Military Review

With censorship - "Cranes are flying", uncensored - Khan transvestite. Where has the “most important of the arts” gone?

155
There are films that can be reviewed half a dozen times and each time you watch it, find something new, important, or, to put it simply, catchy. There are antipodes from the pantries of the film industry, which, having looked and once, catch the basic idea, the main, so to speak, vector - once and for all captured - is reinforced concrete. - To revise not that there is no desire - everything is just done so neatly, aesthetically, unequivocally that the revision is unlikely to add new emotions, since the received emotions were already beyond the limits of the first viewing.


With censorship - "Cranes are flying", uncensored - Khan transvestite. Where has the “most important of the arts” gone?


Both the first and the second version of the national cinema without any additions can be attributed to the real intangible values, the cultural heritage of not only our country, but the whole (without exaggeration) of humanity.

Recently, however, one has to face a new phenomenon: there seems to be a professional director, there are no less professional actors, there are hundreds or another of budget millions, there is a dedicated film project, and ultimately the pancake is lumpy. And the first pancake - it's okay, but the second, and the third, and the twentieth.

There are many things in the films - dozens of plans - from above, from below, from the side and even almost from the inside of actors, flying cameras, white-toothed smiles of the art community, there are expensive costumes, incredible make-up, a lot of special effects, advertising on federal channels, the largest radio stations, advertising is full of sites , including the main pages of search engines. There is a lot, but when an average person buys a ticket and sits in a cinema chair, the film ultimately reduces to the thought: wasn’t it better to spend these two hours somewhere else - at least in the garage; or: if half a billion is spent on it, then how much does the film crew need for it to shoot something distinct ... And then the child is interested in: is the khan the uncle or the aunt? ..

Aesthetes from the world of cinema often answer the average viewer: if there is no aesthetic vein, then even a piggy-eyed nech poke a screen; they say, there are real experts in business who will appreciate the creation of this director. But this should happen - and the real experts in the case, after watching a whole series of modern “filmmaking”, shrug their shoulders and ask: friends, what was it?
Actor, director, teacher Ivan Didenko in his author's program “Director's analysis” distributed the nuts to the creators of the film “The Legend of Kolovrat” - a film with a claim to some historical the rationale - well, now "cut into history" has become fashionable. Ivan sincerely wonders what it was necessary to eat (or smoke ...) in order to present Batu Khan as a freak from a transvestite show (whoever watched the film (well, at least the trailer) will understand what this is about). In the film with budgets of 360 million rubles, “one handsome young man Kolovrat is fighting with another handsome young man Batu”.

Ivan Didenko:
I have a question: who selected them for the leading roles? You did everything badly: you built a stupid pavilion. The feeling is that you are shooting in a box with an old searchlight. You have a script - complete garbage, sucked from the finger. So you also took some strange people to the main roles. And there is no artist fault. They paint - in what circumstances they put, in such and will work. Artists are more experienced to somehow try to portray cold and tired, and artists with less experience are looking for less.




But, by and large, it is not even about who was chosen for the main roles, which box was turned into a pavilion, which searchlight was directed in what direction. The point is in general principle, which has become characteristic of recent years. And this is the principle of uncontrolled vacuity - especially for consumer society - under the chips and popcorn.

In 90, there were excuses about what, they say, there were no means - and therefore the films were either not filmed at all, or for some monetary crumbs they had to turn around to get a more or less digestible product. But why "excuses"? - funds really was not, and not only in the cinema.

Today, cash in the film invested frankly considerable. Reaches billions in investments. And what, so to speak, at the exit? Is there at all today a group of responsible people in a country that is ready to inquire, if only for decency, how many millions were spent on the “hubnushka” and eyeliner for “Khan Batyi”, how many were spent on dirt and manure in the film “Viking”, as well as other similar elements in these and other "historic-fabulous" films? By the way, now it has become fashionable and convenient for directors to declare: we, they say, are shooting not a historical film, but a "fantasy story", and therefore "it is not the historical details that are important, but the spiritual organization of the heroes." Indeed, it is convenient - after that you can send the same Batu, even in jeans with rhinestones to Ryazan. Well, fantasy, fairy tale ...

It’s only for these fantasies that money is allocated not only from the pocket of specific production centers previously earned by these production centers and no one else. If we return to the same “Kolovrat”, then it was created by the film company “Central Partnership”, which in turn (from 2014 year) is part of Gazprom-Media Holding. Well, the one that contains “Echo of Moscow” and one well-known serial studio, a well-known actress, attracted by which recently announced that the power is shit, it's time to take to the streets and, at least, support Navalny. And so that Gazprom is not quite private, or rather, not private at all, hardly anyone has forgotten. And the authors of the text for the now well-known schoolgirl in the whole country have not forgotten either ...

That is, the state has funds for the film industry. These funds in considerable amounts (including through companies with active state participation) for certain projects are allocated. And so on - even though the grass does not grow. Only after the billions have been mastered, all of a sudden questions are revealed: were there transgender people in the Horde too? Viking and Varyag - is it really the same thing? How many German women raped Russian prince? ..

And the questions of public financiers are found out, interestingly? Or does the state seriously fear that Western partners and parochial liberals will accuse him of censorship? Sorry, but doesn’t the government have the right to ask for its own money? In the end, state funds - these are taxpayers' funds - do we not have the right to ask either? ..

There is no talk about total, ideological censorship. But the fact that it often comes out on screens today really suggests - it would be better with censorship ... In fact, if you list all the ingenious things that came out in our country with centralized censoring, then such an idea would no longer be felt idle. Well, where is marasmus - “Brezhnev” views before the mass hire or today's “kolovrats” with pomada not only villagers, but also Mongolian leaders ...

By the way, we are still wondering how this is so: the leading Western media manage to confuse Kiev with Ulan Bator on the map, and the presidents of Slovenia are called Slovakia. Judging by the trend, we still have everything ahead ...
Author:
Photos used:
shot from the movie "The Legend of Kolovrat"
155 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 4 December 2017 06: 25
    23
    How many Germans were raped by the Russian prince ?.


    And when he managed to take Berlin ??? what
    Take Kolya from Urengoy as a screenwriter ... after a bottle of Bavarian, he will tell you such a thing ... it will not seem enough.
    1. Varyag_0711
      Varyag_0711 4 December 2017 09: 03
      41
      The same LESHA Today, 06:25 New
      And when he managed to take Berlin ??? what
      And for modern filmmakers and screenwriters on the drum to such trifles. They see it this way, and if you see everything differently, then they don’t care about your "bydlyatsky" opinion. In their opinion, we did not go out to snout about “high art” as a snout. They show you the device from the scene, this is "high art", do not like it, don’t look, the answer is something like this.
      It strikes another, it affects people to whom you treated before that with respect. It turns out that among all this party, actors, directors and other "bohemia" there are no normal people at all, and even if there are literally a few. Not for nothing in the Middle Ages, and after all the actors and actors were held for prostitutes, however they were. Therefore, apparently they were even buried outside the cemetery, and not inside.
      To look at the abomination from Russian cinema, recently there is no desire whatsoever, especially with regard to contemporary film-makers about the Great Patriotic War. Yesterday I watched Klim Zhukov about the project under the working title "Sevastopol. 1942.". As far as I understand, there will be something like "28 Panfilov", here is a movie and you can wait. Although, again, to my taste, in “28 Panfilov’s” everything is fine, but the film doesn’t catch my soul, I don’t want to cry. You watch “Some old people go into battle”, “And the dawns here are quiet” and other Soviet films, tears flow from your eyes, as you can’t hold back, but here is the void.
      So it’s time to return censorship, and all “movie artists” like the Raikins, Serebrennikovs, Reichelgauzev and other shelupon should be stalled and asked for every penny spent. And so ask that the skin cracked and thoughts to remove some sort of abomination did not even arise.
      1. Jabal
        Jabal 4 December 2017 10: 27
        11
        The same LEKHA, Varyag_0711: Well, why did you let all the stones down on the scriptwriters?))). The author, in principle, asks - where does such a movie come from? Millions, they say, they are so - a side way to achieve. All the more so - "people's Gazprom" millions - who counts them there?
        And I’ll try to explain to the author. Duc, Alexey, fantasy is a trend. About twenty years old. Look at the gloss statistics on the shelves in bookstores (offline) and the consumption of the same kind of “art” in online electronic reading rooms. It is precisely this “g ** but” that enjoys mass consumption (young people of the 90s mainly).
        Now for the scriptwriters and producers from the cinema. Well, they both feel the trend, they are one with the people, how can it be otherwise ?! Screenwriters (usually the same “peseters” as screenwriters and take it - they’re alive) —they are aware that money is being made not only in circulation, but also in scripts. This, by the way, is also a trend. And if you add 1 + 1 (producer + screenwriter), then that very “theme” comes out - movie guano.
        It just doesn’t fit both of their heads that not only those fantasy fans will come to the “beautiful film”, but also people with intelligence. Who are more or less honoring history and in their lifetime have seen real films about the war. Soviet films with a soul, with soldier’s direct humor and with the wet eyes of a spectator who hears a familiar trench joke for the thousandth time and already knows in advance that in half an hour this particular soldier will die. Fell. Will die. Saving the motherland.
        But not a fantasy beauty from the horde.
        There is no soul in new films, not in literature, not in "new" theaters. There is a business. And nothing personal.
        1. Nicholas C.
          Nicholas C. 4 December 2017 11: 27
          15
          In the "cinema" of modern Russia, for example, they put on "remakes" of old cinema masterpieces. They put it so that always (!!) the question remains: for what purpose did they spend money on the glum. Once again, having experienced gag reflexes when I saw the “film” “Disappeared” in the TV program, I was bothered by the answer to the question: what kind of creatures shot this disgusting abomination, trashing the beautiful film “There is no turning back” 1970. It turned out that the film company Pro-Cinema Production, the authorized capital of 10 thousand rubles, for three founders 3 thousand rubles each with a small one. Once in several years they liquidate the "company", having previously created another with a similar name. There are signs of tax evasion and related: kickbacks, cuts, etc. Here the question is more likely to those who such a "company" gives money for the production of cinema: the Film Fund and the leadership of the Ministry of Culture. Although there is still a question to whom more funding is allocated for the production of cinema: to such "companies" or film companies of a non-state that has declared our country as its enemy. These film companies, for example, when translating voiceovers for foreign countries, distort the Russian text in order to falsify our history at the expense of the Russian budget.

          Is it possible with this approach to expect professional work from directors, from actors (some of them do not have specialized education).
          1. a.sirin
            a.sirin 4 December 2017 15: 42
            +2
            Because in Ukraine it is removed quickly, relatively high quality, not expensive. Actually, as the production of household appliances in China
        2. Same lech
          Same lech 4 December 2017 16: 46
          +5
          There is no soul in new films, not in literature, not in "new" theaters. There is a business. And nothing personal.

          Right ... absolutely right ...
          I remember the movie ... CRANES are flying ... shocked to the core ...
          will modern youth understand this ... I doubt it ...
          other times ... other mores.
          1. odometer
            odometer 6 December 2017 04: 19
            +2
            So the current, I’m not afraid of the word, pseudo-directors, seeing wild people in modern youth, consider it ... But did you like the film "Chapaev"? And I think that your youth and youth did not pass in the 30s, but you understood and accepted this and many other films of the 60-70s. The quality of the actors' play and the skill of the director is the basis of understanding for any generation ... And compare, for example, the modern "Quiet Don" or "A Dawns ..." with those films ...
        3. CONTROL
          CONTROL 5 December 2017 09: 14
          +4
          Quote: Jabal
          Duc, Alexey, fantasy is a trend. About twenty years old. Look at the gloss statistics on the shelves in bookstores (offline) and the consumption of the same kind of “art” in online electronic reading rooms. It is precisely this “g ** but” that enjoys mass consumption (young people of the 90s mainly). .

          Fantasy and "fantasy" - one another is not a friend!
          There is such a fantasy author: Svyatoslav Loginov. A rather well-known thing is “The Many-armed God of Dalain”, based on the Mongol myths and the Mongol epic. But how many are familiar with the Mongol myths? To write such a a book - it should be good - at a minimum! - to study Mongolian mythology ... And the book is "fantasy", fun ...
          ... Or - his own - "Apple from the apple tree", a small novel of such volume. To write it, he - the author - worked out more than 1500 books: selection, regionalization, storage of apples, canning, cooking apples ... The approach! And it turned out a relatively small novel in the style of "fantasy" ...
          -----------------------
          ... The question of the ratio of labor invested, talent (if any) and - the result?
          1. Jabal
            Jabal 5 December 2017 15: 34
            +2
            CONTROL: Well, yes, yes. I did not say that fantasy is guano. I said that this is a trend. Today's, but not so much a trend as to be generally understood. Moreover, generally accepted. My creature after the Strugatsky does not accept something similar, for example ... That is - IMHO, be sobery))
            The same LEKHA: I will stand up for modern youth. Can I?)) Thanks God, he raised his own in such a way that they penetrated. As well as "They fought for their homeland" and "Only old people go into battle" we felt. The only question was - in the war, is everything really so straightforward, homely and without wisdom? I had to explain a bit that the pain and dirt were not far-fetched and will never be ...))) Now we are growing up two grandchildren. I’ll instill a real movie in 10-12 years ... So that I won’t accidentally brainwash.))
      2. Lexus
        Lexus 6 December 2017 18: 57
        +2
        Contemporary Russian cinema is the case when a century of evolution has passed for nothing.

    2. Primoos
      Primoos 4 December 2017 11: 02
      +3
      Kolovrat has not watched yet. What, and managed to screw a homosexual here? Zarraza!
      1. albert
        albert 4 December 2017 22: 28
        +2
        We are waiting for a review of Bad Comedian. And it will be seen there whether to watch or not. For me, this guy is the only one in Russia, a normal film critic. Well, except that the Red Cynic is still there.
    3. svp67
      svp67 4 December 2017 13: 34
      +5
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      And when he managed to take Berlin ???

      In those days, Berlin was a SLAVIC VILLAGE, and Germans, that is, dumb, called those who did not own the WORD, that is, they were not a Slav.
    4. Vend
      Vend 4 December 2017 17: 48
      +2
      They criticize modern historical films, they often criticize deservedly, to recall, at least, “Viking”. However, let's recall the Soviet film "Anna Yaroslavna Queen of France", those who did not watch look. You will be unpleasantly surprised by the Soviet vision of Ancient Russia. And I have one more question for the admins of the site, they posted this obscene review, but the other one is not, why?
    5. siberalt
      siberalt 7 December 2017 14: 41
      +1
      If you don’t ask what the allocated funds went for, then it is beneficial to the one who allocates them. It's elementary! " lol
  2. Shurale
    Shurale 4 December 2017 06: 43
    10
    "Why enter this crap? The terminator is iron from metal, but why is the child a puppet?" ....... (c)
    The great words from the film "Knocking on Heaven" perfectly reveal my opinion on this issue. I'm not trying to figure out these intricacies of the brain of the directors of downs, I just do not watch their films.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 4 December 2017 06: 48
      +8
      And you’re doing it right. It's a shame that such "products" are made in our country, rich in talents and just brains. But in the media there are natural hoopoes ..
      Quote: Shurale
      "Why enter this crap? The terminator is iron from metal, but why is the child a puppet?" ....... (c)
      The great words from the film "Knocking on Heaven" perfectly reveal my opinion on this issue. I'm not trying to figure out these intricacies of the brain of the directors of downs, I just do not watch their films.
      1. Uncle lee
        Uncle lee 4 December 2017 07: 07
        17
        Apparently the bar has fallen so low that films can no longer be made without entertainment!
        You cannot bring up me, brought up in the "Immortal Garrison," Star "," Only old men and others go into battle. I just can’t watch them! hi
      2. aybolyt678
        aybolyt678 4 December 2017 08: 06
        +6
        Quote: 210ox
        It's a shame that such "products" are made in our country, rich in talents and just brains.

        Talent is the monetary unit of ancient Athens, expressing the value of a specialist slave. Brains, they have sheep. Even a not-so-talented person, when he has a Goal, can do beautiful things. The trouble with our country is not that we focus on the West, but that we have lost ourselves.
        1. andj61
          andj61 4 December 2017 11: 50
          +3
          Quote: aybolyt678
          Quote: 210ox
          It's a shame that such "products" are made in our country, rich in talents and just brains.

          Talent is the monetary unit of ancient Athens, expressing the value of a specialist slave. Brains, they have sheep. Even a not-so-talented person, when he has a Goal, can do beautiful things. The trouble with our country is not that we focus on the West, but that we have lost ourselves.

          Actually, talent was a measure of weight in ancient times, and different talents had different weights - from 60.4 (“heavy” Babylonian talent - there was also “light” royal in 30,2 kg) to 16,8 kg (Homeric talent) .Silver talent (Attic or European) as a monetary unit was equated to 26,196 kg. Since the time of Alexander the Great, the weight of Attic talent has been 25,902 kg. Talent had no clear correlation with the cost of a specialist slave. And even on the silver Attic (that is, Athenian - the area where Athens is located is called Attica) you could buy many slaves - it was a lot of money.
          And the current meaning of the word "talent" - outstanding innate qualities, special natural abilities - have their origin in assessing human abilities through a huge number of metal drags. At first it was a metaphor, but then it was no longer a metaphor.
          And I do not agree with you that we have lost ourselves. I think that this is not so - it is too early to put an end to our country! hi
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 4 December 2017 12: 08
            +1
            Quote: andj61
            Actually, talent is a measure of weight in ancient times, and different talents had different weights.

            The cost of specialists also changed, and in order to emphasize the cost, such a word was used. Semantics is the science of the origin of words.
            Quote: andj61
            I think that this is not so - it is too early to put an end to our country!
            a cross or crescent is really early. But I'm glad that you understand the danger of perspectivelaughing
        2. a.sirin
          a.sirin 4 December 2017 14: 49
          +3
          Ok, are you oriented to the West? Then film something at least remotely approaching Fury with Brad Pete.
          1. AleBors
            AleBors 5 December 2017 12: 10
            +5
            Well, too, you know, not a masterpiece ..
            1. Ulan
              Ulan 5 December 2017 18: 42
              +6
              To put it mildly - not a masterpiece. Compared to "They Fought for the Homeland," it’s just ... mo.
              And if not for the hyped Brad Pitt, then probably no one would have looked.
              Another "Private Ryan" set an example.
              And here I am again on the weekend I looked at “Shield and Sword” and all the “fury” went mattress, far and for a long time.
              1. a.sirin
                a.sirin 6 December 2017 15: 29
                +1
                From the point of view of the quality of the filming and playing of the actors, the emotional intensity conveyed by the gaze, the gesture of fury “Rage” is not a cut above the “Shield with the Sword”. There, excuse me, the heroes are frozen, literally predictable, inanimate.
                And in Rage, we see ordinary, normal people - not heroes in essence and origin, but forced to become so.
                War is a tragedy of the psyche and life of normal people - not heroes. In this is the quality of "Fury."
                Just like Dawn, the drama of people in war
                1. Ulan
                  Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 13
                  +2
                  Shield and sword, this is a film about a scout. What kind of glow should he demonstrate? Go on the attack with a cry of cheers? And the emotions and intensity there are quite enough, it looks like you didn’t see the film, otherwise you would have remembered Weiss-Belov’s trip to a children's concentration camp and the death of a Russian pilot who crashed a plane with Gestapo on board.
                  1. a.sirin
                    a.sirin 6 December 2017 21: 47
                    +1
                    Saw. Not once. After the "Schindler's List" I will not discuss anything about the "quality of shooting" of concentration camps. The rest, too, is so-so. Compared to "Soldier's Father" for 3s +
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 4 December 2017 07: 01
    +3
    Of modern films, only about the young Nevsky can still be watched modestly and tastefully, the problems of patriotism are revealed, the budget is $ 10 million.
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 4 December 2017 07: 11
    16
    A good film and without government support will pave the way. Low-budget Balabanov, Mamin, Rogozhkin and Kachanov at one time took off their masterpieces, and often took little-known actors or persuaded them to make famous films for little money, but you get more pleasure from watching those films than from the current pathos films.
    On the other hand, this is a global trend, as I take a look. Even well-known directors, following the market, begin to slide into taste, throwing a lot of money into the production, and the output is another passing film that only fans watch. The golden era of the late 80's - the middle of the 90's, when simply cult films were shot, which can already be considered a classic of cinema, is gone. From time to time, Cameron or Tarantino will shine, but for the most part it turns out something like "Desolation of Smaug" - nothing is dragged on, with the notions of scriptwriters that completely change the plan of the author of the book. Or “Rage” - the director’s drug addictions about how American troops could fight in Europe if they were told which side the enemy was on.
  5. ImPerts
    ImPerts 4 December 2017 07: 28
    +7
    Relatives went, liked it.
    But Batu was created as a freak, and in 300 of the Spartans Xerxes did not understand what.
    I completely agree with this. Why do modern historical figures do not understand what, from the category of God forgive me and offend the Mongols with such “delights”.
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 4 December 2017 08: 26
      +1
      And then, that modern historians have difficulty imagining how one or another historical character really looked like - what he said, what he was dressed in.
      Only according to historical documents, the price of which we can determine by reading the relevant documents on recent history.
      Therefore, I consider the cry of historians-reconstructors, amateurs to count the number of rivets on the armor strictly as a commercial enterprise of the latter in order to keep their historical school afloat.
      1. ImPerts
        ImPerts 4 December 2017 08: 33
        10
        Quote: Mestny
        And then, that modern historians have difficulty imagining how one or another historical character really looked like - what he said, what he was dressed in.

        So do you think Xerxes looked like this?
        1. aybolyt678
          aybolyt678 5 December 2017 21: 14
          +2
          Quote: ImPerts
          So do you think Xerxes looked like this?

          actually it's not Xerxes .. it's from Egypt. All the frescoes depicting the battle of Alexander the Great with the Persians on Xerxes should have a tiara on his head, and a beard !!!
          1. zoolu350
            zoolu350 7 December 2017 10: 00
            +1
            This is just Xerxes from the mattress "300 Spartans." Glamor in the cube, but his dad Darius 1 in the next film is shown quite in the spirit of the times. The appearance of historical characters is really a problem. There is evidence that among the grandchildren of Genghis Khan, the fashion of the court of the Jin empire was already popular, then claims to Kolovrat were invented in this regard. Here in the series "Vikings" all the main characters are tattooed from heels to the crown and the question is, were they really like that?
      2. novel66
        novel66 4 December 2017 09: 44
        +4
        but what does the story have to do with it? legend of the legendary invasion, any bike will do
      3. sivuch
        sivuch 10 December 2017 12: 28
        +2
        If I remember correctly, in the movie Sophie's Choice, the main character is released from Auschwitz by American soldiers - is this also due to ignorance?
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 4 December 2017 07: 30
    +4
    In any movie that you want to see, you will see.
    For example, "28 Panfilov" I liked very much. I remember the audience in the hall even slammed ...
    Kolovrat is a legend. The first time I heard this name
    1. Ulan
      Ulan 5 December 2017 18: 44
      +3
      Have you really not read the trilogy of V. Yan? And in childhood we read. I read it in the 8th grade.
      And at the institute "Cruel Age" I. Kalashnikov.
  7. Moore
    Moore 4 December 2017 07: 43
    +8
    Tell me, does the "300 Spartans" of 2007 also have to be evaluated in terms of historical authenticity?
    The dough was poured in there comparable to “Kolovrat,” on the screen about the same free interpretation of everything - from events to costumes and weapons. And Xerxes there - the cousin of Batu - is the same gender not defined.
    Once in 1979, they scolded Jungwald-Khilkevich abusively for hacking with musketeers. But here you go, still watching this imperishable in the then fashionable musical style.
    Maybe it makes sense to wait a couple of years? A people with its own popular rating will figure it out. But somehow he figured out the “Citadel”, “The Anticipation” and other “Bastards” and “Matilda” - he voted against the ruble.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 4 December 2017 08: 31
      14
      Quote: Moore
      Tell me, the "300 Spartans" 2007

      And compare with the "300 Spartans" of 1962! There is a difference ?
      1. Moore
        Moore 4 December 2017 08: 48
        +3
        The film of the 62nd year in terms of historicity makes sense to compare with "Alexander Nevsky" - both films are classic versions of events (although according to Klim Zhukov, the events there were somewhat different).
        Those same dumb “Three Musketeers” - who in 1922 threw presentations to Max Linder about unhistoricality?
        1. Ulan
          Ulan 5 December 2017 18: 45
          +2
          Max Linder is actually a comedian.
  8. Altona
    Altona 4 December 2017 07: 49
    +2
    I don’t watch modern cinema. Before the Eisenstein films, although they were also a little fantastic, far away. There is no unifying idea. As for the duel between Kolovrat and Batu, this is generally beyond the bounds of good and evil. The fight between Peresvet and Chelubey is memorable, and Peresvet was a monk. Kolovrat, on the other hand, was simply an avenger who assembled a detachment and avenged some nomad detachment for the destroyed village.
    1. xtur
      xtur 4 December 2017 09: 20
      +6
      > As for the duel between Kolovrat and Batu, it is generally beyond good and evil.

      But how did you imagine the image of Kolovrat? Like Ilya Muromets - a huge giant who fights with a tree trunk and a complete zero in martial art - such as strength, there is no need for mind?

      Have you ever wondered how to make a film on such a topic when the whole world speaks about incomprehensible things about the Mongols, when it is generally incomprehensible how they conquered this world, when Russia is a small and godforsaken place that neighbors did not conquer only by mistake

      The film showed such a battle of the hell warriors with the unbrokenly undying Russian squad in the country of absolute misunderstanding. And the director, in fact, behaved as an intellectual hero and showed, contrary to all the grief to historians, thatо
      1) An army with catapults and siege weapons cannot move fast
      2) That the Mongolian bows in a battle against a trained army are useless and harmless from the word in general
      3) and if the army moves quickly, it will not be able to conquer the fortified city, no matter what the number of troops
      4) He vividly showed that the Mongol horses are not humpbacked horses who take plants out of the snow that will grow in six months. Or rather, he did not show this game
      1. novel66
        novel66 4 December 2017 09: 46
        +7
        which Mongols, well enough already about the historicity of the legendary, let's talk about gnomes and elves.
      2. Victorio
        Victorio 4 December 2017 12: 17
        +5
        Quote: xtur
        1) An army with catapults and siege weapons cannot move fast
        2) That the Mongolian bows in a battle against a trained army are useless and harmless from the word in general
        3) and if the army moves quickly, it will not be able to conquer the fortified city, no matter what the number of troops

        =====
        1) the horse army moves quickly, and the catapults are pulled to the already surrounded city later
        2) then the few troops of the princes, the rest of the peasantry and artisans can be attributed to the trained army in Russia, so 2-3 Mongol warriors with the help of bows and horses will easily take tens or two peasants armed with axes and pitchforks.
        3) what does a fortified city in Russia mean at that time !? walls, and towers made of logs, what kind of a barrier is this for the Mongols with their experience of capturing the Chinese. yes Asian walled cities! therefore, if there were delays in the capture of Russian cities, it was solely due to the dedication of specific defenders, and the Mongols, like all pros, did not like the loss.
        1. xtur
          xtur 4 December 2017 13: 40
          +2
          > 1) the cavalry army moves quickly, and the catapults are pulled up to the already surrounded city later

          1) then they set up ambushes in the forests along the river bank, block the river from two sides, and the horse army is completely cut out

          2) Russia of that time was a developed and rich state with a huge number of cities, in Novgorod, the literacy level was quite Byzantine, there even merchants and artisans owned the letter and wrote letters to each other, and with such stupid defenders, Germans, or Byzantines, or the same Polovtsy / Pechenegs, and certainly Khazar Kaganate such under-state could not be defeated
          And this is not only my logic, but also the result of archaeological excavations and other studies on various archival materials - naturally, this is not about my efforts. This is all the point of view of respectable historians.
          3) I do not know, see (2). And besides, the walls made of wood are set on fire elementarily and they could not be an obstacle in the days of the feudal dismantling of the princes, which had gone for many decades

          In a word, you uncritically reproduced all the myths that I spoke about
          1. sivuch
            sivuch 10 December 2017 12: 06
            +2
            However, at the expense of the walls, the previous speaker wrote correctly. In Kievan Rus, normal stone walls of cities had just begun to appear, and mainly in the North, where they had to deal with the Order and the Swedes. And in the rest, there were quite high earthen ramparts with wooden potholes at the top. Sometimes a wooden fence was double filled with soil. Only towers were stone and, accordingly, only arrows could be placed on the towers. If the Mongols appeared 50 years later, they would also have to deal with the stone walls of cities, monasteries and castles.
      3. your1970
        your1970 5 December 2017 19: 08
        +1
        Quote: xtur
        4) He vividly showed that the Mongol horses are not humpbacked horses who take plants out of the snow that will grow in six months. Or rather, he did not show this game
        - I don’t know about Mongolian horses - I won’t lie. But the cows of the Kalmyk breed graze in the steppe all winter, eat what they get out of the snow. Naturally, they are fed, but fed,do not feed.Usual normal cows .....
        1. xtur
          xtur 6 December 2017 09: 15
          0
          > Ordinary normal cows .....

          the whole load of the cow is that it just walks and digs grass out from under the snow. Now let's try to imagine what a cow can dig in the forest, and on the ice of the river, and how much it will ride during the campaign.
          In my opinion, it is obvious that the load level for an animal differs somewhere by an order of magnitude. And now to this we need to add the number of animals, because each warrior needed about 2-3 horses.
      4. tezey
        tezey 6 December 2017 04: 03
        +2
        As for the Mongol horses. In the Mongolian Tumen there was light cavalry, which just sat on a short and hardy horse and heavily armed warriors on taller, but less hardy horses. And those and other horses clearly did not eat plants from under the snow. During the campaign, they needed enough food, otherwise they would just have rested. So, the main horse in the Mongolian army was just undersized, that is, in your opinion, the humpbacked horse. Historical fact however.
        1. xtur
          xtur 6 December 2017 09: 20
          0
          > that is, according to your little hunchback horse. Historical fact however.

          nothing like that, the little humpbacked horse is a mythical Mongolian horse who, at full gallop, will get his own food out of the snow, because he will not have other time for feeding, due to the fact that, according to the generally accepted explanation / legend, they quickly move from one conquered cities to another.
          Obviously, only a humpbacked horse can have such skills, and no one will find food during a military campaign in the conditions of the Russian winter.
          1. Ulan
            Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 15
            +2
            Nonsense, why write.
            1. xtur
              xtur 7 December 2017 13: 35
              0
              > Nonsense, why write.

              it looks like you have a sense of humor / irony / sarcasm.
    2. Ulan
      Ulan 5 December 2017 18: 48
      +3
      Actually, the duel was not with Batu, but with his son-in-law Khoztovrul.
      So at least in "The Legend of the Ruin of Ryazan Batu".
      The film is undoubtedly fantasy. But on him. will judge the history of Russia.
      DO NOT shoot fantasy on historical subjects.
  9. Rey_ka
    Rey_ka 4 December 2017 07: 51
    +3
    Hollywood laurels haunt small-town stars. "300 Spartans" in the Russian version. The Hollywood version was clear: the Spartans - West; Xerxes is the personification of the whole East and has collected all the freaks, both moral and physical, and the pervert himself do not understand that. But ours, Batu !? I would be very indignant at the place of Kazan!
    1. the lord
      the lord 5 December 2017 04: 43
      0
      And what to be indignant at once, it is immediately evident that it was precisely such tristarases that were painted and brought them before the conquest of Russia. And it seems like Polovtsy and Bulgars, like from the Mongols, were also defeated. and these are also their ancestors.
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 10 December 2017 12: 10
        +3
        Just the Bulgars once arranged a very successful ambush not for someone, but for Subudai himself. True, in the future he returned the debt with interest.
  10. Altona
    Altona 4 December 2017 07: 53
    +5
    Quote: ImPerts
    Relatives went, liked it.

    -------------------------
    The average tradesman likes fantasy. The Bolshevik aliens with Trotsky and Parvus, the Viking in the person of Danila Kozlovsky, and then the pilot, and then the manager. Well and other such fancy dress.
    1. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 4 December 2017 10: 06
      +3
      Recently I watched the American TV series "Expansion" of the production company "Lost" the series is fantastic and quite good and it has an interesting "message", namely in the distant future, having passed through a series of wars, mankind nevertheless united into one whole, everything ..... except for Russians. They dumped from the Earth and began to colonize Mars, having founded a powerful militarized state there and the same “leapfrog” that is happening between Russia and the West started. The cool thing is that the Russians there have to spend all their strength and resources trying to colonize an alien planet, dreaming of making it something like the Earth in the future, and "united humanity" in every way interferes with them, provokes, etc. fearing their "excessive amplification "
  11. Rey_ka
    Rey_ka 4 December 2017 07: 54
    +2
    And so why indignation the film is not documentary! And we remember in capitalism, but here we need a picture! In the Middle Ages and to be executed by the whole family, too, there was a sight! So everything is expected!
    Well, yes, the Hollywood laurels do not give local directors peace. Yes, the same "300 Spartans." But the message of the 300s is understandable. Spartans are a good personification of the West. Kserk East and Asia there are all types of him physical and moral, and he himself is a pervert. But where are we? or completely forgot how to think !? I would be indignant at the place of Kazan!
  12. antivirus
    antivirus 4 December 2017 08: 00
    +4
    in the end, damn it turns out lumpy. Moreover, the first pancake is still okay, but the second and third

    PURPOSE -BAKING Nausea in deep-frying oil. no purpose bake pancakes.

    we are still wondering how it is like this: the leading Western media manage to confuse Kiev with Ulan Bator on the map, and the presidents of Slovenia call Slovakia.

    - ours will take fantasy - they will come up with the capital and the country.
  13. aybolyt678
    aybolyt678 4 December 2017 08: 16
    +5
    Sadly not even because of the movie. Nowadays, there is a certain public request for a Goal. Where to go? what to focus on? how to be Art, by definition, should have an educational function. Empathizing with the hero, changing with him, we grow spiritually, internally. As internal changes from watching a movie, we evaluate it. And the modern message is this: be cool, painted, tough, rich. It doesn't matter how you got it. There is no change in the character of the hero during the film. There is only the feeling of shooting, and a lot of money. It is devastating.
  14. parusnik
    parusnik 4 December 2017 08: 18
    +6
    "The Legend of Kolovrat", another film based on Hollywood patterns .. Russian cinema is dying ..
    1. Serhiodjan
      Serhiodjan 4 December 2017 09: 21
      +2
      Yes, he objects and does not die. Only your ability to perceive something new dies and change old hackneyed Soviet attitudes in your head. In general, a collection of old constantly groaning soviet Soviet grandfathers. Sorry to boil, no matter how honorable here everyone just complain and whine. Everything, I respect you all, leave.
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 4 December 2017 09: 35
        +7
        Well, you can be reborn according to Hollywood patterns ... You know, I watched the film, it didn’t catch it ... well, sorry for the groaning, but the Soviet cartoon of 1985. The Tale of Evpatia Kolovrat somehow looks better, although there are jambs there .. German knights in the troops of Batu ... But it looks organically .. Something like that I would see in the film .. No, they took off their own, based on foreign ones ... This is of course a revival ...
      2. aybolyt678
        aybolyt678 4 December 2017 10: 26
        +3
        technically, of course, he is being reborn - special effects and all that .... But from modern films I was hooked by one - the back of the moon. Clearly mid-budget, but the idea was !!!!! after him I even noticed a lot of positive things in our country.
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 4 December 2017 11: 29
          +4
          Special effects are the technical development of cinema .. No more .. Have you seen an American film like Kramer against Kramer for a long time? .. Hollywood doesn’t release such films ... "The Other Side of the Moon," if you mean the series about the maniac who kills young girls, where did the policeman move in time? I have to disappoint you, again not ours, is an adaptation of the popular British project "Life on Mars", which was released from 2006 to 2007.
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 4 December 2017 12: 10
            +2
            Quote: parusnik
            is an adaptation of the popular British project

            in fact, all that was already there. Only in the British project was there no Soviet Union.
            1. parusnik
              parusnik 4 December 2017 13: 25
              +2
              I wrote an adaptation .. Their script was adapted to local realities, not copied, but adapted ... Two big differences, but the main thing is not ours .. The series "Life on Mars" is about what: the inspector of the criminal police of modern Manchester, preys on a maniac the killer, as a result of a car accident, ends up in 1973 in Manchester.
          2. Victorio
            Victorio 4 December 2017 12: 27
            +2
            Quote: parusnik
            I have to disappoint you, again not ours, is an adaptation of the popular British project "Life on Mars", which was released from 2006 to 2007.

            ====
            the comparison is not entirely correct, but their idea, storyline, the rest is different, because there is no main thing, a change in the socio-economic formation, and everything connected with it
            1. parusnik
              parusnik 4 December 2017 13: 32
              0
              Do you understand the difference in words adapted and copied ..? Or the film was shot based on a work or based on a work ... Watch the films Treasure Island 1937 and 1972 .. So the first one was shot based on the work, the second one on the work .. Life on Mars series about which: Criminal Police Inspector of modern Manchester, preys on a maniac killer, as a result of a car accident ends up in 1973 in Manchester.
        2. CONTROL
          CONTROL 4 December 2017 14: 12
          +1
          Quote: aybolyt678
          Of modern films, I was hooked by one - the back of the moon.

          ... not a cartoon of Alexander Tatarsky?
          ... or his own - "Plasticine crow" ... "Wings, legs and tails" ...
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 5 December 2017 21: 17
            +1
            Quote: CONTROL
            .or him - "Plasticine crow" ... "Wings, legs and tails" ..

            I'm not so old ... my wife is younger than you, and I do push-ups 51 times, and besides my degree I have a sambo rank
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter 5 December 2017 21: 34
              +1
              Quote: aybolyt678
              I'm not so old ... my wife is younger than you, and I do push-ups 51 times, and besides my degree I have a sambo rank

              It’s immediately obvious that a person is not lying wink Otherwise I would write 52 times fellow
      3. Ulan
        Ulan 5 December 2017 19: 09
        +5
        First you do more than these groaning Soviet grandfathers, "and then boil with" righteous "anger.
        The dearest thing, not in age, but in knowledge and not patience with trash.
        Not only in cinema, but also in construction, manufacturing, medicine, economics, politics.
        Therefore, we have the right to criticism, because we don’t like the free interpretation of history due to the lack of knowledge and market trends that are hiding behind, "the director’s vision.
        How do you feel about the fact that the dentist instead of a seal will leave a needle in your tooth and declare that this is a "vision of the master."
        Hackwork should not be a place anywhere.
  15. xtur
    xtur 4 December 2017 09: 03
    +6
    Curiously, was Volodin watching the movie about Kolovrat? And in general, does he even imagine that this is literally a legend, and no one has proven that this is a real historical event?

    And for such a framework, the film was a complete success. Of course, I am sincerely sorry that the Mongols are depicted as meaninglessly bloodthirsty, whose motives, when they conquer such a forgotten, from their point of view, place, like Russia, in this utter cold, are completely incomprehensible. But this is not the fault of the director, it is the fault of the very concept of the Mongol conquest.
    The film only made obvious and obvious all the flaws of the concept of the Mongol conquest. There is no quick troop movement on ice in the film, nor any giant convoys of food, there are no horses eating hedgehogs in Chicago, in the sense of spruce branches and cones, and algae on the sea days, after breaking the chilling river of ice, too.

    You just need to believe that a huge army, in which there were an order of magnitude more soldiers than inhabitants in Ryazan, could feed on this minuscule. And by the way, there are no Russian troops in the film either - there are small squads that are not even pulled to the regiment. And how in such conditions they held a huge and rich country, and why Europeans and Byzantines did not conquer them before, is also not clear.

    In a word, the director, shooting what is more or less realistic from his point of view, and what the audience will believe, shows us a huge army, who knows what’s coming, who knows why, who wants to know what’s moving, terribly slow, and conquering Russia at the expense of troop training and the huge difference in population, and the population of Russia is underestimated, apparently by orders of magnitude, and The political abilities of the princes were reduced to the level of full imbeciles, because for the sake of the Polovtsy they united, and for the sake of saving themselves they did not want to unite against the Mongols.
    And yes, they simply showed how normally trained warriors defend themselves against a hail of arrows, the main weapon of the Mongolian army, according to historians
    1. novel66
      novel66 4 December 2017 09: 48
      +5
      do not believe historians
      1. aybolyt678
        aybolyt678 4 December 2017 10: 37
        +2
        history is the mother of all sciences, connects the past with the present and helps to see the future. Studying modern historians, you understand that war is needed to clean the historical memory of information viruses
        1. novel66
          novel66 4 December 2017 10: 39
          +4
          I would still separate history from historians, at least from some. I do not believe in the Mongol invasion
        2. Dedall
          Dedall 4 December 2017 22: 57
          +3
          Quote: aybolyt678
          history is the mother of all sciences, connects the past with the present and helps to see the future.

          In-in, and who knows her now?
          I work as a doctor in a military unit, and when a young replenishment arrives, I often do “lice tests”. Do not think that I am mocking someone - I’m just looking for a soldier at the catch in the first-aid post. Well, there is a simple dressing to do, or give pills. And I can say that not every kid with medical education is taking root in this place.
          So, I can say that it is historical education that has fallen sharply lately. A particularly revealing example is when I asked a guy who graduated from the university’s history department about Berlin World. When he began to weave about the surrender of the Germans in 1945, I asked him about the Potsdam conference, then the guy "hung up." But the Genoese Conference and the San Rapal Treaty finally finished it off. But twenty years ago, a third of the recruits called at least the one who was tried at the Nuremberg trials. But is this a certified historian !?
      2. CONTROL
        CONTROL 4 December 2017 13: 48
        +2
        Quote: novel xnumx
        do not believe historians

        Modern history as a science - perverted by donelzya !!!
        Especially - Russian history!
        Take even the Millerovsky version of the history of Russia - for which Lomonosov was nearly executed publicly as a heretic! and his archives disappeared after death ...
        And now we are studying the history of Russia according to Miller - a German and a liar, one of the "Russian academics" who had killed Lomonosov and distorted, distorted (still a big question - in whose interests?) Russian history!
        --------------------------
        (Even after Lomonosov’s death, Miller didn’t calm down: he wandered himself and sent expeditions to monasteries and monastery monasteries, seizing ("to state archives ...") the oldest chronicles, lists, historical documents ... only in "state archives" they are not ... Destroyed?)
        1. novel66
          novel66 4 December 2017 13: 52
          +4
          in fact, this is what I had in mind! hi as you know, Russia is a country with an unpredictable history
    2. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 4 December 2017 10: 29
      +1
      50 percent of the Mongol warrior's diet was horse blood, which they drank incised in the jugular vein .. pure, high-quality protein. Without getting off the horse.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 4 December 2017 15: 59
        +4
        50 percent of the Mongol warrior's diet was horse blood, which they drank incising in the jugular vein .. pure, high-quality protein.

        Are you serious?
        And then they cut a vein for themselves and probably fed the horse laughing
        1. aybolyt678
          aybolyt678 4 December 2017 16: 01
          +1
          the horses of the Mongols were interchangeable 2-3 per warrior. They were small, hardy, shaggy. I read one archaeologist, I don’t remember who, but he described their life specifically. Without this technique - drinking blood through a vein, an invasion at all would have been impossible.
          1. xtur
            xtur 5 December 2017 08: 29
            0
            > Mongolian horses were interchangeable 2-3 per warrior

            do you even imagine how to feed such a breakthrough of horses - even if the Mongol horses had eaten all the inhabitants of Ryazan with their supplies, and even all the hedgehogs in the district, this would be enough for them for another day - with a ratio of numbers, as in the movie
            1. Ulan
              Ulan 5 December 2017 20: 35
              +4
              First, many continue to be confident that Batu brought 300 soldiers to Russia, as is said in Soviet school history textbooks.
              It is clear that this figure is greatly exaggerated. It is unlikely that he had more than 50-70 thousand soldiers, which at that time was just a gigantic amount.
              For fun, see how many soldiers participated in the famous Battle of Grunwald. But on the side of the Poles half of Europe was on the side of the Teutonic Order, too.
              If I correctly remember from the memory of the Poles something 20-25 thousand for the order of 15-20, and this is the largest battle of the Middle Ages.
              Well, let's say the battle of Cressy and Poitiers. A few thousand on both sides. The most famous battles of the Middle Ages.
              So someone greatly overestimated the numbers of Batu’s troops. And as they say - the province went to dance.
              I think the idea of ​​Mongolian horses as small shaggy horses is incorrect.
              It is most likely based on the appearance of the current Mongolian horses.
              War horses, of course, were larger, otherwise they simply could not stand the heavily armed Mongolian horseman ..
              Yes, it is heavily armed in armor and with heavy weapons.
              In the Middle Ages. The main striking force of ANY army was the heavily armed spearmen who delivered the main ramming strike.
              For the Mongols, this was the same thing, but not at all light riders with bows on small horses in fox malachas and robes.
              So it is heavily armed cavalry. only she could withstand the heavily armed and horsemen of Khorezm and Polovtsy and Russian combatants of the senior squad.
              If you want the knights of the steppes, it seems so respected Shpakovsky called them ..
              It looked like a Russian heavily armed equestrian spearman, you can see in the film "Alexander. Battle of Neva."
              There, though with errors, but in general the Russian armor is shown correctly.
              Very heavy. And how could a Mongol archer resist such a warrior or a European knight? No way.
              Besides the light cavalry, the Mongols also had other weapons, a shield, a straight sword, a spear and armor, although not as strong as the heavily armed Mongol cavalry.
              But there were always felt or leather armor.
              For Mongolian horses, winter was not outlandish, where the Mongol tribes wandered, the winter was often quite severe and there was enough snow.
              So they knew how to get their own food. By the way, all the horses in the Middle Ages were smaller than modern breeds.
              The army of Batu did not go at all in a compact mass, they raided, as if on a hunt, on different roads and the troops gathered only when they met resistance in some place.
              As a rule, neighboring units came to the rescue, as was the case with the City.
              That is, this is a classic concentration of forces on a dangerous site.
              The Mongols did not go blind at all, the pre-upcoming theater of operations, was examined with the help of scouts, merchants, traitors .. Tactical intelligence was also at its best, and the Mongols knew which settlements were within reach.
              They got food there. Like any medieval army, the Mongols were supplied by robbery, conquered territories and food and fodder, gathered and guarded.
              By the way, let me remind you that in Russian villages the roofs were covered with straw, and this is feed for horses. In addition, the harvest harvested in the fall was also seized.
              The warriors, on the other hand, kept a supply of food for only a few days, this was mainly jerky, koumiss, sheep’s cheese.
              They also drank the blood of horses, but this is an extreme case.
              So the Mongol army was centralized, had a single command, was well organized in terms of intelligence and supply.
              By the way, whoever did not read the “Memory” of Chivilikhin, I advise you to read. Of course, this is the author’s view of those events, and much is debatable, but a lot of interesting things.
              1. xtur
                xtur 6 December 2017 09: 31
                0
                > There they got food.

                the Russian princes had about 20 years to think over and prepare for the invasion of the Mongols, after the battle of Kalka, where the Mongols destroyed their combined army. And the preparation included the organization of food warehouses outside the cities, in the forests that were available in those years in Russia anywhere in abundance - to deprive the Mongols of food during the campaign was the only winning tactic and strategy.

                In addition, the population of Russia is the heir to the Scythians and their tact of the scorched earth, which the Russian army used even 2-3 years after the Scythians disappeared.

                And after that, no habits of Mughal horses to get food from under the snow would not save them. And the more the Mongol army is dispersed, the easier it is to beat them in parts, it’s also obvious

                In a word, the official version of the Mongol conquest does not stand up to any simple criticism of reliability.

                And yes - none of the historians spoke of the heavy cavalry of the Mongols, everyone spoke of light archers. Then after that, or historians report false information, or your information is false
                1. Ulan
                  Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 26
                  +3
                  How do you imagine these 20 years? Gather thousands of troops and wait 20 years when the Mongols come forward?
                  And how could the Russian princes know that the Mongols would come to Russia again?
                  Just for many years dealing with the steppes they quite reasonably decided that like all the nomads they raided and left.
                  We now know that the Mongols were not ordinary nomads and what a cohesive force they represented.
                  Yes, Kolovrat was the first to beat individual Mongolian detachments, until he ran into the main part of the Mongolian army, headed by Batu and his guard - Keshikten.
                  You probably read inattentively, I wrote that the Mongol horses did not at all eat one grass from under the snow. Why are you doing substitutions? If you don’t want to talk seriously, just stop the discussion and that’s it.
                  I'm not interested in talking in that tone. We can fast on another topic.
                  So the Mongol army, although it was going in lava, was quickly concentrated where it was needed.
                  With regard to the weapons and armor of the Mongols, it is clear that you have not studied the topic and your knowledge remained at the level of the Soviet high school.
                  That is very superficial and outdated.
                  And during this time a lot of work appeared, as well as the number of Mongol troops. their tactics and weapons.
                  On armaments, you can read the books of the historian M. Gorelik, he carefully studied the eastern armament systems.
                  1. xtur
                    xtur 7 December 2017 13: 42
                    0
                    > How do you imagine these 20 years?


                    The USSR for 10 years prepared for WWII and even became its winner. For 20 years, much could be done.

                    > With regards to weapons and armor of the Mongols, it is clear that you did not study the topic and your knowledge remained at the level of the Soviet high school.

                    There are more articles on this topic than there are news on topvar :-)
                    And everyone refers to historians, even links lead. And it’s useless to read modern historians, they are only unscrupulous commentators of ancient storytellers who wrote that the Mongols are a fiend of hell.
                    Some such storytellers from Armenian historians wrote about all sorts of atrocities of the Mongols, and at the same time, other Armenian princes, in Cilicia, recognized their authority and transferred this time without any problems.

                    So all this garbage and all this is useless - to read the arguments of the monks about the Mongols
            2. aybolyt678
              aybolyt678 5 December 2017 21: 22
              +1
              Quote: xtur
              feed horses - even if the Mongol horses had eaten all the inhabitants of Ryazan with their supplies,

              horses they are herbivores. And in appearance and size, the then Mongolian horses resembled Przewalski's horse, which lives in the desert. The less weight the easier it is to live. The largest chain mail preserved after the ice battle corresponds to 44 sizes. Look in the museums of knightly armor ... They are small.
              1. xtur
                xtur 6 December 2017 09: 32
                0
                > horses are herbivores.

                it looks like the sarcasm option has turned off for you, respectively, the adequacy of the rest of the text, presumably, is about the same
                1. aybolyt678
                  aybolyt678 6 December 2017 09: 47
                  0
                  You need to watch less YouTube, take time to read Chivilikhin's "Memory"
                  1. xtur
                    xtur 7 December 2017 13: 43
                    +1
                    > You need to watch less YouTube, take the time to read Chivilikhin "Memory"

                    no offense - don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you where to go
    3. CONTROL
      CONTROL 4 December 2017 13: 41
      +1
      Quote: xtur
      Curiously, was Volodin watching the movie about Kolovrat? And in general, does he even imagine that this is literally a legend, and no one has proven that this is a real historical event?

      And for such a framework, the film was completely successful.
      The political abilities of the princes were reduced to the level of full imbeciles, because for the sake of the Polovtsy they united, and for the sake of saving themselves they did not want to unite against the Mongols.

      Well, in the "legend" there was still not enough politics to drag in! Well a fairy tale! ...
      ... and a fairy tale, as you know, is a lie ... But - there is a hint in it! ...
      -----------------------------------------
      Then we will discuss the pirates' affiliation in the fairy tale "Barbarian Beauty ..." - in what seas drowning occurred, in which units these brave guys were engaged in noble robbery; and which of them is a corsair, who is a buccaneer, a filibuster or privateer ... Although the film is about love!
      ... The film "The Legend of Kolovrat" - about patriotism first of all!
      1. xtur
        xtur 5 December 2017 08: 26
        +1
        > Well, in the "legend" there was not enough more politics to weave! Well that's a fairy tale! ...

        a fairy tale a lie, but a hint in it
        The film begins with a story about Kalka - that is, the history of the union of Russian princes for the sake of the Polovtsians. And then, in the film itself, they show two Russian princes who do not want to unite their troops and jointly beat Batu in a convenient place.

        So it turns out political inadequacy - for the Polovtsy princes united, but for their own sake - no
        1. Ulan
          Ulan 5 December 2017 19: 52
          +1
          The battle on Kalka, just with the Mongols, which led the commanders Subaedey and Jebe.
          At Kalka, the Polovtsy were on the side of the Russian three Mstislavs.
          Are you sure that the prince did not want to unite? Or maybe they could? It takes time to unite.
          Remember how long the troops of the three Mstislavs gathered before coming out to meet the Mongols. And how much time did the Prince of Vladimir collect the all-Russian army (northeastern Russia) on the River r.
          1. xtur
            xtur 6 December 2017 09: 33
            0
            > Are you sure that the prince did not want to unite? Maybe they couldn't? It takes time to unite.

            so there 20 years have passed if my memory serves me
            1. Ulan
              Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 29
              +1
              This is about nothing. An army gathers only in the event of a campaign or threat, and then dissolves. Remember how many army Dmitry Donskoy gathered.
              And he began to collect it only when he received accurate information about the campaign of Mamaia.
              And you propose to gather a large army of Russian princes and wait 20 years when the Mongols come.
              The Russian princes did not have reliable information about the invasion of the Mongols.
              In general, your comment about 20 years, it's about nothing.
              1. xtur
                xtur 7 December 2017 13: 47
                0
                > It's about nothing.

                you have little idea of ​​preparing for war, especially in the case of a superior opponent. In such a situation, 20 years is infinitely many
                Possible measures, but far from exhaustive, I have already cited.
                I can bring others - send the embassy in advance with recognition of the supreme authority. A. Nevsky managed to do it and the king of Cilicia managed to do it
          2. zoolu350
            zoolu350 7 December 2017 10: 25
            +1
            On the river The city of Burundai just finished off the remnants of the troops of Grand Duke Yuri. And in Soviet times and today, historians carefully bypass the 3 DAY FIELD !!! the battle of Kolomna, where the son of Genghis Khan Kulhan died, which in fact was the turning point that changed the fate of all of Russia in an unfavorable direction. And why? Yes, because it is impossible to FIELD a 3-day battle between troops the strength of which differs significantly, only between troops of comparable strength.
    4. your1970
      your1970 5 December 2017 19: 30
      0
      Quote: xtur
      a huge army in which there were an order of magnitude more soldiers than inhabitants in Ryazan could feed on this minuscule.
      - A sheep flock of just a thousand heads knocks grass in the steppe to zero very quickly.
      Even 100 troops is at least 000 double horses + carts. Horses need about 200 kg of hay per day for normal movement.
      This is even with 200 * 000 kg =2 000 tons hay in day(!!!) . Remember the number ??
      We go further: the average hay yield in our steppe area (along which the conquerors went to Russia, it is precisely along it and not otherwise) - 3 tons per ha
      2000ton / 3t = 666 ha - exactly such an area is needed to feed the Mongol Tatars in DAY(!!), and to stand still it is IMPOSSIBLE-horses will have nothing to eat here tomorrow.
      Not about any slow when moving, the question is not even worth it –– otherwise the first horses will eat / trample everything –– the rear / backward ones will not get it nothing
      Given that the forest cover of Russia is much higher - than our steppe, and the hayfields are much smaller, they are better (but much smaller) - the army of the Mongol Tatars would simply not have reached Russia.
      I didn’t plus horses for a train and cattle for slaughter - you also need to eat troops. In the winter, a certain amount can be fed, but not 100 horses at once ..
      In my opinion, the army of the Mongol Tatars had a population of 10-15 people and this was enough for a fairly weakly populated Russia. The mobility of such an army more than blocked the probability of quickly receiving reinforcements from other Russian princes ..
      1. xtur
        xtur 6 December 2017 09: 36
        0
        > Remember the number ??

        friend, you need to read the entire discussion in order to adequately understand one separately taken message. I just quote the official point of view on the Mongol conquest of Russia, which I do not believe in power, even if your calculations.
        And 15 soldiers would not be able to conquer Russia and slaughter as many of the population as they attributed
        1. your1970
          your1970 6 December 2017 20: 01
          0
          Quote: xtur
          > Remember the number ??

          friend, you need to read the entire discussion in order to adequately understand one separately taken message. I just quote the official point of view on the Mongol conquest of Russia, which I do not believe in power, even if your calculations.
          And 15 soldiers would not be able to conquer Russia and slaughter as many of the population as they attributed
          - but this is quite enough for a surprise attack and cutting off the opportunity to get outside help
          1. xtur
            xtur 7 December 2017 13: 48
            0
            > but this is quite enough for a surprise attack and cutting off the opportunity to get outside help

            where did the Mongols suddenly rise from the Russian forests if they had first devastated Georgia and Armenia, and then continued their expedition to Russia?
        2. Ulan
          Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 31
          +1
          There were much more of them. Otherwise, they would not be able to defeat Khorezm, before going to Russia.
          Now historians operate with a number in the range of 50-70 thousand. And at that time it is a lot.
      2. Ulan
        Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 35
        +2
        You only focus on hay. And there was straw, oilcake, grain. It was just the time after the harvest, and the grain was stored in assembled form, in storage.
        The Mongols had special teams that collected fodder and grain, straw. hay and products.
        Those warriors who allowed the destruction of grain and other forage were punishable by death.
        Everything was taken into account and distributed. There was no anarchy.
        1. your1970
          your1970 7 December 2017 10: 27
          +1
          Quote: Ulan
          And there was straw, oilcake, grain. It was just the time after the harvest, and the grain was stored in assembled form, in storage.
          - at present, in Kazakhstan, over 2000 km grain crops are not sown. The same thing happened under the USSR and the kings:
          "The climate here is not the same!" © V.S. Vysotsky
          further - in the Orenburg, Saratov, Samara, Volgograd regions, crops are sown - but only for the last 100-120 years. Before that - the bare steppe with an almost complete absence of settlements in general
          More or less the area - where it was possible to take away fodder / grain starts from the Tambov level - but they still had to be reached.
          On average, horses need 5 kg of grain per day = 200 * 000 kg = 5 tons per day
          A 100 day hike, but less time can not be controlled = 100 tons - and this is equal to 1818 wagons belay belay
          In addition, the grain has a rather large weight, which requires transportation of it at least in any significant quantities or a large number of pack animals or bulls.
          Bulls are death to any offensive. They can carry a lot, he saw how a couple pulled a tractor out of salt licks - which Kirovets did not pull out belay belay , pulled from a knee, got up and went (the tractor turned sideways, then it fell, but they didn’t care). But speed !!! - a pedestrian with an easy walking step easily overtakes a freely walking bull - 2, well, 3 km per hour.
          Those. To transport such volumes is simply unrealistic.
          From us to Ryazan 1000 km. Given the crossing of the Volga (!!!!) - a war at such distances by forces of 100 soldiers - delirium of a hangover

          If there were any objections, a little later, in 1812, Napoleon's army had about a million horses. By the fall, the requisitioned forage began to end, and they walked to wildly populated (compared to our steppe) places. And this is precisely what led to the fact that they went back to Berezina practically on foot.

          ZY 10-15 000 maximum, in reality I think there were 3-5 000 soldiers.
  16. Serhiodjan
    Serhiodjan 4 December 2017 09: 17
    +3
    Some kind of nonsense is written. Sorry, I'm not a connoisseur, not a film critic, but the film is excellent, it looks in one breath, what has been happening lately in our cinema is very happy - there are normal films that you can go to the cinema and get fun and not spit. I confessed the day before when I watched I even thought that this film would have gone quite well abroad - the filming is beautiful, the actors are alive, Baty’s dressing gown and the khan himself were certainly amused, but what is the problem actually? And the truth is because the director has the right to shoot as he wants, as for me it’s even more fun.
    Not only pleasing critics-wailing-guards, but what can be done about their hard life :)
    1. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 4 December 2017 10: 39
      +2
      The film is just for abroad and made ... Colorful, with a feminine Mongol khan.
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 10 December 2017 12: 20
        +2
        Strictly speaking, there is some Chinese engraving depicting Batu Khan. So there he is really depicted as young and effeminate, although makeup is not visible. Of course, with a straight huldu sword and a quiver with 3 arrows. But Subudai is old and you cannot call it effeminate. Rank lower, so 4 arrows in the quiver
  17. Lnglr
    Lnglr 4 December 2017 09: 23
    +4
    And you? Waited for us to remove the second “Stalker"?
    I don’t say anything about the “Go and see” level, because in order to remove (write) it, you must pass through hell
    1. xtur
      xtur 4 December 2017 09: 28
      +2
      > I'm not talking about the level "Come and see", because in order to remove (write) such a thing, you have to pass hell through yourself

      This film is successful, because its author saw everything with his own eyes, talked with people who saw everything themselves. And the concept of the Mongol conquest is completely and completely false, it is unrealistic, also like the concept of Russia of that time.
      In a situation of such a heap of lies, it is impossible to make a film of such a level as you say. You can only shoot an action movie in which the image of Kolovrat is extremely realistic in the framework of the unrealistic world, which was originally set by the legend of the Mongol conquest
  18. Altona
    Altona 4 December 2017 09: 26
    10
    Quote: xtur
    Have you ever wondered how to make a film on such a topic when the whole world speaks about incomprehensible things about the Mongols, when it is generally incomprehensible how they conquered this world, when Russia is a small and godforsaken place that neighbors did not conquer only by mistake

    ------------------------------------------------
    I didn’t seem to drink at the Brudershaft so that you would poke me with a mentor tone. There is quite a "Legend of Evpatiy Kolovrat", which says that he fought with the Mongol warrior Khostovrul, but not with Batu. Batu simply sent a punitive expedition, so to speak, to search for Kolovrat and his squads. Now about the war with catapults and other heavy siege weapons. A similar technique is used only for the siege of cities. As for the "quick war" and generally a blitzkrieg. If you drag out the war and not try to disorganize the enemy with the active actions of the cavalry, then what for then you need such an expensive action as war. It is difficult to feed an army of many thousands in winter. Moreover, it’s not for Senka that the cap of the commander in chief fights with the head of the partisan detachment. If you are discussing, then respect the interlocutor.
    1. xtur
      xtur 4 December 2017 09: 45
      +2
      > I didn’t seem to have drunk with you for brotherhood, so that you would poke me with a mentor tone.



      But in the case have something to say?
      I said that the concept of the Mongol conquest itself is unrealistic to the point of indecency. The concept of the level of Russia at the time of the Mongol conquest is also indecent, otherwise it is impossible to understand how it was possible to conquer the country at distant lands - in winter, by landing
      In this framework, it is impossible to shoot anything better than this film - the director is trying to remove something that can be believed in such a framework - because the movie requires extreme visibility, by virtue of its nature.
      1. Ulan
        Ulan 5 December 2017 19: 41
        +1
        Is Alexander the Great’s campaign in India realistic? And the conquests of Tamerlane? Are bare-legged legionaries, who have conquered half the world with the infantry and reached Britain, realistic?
        1. xtur
          xtur 6 December 2017 09: 41
          +1
          > Is the campaign of Alexander the Great to India realistic? And the conquests of Tamerlane?

          yes, because he (A.M) did not go to Armenia, and even then did not try to do it - because all his Macedonian guard would be destroyed in the Armenian mountains, and what would he do without it? This is the obvious wisdom of the commander. At that time, the Arabs did the same - they first conquered everything that was possible, and then, after creating their caliphate, they already conquered Armenia.
          If they had done this in the reverse order, then those few thousand passionate unarmed holders would simply have been destroyed in the Armenian mountains, and the caliphate would simply not have taken place.

          And Tamerlan visited Armenia, and fucked the Ottoman Turks
          1. Ulan
            Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 39
            +1
            Armenians in the Middle Ages were considered very skilled warriors and were readily hired by other sovereigns.
            It is known that a detachment of Armenian soldiers fought on the Kulikovo field in the ranks of the troops of Mamaia, who hired them.
            In the Middle Ages, this was commonplace.
            But I’m talking about something else, if we believe that the Macedonian campaign to India took place and he conquered all of Asia from Egypt to India, if we believe in Tamerlane’s campaigns, then we have no reason to doubt the reality of the Mongol conquests.
            1. xtur
              xtur 7 December 2017 13: 55
              0
              > Armenians in the Middle Ages were considered to be very skillful warriors and they were willingly hired by other sovereigns.

              and now nothing - Baghramyan, Babajanyan, Isakov and Khudyakov an example of this. But precisely because the Armenians were literate and stoic warriors, A. Makedonsky neither before nor after his conquests on the Armenian Highlands - he lost his little Macedonian guard in these mountains, and without it his power ended.

              I will say even more - after his conquests, he tried to establish power over Armenia, but his army was defeated, the commander was deliberately hanged - and nothing. In every sense, nothing, and so on until the death of A. Macedon. But the capital of his empire directly bordered on Armenia.
  19. BAI
    BAI 4 December 2017 09: 33
    +1
    The film is positioned as "historical fantasy." Those. the author (s) are not required to accurately reproduce historical facts or adhere to them. They have the right to invent anything. If the film makes a profit, it means the right investment. No means wrong. Gazprom, though a state-owned, but primarily a commercial organization. And he does: 1. That which makes a profit. 2 - what the state will order. The state does not censor films made with state money, but in vain. It is necessary for other films. There at some festival gathered to show a film praising pravosekov, and nothing. But there really need to make noise.
    And to be honest, I don’t want to watch films that impose something on me and try to educate me. I just want to relax.
  20. Stepan Kudinov
    Stepan Kudinov 4 December 2017 09: 34
    +1
    Today’s “geniuses”, except below the belt, have nothing interesting to say about. And the topic below the belt, in their "genius" opinion, is inexhaustible. I’m thinking: how many musts are needed today to close the tap of this muddy slurry ???????????
  21. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 4 December 2017 09: 43
    +2
    Dear Alexey! Do you really not know the answer to this question "why"? There is a conscious dibilization of the Earth’s population and Russia is no exception! Neoliberal capitalism does not need thinking people. They ask too many questions and finally muddied the water with their "why." Capitalists need "functions", preferably cost-effective and not so much. If you accept this assumption, very many phenomena in art, culture, science, and just life, you will immediately understand. And I will tell you more: the Russian government is interested in "functional dibilah". And you don’t need to sin only on the cinema figures alone, the state gives money for this, and I dare to assure you that the Guarantor is in the know and in the subject.
  22. algonquin
    algonquin 4 December 2017 09: 49
    +3
    Of the 2 films, you can create a third, with a logical plot:

    - From Batu make the Shamakhan Queen
    - the leaders of the squabbles quarreled and killed the arcs of a friend because of the insidious woman
    - to take the missing princes and sons of Tsar Dodon from Danil Kozlovsky’s Viking
  23. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 4 December 2017 10: 13
    +3
    "one handsome young man Kolovrat is fighting with another handsome young man Batu"
    But Kolovrat fought with Batu ....................... stsuka and Hto won? wassat
    1. The comment was deleted.
  24. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 4 December 2017 10: 32
    +1
    Well, somehow I don’t quite understand the goal of booing this film.
    The film even has a name - "The Legend of Kolovrat". Legend! This means that someone once made three boxes, and then everyone else agreed. With a pen. For it is beautiful. Cool. Romantic. Or, there, patriotic. Or, best of all - in cash. You can just sell, say, or you can defend a candidate-doctor’s defense, musifying the legend, also money, after all.
    So here - without thinking twice they took the legendary legend (legend - from the word _tale_). Patriotic legend. Recently in demand. Well, how to miss out ....
    Here, under this case, they will also give money. Let even Gazprom give. This, of course, is not a state entity, and is not even controlled by the state at all, unless, say, sometimes it is necessary to beg for money or what kind of help there.
    And so ... it's a natural megacorporation, a transnational monopoly. PRIVATE .... corporatized.
    So, you have to meet the demands for gender equality and recognition of backwardness ... of non-gender!
    Anyway, the direction should be in line with the TREND, regardless of what the director wrote for himself there.
    No matter what the electorate expects there. INDEPENDENTLY
    For this project is just an investment! Based on risk-based business process planning.
    Exclusively in accordance with ISO-9001.
    And not a step to the side! “Gazprom”, in the person of the Supervisory Board, will not allow joking. And, as they say, "although it’s yalovy, but calve." Have you invested money? Invested! Profit percentage calculated? It is calculated. Provide! And the point.
    Well, transvestites, in Holland, for example, will watch how Evpatiy crumbles their “sweet transvestite”.
    Hence the whole production - beautiful, legendary, gender-correct.
    Everyone was pleased.
    Well, and to whom not - as they say, ".... our problems ...". Moreover, the Guarantor approved. Only in vain did he cancel the 37th, otherwise ...
    ....
    “People, citizens, brothers, hear me,” - compare “The Legend of Kolovrat” with “And the Dawns Here Are Quiet” - this is not to respect yourself!
    And to show the "liberoid herd" the ability to snicker at us vilely.
    Correctly, Mart said - ".. you need to vote with money ..".
    I even felt sorry for them. I downloaded the nursery rhyme, but looked at home. For some reason, it seemed to me wrong to look at the painted screen in the cinema.
    What can I say - the film as a whole is quite suitable for a fairy tale. What he, in fact, is.
    But, even in comparison with the “Finist - Clear Falcon" - and that is not it.
    Not that, brothers.
    I’m standing on that.
  25. Eurodav
    Eurodav 4 December 2017 12: 01
    +1
    Quote: Primoos
    Kolovrat has not watched yet. What, and managed to screw a homosexual here? Zarraza!

    Looked. In principle, you can see. Only somehow everything is damp, in a hurry ... There is no homosexual ... Well said, fantasy, why whine? The appearance of a bear, as it calculates, according to the Russian spirit or something, Slavs, is confirmation of this. In "300 Spartans" the king of kings was also not Arnold at all ... Our directors have a little fenka so that both patriots and tolerant bastards !!! Take the "9th company" ... Bondarchuk also piled ... Well, they didn’t communicate like that with the young in the army, well, not those words !!! Everything is like in the Hollywood action movies about the army. I mean communication, so the movie is normal ...
  26. Eurodav
    Eurodav 4 December 2017 12: 04
    0
    Quote: kapitan281271
    "one handsome young man Kolovrat is fighting with another handsome young man Batu"
    But Kolovrat fought with Batu ....................... stsuka and Hto won? wassat

    Personally, no. Friendship won!)))
  27. Eurodav
    Eurodav 4 December 2017 12: 10
    0
    Quote: Stepan Kudinov
    Today’s “geniuses”, except below the belt, have nothing interesting to say about. And the topic below the belt, in their "genius" opinion, is inexhaustible. I’m thinking: how many musts are needed today to close the tap of this muddy slurry ???????????

    Suslov then? He hid something from the people that the people did not need to know, otherwise they would grow wiser and ask unnecessary questions! That people could still do this, he still had not forgotten Joseph Vissarionovich ... If the “gray cardinal” were alive now, he would be happy about the problems of Russia along with the Humpbacked Spot ...
  28. prior
    prior 4 December 2017 12: 56
    +1
    Which country, such a culture, such a movie.
    Monetization, however .... Salvage is a great European democratic value.
    Where are you CENSORING, who are you walking with now? ...
  29. CONTROL
    CONTROL 4 December 2017 13: 27
    +1
    ... the author of the article is weak to go to some kind of museum to look at the reconstruction of the looks and costumes of that era?
    -------------------------------------
    The "Horde" - the Mongols-Genghisides - not so bad by that time conquered almost all of China, and much better in it (due to insignificant national and mental differences) assimilated into it! Hence, Chinese costumes and Chinese make-up; and in museums there are also Chinese armor, weapons, and the same stone-throwing machines (they are a copy of Chinese from museums ...).
    And the strategy and tactics of the Mongols - and even the graphics in the image of the cards - are Chinese! The Mongols generally very quickly perceived everything useful ...
    1. estidea
      estidea 4 December 2017 15: 33
      0
      the emperors who conquered China do not "jump" like Saakashvili in front of the camera ....
  30. xtur
    xtur 4 December 2017 13: 56
    +3
    I would be interested to hear the opinion of those who are dissatisfied with the image of Kolovrat in this film - what specific claims are to him, what are they so dissatisfied with.
    From my point of view, Kolovrat is depicted very realistically, for a legend. Among other things, Kolovrat is an exceptionally competent warrior, familiar with tactics, always thinks. And the plot conflict itself is absolutely reliable, there is nothing derogatory for the Ryazan prince and Kolovrat himself. If there is anything offensive, then it concerns the Mongols, which, within the framework of this legend, is quite acceptable

    Another possible version of the image of such a hero is to make him a very tall and broad-shouldered extremely hardy and strong person. It would also be quite realistic for such a legend
    The author chose one of two obviously available options for the normal image of Kolovrat, kmk
    1. Ulan
      Ulan 5 December 2017 19: 35
      +3
      Kolovrat in the film is almost a puny boy. According to legend, Kolovrat is an experienced warrior, a hero, and middle-aged. for 30 years.
      He is the Ryazan governor, and the governor is not a foreman in the squad of the prince.
      In general, we could have chosen the actor more effectively for the role of Kolovrat.
      By the way, in the Vladimir land, where Kolovrat went for help, he, in addition to the warriors that the Prince of Vladimir allocated to him, he recruited more volunteers and the detachment was more than one and a half thousand and this is a very serious force for that time, if the prince's squad was estimated at that time by several hundred , at best, two thousand and two warriors, including the youngest and oldest squad.
      There is such a film, also fantasy, called Druzhina, where you can see how a real Kolovrat could look like.
      1. xtur
        xtur 6 December 2017 09: 43
        0
        > Kolovrat in the film is almost a boy, puny.

        But what a fortitude, thanks to which he is a great warrior

        > He is the Ryazan governor, and the governor is not a foreman in the prince's squad.

        judging by the above, the authority of Kolovrat was at a level and the army of the prince did not differ much from the Kolovrat squad, that is, everything was in the spirit of a legend
        1. Ulan
          Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 43
          0
          Alas, you cannot defeat the enemy with one strength of spirit. Therefore, the boyars of warriors were raised by soldiers from childhood.
          The armor was quite heavy and it was necessary to be strong people, so as not only to wear them, but to fight in them.
          Therefore, the Russian combatants both fought well and beat the enemy more, because they were strong and well-trained warriors.
          1. xtur
            xtur 7 December 2017 13: 57
            0
            > The strength of the spirit alone will not defeat the enemy. Therefore, the boyars of vigilantes were brought up as warriors from childhood.

            But isn’t it that in the film Kolovrat was raised as a warrior from childhood?
  31. tacet
    tacet 4 December 2017 15: 08
    0
    Yesterday I went to this film.
    There was no sensation, but such a sharp rejection as the "Viking" did not cause. Progress on the face)))
  32. estidea
    estidea 4 December 2017 15: 31
    0
    I agree) I spat on Batu)
  33. Semenov
    Semenov 4 December 2017 15: 32
    +3
    I expected more from the film. They showed “Ilya Muromets” on TV, involuntarily compared it with “Kolovrat” - there are more special effects and costumes more colorful, and there’s where to laugh and think about - in general, modern cinema is at least 60 times behind the Soviet Union in all respects.
  34. Archon
    Archon 4 December 2017 17: 50
    0
    Now there is an ENVELOPE movie in the cinema, I advise you to watch it. This is not a horror film, but rather a mystical thriller with elements of Russian philosophy and motifs of popular horror stories in a modern way. In general, despite the almost complete absence of advertising, this Russian film was a success. There is an inevitable punishment for a crime, a gift of a second chance, and many other elements.
  35. Ryazan87
    Ryazan87 4 December 2017 18: 01
    0
    To the question of accuracy. One of the most famous images of Batu (Chinese manuscript "History of the first four khans from the genus of Genghis"). Obviously, the director took him as a model.
    1. sivuch
      sivuch 10 December 2017 12: 24
      +1
      Well, and I already painted with words.
  36. The comment was deleted.
  37. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 4 December 2017 20: 40
    +1
    Natural selection must work - making bad films should be unprofitable. And the state should become more discriminating and stop investing citizens' money in any garbage.
  38. AleBors
    AleBors 5 December 2017 12: 19
    0
    Thanks for the review. I'll watch a movie, make some kind of judgment. I agree with the commentators in one of our films in the deep .....
  39. Asthma
    Asthma 5 December 2017 13: 48
    0
    how tired all these pokes are towards the film, regarding its unhistoricalness. the film is called the LEGEND OF KOLOVRAT! LEGEND, LEGEND! Unfortunately, there is no accurate evidence of the existence of Eupathia. please read Jan Vasily Grigoryevich and his trilogy Invasion of the Mongols (Evpatiy in the second book - Batu). there is more realistic.
    1. Ulan
      Ulan 5 December 2017 19: 28
      0
      Ian took the identity of Kolovrat from "The Legend of the Ruin of Ryazan Batu".
  40. insular
    insular 6 December 2017 01: 38
    +1
    I liked the movie. Spit on Volodin and other nedokritikoff ..
    About the "historical details" - to you a psychiatrist, dear. This is a legend, and legends give rise to monsters and ascribe many non-human abilities in allegories - and this is just normal.
  41. AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 6 December 2017 10: 17
    +2
    really suggestive - it would be better with censorship ...

    Censorship for the good only in a patriarchal society. It was in the Republic of Ingushetia that the emperor was Pushkin’s personal censor; both Dostoevsky and Saltykov-Shchedrin passed through censorship. And through Soviet censorship, great works were created. If censorship is introduced today, then such things as Matilda, Viking and the rest of the list will be kindly treated ... And things like “28 Panfilov’s” aren’t just on the shelf, they won’t even be allowed to create them! Look at the US film industry - this is the result of censorship! You will not see films about bad Bosniaks and good Serbs, about Crimea or Georgia in any interpretation that is different from the State Department.
    So the calls to return censorship - nothing! Censorship is just a tool! The main question: who are the censors?
  42. robo spirit
    robo spirit 6 December 2017 17: 20
    0
    Dear you, my Volodin Alexey! But the thing is that “The Legend of Kolovrat” (I waited for this film for two years, followed the news from the set, etc.) was filmed generally away from the story. The ZOO PARTNERS were taken by Zack Snyder, where, for a minute, King Xerox also raises questions regarding sexual orientation. In history, Xerox is remarkably bearded and generally slightly brutal (according to bas-reliefs). In the film - a strange languid almost three-meter man in a piercing and gold lipstick.
    Here we are talking about the movie comic mix, in which the main chapter should contrast as much as possible with the main director. Brutal Leonide - a coveted Xerox. Brutal Kolovraty - Batu transvestite. They did everything right. And no one even tried to wave to historicity when creating the film initially. So do not throw lightning bolts, but take a closer look at the issue.
    1. Ulan
      Ulan 6 December 2017 21: 49
      0
      I agree with you. Only I always say, in order not to mislead people who have a poor history, and most of them have not heard about Kolovrat, the ruin of Ryazan, you need to write in the credits before the start of such films that this is not a historical film, but a fantasy author on historical topics.
      Then there are no complaints.
      Then we will not be indignant when in the film "Admiral" .... Kolchak appears to be a land general. as "glory commander."
      Well, other nonsense, such as "Viking", where in general it is not clear what the Vikings have to do with it.
      1. robo spirit
        robo spirit 7 December 2017 23: 16
        0
        Well, about Kolchak and the “Glory” cruiser ... Well, let's not take this film seriously from the first shots. An artillery battle between the "Siberian shooter" (or whatever it is, this "Siberian ... standard-bearer ... banner-bearer ... icon-bearer ... admiralonos ... dumpling"?) And the whole armored cruiser "Frederick Karl", which of the 102 mm (well, I mean this in the film, 120 mm Kane was ashamed to shove into the frame, they weren’t quite yet open) they carried the conning tower, although the FC, like everyone else, had the Princes of the Adalberts, chopping and gun the towers had armor thicker than the armor of the main belt. Why would Kolchak personally aim at the pilothouse instead of mocking at the waterline? That's what the Germans would have surprised by breaking a 102-mm shell of their 100-mm Krupp armor, yeah. And the Germans would have eaten ahu, realizing how vulnerable their armored cruisers are to artillery fire from destroyers!
        This long and uninteresting statement is intended to scold all kinds of historians and patriots and anti-patriots, who regard the cinema as an attempt to say, "how it really was." Surround, citizens: "how it really was" is a documentary film, a separate cinematic genre. Here in the discussion of documentary films there is a place for sucking, who has the wrong sword, the brooch on the cloak of the wrong system, chain mail of the wrong century. And this is art cinema, for which entertainment and drama are important. And so it has been since Shakespeare. Or do you think that Amlet held the title of prince, and that a man named Claudius wrested his power in the Scandinavian country? And a stray theater suddenly became an element of ideological sabotage in the camp of barely European Vikings? But “Hamlet” is still no one disputes. Why then does the Viking need to dispute?
  43. lopvlad
    lopvlad 7 December 2017 01: 06
    +1
    Uncensored - Khan Crossdresser


    all right. Because attacked Russia is always "progressive and developed humanity", namely all sorts of ........ and no matter what direction they came from.
    It's funny about historicism. Has the director seen many films about France where he showed how the French elite crap in the bushes and urinate on the walls of Versailles? After all, until the 19th century in Versailles there were no latrines (toilets) at all.
    "The Legend of Kolovrat" is an example of high-quality domestic cinema at the Hollywood level for little money. Only a few pseudo historians and other connoisseurs will appreciate the historicity of showing life in mud and shit, but for modern youth it will become evidence of Western propaganda about backward and unwashed Russia.
    1. robo spirit
      robo spirit 7 December 2017 22: 34
      +1
      Excuse me, but who generally considered the "Mongols" as a "progressive and developed humanity" in modern discourse? Even the Americans, the owners of the world record for moral flexibility (weren't the American businessmen, under the clear guidance of the New Deal, Roosevelt, Hitler completely advised on the ears? And then they fought with him themselves. . And just recently (recently, gentlemen, I rejoice!) With ISIS, with Usamych. Quite right now, the same scenario with Ukraine: “The Moor has done his job. The Moor can leave.” So, in the American public’s mind the Mongol is not progressive humanity in any way, it’s a savage on horseback, which you can’t even agree with anyway. Worse than Comanche, Chesslov! The Great Wall film, although filmed in China, is by Hollywood standards ...
      About the historicity of the show: the film was in deep production, at the level of the first roller stitched from the editing table, when it was already announced: we shoot, bleat, fantasy on historical material! Why did no one ever have questions for the "Howard" series "Conan" - "Kull" - "New Conan"? Indeed, in every American book "Horsemeat" there is at the end a note from the original author Howard, where he sets out in detail and intelligibly (at the level of the 20s of the 20th century) the connection of the Khaibori Era to our reality. It is intelligible, at the dissertation level, and - you believe it! - tied to a real HISTORICAL HISTORY HISTORICALLY TRUSTED WORLD!
      And - a funny moment - through the efforts of numerous successors, Conan eventually sailed from Highboria (i.e. Europe) - to America. And there he laid the foundations of true democracy.

      And do not worry about youth and children: they pick up dirt and crap at any time, in any era. Such is the property of the child's psyche. They, children, the world know how they can. And even if they don’t catch the smell of shit in their family, if they sit in complete isolation from the outside world and its completely natural shit (no one thinks that he lives in paradise, right?), Then buddhas grow out of them, sooner or later all the shit in the world get in bulk, shock. Someone (one person, presumably: Gautamu Shakyamuni) enlightened this shock, while most die in drugs, booze and other dirt of the world. Just because they grew up and brought up, not knowing the dangers of this dirt.
      Western propaganda about the backward and unwashed? What are you! For a long time no one is promoting this! On the contrary! If our Russian hackers can crack anything, even the Pentagon, even the sky, even Allah, then such people are somehow not backward and unwashed. On the contrary, Russians are now accepted in the world as cool and sinister professionals. So do not be afraid of Western propaganda about unwashed Russia. The theme of Western propaganda has long changed.
  44. egsp
    egsp 7 December 2017 20: 42
    0
    we don’t need to read this mantra to us here: "this film is LEGEND." Children who see this film will perceive everything that is happening on the screen at face value. And there, as you know, not everything is normal from a historical and simply cultural point of view. MONEY kills movies and cripples our children. As Lavrov said: "Dibily b ....
    1. robo spirit
      robo spirit 7 December 2017 21: 14
      0
      Yes, what my nephews, schoolchildren of 10 and 13 years old watch, is cool, of course. The cycle about the heroes is historical, no? But the elder slept in a history lesson, seriously declaring that Khan Konchak was a clear enemy, and that it was necessary to send heroic special forces. Who cripples children? Who or nobody, that’s the question!
    2. robo spirit
      robo spirit 7 December 2017 21: 18
      0
      And, yes, give in public an example of the most historical film, from your point of view, and your personal opinion that you understood from this film. Well, if not difficult. You are welcome. Beg.