev film, and the director’s desire is more clearly visible to concentrate all his previous work, as it were Having increased to an unbearable painful effect the density of the already detailed catastrophes studied - from a teenage rebellion and marital betrayals and ending with an indestructible and hopeless desire to break out of the household and timeless trap.

So into the world of Zvyagintsev, with all the deafening uncompromisingness, the large society that he had previously ignored, and his heroes did not save all this from local dramas and made their life all the more unbearable. Of course, innovation is not accidental here, but it went through natural development, not from a simple desire to please Western critics. A real artist works non -banally and more on a hunch, finding what everyone had passed by before. And that risky, inexperienced move does not succeed in all worthy, because the bold success awaits only with some little probability. “A real work of art creates a crack in the surface of our ideas about the world, about our connections with people,” the Zvyagintsev himself suggested such a hint in an interview with The New Times (2007, No. 10) given to the screens of his second large film - “Exile”. Zvyagintsev’s Dratniafanov films (“Return”, “Exile”, “Elena”) put unusual family conflicts protruding from the trivial roles from the trivial roles.

Their delimited from the surrounding society, in principle, made it possible to mentally transfer the drama to almost any other country - it would all look as wonderful as when showing here. But the smallest fabric of the film as opposed to the common plot always turned out to be native, recognizable, creating a wild tension of new circumstances with brain removal. In principle, the same in Leviathan - starting from the scene of a friend’s meeting at the railway station with all these sounds, gestures, fogs, provincial water stations, it seems, even smells - the atmosphere of the film does not allow us to be deceived - this is ours.

However, the very idea of ​​showing an unprecedented riot against the idiotic system of an individual, brought to the last line, came to Zvyagintsev from Western news (there was such an sensational case with the poor fellow, which smashed the American town with the help of a specially equipped super -bolder). In our atmosphere, the whole riot was blown away unusually - to drunken skirmishes and in vain attempts to “grab the bosses behind Faberge”, although the video was enriched with the remarkable Putin portraits and the Pussy Riot, and the sound row with typical court tongue twisters and impressive sermons.

In the framework of the usual genre system (and even decadent and “perestroika chernukha”), you expect at least some life-affirming “catharsis”. The hero, yes, is defeated, but not broken ... He died, but at least tried to do something. I was mistaken in the calculations, but always relied on friends and loved ones. He was a loner, he was betrayed, but he did not betray ... Zvyagintsev, of course, beat all these stamps, but as a result he ruthlessly casts up. In his world, a trampled person has nothing to rely on, as, however, sometimes in life. All familiar recipes are only illusions, long -excessed unfit schemes. And the betrayal friend does not at all become the finished bastard, the betrayal of his wife (played by Elena Lyadova) causes only sympathy for all sides of this ridiculous triangle.

In the struggle of a good, in general, but terribly imperfect person with society, the same ruthless life from the former Zvyagintsev films invades, concentrating hopeless. That explosive mixture, which in inexperienced hands would break and measure the plot at the poorly corresponding to each other, multi -ganged shreds, at Zvyagintsev unexpectedly began to play with new meanings, repeatedly and to unbearably enhanced the effect of human alienation now at all levels of being.

Even waiting closer to the final and promised by the name “Proverbs” turned into another painful deception-after all, it seemed that the rural priest, who came across on the threshold of the store on the eyes of the hero to be torn by his internal demon demons, would become a natural counterweight to the high church hierarchs, will utter some uncomplicated truth, reconcile us with this world ...

But no, he, too, at such a convenient moment, the moment carries some kind of blizzard, the usual biblical gallest, is inappropriately highly nonsense, but the camera that traces the path of the bread he bought, followed by the replica "eat!" It falls into a trough on a non -appetizing those who burn their swilles and rather grunting pigs.

The inevitability of Leviathan ?

Did the director overwhelm the surrounding reality, did he create something archetypal from the broken bricks, poorly attached to our time and space, conveyed the essence of the era, having fallen into the target, in the naked nerve? Probably, he did nothing completely consciously, he simply gave the spectators quite universal tools so that they would think of their stories for him. Lacuns and lack of fire in the film are much more important than the specifics of the remaining scenes and create the same effect as the fallen pieces of plots from our real life, where we are constantly forced to conditionally assume and think up, tormented by the options.

In principle, it does not matter how exactly the specific scene of jealousy developed, whether the hero’s wife or enemies was killed only used her suicide for their own purposes ... On the contrary, the decoding of these scenes will inevitably turn on cliches from the criminal chronicle, the entire canvas will lose the analogy with the incontinuities and indefinite in life and predictably somewhere, somewhere, from all this, non-rewarded thoughts of thought He will inevitably suffer, and Zvyagintsev seemed to intend to not give a single chance to critics, striving to accuse him of violating logic.

To the creation of, albeit an unloved, but real artist (and Zvyagintsev has long proved his right to be called as such, and it will not be possible to reconsider this status “retroactively”), you generally come up with a different measure. If this creation hurts, causes emotions and pain, a fierce desire to argue, then, alas, it hit. And some line of reality displayed.

The very story of any art (no matter how pure and no matter how much it is stated to get away from reality) - a chain of attempts to reveal to readers, listeners and spectators new, hitherto hidden features of reality, remind of its power, unpredictability and paradoxicality, to contrast these new discoveries with the dead dogmas and genre samples, make you think about and be deceived in expectations and deceived in expectations and deceived in expectations and deceived in expectations. New Hell. In this sense, even the very denial of reality and the game in it becomes an element of a new revelation, a new approach to the essence of our existence.

In general, from the spickedness of all this uncompromising, the viewer “torn the template”, which is shifting to recognizing the little things sweet to the heart and the rejection of the idea of ​​total hopelessness with all kinds of living body, hoping to live somehow more or less comfortably. It turned out not even a bomb, but some disintegration, absolute rejection of hopes, complete stripping, and then universal collapse and departure to the singularity. Neither you drive black comedies, nor even Pelevin's sweet emptiness, which the hero has lost in his heart.

In this sense, the film by Zvyagintsev, of course, spent not so much to Western critics as fatalistic and apocalyptic moods in Russia itself, almost universal conviction that the authorities and society need to go through some cleansing (only a question, which exactly). Unfortunately, some part of society by this very cleansing means both the fire of the war, and the selfless demarcation with all sorts of slightly wrong, and the sweetness of future uncompromising lustrations ...

The fears are already expressed that the Leviathan, or rather, is also what is happening around him, also contains such a desperate temptation-the simplicity and versatility of the meme in exchange for attempts to at least somehow understand its essence and origins, without detailed explanations, reasoning and searches for output, specific decisions ... In general, the disarming force of art before the arrival of a northern northern animal.