Translated material
Front facade
"Golden Eagles" settled down
Who is the face of current Russian cinema, its front sign, its mouth, its brains, its cliches and its hope? Of course, our dear Nikita Sergeevich Mikhalkov, his studio TRITE and Channel One, which showed the presentation of the Main National Cinematographic Award “Golden Eagle”, awarded by the Main National Film Academy, day after day. Taking the main film heights, because from the September television reports there was a clear impression that it was “12” that received the main “Lion” at the Venice festival, and the TV channels had already practically given the Oscar to this film (and I’m almost sure that many simple-minded TV viewers are convinced that I mean the main Oscar) - the film “12” is rightfully located on the Olympus of local significance. And no one doubted it. They don't take prisoners here...Competition for “12” included: the quiet “Travel with Pets”, the winner of “Kinotavr” “Simple Things”, the dashing “Artist” by Stanislav Govorukhin and, finally, “Mongol”, with which “12” fought at the box office and will now compete for “ Oscar". Mikhalkov’s film won in five categories out of six possible (Vladimir Klimov, who directed the TV series “Leningrad” on Channel One), was preferred over the film’s cameraman Vlad Opelyanets). "The Artist" - in three, "Mongol" received prizes in categories considered less respectable - costumes and sound design, "Simple Things" received a prize for the screenplay, "Journey" was bypassed altogether. What does this mean? First of all, about the tastes of people whose preferences are expressed by the “Golden Eagle”. And by the way, unlike some of my colleagues, I am not at all inclined to believe that Mikhalkov directly dictates his will to the Orel Academy. The situation is somewhat different - Mikhalkov occupies a special place in the modern landscape because his tastes and preferences find understanding in certain circles and correspond to the Main public mood (how exactly academicians vote, and who counts their votes, and how they get the result - to judge I don’t dare, although, of course, many things seem surprising). But I’m quite ready to assume that this majority sincerely likes “The Artist,” with its rough and archaic style of a provincial benefit performance, which is why it comes out in second place in the premium ranking. And it is no coincidence that “Simple Things”, which has many wonderful qualities - the acting work of Bronevoy and Puskepalis, the cinematography - of Pavel Kostomarov, the directorial work of Alexey Popogrebsky, at the "Eagle" receives an award for the weakest thing in the film - - for a script whose author did not find an organic ending for his hero and attached an artificial melodramatic tail to an excellent beginning.
Of the foreign films, “The Eagle” also liked “The Queen”, from the previous “Oscar” awards, the film, by the way, is very worthy, but conservative, calm, and not annoying. And besides, it is clearly monarchical, although with ideas...
In this world they obviously don’t like anything particularly new; everything here should be decent and of high quality, like in a formal living room. Armchairs along the walls, curtains discreetly picked up by festoons, paintings - albeit copies, but in the spirit of ancient masters... The secondary images, recognizable subjects, and the lack of search, innovation, fresh look do not bother anyone - that’s how it should be, that’s how it should be be stable. Those who won awards yesterday continue to receive them today. “For outstanding contribution to cinema” the president of the academy, eighty-year-old director Vladimir Naumov, is awarded: in the distant past he directed the famous “Tehran-43” and “Running”, and he is still filming now... Moreover, it is his anniversary. Filmmakers who have passed away are also marked - this is humanly understandable, it looks dignified and adds solemnity. And it doesn’t shake the foundations in any way, and doesn’t add nervousness - besides, it’s just what they deserved... Alexander Abdulov, Alexander Tatarsky, Andrei Krasko received the “Orlov” posthumously. State view.
Minister of Culture Sokolov, who read out a greeting from President Putin, is also a supporter of a serious, responsible attitude towards culture, which, of course, is not a place for discussion. In this case, the minister will not have to be ashamed of a country that has such heroes as the actors of the film “12”, all our dozen golden eagles, including the Chief, who played a key role, the only one entirely invented specifically for this film. The president is right: “For the masters of the domestic film screen, the possession of such a prestigious award is a convincing confirmation of their high status.” High status means high bonuses, the relationship is direct.
And no avant-gardeism. In documentary films, academics preferred Sergei Miroshnichenko’s quite good film “Born in the USSR,” the third part of a series about children who once had a common homeland, but are now scattered around the world. Miroshnichenko. And the film “Mother” - the obvious leader of the year in documentary films - did not even make it into the nomination. And how is it possible? There they swear, drink and even fight. In the country that the “Golden Eagle” demonstrates, everything is not always good, but it is certainly within the framework of decency and good intentions, positive, and most importantly, predictable. And it is very far from reality, because it is difficult to imagine a more fabulous film than “12” today. Even in "Night Watch" there was more truth to life. But reality, naturalism, and documentary are not at all implied in the new Russian pomp. A different aesthetic reigns here, imperially ponderous, condescending, tear-jerking and sensitive in its own way.
“We are going our own way!” - confirmed Nikita Mikhalkov, receiving the “Eagle” for directing. And indeed. For example, foreign awards matter to us only if they award correctly. The Cannes Film Festival recognized the work of Konstantin Lavronenko in the film “Exile” as the best role, so what? Nothing. There is no such film among the laureates or nominees of “The Eagle”. Commercial success doesn’t matter either - none of the box office leaders (“Heat”, “Love-Carrots”, “Shadowboxing 2”) are among the laureates. The price of art is not mass, not on the market. But any overly creative fantasies should not be encouraged either. We need works that are solid, representative, and have serious moral problems. The kind that Nikita Mikhalkov produces together with the main TV channels of the country, where a proper measure of patriotism is accompanied by decent budgets and good advertising. Even a remake, based on a theatrical play with unity of place and time, under such conditions can turn out to be a completely solid, wide-format, high-quality product that is not ashamed to show... Yes, we copy, but it’s original. Taking into account national traditions.
On a stage subtly reminiscent of party congresses, famous actors presented statuettes that had been prepared in advance to other famous actors. We were joking a little, it's a serious matter. But Evgeny Mironov somehow successfully quoted an old joke about decreasing denominators and increasing numerators, and Yuri Stoyanov compared a successful film montage, in which the joints are not noticeable, with the upcoming presidential elections... The hosts of the ceremony, Fyodor Bondarchuk and Maria Mironova, minted phrases and smiled reservedly . The demonstration of the front facade, dried by television editing, went as expected, and, most importantly, the fact that there has been nothing behind this facade for a long time was almost possible to hide.