May 30, 2022
0 View
0 0

Unfaithful love of the media

The film by Russian director Dmitry Frolov, which won at Cannes, the media did not want to notice

For more than a month now, the world information space has been twisting and converging around Russia, delineating a small field of topics: about the war, about the war, about the war … and a little more war on the track. Only military operations, only confrontation between Russia “with the whole world” in the name of its “imperial ambitions”, only impregnable fortress walls and loopholes, bristling with gun barrels. So that you immediately get the feeling: no, you can’t negotiate with this. Can’t answer that not a shot, but a human word or a work of art.

Our own former citizens diligently maintain the image of “Russian Mordor”, constantly complaining on networks and in interviews, at cultural events, in the media: Russia no longer has talents, does not listen to the voice of art, is not interested in cultural phenomena, it is deaf to everything except guns, especially now that we left. In order to support this lie, the world community is ready to give up its indestructible curiosity, ready to silence any facts. For example, the fact that Russia nevertheless won in Cannes in the midst of a rampage of Russophobia, in the epicenter of ostracism, at a festival where Russia was not allowed (Kirill Serebrennikov brought his film “Tchaikovsky’s Wife” not from the Russian Federation, but as, so to speak, , a freelance artist – as one and lost in all nominations.)

Under these conditions, which are incompatible with “arbitrage” or at least with a benevolent attitude towards Russian cinema, the film “Last Love” (2017) by Russian director Dmitry Frolov won in the nomination “Best Underground Film”. Do you know anything about him, have you read anything? Have you seen messages? Have you met, perhaps, a story about this film? Meanwhile, he received many awards, including at foreign competitions.

However, any victory our mass media do not notice cinematography. Such is the mass media we have. No one has been able to do anything about this for decades. On the other hand, newspapers-magazines were and are still full of reports about how Kirill Serebrennikov was received in Cannes, and how he spoke about Russia, where (attention!) He received a prison term for embezzlement, and what did the Western press write about a film about a crazy nymphomaniac, which, according toIDeniya Serebrennikov, was the wife of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, and in what dress the actress who played her appeared on the red carpet … In a word, a film about the stormy intimate life of the Russian composer, whose music in the film did not have (for which some critics – Western critics! – called the film “worthless”), received a full measure of press attention.

Well, the work, where, on the contrary, they respectfully treated the Russian classics, went unnoticed. Although it passed in two categories: “Best Underground Film” (the film received an award) and “Best Experimental Film” (did not receive). The film is based on the musical and poetic composition “My Prophetic Soul” based on poems by Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev, read behind the scenes by the Honored Artist of Russia Leonid Mozgov, to the music of the Russian composer, Honored Artist of Russia Sergei Oskolkov. This composition served as the basis for a philosophical parable about human and divine love, about the cycle of life, about the decline of civilization and that the last will become the first. Young actors Natalya Surkova and Vladimir Zolotar, through “plastic interaction” (here you can see a lot – pantomime, dance, and mimesis) convey the feelings and attitudes of the first people, free from the experience and prejudices of countless descendants of the human race. According to the plot, humanity begins and ends with them, Adam and Eve.

As can be understood from these meager lines, nothing in the Russian film was of the now fashionable European values: neither mental deviations, nor sexual, nor biased historical events, nor such an interpretation of the political situation that would please the collective West. The film didn’t even include foreign actors cast solely to make the film look more “European”; all the actors are Russians, both in the frame and behind the scenes. Dmitry Frolov’s film seemed to set out to win without populism, on the mere talent of the creator and performers. And what they have done is a sign that Russian cinema can show a high level even in the most hostile environment, that it is worthy of respect. Not only imitation and “Westernism” in its worst manifestations ensure victories in competitions and festivals, no matter what directors like Kirill Serebrennikov think about it. There is no need to monkey around and crawl, it is better to be yourself.

But support from the media would not hurt the Russians. At least their own, Russian media. There is also a war on the media front, but we stubbornly refuse to notice it. Is this the reason for our collective indifference, our blindness, our inattention to the very fact of the victory of the Russians in the prestigious world competition? How many more victories will we ignore, concentrating it on the scandalous antics and no less scandalous works of “former fellow citizens”?

You can relate to the underground in different ways. It is possible to perceive Western competitions, festivals, praise and criticism of Russia from the Western cultural community in different ways. Finally, one can not consider the award from the West a reason for admiration at a time when Russia is in fact opposed to the Western world. But why hush them up? Why, in the information war, does the press work for the enemy, whose main goal is to represent Russia as a monster of militarism, where there is no place for any art, no creative achievements?

If you notice a mistake in the text, highlight it and press Ctrl+Enter to send the information to the editor.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply