Translated material
Russia glorified an independent movie
The results of the Cannes Film Festival
On the night after the closure of the anniversary festival, the Swedes walked and celebrated as if they had won the World Cup. In general, not surprising. The Cannes review, by status, prestige, is largely similar to sports world championship, no matter how offensive it may sound for the creators.
Summing up, we can say that the bets of selectors on loud names were unjustified. Ozone films (“Two-faced lover”), Haneke (“Happy End”), Dumon (“Zhenett”), Akina (“out of nowhere”) looked paler than their previous paintings. Against this background, the Melancholic farce "Square" of the Swedish director Ruben Estlund ("Force Major") looked fresh and unexpectedly.
The jury under the control of Pedro Almodovar appreciated the relevance of Estlund's statement about present Europe through the prism of contemporary art. “Square” - the area of good, solidarity, equality and justice outlined by the cobblestone. Here people will get a chance to swim in altruism: to help each other, to get rid of the main scourge of time - isolationism. “Square” is a prototype of ideal Europe, unattainable and unfulfilled tomorrow, which feed many modern “installations”, which give out the desired and in no hurry to part with pink glasses ... until they break them about the rude reality. In the central scene of the solemn dinner, which is invited to the performance grown by curators of the Gorill man (clearly inspired by Oleg Kulik), the reception hall turns into a dangerous safari. The very scene of the attacker on people created in the social “flask” of Homunkulus will remind the story of the “dog heart”.
Sofia Coppola nevertheless tempted with her film “The trap” of an experienced Almodovor, who gave her, and not Zvyagintsev, as many critics suggested, a reward for directing. Her Romek of the film of the same name Don Siegel (in the Russian box office is a more accurate name - “Fatal Temptation”) - an exquisite bonbonniere with thinly written pictures. Porcelain pupils and educators of the boarding house of noble girls care about the wounded Corrala, miraculously saved during the Civil War of the North and South. They care, as follows from the picture, to such an extent that there is no place for the living place from the corporal after their “lace custody”.
Russian (more precisely, Russian -speaking) cinema at the anniversary festival looked unprecedentedly convincingly (Zvyagintsev’s film in the ranking of festival criticism stubbornly held first place). But, no less important, all three paintings - “dislike” by Andrei Zvyagintsev, “meek” by Sergey Loznitsa, “cramped” Kantemir Balagov - talk about modern Russia.
Almost everyone was made independently (only Balagova’s work was partially supported). The judgments about the life of our compatriots are distinguished by freedom. Our overturned patriots will certainly instruct the mantra about the outline of Russia, for which enemy Europe takes these films. But the paintings chosen by Cannes do not denigrate and do not brighten. As the genre painting of Fedotov, Solomatkina, Nevreva did not humiliate the merits of Russia. As the “Last Judgment” of Bosch and his hellish monsters did not “stipulate” the Netherlands. Not only beauty, but also hatred, bias, resentment - in the eyes of the watchman.
It happens - recently not so often - when Russian authors have been recognized. The recognition of the anniversary seventh festival is expressed in significant awards: the special prize of the jury is Andrei Zvyagintsev, the prize of Fipers is Kantemir Balagova. Let's just congratulate them. No matter how hard the patriotism is in the cinema, whatever fat grants, but thanks to the films of independent authors, independent primarily from state, bureaucratic pressure, Russia continues to remain on the map of world cinema.