What are the children think about

How adolescents visualize history by teachers and students of the film school named after McGaffin

Tamara Lyalenkova: Today we will talk about a film school that positions itself as an alternative territory for the formation of an expert view of the cinema, the McGaffin film school. In the Moscow studio - the coordinator of the film school Julia Melikhova ; operator-operator Maxim Trapo ; Actress and director Galia Fathutdinova and students of the film school Alexander Klyamkin and Olga Chernienko .

We will speak mainly about the youth section, in which guys from 10 to 18 years old are engaged. In the learning process, they create short feature films. Where do the topics and ideas that the guys take off are?

Julia Melikhova: Recently, in June, we went to St. Petersburg to conduct a short -term movie intensity. The guys gathered, brought some from Moscow, conducted a squeak - a competition of ideas. The purpose of the piching is to get out of the children the idea of a film that all other children want to shoot. Ideas are chosen by children on their own. We tell them that the idea is always in your palm. They walk along the street, talk with their parents, and the idea is always somehow thrown over their heads, and they come to the bee with the finished presentation, no one instructs them.

Tamara Lyalenkova: That is, you do not tell them, you do not consult with psychologists, you don’t read special literature ...

Julia Melikhova: No, of course. It is not good to read the literature at all, but in this case we do not do this.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Olga, you came from the summer camp, there were shootings there, and as I understand it, that your idea formed the basis of one of the films that was shot, the film "Student is ready". What is this movie?

Olga Chernienko: Yes, somewhere on the third day after our arrival there was a bee. 21 people - 21 ideas. After the vote, three ideas won - mine and two other guys who studied at a film school. The ideas were completely different. Someone tells some vampire stories, someone takes their life, their past. There were stories about the split personality. A lot of different ideas!

Tamara Lyalenkova: Sasha, did you participate in this?

Alexandra Klyamkina: I did not go with film school to Bulgaria. But before that I won the bee and shot the film. The idea came to me from my relatives. It was necessary to come up with an idea related to the Great Patriotic War, and I realized that I have a grandfather and grandmother, who simply are a repository of stories and plots on this topic, choose any.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Olga, what was your film, what idea did you suggest?

Olga Chernienko: I thought for a long time over the topic, and I realized that this time I did not want to be a director and put forward the idea that is in my head. It was a fairy tale about how a 15-year-old boy lived with his mother in a greenhouse, and they were always surrounded by flowers, but at some point the boy realized that he wanted more. Mother forbids him to go somewhere further than to the forest, and he understands that he wants to escape. He runs into a completely different world, where everything is cruel, where there are no colors and flowers. But after we rewritten this idea, it completely changed its meaning. And I still said that I would not leave my film, I will be a director. This is not my first experience, in the McGaffin film school I have been since October, for me this is the fourth film-somewhere I was a producer, somewhere a screenwriter. This is my second directorial experience.

Of course, it was difficult. Moreover, not all the guys came to the camp that were previously engaged in cinema. Some came to just find out what it is, try themselves, find out whether they are or not. They just watched, were third -party observers. Some guys, there were very few of them, really for some time in the cinema. Therefore, it was very difficult to set the guys to work. It was necessary to find actors, prepare a location, and not everyone understood what was required of them. It was very difficult!

Tamara Lyalenkova: I want to ask teachers. How is training? Does everyone engage in producing, directing or it depends on what the child himself wants, or should he go through all the steps of the film?

Galia Fathutdinova: Of course, these are very different professions - producing, directing, operator skill, and different people have talent for this, but we believe that basic knowledge, basic understanding of how the process is generally happening, that it is, of course, everyone gets. After they receive this basic knowledge, they can already decide more accurately than it is more interesting to do. Someone comes to our school and says: “I want to be a director, and only a director, with ambitions, having tried, looking at what it is, a person understands that he does not want to be a director, but wants to be an actor or even a producer. Here Olga produced a film, and this should be very special for a person, special features of character, because it is not easy, and not every person and not every person and every person is not easy Not every person is capable of writing a script, here is a literary talent, so the basics gets everything, and then everyone develops, as he likes more, which is closer.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Maxim, you are an operator, and it is believed that boys usually show serious interest in what is associated with technology. This is so, does the guys go to your classes more?

Maxim Trapo: I, rather, in relation to the McGaffin school, the contemplator and the challenger, and I acted as a curator of one of the filming projects. I am a curator of a more adult school - the Moscow school of new cinema, and there I have a course based on higher education.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Is there a difference between the training of adults and adolescents?

Maxim Trapo: So I was interested to find out and see it. The difference, of course, is, it is at every stage, it is very cool that with the simplification of film technologies ... Previously, the cinema was quite a technological process, expensive, and it was difficult to approach this. That is why the profession of the operator was sacred, because what he was doing, it was an incomprehensible thing, inaccessible to anyone.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Well, a lot still depends on the operator.

Maxim Trapo: A lot depends on each participant in the process. There is such an expression that cinema is the art of one person, which is made by strangers. And in this sense, it is important to understand people who come to film production, no matter what part of the production they are, no matter how mistakes in a particular field affect the entire process. And now, in connection with simplifications of technology, anyone who shows the desire to do this easily cope with technology, and the border has ceased to exist. In recent years, in VGIK, suppose the faculty of the faculty came more girls than boys. Now again the trend is changing, the infantility of the male grows up, the boys are again going into the profession. But, in principle, a sufficient number of well-known women operators, sexual boundaries in the profession in this sense no longer exist.

Tamara Lyalenkova: In general, the guys come with the understanding that they then want to go to some kind of cinema profession? Or just at a certain age everyone wants to be inside the screen?

Julia Melikhova: Well, to become actors, they go to other establishments. All children already know what it is to be an actress, an actor, we heard and watched a lot about this, but few people know what it is - to work in a movie, inside it. And this revives interest, children are interested in trying themselves with the detail of the general mechanism. Our children do not want acting. The guys who do not always cope with the responsibilities of producing, scenario, they say: oh, I seem to be only an actor. And there is nothing wrong with this, the actor is so an actor - we develop.

Tamara Lyalenkova: In adolescence, is it difficult to be an actor?

Galia Fathutdinova: Of course, children come who do not quite understand where they came. They like the beautiful word "cinema", parents also like it, and often after a few classes they understand that they did not want to do this a little. It turns out that someone wanted to be, in fact, an actor, and this is a completely different job, a completely different profession. But most of the children who come are 98 percent, they remain in the film school, already realizing that it is not so fun, simple and easy that a huge amount of information, technical and any. To create something, show projects at the peaching, it turns out that you need to read, know, be able to give your position. But they remain. We also have trainings in acting, because our children and as actors participate in projects, including. But it is useful to know about all film production if a person wants to act in films.

We have guys who understand where they came, and at the age of 11-13 they already say that they do not want to act, but want to be actors themselves to make a movie. And since I taught actors, and students, and children, I want to say that these are completely different typologically people who go to acting or film production, different in psychotype, in energy. We do not want to change anyone, and as our artistic director Daria Gladysheva says, we in no case call the guys to go to professional cinema in the future. We do not educate professional filmmakers, we do not strive, at least.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Guys, do you think yourself in the future in film production or is it an interesting story for you that you can now live and get a lot of skills from this?

Olga Chernienko: They also said that I don’t need to go to the cinema, I should not, but I can’t imagine where I will go, if not in this direction. I have been close to cinema from 9 years old. My parents were always against this, they said that I had to be born, probably, in the director’s family, but this happened by itself. I spent a lot of time a lot of time and watched the TV. At first I just watched a movie, then I began to get into a deeper way, I sorted out the films, which is not so. And it was always more interesting for me to watch films about films than the works themselves. And then it went. I was engaged in Sergei Broke according to scenario drama, went to the Mitta film school, and was approaching the McGaffin film school every year. From 9 years, I already knew that I love cinema.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Have you finished now what class?

Olga Chernienko: I'm going to the 11th.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Sasha, and your way to the film school?

Alexander Klyamkin: Well, I came to the McGaffin film school just recently, just six months ago. I consider myself creatively a person, I tried myself in different aspects of creativity, whether it be drawing, in general, different art. But in every type of art I did not have something, I wanted something more alive from everyone, not as entertainment, but as production. So far, I have not thought seriously about the movie as work, but now this is my favorite pastime and the only option where I want to go. But everything can change.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Maxim, but is it not to go to retrain children with some ideas, ambitions, techniques and methods of work?

Maxim Trapo: Everything is very individual, and creativity is a thing chained to an individual. Our training is built on the principle of workshops, and you are recruiting people who, in your opinion, who are most often subjective, correspond to your understanding of the opportunity to work with this person. As for the retraining in general, the school does not have the task of raising professional personnel, and we are talking about the most to reveal creative potential, to give the opportunity to create in the broad sense of the word. And it did not go to any harm to anyone and cannot go. Political personnel with clear postulates do not bathe here, how and why. People are simply trying to think and get certain skills, an understanding, what is the world of cinema from the inside, and this, of course, will help them, and will not be harmful. The more films are, and the more children they are involved in this, the more efficiency, I think, in the end will be higher in adult cinema.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Now it’s easier to cope with the technique, this gives new opportunities, and as for acting, is it possible to do without a large school?

Galia Fathutdinova: I have the highest acting education, and I think that professionals are needed. Of course, a person can do without higher acting education, and he can be organized in the cinema, but there is still such a story that it is emotional, psychological costs in any case, and if a person does not manage his body, his psychophysics, does not understand how his nervous system works, this can be brilliant on the screen, but a non -professional person can cause harm to himself. Therefore, of course, now many children are acting in the cinema, and it is more pleasant, it’s easier to work with the children trained. We have many theatrical studios and schools for children.

Of course, the cinema is constantly changing, and now, for example, the trend is accepted to play more documented, of course, hyperorganically and simple, neutral. The theater actors have a rather negative comments on this, but a good actor is always a good actor. Even if you take an amazing actor 30 years ago, maybe it will seem to us now that he is squeezing, that he is too much, but it will still be good, we will believe him and follow him. A good actor at any time, he does not obey trends. We have time quickly, the video material is a lot, and everything is simpler, easier, as they say - exist more watercolor.

Tamara Lyalenkova: I will ask the guys a question. In general, why do you need a movie?

Olga Chernienko: Cinema-in any case, art, and art shows people something in their chest, but they cannot see it around. Architecture, painting, cinema-a person sees it and opens up something new in himself. Nowadays, the cinema has become somewhat different, it was not created to tell people something, but to just take time, earn money, and I think this is wrong! The cinema is out of time, and although it changes, it should not go down.

Alexander Klyamkin: Cinema is such a very good way to convey something very complicated a person deeply. Since several arts work in the cinema at once, the impact on a person is easier, and it is easier for him to convey something. Cinema, I think, exists in order to convey some thoughts, ideas. Initially, the cinema in the Soviet Union originated as a carrier of ideas, since the movie easily drives something into the head. But now it’s not the time, and now the cinema is used in order to convey thoughts, very easy and simple.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Yes, there is a difference between an idea and a thought, Sasha very subtly noticed it. As I understand it, one of the ideas of the film in the project of a film school dedicated to the Great Patriotic War was yours.

Alexander Klyamkin: Yes. The idea was that children sometimes do something not very meaningful. Grandfather told me how they had fun in evacuation when they were children. They hooligated, laying gunpowder under the caravans of horses when horses scattered from the explosions of horses. And they often divided into two teams - fascists and Soviet troops, and so played. And they, it seems to me, did not fully understand that truly adults really fight not far from them. The script corresponded many times, and at the end it turned out to be a short film.

Tamara Lyalenkova: Yes, and also the same cycle - the film "Sugar". Yes, and of course, it was not very difficult to create an atmosphere of wartime, but who invented all that, found objects, watches, calendar, all this?

Maxim Trapo: This is the joy of the school that the children of the film school are breaking in every project, and in this almanac there were four stories, four films, and each film involves a fairly large administration of the film process, and the guys performed each other with all. Someone was directors, someone by an operator, a decorator, a requiser, and on other projects were in other hypostases, but the children themselves did in the end. Our supervision was to simply indicate, to make it clear how important this thorough work of everyone is. Indeed, the sensation of the film as a whole depends on the requiser, costume artist in such a small film. It is necessary to recreate time. It is not enough to choose the actors and recreate the story, and cinematography is in the details, what a suit, a T -shirt, wallpaper, what shape will be this piece of sugar, in what scarf it will be wrapped, what frame will the photograph have ... in the process of creating this atmosphere, which, in fact, is the difference between the theater, the movie is an unconditional thing and the viewer sees it and understands that it is immersed in an era, and it is immersed in an era, and Accordingly, he believes. Or he sees a picture, sees details that do not close in his head over time, and he does not immediately believe, and then it is useless to immerse him. There are no trifles, everything is important in the cinema.

Tamara Lyalenkova: When you prepared the “Children of War” project, did you face the fact that the guys do not understand something or do not know?

Maxim Trapo: Everything is different. Someone understands at 11, and someone at 16 is not able to realize.

Tamara Lyalenkova: I just judge the school curriculum. You had to explain something to them, to give them, or did they somehow complement each other?

Julia Melikhova: Of course, during the preparation period, we are pre -production, we invite specialists in a particular industry, if we feel the gaps. In historical films, children, of course, do not know subtleties. There were consultations with a costumeman, we went the whole group to Mosfilm, picked up, explained to us in detail. Но очень часто вываливаются детали, которые мы узнаем прямо на площадке. Мы зовем специалистов: грим, костюм, реквизит, технические специалисты.

Тамара Ляленкова: Я так понимаю, вы ездили на натуру снимать. Мы видим там разбитую церковь, но такое в России не редкость…

Юлия Мелихова: Процедура отбора была очень сложной. Этот проект был, наверное, самым глобальным с точки зрения переездов. Нам нужно было в 7 утра вывезти группу в 20 человек, собрать всех родителей, поехать в Клинскую область, где мы нашли ближайшую церковь такого плана. Поговорили с администрацией Клинского района, договорились, получили разрешение. Церковь в аварийном состоянии, но мы ее оживили.

(Отрывок из фильма)

Тамара Ляленкова: А вот фильм "Битва на линейках", в чем там суть?

Галия Фатхутдинова: Это была целая история. Это был совместный проект с Культурным центром ЗИЛ. На два месяца ребята, не из киношколы, собирались и обучались кинопроизводству, и снимали фильм. Вот два фильма – "Папка" и "Урок истории. Битва не линейках" – были сделаны в рамках этого проекта. Это достаточно смелая затея была, потому что времени мало, ребята с нуля, без понимания, что такое кино и как оно делается. "Папка" – там у автора, Ивана, был уже на пичинге готовый сценарий с раскадровками, и было понятно, что это фаворит. "Битва на линейках" – это была заявка, где не было истории вообще. Был просто общий замысел, и это была комедия изначально, такая веселая история о том, что ребята на уроке подрались, начались играть в войнушку, мол, я Гитлер, я Сталин, подрались на линейках, и как-то все закончилось… Парень, который это представлял на пичинге, в общем, ничего больше не придумал, но почему-то эта идея и ребят, и нас очень зацепила. Наверное, потому что, в отличие от "Папки", это современное время, это одна локация. Мы устали от "Сахара", от исторических проектов и подумали: почему бы и нет… Мы подобрали ребят под этот проект, но ребята оказались не такими веселыми, как тот парень, который эту идею предложил, и они эту веселую идею детского кино развернули с совершенно другой стороны.

В итоге получилось достаточно серьезное кино о выборе. The boy falls in love with the girl and, wanting to impress her in the history lesson, begins to agitate the guys for fascism, not really understanding what it is. Эпатаж, оригинальность какая-то. И оппонент его был такой антифашистски настроенный: "Я бы всех этих фашистов расстрелял!" Парень сам по себе харизматичный и обаятельный, он увлекается этой историей, и в конце концов он заражает весь класс этой идеей, что фашизм – это было на самом деле не так плохо, Гитлер не такой плохой, и вся эта идея имела смысл. Сценарий там переписывался очень много раз, каждый день раз 15-20. И это был, наверное, самый сложный проект из всех по сценарию. Потом рисовали раскадровки, каждую реплику выверяли. И мы были недовольны финальным вариантом, но просто уже не успели. Потому что тема сложная, и в сценарии ее деликатно показать нелегко и для нас, а для детей тем более.

Когда мы работали над проектом, мы очень много с детьми общались и на современные темы, на темы национализма, как ее воспринимают дети, и много интересного ребята сами про себя открыли. Я думаю, это было полезно не только как финальный результат, но и вообще полезно рассуждать на подобные темы. Сама тема обширная и большая, а хронометраж нашего кино маленький, и это важно и интересно, наверное, как такой намек, но полностью раскрыть здесь тему невозможно.

Максим Трапо: Не соглашусь. Мне кажется, из всех четырех фильмов это несмотря на всю спонтанность родившейся идея, это самая интересная идея. И это то, что мы сейчас наблюдаем очень близко – насколько легко популистские идеологии в момент исторического слома… Дети же тоже это не из пустоты рождают, фашизм и коммунизм приходили на сломах, и простые и популистские идеология рождаются моментально. И сам факт, что дети это чувствуют и улавливают, и мы с этим сталкиваемся сейчас, это идеи, которые витают в воздухе. Мне кажется, важно было поставить этот вопрос, и мне вообще нравится, что во всех этих фильмах дети не рассуждали штампованно, а ставили вопросы, не декларируя какой-то конечной морали. Это кино, мне кажется, наиболее эмоционально и современно с точки зрения ситуации, в которой мы сейчас живем.

Тамара Ляленкова: А были какие-то темы, предложенные ребятами, которые вы не хотели обсуждать и снимать?

Галия Фатхутдинова: Я была на двух пичингах в этом году, посвященных как раз Великой Отечественной войне, у нас в киношколе и на ЗИЛе, и не было ни одного сюжета, который бы у нас вызвал чувство, что это невозможно, мы не будем этого делать по этическим соображениям или каким-то еще. Удивило, наоборот, что было большое количество достойных проектов. И там и там было два победителя, и мы порекомендовали четыре проекта на производство, а на ЗИЛе – пять проектов, что это имеет право на существование, и нужно над этим работать.

На ЗИЛе был очень хороший проект, который победил. Там была история про трех детей, которая развивается параллельно, один советский ребенок, второй – польский, третий – немецкий. И мы видим прямо полиэкран, три картинки, и как они параллельно двигаются. И дальше была история, что было бы, если бы не было войны, как продолжалась бы их линия жизни, и что случилось в ситуации войны. Потрясающая идея! Она нас поразила. But we did not have the opportunity and resources in order to adequately realize it. Мы порекомендовали девочке продолжать работать, мы готовы ей помогать, работать вместе с ней в будущем. Она на нашем проекте получила полезный опыт продюсера. Сейчас она получила готовую команду для своего проекта, получали связи и навыки, и я надеюсь, что проект состоится. И как ни странно, не было примитивных идей, совсем простых.

Тамара Ляленкова: Да, там ставятся очень серьезные вопросы даже, вот в фильме "Папка", там мальчик стреляет в своего отца, увидев его в форме фашистского солдата, потому что он предатель родины… Тут важные вопросы, и не каждый взрослый решится их вслух озвучить. Вы рефлексируете как-то с ними на эту тему или просто есть идея, давайте сделаем, а потом уже…

Максим Трапо: Они сами рефлексируют на эти темы. Общение происходит абсолютно на равных. Может быть, бекграунд, какой-то опыт разный, но способность рефлексировать на действительность и на прошлое – это абсолютно личностные вещи, и это абсолютно не зависит от возраста. Someone at the age of 11 is able to speak on serious topics, and someone at 40 is not able to do it. Технический профессионализм придет, это вещь наживная, а вот возможность рефлексировать, довести свою мысль до внятного результата, понять и прожить что-то для себя, углубиться и пойти дальше – это замечательные вещи, тот опыт, который дети и получают. Во всех фильмах – не банальный подход с точки зрения тем, с точки зрения попытки взглянуть на прошлое, на отношения с историей.

Тоже интересный вопрос был – не пытались ли мы что-то запрещать. Я помню, когда была премьера на ЗИЛе, витало в воздухе, а не запретят ли показ альманаха. Тот же "Урок истории", там есть определенные декларативно-провокативные мысли в отношении фашизма, и кто-то из взрослых руководителей думал: а чем это нам будет грозить? То есть взрослые гораздо более закостенелые, и они часто перестраховываются. Мне кажется, тут даже не вопрос опыта, и то, что мы наблюдаем сейчас в нашей стране, это не связано с опытом. Если бы взрослые умели пользоваться опытом прошлых поколений, я думаю, ситуация не возвращалась бы к каким-то вещам, которые мы сейчас наблюдаем. И наша беда как раз в том, что мы, скорее, приспосабливаемся под действительность, нежели чем рефлексируем то прошлое, которое имеем.

Тамара Ляленкова: Ребята, а вам как кажется, есть разница между взрослым кино и кино для молодежи?

Александр Клямкин: Все зависит от тех людей, которые снимают. Есть дети, которые могут снимать детское кино, для еще более малых детей. А есть дети, над которым нависли тяжелые мысли, и они воплощают их в кино. Такие тяжелые мысли порой не увидишь даже во взрослом кино.

Тамара Ляленкова: А есть ли у тебя любимый режиссер, любимое кино?

Александр Клямкин: Да нет… У меня нет ни любого режиссера, ни любого кино, и я иногда смотрю кино и думаю: как люди вообще посмели это в прокат пустить? (смеются) Если я стану режиссером, я никогда такого снимать на буду!

Тамара Ляленкова: Это фильмы, которые ты смотришь по телевизору или в кинотеатре?

Александр Клямкин: Я очень редко в кино хожу, скорее телевизор.

Максим Трапо: Они кажутся тебе непрофессиональными?

Александр Клямкин: Мне кажется, что даже легкие фильмы, развлекательные, комедии, они ужасно глупые и странные. Такое стыдно немного даже иногда смотреть.

Максим Трапо: Да, это доказывает, что даже дети отличают зерна от плевел…

Тамара Ляленкова: Это очень взрослый взгляд.

Максим Трапо: Он не взрослый, а осознанный просто уже. С этим люди, как правило, рождаются, и немножко воспитываются.

Александр Клямкин: Есть два типа кино – это то, к которому ты приходишь, чтобы отдохнуть от всего, и то кино, на которое ты приходишь подумать. Но ни в том, ни в другом нельзя делать такие глупости, которые часто происходят во взрослом кино. Ты сидишь, смотришь и думаешь: как же так можно-то…

Максим Трапо: Речь просто о том, что нельзя понижать планку. Вот это утверждение, что "пипл хавает", оно ужасно по сути своей.

Тамара Ляленкова: Это вообще хорошая мысль – пойти в кино, чтобы делать хорошее кино. Оля, ваш посыл с этим же связан? Или у вас ест образцы, к которым вы хотели бы приблизиться?

Ольга Черниенко: Нет, я тоже пришла в кино, чтобы привнести что-то свое, какие-то свои идеи, свои взгляды на него. Из фильмов я люблю, скорее, фантастику и психологические драмы. И всегда хотела, если фильм, то с какой-нибудь моралью глубокой, чтобы ты порой даже посмотрел, понял суть через пару дней или даже через неделю, но чтобы идея была, и люди заглянули в свое сердце через кино, и поняли, что нужно посмотреть на эти вещи по-другому.

Тамара Ляленкова: Теперь понятно, зачем ходят в Киношколу ими МакГаффина…