3,5 films about the past
Vladimir Mashkov`s Film drama “ the Father “ the Russian participation in competition of the Moscow film festival has come to the end. Three and a half a film (one is made together with Azerbaijan) of seventeen - the unprecedented number for the Moscow competition, such done not happen even in the USSR where our victory at festival was considered as business of the state importance.
“ the Father “ it is removed on motives of the play of Alexander Galicha “ Sailor`s silence “ also does not try to pretend to be “ the cinema present “ in modern understanding of the term. It has saved even clearly visible three-act structure (4 - j the certificate is cut). It is history about inhabitants of poor Jewish quarter in the Ukrainian small town Tulchin. About the storekeeper who swindles with the goods a little, but nurtures the son strictly, wants to make of it the outstanding violinist and dreams of time when at a concert in the Big hall of conservatory he will be proud of the David, and David with pride will tell: he/she is my father. David it becomes valid the winner of All-Union competition of violinists, but he lives now in other world, wants to forget about the backward childhood, and arrival of the unsightly father never leaving for limits of the small town, calls in it shame acute sense. War here comes, and to wounded man David should amputate a hand - career of the musician is finished. The final meeting of a sanitary train of David raving on a regiment and its father shot by nazis reminds of a filial debt and that life goes on in children: David will nurture the son, and already that will carry out Abram Schwarz`s dream - becomes the great violinist.
Written right after wars and for 30 years the forbidden play, naturally, bears the impress of dramatic art of the middle of the century. Though then it was innovatively courageous, treated not too kind to the authorities the Jewish subject and even entered “ mystical “ the meeting of the son with the lost father - this reception will be repeated by Gennady Shpalikov in the film scenario " later; To me twenty years “. Too it is possible to consider a choice of producer Igor Tolstunova and director Vladimir Mashkov courageous, but for other reasons: the play badly keeps within in prokrustovo a bed of the new cinema focused on entertainment, the rolling destiny of such film is problematic. And style of a linear narration, characteristic for those years, will inevitably seem archaic, a film will accuse of theatricality of dialogues and to that similar sins.
And nevertheless it is a good film. Development of characters and destinies you watch with interest and the stirring, many spectators of a female are excited to tears. It is quite possible to put it in the same number of pictures about our general destiny, as “ My dear person “ or even “ To me twenty years “. It is qualitative “ a mainstream “ which existed in the Soviet cinema and has ceased to exist in the Post-Soviet. The demand for occurrence such “ a mainstream “ - already basic event.
Mashkov the director that is called, strong, he owns secrets of film language and is able to work with the actor. It will perfectly well stylise also conditions of the Ukrainian remote place, and especially pre-war Moscow, as if penetrated by a red bunting and Mayakovsky`s rhythms. A serious role in creation of a musical fabric of a film (it here is very important) maestro Vladimir Spivakov has played. It is good in the matured David Egor Beroev`s role, and in military scenes operator Oleg Dobronravov removes it, almost quoting compositions with Alexey Batalov in a film of Hejfitsa “ My dear person “ - I hope that muster was included into the realised art problem. More questions Vladimir Mashkov in Abram Schwarz`s role - here calls obvious search in a make-up and in a habit, suitable is faster for theatre with its notorious 25 - m nearby, than for a close up at cinema. This image most painfullly reminds of the theatrical nature of a thing and about convention unusual for cinema.
“ the Father “ has got to competition, as it is known, contrary to will of the selection commission. As well as Russian - the Azerbaijan comedy “ the National bomb “. In conversation with head otborshchikov Cyril Razlogov has suggested to estimate this fact to critics. And so, both films have appeared, on - to mine, completely not superfluous. “ a bomb “ on a broader scale justifies the name: it was not only pleasant, but also an important meeting for our cinema with rare comedy talent of Vagifa Mustafaeva - at us after all with comedies absolutely poorly. “ the father “ As I have told, signals about returning qualitative “ middle tier “ without which there are films, but there is no cinema. And as a whole the domestic command on this film competition looks not simply well - against the weakest competition it looks, on shukshinskomu to expression, as three hairs on a bald head.
Here it would be possible even to suspect otborshchikov of desire having lowered level of foreign participants, to give odds to our cinema. But I am assured that it not so - they took that could catch. That is, how the international authority of the president of festival Nikita Mikhalkov, allowed to bring to Moscow the first class stars, authority of the festival still for world cinema under doubt was high. The judicial command under Alan Parker`s guidance has appeared in hard position: Russian films are almost doomed to prizes, and to select best of other quite ordinary tapes - a problem not for nervous.
another is worse: Three and a half ours a film at all of them worthiness express only one of tendencies of modern Russian cinema - back to tradition. I both hands “ for “ and I like courage of the authors who have opposed thoughtless “ today “ sated with thought and feeling “ yesterday “. To Marina Razbezhkinoj`s brilliant works (“ the Harvest-time “), Dmitry Meshieva (“ The “) and Vagifa Mustafaeva (“ the National bomb “) has already done justice. But it we know that a context of our cinema, to put it mildly, other, and “ a retro “ - only a paint in its palette. And visitors people in jury can think that the cinema of Russia is necessarily offscreen voice of the story-teller and continuous memoirs about its poor, but the happy childhood.