Military Review

Movement up, but actually falling down

252
Have you ever wondered why anyone, even a seemingly purely Christian holiday like Christmas, can watch old Soviet films on our television? On such a specialized channel as “Spas”, we enjoyed watching “Heavenly Slow Mover” and “Hussar Ballad”. On other channels that just went: all the golden fund of Soviet cinema.




We - those who used to be at least a corner of his life "caught" the Soviet Union. Those who have lived a little while in the "regime." Who graduated from school, received higher education. Those who even today, despite their age, can go out and ask the authorities. Who was in the mountains of the Caucasus and Afghanistan, who was in the Donbas and in Syria ...

But we will talk about us in the next article, in the sequel. For worthy to talk. Now we look at the generation who grew up with Russia's "independence" from the Soviet regime.

Meanwhile, the young, those who very soon will take the helm of firms, factories, military units and divisions, the state finally, watch another movie. Fairy tales of Hollywood or our "Hollywood". Fairy tales where fictional heroes defeat fictional enemies. Where a fleshy hero with a leggy girlfriend is constantly kissing in between the destruction of hundreds of enemies and the undermining of the bases of international terrorists and other bad guys. And the USSR is shown as a constant hopelessness, drunkenness, gray hopelessness and hopelessness of life.

Strange? And let's go back a little. To the event in which we participated, including us. For a film that really hit the heart. "28 Panfilov".

Remember the money that was sent to the film crew to continue working? Remember the wait? Remember the reaction of our state to the shooting? People wanted a normal movie about the war. Like "They fought for the Motherland", like "Hot Snow", like "Liberation", like "Aty-baty, the soldiers went".

Many films that were shot for those who actually went through the war, those who went alongside them in the attack in that war.

But most importantly, we repeat, the reaction of the state. Remember how suddenly there were several millions to shoot? Already when it became clear that the film in any case will be released on screens. Through the efforts of decent people of Russia and Kazakhstan.

What for? Is it then to try to "push" the director and other creators? So that patriotism was shown taking into account state interests in this issue?

The success of the film is just grounded by a “non-state” approach to the topic. And the soldiers shows no heroes without fear and without reproach, and ordinary peasants. Russian, Kazakh, Tatars, the Soviet people. And they do not perceive the war as a feat in the name of something there, but as a regular job.

It is necessary to drive out the enemy to live did not interfere. At home, children are waiting, wives, parents, loved ones. Because the Germans do not need to admit to their own home. It is necessary to drive. Do not retreat, and drive!

And now look at what has been created by our film masters by order of the state. Enumerate the "masterpieces" can be quite long. From "Bastards" to "Stalingrad", from "Legends number 17" to "Move up." What do all these films have in common? What is the "state order" different from the national order? Try to figure it out?

About the "Bastards" we will not say a word. As for Stalingrad, the Citadel and other rubbish, it has already been said so much that I don’t even want to repeat myself. Much has already been disassembled, so just a couple of words on sports topics.

And let's start a little from afar.

New Year holidays gave us another movie masterpiece from the studio “Three Te” Mr. Nikita Mikhalkov. And immediately a definite link was drawn between the previous creation on a sports theme, "The Legend of 17 Number", and "Upward Movement."

The name of this connecting element is false.

You can, of course, call all this kinolyapy, but then we have recently all the films of these kinolyapy and consist (on 90%). Remembering fresh "Matilda" and "Salyut-7».

There is a very strange feeling. On the one hand, Nikita Mikhalkov's “Besogon” is a very seemingly useful and spiritual phenomenon. Well, you see, mentally, the singer is broadcasting on contemporary affairs. And very reasonable and logical.

But "Besogon" is exactly for the soul. Because for the body, that is, the wallet, several other things are required.

And where are these things coming from? That's right, from the budget.

"Legend number 17" and "Move up" studio "TriTe" began to create on the terms of the state order. Evil tongues generally claim that the studio does not work without state funding. Barin does not give money ...

And here the question arises, and it is very difficult. Why is "Besogon" in Mikhalkov's so heartfelt, correct and truthful, and in the films for which he has been paid well in general, sheer lies and fictions?

Who watched "The Legend ...", he probably remembers how easily a madhouse was created on the screen.

A CSKA fan with experience Colonel Brezhnev in the film became a Spartak fan and began to bend over CSKA coach Tarasov.

A certain party worker from the Central Committee invites the serviceman Valery Kharlamov to go to Spartak. Almost desert, because then Kharlamov was listed on the passage of military service.

Yes, and on the ice going on a complete madhouse. Three arbitrators are judged instead of two. The form is generally a complete bomzhatnik: a mixture of all for 20 years. I'm not sure that the clubs and helmets correspond to the era, but the fact that the skates and breastplates are younger on 10-15 is a fact. In short, the "tigers" near Moscow in 1941.

Well, the cherry on the cake is the planned marriage of one of the members of the USSR national hockey team to ... a colleague from the women's hockey team. The fact that prior to the creation of this team in 1972, even 23, does not bother anyone.

Yes, critics from knowledgeable people were more than enough. And almost five years have passed. And here either to draw conclusions, or to expect that everyone has forgotten everything.

Of course, the second. Because the “Upward Movement” became the most worthy successor of the “Legends ...” in terms of foolishness and anti-Sovietism.

In the 1972 year at the Olympics in Munich, a team of Soviet basketball players defeated the team of American students. It was a match of equal rivals, and the victory depended on many factors, including the coach and players.

In any case, this victory is worth screening. But the authors of the film have nothing to do with it. Figures from Mikhalkov remove fictional history about invented people. And people invented frankly bad. Yes, and they spit on everyone who can be reached.

Most of all, it is insulting for Modestas Paulauskas, who was exposed either to a traitor or a Russophobe. Ready to betray at any moment and run.

This “fiercely hating” all Soviet man still rides twice a week from Lithuania to Russia and trains our boys in the Kaliningrad region. More to such Russophobes ...

We have become a hopeless liar coach so that I had to change the name, so that the court is not to play. Vladimir Kondrashin, not Vladimir Garanzhin led our team to victory. But then "artistic" film ... As the "Salyut-7». Therefore they lie impersonal.

We will not analyze all this mess, for example, that they have slandered many: the coach and the players. According to the full program.

Well, to hell with them, with kinolyapami. The wretchedness of our directors and screenwriters is already in a good tone, so we have what we have. More precisely, they have a budget first, then us. Well, relatives, friends and friends of slandered people.

But what is the main thing? Show the sporting feat of Soviet athletes and coaches, or dazzle another Hollywood-like brew and quickly take a queue to finance the next “masterpiece”?

It is clear that the money is more important ...

It turns out that the state order implies the creation of artistic “pictures” that colorfully and vividly (who watched “Salute-7” will understand what they are talking about) create insanity mixed with spitting into the past of the country.

And they pay for it. And these films are advertised by very high-ranking officials, including the president.

We will answer the question “why and to whom it is profitable” in the second part of the material.

Now, as an intermediate result, it is worth saying that everything that is happening today by ministry officials from the culture of Russia is part of one plan. Not the most beautiful, so to speak.

And it is this plan that pushes Nikita Mikhalkov to the role of non-commissioned officer's widow, who has carved herself. On the one hand, the master criticizes and criticizes correctly, on the other hand, directors and other filmmakers led by him continue to make films, which can be called artistic only with the use of quotes.

So far, we can watch really great films on TV, all shot in the USSR, in which (again, almost a quote from GDP) “there was nothing but blue hens and black galoshes”.

But to all the beautiful tapes, which still enjoy the attention and respect of the audience, in the back of the head (not worse than the detachments from Mikhalkov’s films) breathe all these “Bastards” and other masterpieces.

And it seems that the upward movement actually turns into a fall downward. In the abyss of lies, lack of culture and concepts replaced. The whole question: who benefits ...
Author:
252 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. apro
    apro 15 January 2018 07: 10
    38
    Today, any film about the achievements of the USSR is essentially anti-secular. It is not possible to watch from lies and far-fetchedness.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 15 January 2018 07: 20
      27
      They wanted to make a film about the sports feat of Soviet athletes, but they lacked talent. And it turned out a white tiger with scum .....
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 15 January 2018 07: 33
        29
        Well, the White Tiger is, nevertheless, a purely military science fiction, it did not claim the truth of life from the very beginning. There is no need to look for an insidious forgery of values, because there is simply no black cat in a dark room. But on the whole, yes, I agree, the parasitism of the current “leaders” on Soviet achievements has gotten enough, which they themselves (or their predecessors) themselves stopped. It’s just right to shoot “Down Movement” - about the current sport, especially about highly paid runners with a soccer ball.
        1. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 15 January 2018 14: 16
          +8
          Quote: andrew42
          It’s just right to shoot “Down” - about the current sport, especially about high-paying runners with a soccer ball

          Precisely noticed! I’m interested in something else, are we now falling at the usual acceleration of 9,8 or faster? what
          And Roman, well done again !!! + 100500
          1. papas-57
            papas-57 15 January 2018 23: 34
            12
            I watched the trailer of the film and that was enough. I won’t go to the cinema. Risen all that is possible and impossible. Well, they didn’t play basketball like that in 1972. Players didn’t fly across the floor, didn’t break shields, didn’t put a “stake” every other time. This idea was ruined, d .... s b ... b.
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter 16 January 2018 00: 29
              +3
              Quote: papas-57
              I watched the trailer of the film and that was enough.

              So everything for the people. People’s country and a film for the people, until it gets completely fucked up fellow
              1. Mestny
                Mestny 17 January 2018 10: 34
                +5
                True people do not know - he took and went to the cinema.
                Probably not that (people).
                The followers of the Goblin Witnesses Sect, as usual, rave about Russian cinema and passionately masturbate on the cheap reconstructive piece "28 Panfilov".
                1. woron333444
                  woron333444 18 January 2018 11: 16
                  +4
                  People from the film came out with tears in their eyes. And at our place at the end of the session, the audience stood amicably and seated. I have not seen this in more than one Soviet film, not like in Russian. People vote in rubles. They go and look. And Skomorokhov and K * just to throw shit on the fan. The article is delusional on the topic "how bad everything is."
                  1. Okolotochny
                    Okolotochny 18 January 2018 12: 54
                    +6
                    I fully support. "Movement to the top" claims the status of "Tale of Bygone Years"? Will this story be studied in this film? But what then, “The meeting place cannot be changed”? During the premiere of the film on TV, a record low commission of crimes was recorded across the entire USSR. Does the film correspond to real events? NO. The story with the Black Cat gang is a different story. By the way, the modern film "Black Cats" is more consistent with the realities. "Movement to the top" raises patriotic feelings of people, pride in their country? YES. So what do the authors want? Well, if you are so smart, take off “A MASTERPIECE”, and the people will appreciate the ruble, tears and applause.
                  2. klaus16
                    klaus16 18 January 2018 13: 01
                    +3
                    I agree! I’m a patriot to the core. He went down, got up himself and clapped himself, because he was hurt. Because pride overwhelmed. Because he was happy for the revived our cinema. And there’s nothing to pour shit on these films! I agree to watch our not always reliable stories, but if they offend and raise patriotism, then the task is completed!
        2. Conductor
          Conductor 17 January 2018 10: 37
          +2
          In the white tiger, the finale is very interesting, where G is talking with some strength.
      2. astepanov
        astepanov 15 January 2018 10: 33
        10
        But how many special effects! Where we do not get the skill, there we put a patch of technical tricks. They try to make us believe that the time of films like The Ballad of a Soldier, built on truth and talent, is gone forever.
        However, Mikita Sergeich (and not one) openly imitates Hollywood directors. What can you do, a generation of current viewers was brought up on beautiful stamping.
        1. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 17 January 2018 10: 58
          +1
          Let them do special effects and brightness! Because it’s impossible to take pale soulfuls when everything around shines and plows.
          But here is a feature of Russian cinema - REAL people on the screen also need to be stored. American no longer climbs. Not because it's bad - there are good films there too. And a lot (because in general a lot is removed) but ...
          Anyone who watches a Western film today is OBLIGED not only to look at the “Russians” portrayed by freaks (it doesn’t catch me - the image of Russia and Russians is too far from reality to cling to) but also fag! Instead of Negro heroes, as in the 90s, now in every film there MANDATORY homosexuals among the main positive heroes. And well, if it's just a preoccupied lesbian ...
          And it really bothers - because it makes you sick. And if earlier homosexuality was marked by a stroke and one could just forget that this hero “loves boys” ... Now in the series they’re not limited to this yet, but they show whole “romantic plot lines” on the subject.

          In general, we look Chinese ... Panties and cars do. And cinema will soon be stamped all over the world. Already studying. And it turns out after all!
      3. BAI
        BAI 15 January 2018 10: 37
        +6
        turned out to be a white tiger with scum

        The film "White Tiger" also corresponds to the book, which was shot as an American cartoon "Adventures Hercules"the myths of ancient Greece.
      4. SERGUS
        SERGUS 17 January 2018 13: 20
        +3
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        They wanted to make a film about the sports feat of Soviet athletes, but they lacked talent.

        In post-Soviet liberal Russia, there are somehow no special feats, so you have to look for them in the history of the Union, simultaneously spitting on it. We spit in the well from which we ourselves drink. All this is stupid.
    2. Finches
      Finches 15 January 2018 07: 49
      14
      I didn’t look, I won’t judge, but what we have "Roads in the country, like cars in the country, as well as salaries, football, utilities and of course cinema - g .... oh! ", there is a certain truth in this! laughing

      There is no particular desire to seriously discuss this topic, but if the USSR approached the issue of creating cinema not from an economic point of view, but from an idiology, which means somewhere of a higher quality, now profit is the main criterion! snot ... So this is not only with us, it is a chip of the entire capitalist system! "People hawks !, bread and circuses ...
      1. insular
        insular 15 January 2018 08: 12
        24
        Quote: Finches
        feature of the entire capitalist system! "

        This is normal.
        At one time, Soviet Russia proclaimed a complete break with tsarist Russia. Now capitalist Russia is kicking the corpse of Soviet Russia ... For that matter, the USSR of the “certain” period was kicking the USSR of the “early” period. It's not worth a thousand words from an article.

        I liked the film (as an art film), watched it in one breath, my wife even cried .. In the aftertaste, I’m proud of the people, country and positive emotions for the day. What else does?

        PS If you look at Soviet films in frames and bones the same way, you can find fault with a lot. But you have to?
        1. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 43
          16
          For that matter,
          for that matter, the Union was a people's state, no matter what fairy tales you were told in the late 80s. And the current ones came to power on lies and betrayal. A silent civil war claimed many lives.
          Judge Soviet films? Well, judge the White Queen's Move.
          1. insular
            insular 15 January 2018 08: 51
            +8
            Quote: Gardamir
            for that matter, the Union was a people's state, no matter what fairy tales you were told in the late 80s.

            I laugh at you ... Well, you yourself substitute the USSR for your statement. In the 80s, there was still the USSR, so where is not accuracy? Why not kick a cold corpse?
            Quote: Gardamir
            And the current ones came to power on lies and betrayal.
            Like the previous ones.
            By the way, what was there about the lies of the 80s?
            Quote: Gardamir
            Judge Soviet films?
            I do not need it
            1. Gardamir
              Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 14
              20
              I'm laughing at you
              That is why the Kremlin has banned cons and the ability to blacklist. What would the trolls feel at ease.
              For the past three years, it has already been an anti-Soviet Union. Gorbachev put in a lot of efforts to make people hate their country and step into “market” socialism with a “happy” system, no one spoke of capitalism then.
              I do not need it
              So what are you doing here?
              1. insular
                insular 15 January 2018 09: 24
                +8
                Quote: Gardamir
                For the past three years, it has already been an anti-Soviet Union. Gorbachev put in a lot of efforts to make people hate their country and step into “market” socialism with a “happy” system, no one spoke of capitalism then.
                It was still the Soviet Union, and it was precisely the party impotence that led the scum to power. Let's not move from the movie to such matters.
                Quote: Gardamir
                So what are you doing here?

                We are currently discussing not Soviet film, but Russian and it does not seem to you that it would be right then to compare it with Russian films?
                Although you distort and juggle the concepts of a cheater with the concepts of the USSR and Anti USSR, I already realized that you are just a troll. They even managed to divide one country into two (this is a good USSR, and this is a bad USSR, look here, but do not look here ... the logic is confused).
                1. Gardamir
                  Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 33
                  11
                  not a Soviet film, but a Russian
                  and then you accuse me of juggling. Let modern Russian directors shoot about modern Russian athletes. I did not divide the country, it was just that the last USSR was prepared for the transition, how much dirt was poured onto our past, many still use it.
                  1. insular
                    insular 15 January 2018 09: 43
                    +3
                    Quote: Gardamir
                    Let modern Russian directors shoot about modern Russian athletes.

                    Do they have any? Is there reason to be proud of that? In the Duma, they think it’s not time for sports to become champions.
                    But at least some patriotic films need to be shot, so much so that the current government cannot be shaken, by an overwhelming feeling of awe. So it’s not far from riot.
                    Quote: Gardamir
                    I did not divide the country, just the last USSR was prepared for the transition

                    And the Party and the "Elite" type are out of business and the Soviets, as it were, too, all made one person (well, two, or whatever you think).
                    Quote: Gardamir
                    how much dirt has been poured onto our past, many still use it.

                    Still would! Glasnost recall ...
                    1. Gardamir
                      Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 59
                      +4
                      In the Duma, they think that it’s not time for sports to become champions. Still! Publicity to remember
                      If there is so much in common between us, then why argue?
                      But at least some patriotic films need to be shot
                      I agree, only dolbyotyaty are in power, they are afraid that if you remove something good about the Union, they will be thrown off. and you just shoot a film about the winning athletes.
                      By the way, for myself I call the first “youth team” a Soviet film, because there is no modern dope there is just a film about modern athletes, but the sequel has let us down.
                  2. Dedall
                    Dedall 15 January 2018 20: 33
                    +5
                    And why not shoot, for example, about an engineer or a simple worker? No, instead, the hero of the film is some gangster policeman or, as creative imagination as possible, an advertising photographer.
                    1. Mestny
                      Mestny 17 January 2018 10: 43
                      +2
                      Well, try it. I'm serious.
                      You know all the conditions - what the viewer is watching, what is interesting to him. Based on the fact that your film under capitalism should make money.
                      Based on this, at least - come up with a story about an engineer, or a worker, in order to fulfill the above conditions.
                      That the viewer would go to the cinema en masse as in the case of "Upward Movement".
                      And that would not have turned out cardboard men who "calmly burn tanks."
              2. activator
                activator 15 January 2018 13: 45
                10
                Quote: Gardamir
                What would the trolls feel at ease.

                YOU KNOW ANYONE WHO DEFINES YOUR OPINION AND IS CHILDREN WITH A RANGE with a common opinion can be called a troll. For example, I did not see anything anti-Soviet in legend 17, and even the fact that Brezhnev instead of one Soviet club was sick in the film after another Soviet, it can be called anti-Soviet only in the authors’s sore brain. and so in every way it perceives any discrepancy as anti-Soviet, and the fact that in all Soviet films instead of tigers is 55, and so the trucks shot everything from zis to urals there. In general, in the comments there is some kind of snobbery and hypocrisy. For example, I really like the white tiger and the fanatic one in it no more than in the same sergeant tsibule, who almost won the Wehrmacht alone, the last hero, and even the same stalingrad, and what they showed there, you know, the love of evil, women they love maniacs. Well, and the fact that the enemy was shown with a human face as we have, the Germans were not fascists, because it was fed and watered. Now I’m watching the Chernobyl series the exclusion zone and I get great pleasure from the famously twisted plot and a mixture of mystic fiction.
                1. Gardamir
                  Gardamir 15 January 2018 14: 01
                  14
                  in legend 17 did not see anything anti-Soviet
                  You see the difference between the Soviet and the liberal, the same as between heaven and earth. The Soviet collective mutual assistance, the liberals on American patterns always have one hero saving the whole world. In the USSR, they were proud of the “RED MACHINE”; in Russia, number 17 is enough.
                  We grumbled at the Soviet cinema at one time, they only show something good. I just wanted to hide strawberries in my youth. And now in the films there is so much chernukha and strawberries that makes me sick.
                  1. Mestny
                    Mestny 17 January 2018 10: 50
                    +3
                    "Collective mutual assistance in the USSR" exists only in the cynically-lying lips of Yulins, Zhukovs and other historians from the wallet.
                    In the same way they drowned each other, in the same way they climbed up their heads, ignoring the victims - as it should be in any human community. However, this was all covered by a lacquered lacquered socialist picture of social relations that had no connection to real life.
                    This, by the way, is one of the direct reasons for the collapse of our state - a mismatch between real relations in society and the declared ones.
                    In this sense, oddly enough, capitalism will be more honorable. If you are a wolf, then it is so, it is normal under capitalism.
                2. GAF
                  GAF 15 January 2018 20: 46
                  +4
                  Quote: activator
                  For example, I did not see anything anti-Soviet in legend 17

                  I didn’t notice either. But how talented Menshov portrayed the "guard" from the apparatus of the Central Committee. There is nothing anti-Soviet about this. But it was. At one time he had communication with one of those goals, who imagines himself to be anyone on the ground floor of the Central Committee. What is the Soviet regime?
                  1. Gardamir
                    Gardamir 15 January 2018 21: 45
                    +5
                    portrayed a "guard"
                    so why not make a film about modernity and portray the current guard?
                    1. Mestny
                      Mestny 17 January 2018 10: 55
                      +4
                      It's not that.
                      The fact is that the author of the article. like his like-minded people are trying to prove to all of us that this was not the case in the USSR. There were no guards, no betrayal, no tyrants in power, no bandits - but there was a great country of the USSR, which in a single impulse built a bright future.
                      By the intensity of cynicism and lies, such constructions of history are no different from those of the monarchists - admirers of Russia until 1913.
                      Both those and those - lie.
                3. Okolotochny
                  Okolotochny 18 January 2018 12: 56
                  +4
                  the fact that in all Soviet films instead of tigers t 55

                  Correctly. And what about the "crew of a combat vehicle"? Instead of the Germans PT-76 in my opinion. And a bad movie?
              3. allaykbar
                allaykbar 17 January 2018 10: 33
                +4
                That's why the Kremlin has banned cons and the ability to blacklist. What would the trolls feel at ease.


                Gardamir well you give wassat

                PS would be a minus - you would sit with gray epaulets forever
              4. woron333444
                woron333444 18 January 2018 11: 21
                +1
                Gardamir
                For the past three years, it has already been an anti-Soviet Union.

                But all the Communists clapped Gorbachev and Zyuganov as well. And now everyone wants to disown it and say that he did not participate.
        2. rkkasa xnumx
          rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 08: 50
          +7
          Quote: insular
          At one time, Soviet Russia proclaimed a complete break with tsarist Russia. Now capitalist Russia is kicking the corpse of Soviet Russia

          In my opinion, these are different things - a break with the previous system, and its blackening (or, as you put it, kicking).
          Can you give a lot of examples when, in Soviet films, they openly lied about pre-revolutionary Russia?
          Quote: insular
          looked at one go, the wife even cried ..

          Nostalgia laughing
          Quote: insular
          The aftertaste is proud of people, country and positive emotions for the day

          Positive due to outright lies? Hm ... request
          1. insular
            insular 15 January 2018 08: 54
            +4
            Quote: rkkasa 81
            Positive due to outright lies?

            Straight frank lies? I think you're lying right now.
            Quote: rkkasa 81
            In my opinion, these are different things - a break with the previous system, and its blackening (or, as you put it, kicking).
            This is something much worse - it is a renunciation of ourselves, of our history and our Fatherland, of our succession
            1. rkkasa xnumx
              rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 09: 32
              +5
              Quote: insular
              you're lying right now

              Will it not be difficult for you to justify your words? In order not to consider you a starball.
              Quote: insular
              This is something much worse - it is a renunciation of ourselves, of our history and our Fatherland, of our succession

              In the sense of ?
              1. insular
                insular 15 January 2018 09: 34
                +3
                Quote: rkkasa 81
                Will it not be difficult for you to justify your words? In order not to consider you a starball.

                Do not you think that this is for your balabolost about outright lies you should answer?
                Quote: rkkasa 81
                In the sense of ?

                In direct.
                1. rkkasa xnumx
                  rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 10: 41
                  +6
                  Quote: insular
                  Do not you think that this is for your balabolost about outright lies you should answer?

                  If you think that there is no outright lies in Upward Movement, then you are still a starball player.
                  Quote: insular
                  In direct.

                  A typical excuse for starball.
                  1. AnpeL
                    AnpeL 15 January 2018 11: 59
                    13
                    Also went to this film with his wife and child. I don’t know what is there to escalate around individual details, but on the whole the film, in my opinion, shows willpower, skill and character: our athletes could and can, I think, now fight on equal terms and defeat those who consider themselves above all. I was able to buy a ticket for a session that began only after 3 hours, for earlier shows all tickets were sold out and even in my time the best places were already missing. By the time the session began, the entire hall was packed with spectators. The whole film is in tension, it looks in one breath. At the moment when the last, winning ball in the opponent’s basket was shown, the entire audience simply applauded, including me. the feeling was as if the game was happening before our eyes right now, and not once in the past. I think that such a perception by the viewer is one of the main tasks of directing and it was a success. The fact that someone, something, or some separate actions are not presented as separate commentators of VO would like, as you say, you can’t please the whole world. One likes one, another another.
                    1. long in stock.
                      long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 09
                      +8
                      forgive me, but if you are offered a barrel of honey in which a spoon floats in. But will you eat it? Tell me why is there a scene with caviar? What is it for, is this a brilliant find of the director? yes it seems no ... then why? can you explain?
                      1. AnpeL
                        AnpeL 15 January 2018 13: 21
                        +2
                        And what is your comparison of caviar with this?
                      2. Monetniy
                        Monetniy 17 January 2018 10: 39
                        +3
                        Then, as it was, the athletes drove for sale everything they bought over the hill, and they brought home what we did not have!
                    2. rkkasa xnumx
                      rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 14: 27
                      +6
                      Quote: AnpeL
                      I don’t know what to pump around individual parts

                      These individual details create a certain (negative) perception of the USSR.
                      Quote: AnpeL
                      in general, the film in my opinion shows willpower, skill and character: our athletes could and can, I think, now fight on equal terms and win

                      And here you don’t need to THINK, here you just need to be at least a little interested in sports, and KNOW that now our athletes, with the rarest exception, cannot. Partly because of these irritations, these cinematographs are so annoying that there isn’t much to choose from these times, the creators are taking Soviet victories, but at the same time, these victories will be swept away.
                      It seems that it’s not an outright chernukha, but it still smells.
                      Correctly in kamen wrote:
                      Quote: Long in stock.
                      forgive me, but if you are offered a barrel of honey in which a spoon floats in. But will you eat it? Tell me why is there a scene with caviar? What is it for, is this a brilliant find of the director? yes it seems no ... then why? can you explain?

                      Quote: AnpeL
                      you cannot please the whole world. One likes one, another another

                      There are things that almost no one likes. Lies for example.
                      1. AnpeL
                        AnpeL 15 January 2018 14: 58
                        +2
                        Something you turn everything that is possible. In your opinion, it turns out that generally it is better not to shoot films about Soviet sports and achievements. Why do you need this? Well, let's forget about all this and never will remember.
                  2. Mestny
                    Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 08
                    +2
                    I will answer.
                    Any film, any country, even biographical, and even more so historical, contains some of the authors' imagination.
                    Why do you demand from this film without fail 100% historical authenticity?
                    In the film "offended" the historical truth about your beloved USSR? So in the USSR, everything was actually not quite the way the ideologists of preserving historical truth are telling us now.
                    About 140 million people now live in Russia. Some of them are "bad", and some are good. And among them, a mass of citizens for any gifts of those who disagree return to the USSR. One may get the impression, especially if one receives information from one source, for example, the Operru website, which is extremely ideological for specific individuals, that the vast majority of citizens believe in a bright and sinless USSR, which was unjustly destroyed by external enemies.
                    This is not true. For 27 years, a new generation has already managed to grow up, which knows nothing about the USSR, and does not seek to know. Under no circumstances will it be possible to revive such a country and order, it is necessary to live further in the current reality, in which it is necessary, for example, in the cinema, to satisfy the needs of the current generation, and not a handful of commissioned historians.
                    It has always been so, and everywhere, in any country and at any time.
                    You do not like it - make your own movie. And look - a modern viewer will come to him or not.
          2. marline
            marline 16 January 2018 11: 01
            +4
            Quote: rkkasa 81
            Can you give a lot of examples when, in Soviet films, they openly lied about pre-revolutionary Russia?

            There is such a very good film that everyone should watch - Chapaev.
            There are also - “We are from Kronstadt”, “Schors”, “The rout of Yudenich”, “Alexander Parkhomenko”, “Kotovsky”, “Unforgettable 1919”, “Arsenal”, “Commissar”
            All the white officers and nobles there are monsters and scum. They even often speak Russian with a terrible German accent. Do you want to say that?
            Or here’s another extreme - “There is no ford in the fire”, “Two comrades served”, “Adjutant of His Excellency”, “Running”, “Days of the Turbins”, “Walking through the agony” and so on. There we have a white officer - well-read, good-natured, generous, and a boob who simply does not understand what is happening around.
            Such is the Soviet truth movie ...
            PS: All of the films listed are actually very good.
            1. Mestny
              Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 17
              +4
              Really very good ...
              Great, so let's admit that now there are films that are very good by the same criteria - there is little historical truth, but everything else is done as it should.
              No, some fighters for the historical truth (I don’t mean you, do not be offended) would like to cling to insignificant details, and on the basis of this, declare the film bad and, what is most interesting, “anti-Soviet”. As if the USSR state still exists, and the authors of the film are trying to insult him.
              Your will, it seems that these critics work for money. It could not be otherwise - living under capitalism they are forced to do it. And so they chose for themselves such a way to earn money, on historical memory in their interpretation, of course the only correct one.
              The most important thing is not to take for the truth the screams and tricks of these historical entertainers.
              About the cinema of the USSR - the vast majority of films are dull g .. Yes, and filmed in a quality close to the home-made crafts of amateur schoolchildren.
              And the very historical reliability of the details in the frame can cause a faint in any modern reenactor. But - nothing for many. Well, what about - the game of actors, the plot, the dialogs, everything is fine. It is a pity that for people living in 2018, all of the above seems to be completely different. As it should be in accordance with the time.
              1. marline
                marline 17 January 2018 11: 58
                +2
                Quote: Mestny
                Great, so let's admit that now there are films that are very good by the same criteria - there is little historical truth, but everything else is done as it should.

                Let’s, in fact, I say so. And in the USSR, not all films were masterpieces of cinematography. And now, a lot of frank misery is being removed.
                Quote: Mestny
                No, some fighters for the historical truth would like to cling to insignificant details, and on the basis of this, declare the film bad and, what is most interesting, “anti-Soviet”.

                I agree with you. Moreover, the absoluteness of judgments in this case is very annoying. Personally, I am for pluralism of opinions.
                Quote: Mestny
                Your will, it seems that these critics work for money.

                I don’t think, it’s rather a fashionable trend now - to praise everything Soviet and criticize the modern.
                Quote: Mestny
                About the cinema of the USSR - the vast majority of films are dull g .. Yes, and filmed in a quality close to the home-made crafts of amateur schoolchildren.
                And the very historical reliability of the details in the frame can cause a faint in any modern reenactor. But - nothing for many. Well, what about - the game of actors, the plot, the dialogs, everything is fine. It is a pity that for people living in 2018, all of the above seems to be completely different. As it should be in accordance with the time.

                Well, "the vast majority of films are dull ..." - one can say about the majority of films shot at that time - yet film-making technologies over the past 20-30 years have jumped far ahead. Nevertheless, there are Soviet masterpieces as feature and auteur cinema, and they are still pleasant and useful to watch. However, in fairness I must say that this is also true for foreign films. Well, who and what to like is a matter of taste.
                1. Mestny
                  Mestny 17 January 2018 12: 12
                  +1
                  You are undoubtedly right. Techniques have also changed, and the acting has become different. But if you recall only the technical aspects, you have to admit that the actual picture on the screen (that in cinema is at least 50% success regardless of genre) in Soviet films was often not just any. but frankly disgusting.
                  There are reasons, of course - the trophy film is over (remember, films of the late 60s and the end of the 70s are almost all black and white, and remember the post-war films - the brightness of colors), studio equipment has not yet been purchased abroad.
                  And as a result, the gray-green fog, the bubbling sound could finally spoil the already not very strong script and not the stellar play of the actors.
                  Some films seem to be really interesting, but it is necessary to have a deep passionate conviction, sincerely and wholeheartedly love exactly the cinema of the USSR, to get through all these obstacles and feel the intention of the authors.
                  1. marline
                    marline 17 January 2018 14: 26
                    +1
                    Quote: Mestny
                    But if you recall only the technical aspects, you have to admit that the actual picture on the screen (that in cinema is at least 50% success regardless of genre) in Soviet films was often not just any. but frankly disgusting.

                    Controversial ... I would say a very controversial statement. The movie "Frost" was shot in 1964, color, received international awards, and S. Spielberg even said that American directors learned to make special effects and film fantasy on this film.
                    Quote: Mestny
                    ... the already not very strong script and not the stellar acting of the actors.

                    Again, the acting and scripts of Soviet films have been praised more than once at international film festivals.
                    So let's not scold either Soviet or modern Russian films - all of them were shot according to the technologies of their time and have approximately the same level as contemporary foreign films.
                    1. Mestny
                      Mestny 17 January 2018 15: 09
                      +2
                      So I'm not saying that ALL Soviet films are like that.
                      There are indeed masterpieces. Just their number in the mass of films that was then shot throughout the union is extremely small.
                      As now, taking into account the fact that it is removed ten times less.
                      1. marline
                        marline 17 January 2018 16: 00
                        +1
                        I completely agree with this. Moreover, I am sure that it will be so in the future and everywhere.
            2. V. Salama
              V. Salama 18 January 2018 02: 01
              +1
              All the white officers and nobles there are fiends and fit .... Do you want to say that?
              No dear, we know that most white officers served in the Red Army, and really fought the majority with scum. The history of the white movement to the rescue. When a feature film is about war, the educational goal is always assumed - intransigence towards the enemy. It is unlikely that the methods used to achieve this goal can be called vile. Another thing is the purposeful manipulation of consciousness using a whole arsenal of subtle lies and slander in order to distort the whole era of the Soviet period according to Solzhenitsinsky - to give part for whole, according to ... Pozner, Mlechin, Svanidze ... in the range from a tar spoon in a barrel of honey to a glass wine in a bucket of slops. And where in the Soviet films is there slander on real historical characters or a negative distortion of historical events?
              1. marline
                marline 18 January 2018 09: 03
                +1
                Quote: V. Salama
                No dear, we know that most white officers served in the Red Army, and really fought the majority with scum.

                Oh, how cool it is to take one moment out of the context of someone else's post, without an addition, and write only about it. What is this if not demagogy?
                Maybe you will read my post further? There, after all, there are other Soviet films that use a completely different image of a white officer (who is not a scum and a scoundrel), and this is directly written about this in my post. In the meantime, you, in your post, actually admitted that in Soviet films there was a sea of ​​lies and distortion "with the aim of distorting an entire era" ...
                1. V. Salama
                  V. Salama 18 January 2018 14: 28
                  +1
                  Turn around like ... on a scallop. Do not confuse text with context. I took from your text a specific statement, which is a complete thought that does not have significant connections with other statements. And your glasses of wine in a bucket of slops are not impressive. Read about the demagoguery in the dictionary - your post is just it. And you have a problem with logic. If I by my post “actually admitted the sea of ​​lies”, then from the context it follows that this is exactly your conviction. So do not change shoes here on the fly.
                  1. V. Salama
                    V. Salama 18 January 2018 14: 45
                    +1
                    PS Maybe I shouldn’t run into you in vain, but ay answer yourself, so what is “Soviet truth” for you if it is such and such?
                    Maybe this is just the truth of life? So no, when it’s bad about whites, then you are asking here - what was it? And when it’s good about the whites, it goes without saying. Or am I reading context poorly? So I won’t apologize.
                    1. marline
                      marline 18 January 2018 15: 18
                      0
                      Quote: V. Salama
                      Maybe this is just the truth of life? So no, when it’s bad about whites, then you are asking here - what was it? And when it’s good about the whites, it goes without saying.

                      No when "OK" - This is also not true, so it was not. Really worth it to emphasize in his post.
                      PS the truth is always somewhere nearby ... and you are looking for the "absolute truth" in the movie, you can find ...
                      1. V. Salama
                        V. Salama 18 January 2018 20: 30
                        0
                        So, when you answered the question: "... when in Soviet films frankly lied about pre-revolutionary Russia?" you were aggravated by the fact that the ratings were too good and you decided to mark this as a lie. Well, you’re just like in a pan. This is a movie, in it there can be no absolute truth, which is the truth. So do not blame me for your cockroaches. And do not confuse the artistic view with lies and slander, the latter always suffer damage, at least moral. And the truth is not the truth, one would also need to know.
                      2. marline
                        marline 19 January 2018 09: 35
                        0
                        Quote: V. Salama
                        This is a movie, in it there can be no absolute truth, which is the truth.

                        This is what you should always remember.
                  2. marline
                    marline 18 January 2018 15: 13
                    0
                    Quote: V. Salama
                    I took from your text a concrete statement that is a complete thought not significant with the rest of the statements.

                    laughing laughing laughing
                    They explain to me what I wrote and what I had in mind !!! ... complete nonsense ...
                    1. V. Salama
                      V. Salama 18 January 2018 20: 56
                      0
                      Quote: merlin

                      laughing laughing laughing
                      They explain to me what I wrote and what I had in mind !!! ... complete nonsense ...

                      What you wrote follows from the text, first of all, both sense and motive. What was the conversation about, which by the way was supposed. You yourself brought your thoughts to a public discussion. And what is the nonsense here? Are you tricking again? Well, if, when you wrote your text, you had in mind something else that was inaccessible to the readers, then this is your problem of expressing your thoughts. There are two options - either to a specialist in delirium, although more likely there are simply gaps in education.
                    2. marline
                      marline 19 January 2018 09: 36
                      0
                      Quote: V. Salama

                      Are you tricking again?

                      Are you tricking again?
                      1. V. Salama
                        V. Salama 19 January 2018 11: 29
                        0
                        Quote: merlin
                        Quote: V. Salama

                        Are you tricking again?

                        Are you tricking again?

                        You have to be older, answer for the bazaar when there are no arguments - behave with dignity. Each of course has its own goal in VO, hence the methods of polemic follow. I do not want to offend anyone, although there are situations when I have to speak the language of my opponent, I do not consider myself the most intelligent and educated. And I attend VO in order to get new information, test my beliefs for strength, and contribute to the analysis of the situation. Of course, I may be wrong in evaluations and introductions, but I must be convinced of this. You want to simply win the argument and how afraid you are to lose the cow ...
                      2. marline
                        marline 19 January 2018 11: 38
                        0
                        Quote: V. Salama
                        You want to simply win the argument and how afraid you are to lose the cow ...

                        You won !!!! I lost the cow !!! Gip-gip hooray! Hooray! Hooray !!!!
                      3. V. Salama
                        V. Salama 19 January 2018 18: 41
                        0
                        Quote: merlin
                        Quote: V. Salama
                        You want to simply win the argument and how afraid you are to lose the cow ...

                        You won !!!! I lost the cow !!! Gip-gip hooray! Hooray! Hooray !!!!

                        I formulated my goals, and you pretend that you did not understand me. It’s a pity that communication ended like that. PS You’re kind of like a film expert here, you know a lot of good Russian films. There is such a film by Akir Kurosov “Rashomon”, in my opinion the rare case when, in my opinion, it’s better (probably I shouldn’t formulate it unprofessionally comparing different things), the work on which was created (“In more often” by Ryatonos Akatugawa). Perhaps you watched it. Why am I doing this? There, five witnesses to one crime in the testimony speak the truth and, for everyone, it is different. How can this be? But Aristotle explained this. In Soviet times, this was understood. And now we no longer understand each other how we speak different languages.
          3. Philip Staros
            Philip Staros 17 January 2018 11: 00
            +1
            As a result, the USSR did not break the connection with RI. Stalin raised the heroism of Peter the Great, Alexander Nevsky and some others.
        3. Varyag_0711
          Varyag_0711 15 January 2018 09: 10
          22
          insular Today, 08:12 ↑ New
          I liked the film (as an art), watched in one breath, my wife even cried ..
          Excuse me, but did you find the USSR? How old are you, if not secret? In fact, the film takes from the very beginning its anti-Soviet, and clearly far-fetched. I don’t know what you liked there and why your wife was crying, but my film provoked rejection right away and precisely because of my deceit from the first minutes. I definitely won’t watch the second time, it’s better once again to revise the soviet “Goalkeeper”.
          The aftertaste is proud of people, country and positive emotions for the day.
          "Proud" for what people? Which run away from the country during the JI? “Proud” for which country, which was slandered from head to toe and from which supposedly everyone wants to blame it without exception? You can’t say anything good “pride” ... This again raises the question: did you find the USSR in general?
          PS If you look at Soviet films in frames and bones the same way, you can find fault with a lot. But you have to?
          After the Soviet films, with all their mistakes, I wanted to be a patriot! I wanted to become a pilot, an astronaut, a captain of a ship, a tanker, a metallurgist, a doctor or a teacher, but I did not want to become a manager in a large company. After those films, I wanted to be useful and useful to people, I wanted to love and create, but now I want to swell and churn after watching all this movie-making ... negative
          1. insular
            insular 15 January 2018 09: 18
            13
            This gall bladder pulled ... You take care of yourself, do not need such emotions. Unhealthy.
            But I will answer you:
            After 30 years of frank rubbish at the box office, about bandits, cops, nannies and oligarchs, even this weak attempt at a good film looks like a MASTERPIECE, in which even caricatures of the past, cause nostalgia and joy for the sport of team play, against a background of white flags.
            1. Varyag_0711
              Varyag_0711 15 January 2018 09: 43
              16
              insular Today, 09:18 ↑
              This gall bladder pulled ... You take care of yourself, do not need such emotions. Unhealthy.
              But the booby boy was not worth it!
              After 30 years of frank rubbish at the box office, about bandits, cops, nannies and oligarchs
              The same rubbish appears, but with anti-Soviet sauce. But, as I understand it, you are from the people, that is, you shove everything that they slip in?
              1. insular
                insular 15 January 2018 09: 46
                +3
                Quote: Varyag_0711
                But the booby boy was not worth it!

                Thank you, but you flatter me.
                Quote: Varyag_0711
                The same rubbish appears, but with anti-Soviet sauce.

                Each sauce tastes different for everyone. About tastes as they say. Maximalism has not eroded - it is sadness, but I ask you not to dispute or insult my right to an opinion.
                Quote: Varyag_0711
                But, as I understand it, you are from the people, that is, you shove everything that they slip in?

                Let's do it without direct insults.
          2. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 15 January 2018 15: 48
            +4
            And "Office Romance" is it never about managers? Of course, this is about the workers of the village and production! This is about people who with bloody corns and occupational diseases tear out a plan from nature! Plan! Ok, this is a love movie, just a love movie, without any class connotations.
            1. Dedall
              Dedall 15 January 2018 20: 45
              +5
              Respected 3x3zsave, agree that all the same there is a certain irony and a note of criticism on the topic of the uselessness of the layer between the producer (enterprises) and the consumer (population) described in the Office Romance. It’s just that in Ryazanov’s manner, everything goes in the deep layers of perception. About the same as in the New Year's "Irony of Fate" a statement was made about the small salaries of teachers and doctors.
              But you, probably, watch films like "Secrets of the Investigation", where an honest prosecutor in each series changes cars and whose children study in England. So to speak, honestly and frankly about the "most important thing."
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 15 January 2018 16: 07
          +7
          It so happened that I posted on the page my comment on the article, as an answer to yours, this particular comment. In my commentary, I supported you and criticized the author of the article. So ... It turned out that my comment ... disappeared! Thus, I came to the conclusion that comments are deliberately "filtered" at the VO, so that comments that are pleasing to the "author-moderator" prevail, and the most "unpleasant" are eliminated!
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 15 January 2018 16: 15
            +1
            PS Message insular-'y to comment from <08.12>
            1. long in stock.
              long in stock. 15 January 2018 19: 39
              +3
              than unsettled the moderators. Do not worry, not you are the first and not the last ..
      2. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 January 2018 08: 14
        +7
        None of the so-called masterpieces of domestic cinema in recent years is not something that did not make a profit, they are disastrous for the money. It’s not about profit ...
        1. insular
          insular 15 January 2018 08: 16
          +3
          Quote: Long in stock.
          None of the so-called masterpieces of domestic cinema in recent years is not something that has not brought profit - they are failing for money

          And there are facts? That's specifically for the film under discussion, let's ...
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 10
            +4
            There are facts. Viking is a failure. Matilda is a failure. Previous Mikhalkov’s weary both parts collected only 20pr. from spent on them. for this film-brought 1 billion 400 ml. half of the cinema is 700 million. Costs-official 450 million. while in plus 250. but so far. and that’s it.
            1. insular
              insular 15 January 2018 09: 33
              +1
              Quote: Long in stock.
              there are facts

              I ask you, specifically on the film under discussion, let's ...
              1. long in stock.
                long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 38
                +2
                read above. why are you inattentive then what ..
                1. insular
                  insular 15 January 2018 09: 51
                  +3
                  Quote: Long in stock.
                  read above. why are you inattentive then what ..

                  I saw, therefore, I accentuate your cunning. You have hidden your deception about "not one" behind a general abstract text ...
                  After all, the specifically discussed is ALREADY in the black.
                  1. long in stock.
                    long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 53
                    +4
                    I wrote to you for good reason, bye .. the fact is that with the Viking it was the same, at first they announced a budget of 1.2 billion and then it suddenly grew up to 1.6.
                    1. rkkasa xnumx
                      rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 10: 58
                      +3
                      Quote: Long in stock.
                      for this film - brought 1 billion 400 mln. half of the cinemas remains 700 mln. costs - official 450 mln. while in plus 250

                      Quote: Long in stock.
                      with the Viking it was the same, at first they announced a budget of 1.2 billion and then it suddenly grew up to 1.6. that's why, for now ... for now it will be seen

                      Plus (or rather minus) - the distributor takes 10-15%, and you also need to take into account the losses from marketing (promotion) of this "masterpiece".
                      "The filmmakers did not disclose the marketing budget. Upward Movement had a large-scale advertising campaign, primarily on the Russia 1 channel," says Sergey Lavrov, editor-in-chief of Kinodata.pro. One of the film’s producers is Anton Zlatopolsky, director of the Russia 1 channel . "
                      1. long in stock.
                        long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 11
                        +2
                        from and I’m talking about the same thing .. profit is pure money. it’s too early to talk about MONEY payback.
                      2. Philip Staros
                        Philip Staros 17 January 2018 11: 03
                        0
                        But you need to understand that:
                        First, marketing is part of the budget. All over the world, at least.
                        Secondly - that the "budget" is money, mainly going to the "stars" and others - these expenses are someone else's income. Revenues of the industry, let’s say so.
                        So everything is not so obvious.
            2. papas-57
              papas-57 15 January 2018 23: 43
              +6
              `` for this film, it brought 1 billion 400 mln. to half of the cinemas there are 700 mln. costs - the official 450 mln. while in plus. '' By the way, in the USSR they always wrote how many viewers watched the film and never how much profit it brought. The golden calf steers.
              1. long in stock.
                long in stock. 16 January 2018 18: 20
                0
                then they measured income differently ..
        2. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 45
          +4
          it’s not about profit ..
          That's right, we believed that business is chasing a momentary profit. And they are not in a hurry. They need to set the stage. In 20-30 years there will be a country of consumers ready to believe in all fairy tales.
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 11
            +6
            they are ready .. just not all yet
      3. Gardamir
        Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 39
        +5
        feature of the entire capitalist system!
        So I agree with you. Just why discussing Syria and the Donbass or candidates for the presidency, everyone forgets this and begins to paint a fictional world.
        1. insular
          insular 15 January 2018 09: 04
          +3
          Quote: Gardamir
          Just why discussing Syria and the Donbass or candidates for the presidency, everyone forgets this and begins to paint a fictional world.

          And here it is impossible not to agree on the selective thinking of the defenders of the current structure.
        2. KVU-NSVD
          KVU-NSVD 15 January 2018 09: 22
          11
          The main thing in any film is the feelings experienced after watching, and kinolapy and distortion (made from stupidity, by order or to increase watchfulness) can, if desired, be found in almost any film, even documentary. And Soviet cinema in this regard, to put it mildly, is no exception
      4. nickname7
        nickname7 17 January 2018 09: 48
        0
        And this is vulgarity, colorfulness, snot ... So this is not only with us, it is a chip of the whole capitalist system
        Different genres, specialize in their chips, for example in musicals they sing and dance, etc. But, now in Western cinema, the main direction is the emphasis on realism and attention to details, the nuances and behavior of a narrow professional group, in itself is a sight, for example, if the film is about the fleet, then they invite participants to events for the script, as well a retired sailor, for consultations who did not serve in the army, write scripts, do not attract consultants, the actors "play" the sailors without understanding anything in the service - this is the difference in approaches.
        The hypocrites were growing up, trying to imitate the type of filming in the form of a clip, anti-Soviet lies, generally Roskino - hack, without state money, hack workers would go broke.
        1. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 17 January 2018 11: 08
          +1
          The "realism" of American films ... I do not know - maybe there are some cogs there that are correct. But in general, the dullness of the scenarios is often really brought up ... About the "not ending shops" in the old action movies, it seems okay - in the new films they reload ... But in everything else ... A person who remembers the laws of physics and at least has some logic in mind to watch a lot is really hard.
          Now Russian films suffer from this. But there they’re trying to show at least a little bit ... Like in a carriage, when people climbed from plane to plane at a speed of about 300 km / h ... It’s clear that it’s not possible to stay at that speed for anything ... But at least it is clear that the scriptwriters understood stupidity ... and are trying to portray exorbitant efforts ... to note moments about air pressure, temperature at altitude ... In the American, most likely, they would not even have steamed and no advisers and consultants would have helped :)
    3. Vend
      Vend 15 January 2018 13: 51
      +6
      The name of this connecting element is false.
      Listen to the truth-teller, and the "tigers" in all war films in 41 is not a lie? Legend No.17 Selut-7 are wonderful films, unlike Viking or Stalingrad. And the fact that there are no connections, the authors write the script. Not every historian can observe historical truth, and this is even more difficult for a screenwriter.
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 January 2018 19: 43
        +4
        so there are consultants for this .. it is very clear that there are things that only a specialist can know. but after all, there are living and witnesses and participants on the same fireworks. It’s not fate to ask them? and the rest of the dissonance participants say that it’s not like that. So they lie? I think it’s very unpleasant for you personally to lie.
        1. Vend
          Vend 16 January 2018 10: 24
          +1
          Quote: long in stock.
          so there are consultants for this .. it is very clear that there are things that only a specialist can know. but after all, there are living and witnesses and participants on the same fireworks. It’s not fate to ask them? and the rest of the dissonance participants say that it’s not like that. So they lie? I think it’s very unpleasant for you personally to lie.

          There is not a single historical film where no mistakes were made. For example, in the movie "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears," the main character participates in the Blue Light, but this program appeared only 4 years later. If the general epoch is conveyed correctly, the heroes communicate exactly as they communicated at that time, the atmosphere is preserved, etc., then oversights do not matter. Oversights arise not from ignorance of consultants or directors or screenwriters, but from a lack of budget or paid sponsor requirements.
          1. nickname7
            nickname7 17 January 2018 10: 25
            +2
            For example, in the film "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears," the main character takes part in the Blue Light, but this program appeared only 4 years later.
            Such individual oversights are excusable, this is not the case. For example, the 9 film by Bondarchuk’s company, where the events are false, the military’s behavior is delusional, (battle scenes - having strengthened and buried, the soldiers began to rush and run) .
            If the general epoch is conveyed correctly, the heroes communicate exactly as they communicated at that time, the atmosphere is preserved, etc., then oversights do not matter.
            This is hack.
            Oversights do not arise from ignorance of consultants
            . And why is this a mistake if professionals are invited to the Western cinema, sitters are invited for crime scenes, retired soldiers, etc. And in films, the actors "play", imitate what they have no idea about,
            therefore, Western films are watched, and films are not popular.
            1. Vend
              Vend 17 January 2018 10: 45
              0
              Quote: nickname7
              For example, in the film "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears," the main character takes part in the Blue Light, but this program appeared only 4 years later.
              Such individual oversights are excusable, this is not the case. For example, the 9 film by Bondarchuk’s company, where the events are false, the military’s behavior is delusional, (battle scenes - having strengthened and buried, the soldiers began to rush and run) .
              If the general epoch is conveyed correctly, the heroes communicate exactly as they communicated at that time, the atmosphere is preserved, etc., then oversights do not matter.
              This is hack.
              Oversights do not arise from ignorance of consultants
              . And why is this a mistake if professionals are invited to the Western cinema, sitters are invited for crime scenes, retired soldiers, etc. And in films, the actors "play", imitate what they have no idea about,
              therefore, Western films are watched, and films are not popular.

              Bondarchuk’s film is hack, there, under the guise of patriotism, Russophobic ideas were pushed through, one machine gun with a crooked barrel is worth it. And on a par with "Legend No. 17" or "Time of the First" I would not put it.
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 15 January 2018 20: 39
        +6
        "Legend No.17 Selut-7 are wonderful films ..."
        I saw Kharlamov live. After “17 Legend” I don’t want to watch these crafts, aimed at one thing - to knock out grandmothers from the modern spectator, who didn’t see the Union, in the name of good people of the USSR.
        1. Vend
          Vend 16 January 2018 10: 19
          +2
          Quote: Doliva63
          "Legend No.17 Selut-7 are wonderful films ..."
          I saw Kharlamov live. After “17 Legend” I don’t want to watch these crafts, aimed at one thing - to knock out grandmothers from the modern spectator, who didn’t see the Union, in the name of good people of the USSR.

          The films are aimed at making people who did not know the USSR proud of the Soviet past and its heroes.
    4. svp67
      svp67 15 January 2018 17: 46
      +3
      Quote: apro
      Today, any film about the achievements of the USSR is essentially anti-war. It is not possible to watch from lies and far-fetchedness.
      And you look at them the way they did in the USSR, then you looked and were enthusiastic, and then you looked and realized that this could not be.
      I LIKED the movie. I liked some kind of faith in people. That DREAM is realizable if you are capable of fighting for it.
      And I do not quite agree with the authors of this article
      To a film that really struck in the heart. "28 Panfilov".
      So there is enough FAILURE in it too, so what? Did he get worse from this?
    5. Buffet
      Buffet 15 January 2018 22: 37
      +6
      Again, this "film criticism" and mixed in a bunch. Like Lermontov’s poem Borodino. For this, “Borodino,” I would put a minus definitely. And in general, in my opinion, there is no film critic from Skomarokhov. I will not tire of repeating as a mantra - if you are discussing what is not true in the film, then talk about the film. And it turns out that 70% is not about the movie at all, but only a saying. And only 4 was indicated for non-truthful moments ... But as for “Oh, I didn’t like it and the FSE is here”, I’m sorry for the desire to pass off the subjective as objective, and once again I pay attention to this, and this, sorry, is not the right approach to business.
    6. nickname7
      nickname7 17 January 2018 10: 27
      +2
      The general principle of rosfilm is hack and anti-Soviet.
      For example, a film of company 9 is a lie.
      1. Mestny
        Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 56
        +3
        I kept waiting - when will anyone of you roll this expert into the argument in all areas of culture.
        Wake up! This uncle makes money, and does not fight for the historical truth as you think.
        Particularly fiercely this citizen wates Bondarchuk precisely - systematically, constantly and for any reason. Either he kicked him in the ass once, or they simply pay him for it. Probably both.
        Well, Russian cinema in general is always watered for any reason. absolutely everything, even cartoons. they have one exception there, which they usually praise (well, apart from 28 Panfilov’s people, of course, in the creation and financing of which the citizen took part) - this is the attention of the film “Gorky!” !
        Here is this vile deceitful craft about the so-called ordinary Russian inhabitants - pushed as an example of "excellent movie".
        Well, obviously, is everything normal with his brains? So he considers his sectarians to be fools?
        Yes, that is right. and on this also earns money. In memory of the USSR, in "historical truth", in all sorts of rubbish about the "revival of the USSR." Well, and with mud pouring on everything that is being done in Russia now.
        Money does not smell.
    7. Sasha71
      Sasha71 17 January 2018 14: 44
      +3
      Today, any article without at least an indirect impact on GDP is not in the trend of the liberal press, which has covered itself with the newly demanded clothes of patriotism.
  2. Vard
    Vard 15 January 2018 07: 18
    +6
    At one time in Russia they were proud of what they did sincerely ... But now it’s not ... But in Hollywood they learned to make such films .... But this is a threat to national security worse than Tomogavkov ...
    .
    1. Philip Staros
      Philip Staros 17 January 2018 11: 16
      +1
      In Russia, just make a LITTLE movie. From what I watched, I liked the part. Part is not very. As in the US, for example. Only Americans are ten times larger and you can weed out guano from them and find good films. But in Russia they take off a little and after culling there remains a scanty thing at all.
      But what I liked. Just look - no philosophies. The fact that Russians on the screen (usually) are not wet, fag in the main characters is not found, etc. Already good, by today's standards.
      And so - in films there should be antiheroes and any other difficulties. And from whom to make them? If the circle "their own, Soviet"? And what - did not run abroad on occasion? There were no frauds, dullness and other things (I didn’t watch the movie, I don’t know what was there and what, but in general)?
      Need to finance the movie. Both the state and people knowingly spend money, vote in rubles.
      And yes - and the replacement of Western consumer goods must also be learned to do! Yes .... "Defenders" is a movie film so-so. But no worse than the “so-so American filmetsa”. But the movie about "The Ghost" is quite nice.
      The crew was scolded ... But I looked at him and, despite the blunders, I did not regret it. Well, "does not go" in the 2017th picture already 70th! Purely technically! The old film on 4K screens is not perceived. Need to update.
      Although here are films like "Only Old Men Go into Battle" when they remade me for color, they again became a revelation - when everything becomes LIVER on the screen ...
      In general ... Something like this.
  3. Moore
    Moore 15 January 2018 07: 34
    27
    And why suddenly such a revealing pathos?
    What little shoals were in Soviet films? Didn't like the shape of the hockey players? And the uniform of the Sumy hussar regiment on Shurka Azarov (oh), which is called the Pavlograd in the mentioned "Hussar ballad" - by? And we should seriously discuss tea drinking in the “Heavenly Slow Walk” with dances and songs and the caricature of the Germans, how improbable in those distant times?
    No, we take it all absolutely calmly, because the film itself good. And what does the viewer care about the presence / absence of 2 or 3 referees on the field, if the question is not in quantity, but in the fact that the film "shot" and really looks in one breath and with empathy? Like "Upward Movement"?
    Well, what now can not help but spit in the USSR, putting a film about the Soviet era, here I agree with the authors: this is such a trend, the rule of "good taste", or something ...
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 52
      +5
      "Hussar ballad" .... "Heavenly slow-moving"
      Let's compare the equal with the equal. Remember the Soviet comedies, remember at least one Russian. And if you are discussing a movie about sports, remember Soviet masterpieces
      However, why do not they shoot about Russian sport?
      1. Moore
        Moore 15 January 2018 09: 13
        +4
        Quote: Gardamir
        Remember the Soviet comedies, remember at least one Russian. And if you are discussing a movie about sports, remember Soviet masterpieces

        1. Soviet comedies were remembered not by me, but by the authors of the article.
        2. Let us recall the Soviet film about the sport of the 80s, "The Eighth Wonder of the World." Good good movie about Soviet basketball players. There, one of them, for example, throws a harmful judge into the ring.
        But do you smear your skis with cosmetic ointment in The White Queen's Movement (70s) on the advice of a hairdresser?
        I don’t know if anyone then lamented the impossibility of these invented pranks. Severe critics, most likely yes. And people watched movies and worried about the heroes.
        1. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 10: 47
          +1
          And people watched movies and worried about the heroes.
          Soviet people were worried about Soviet heroes. Why aren't the current ones making films about their heroes or is there nothing to make?
          1. Moore
            Moore 15 January 2018 11: 25
            +3
            We are discussing the fact that filmmakers turned to the Soviet era, about their heroes - a separate issue. What do you not like for example the film "Bodrov's War" or the same "Breakthrough"?
            But the demand for turning to the past in the form of the USSR of a people who felt all the charms of the “saints” of the 90s and poorly understood what to expect from those holding power further dictates a proposal: when it’s high-quality, such as “Legends” or “Movement”, when it’s deshmanic endless series about the 50-60-70s.
          2. Okolotochny
            Okolotochny 18 January 2018 17: 20
            +5
            Yes, someone invent a time machine and throw Gardamira in the USSR. I already got it with my whining: "Now everything is bad, but in the USSR everything was fine." Well, shoot yourself then. It will be more honest than living and crying, crying and living.
            1. Gardamir
              Gardamir 18 January 2018 17: 49
              0
              and throw
              Well, scatter under the bench.
              1. Okolotochny
                Okolotochny 19 January 2018 13: 06
                +4
                Do not provoke rudeness. Then you’ll make a complaint.
                1. Gardamir
                  Gardamir 19 January 2018 14: 45
                  0
                  Do not provoke rudeness.
                  cool. can you be rude only? who are you colonel-generals, as from one box?
                  1. Okolotochny
                    Okolotochny 21 January 2018 11: 32
                    +4
                    who are you colonel-generals, as from one box?

                    Envy is a bad feeling. Are you probably offended by life?
        2. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 15 January 2018 15: 59
          0
          There was also a sci-fi short with Kalyagin in the title role, just about basketball. "Ability to throw the ball" was called. It seems from the story of Bulychev.
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 15 January 2018 20: 40
        +6
        Quote: Gardamir
        However, why do not they shoot about Russian sport?

        The question is class! laughing In our hall, biathlete Shipulin was engaged (maybe he is walking now, I don’t know, I haven’t been walking for a couple of years), a friend asked him - what, they say, is it true about the “wheels”? That - and what not? We have everything like them. Therefore, there is nothing to shoot. There is nothing of its own.
      3. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 17 January 2018 11: 18
        +2
        Good comedies and stuff in Russia were also filmed. But there is no need to compare what was selected over 50 years from the mass of Soviet films and what they managed to make in 15 years in Russia. The percentage of decent films is comparable think. But yes ... In youth, the grass was greener.
        1. woron333444
          woron333444 18 January 2018 11: 38
          0
          And more beautiful girls request
  4. Clueless
    Clueless 15 January 2018 07: 35
    11
    Author, but over the hill, isn’t that the same? They also change the story in the movies. Cinema is a show, and a show is money.

    Want to watch all the truth, watch a documentary movie :)

    And now article after article is going on, such as all our bad, etc. We got it to God - do not want to watch, do not look. The quality of our cinema has become an order of magnitude better than before (I mean after the collapse of the USSR), this is a fact - which many here obviously forget.

    And note - this is also visible by rental, this film has already collected, by the way, 1.6 billion rubles, let's say very well for our market (first place in the history of Russian rental).

    Honestly, already in order to get the articles of the next obsobschikov .. who do not like everything, but at the same time constructive zero. Want something else? So take off who bothers you.
    1. domokl
      domokl 15 January 2018 08: 10
      +6
      Quote: Bad
      but beyond the hill, isn't it the same?

      Bravo. All that is not ours is definitely better? And about zabugor, there is the same, only now they do not spoil the past, but, on the contrary, decorate it. We're crap, crap, crap ... Not tired?
      The value of the film is not determined by the minute break. Not everything in life is measured in millions and billions.
      1. tasha
        tasha 15 January 2018 08: 17
        +4
        Bravo. All that is not our od

        Someone loves oranges, and someone drawers from under them. wink
        If a person watches a film, having previously labeled it "anti-Soviet", then he will not be able to write anything good ...
        So it turned out, for example, with the film "Salute-7". I read the reviews, they write everything. I went away myself - I liked the picture ....
        1. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 55
          +3
          I went away myself - I liked the picture ....
          your right, but answer why I’m not shooting about modernity? Indeed, there was one fantasy in the Salyut-7 film, there wasn’t such, but after watching this film you will already be here to prove that everything happened in the Union.
          1. tasha
            tasha 15 January 2018 09: 03
            +2
            you will already be here at VO to prove

            BOO!
            I’m trying to frighten you so as not to ask you stupid questions like "what fright did you decide so" ....
            I understand that this is a feature film wink
            1. Gardamir
              Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 20
              +3
              Feature Film
              and there are still fantasy films. Or is it now possible to show modern tanks fighting in feature films about war or adhere to at least some historical truth?
              By the way, the main drawback, not even that in the film about the Union, a plastic window enters the frame. People at different times spoke differently, and when modern jargon is pronounced somewhere in the 50s, all this is somehow silly. Or is it a glamorous unshaven. I well remember the expression, a real man, always shaved smoothly.
              1. tasha
                tasha 15 January 2018 09: 49
                +2
                There are also fantasy ones.
                Who will define the line between the requirement of historical authenticity and boring? Already wrote earlier about the "28 Panfilov". Reconstruction shot .. And as a movie I’d better watch "They Fought for the Homeland", where German tanks are dressed as T-44 ...
                1. Gardamir
                  Gardamir 15 January 2018 10: 04
                  +3
                  Filmed reconstruction
                  I agree, I honestly tried to see, did not interest me. By the way, one of my favorite films is "Battalions ask for fire."
                2. long in stock.
                  long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 15
                  +5
                  28 this is a film without the main character. This is the ideology of the film. And maybe its main drawback. It's how to look. Yes, as a rivet warms my soul, an attempt to match the era as much as possible. And about them they fought for their homeland .... let's not forget who wrote a book. all the same genius is a genius ..
      2. insular
        insular 15 January 2018 08: 28
        +1
        Quote: domokl
        only now they do not spoil the OWNED past, but, on the contrary, decorate it. We are crap, crap, crap ... Not tired?

        Tradition hi
        Quote: domokl
        The value of the film is not determined by a momentary breakthrough.
        You still remember about the value of photography ... By the way, the topic is no less important both culturally and morally
      3. Ruslan67
        Ruslan67 16 January 2018 04: 09
        +6
        Quote: domokl
        .Not tired?

        Sasha drinks No offense stop Are you and Roma not tired of you? I will not analyze everything in detail, but a couple of points repeat Colonel Brezhnev, who ended the war with a major general and a parade on Red Square, is this a journalistic technique for charring the Soviet leaders? request Historical fact yes
      4. marline
        marline 16 January 2018 11: 19
        +1
        Quote: domokl
        And about the foreign matter, it’s the same there, only they don’t spoil the OWNED past, but, on the contrary, decorate it.

        Is it true? Literally, not a month has passed since I saw "Made in America" ​​- so shit on the CIA - we must try this ...
    2. long in stock.
      long in stock. 15 January 2018 08: 18
      +3
      collected 1.6bn. half the cinemas were taken away. how much is left? there’s just a conversation and it’s that ours was all bad ... and yes, they wanted to take it off. the same 28 Panfilov’s ... and how much stink about this film .. so -mixed ... but what in this film could not do without such lies as attempts to sell smuggled red caviar? After 5 years they will already shoot how our athletes smuggled drugs .. and that the author sees so he can ..
      1. Freeman
        Freeman 15 January 2018 17: 04
        +1
        long in stock. Today, 08:18
        ... and what in this film could not do without such a lie as an attempt to sell smuggled red caviar?

        Here I agree with you that this episode is "a lie."
        stop "Pushed" is not red, but black caviar.
        1. long in stock.
          long in stock. 15 January 2018 19: 44
          +2
          I don’t care what. I personally don’t understand why this scene.
    3. rkkasa xnumx
      rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 08: 21
      +4
      Quote: Bad
      Want to watch all the truth, watch a documentary movie :)

      It would be more correct:
      "Want to watch all the truth, watch a documentary (sarcasm)"
      Quote: Bad
      The quality of our cinema has become an order of magnitude better than before

      If you mean the quality of special effects - yes.
      If you mean the work of screenwriters, directors, actors - xs, xs ...
      If you mean reliability, truthfulness - definitely not.
      Quote: Bad
      This film, by the way, has already collected 1.6 billion rubles, let's say very well for our market (first place in the history of Russian hire)

      In modern Russia, there are no sports victories of such a level, so people go after the ersatz to the cinema. Plus, nostalgia of course.
      Quote: Bad
      Want something else? So take off who's stopping you

      Debilitating advice.
    4. rkkasa xnumx
      rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 08: 29
      +4
      Quote: Bad
      Author, but over the hill is not the same? They also change the story in the movies

      Firstly, what kind of movie is being shot behind the hill, these are their problems. We are mainly interested in ours. And secondly, are there, too, very often smearing their past with d ... m?
      1. Mestny
        Mestny 17 January 2018 12: 40
        0
        - And let the whole country breathe pure oxygen!
        “Well, does everyone else over the hill breathe ordinary air?”
        - These are their problems! And we are interested in ours! Here in the USSR everyone was breathing pure oxygen, and now they are lying to us in the cinema that this was not entirely true. And the current government is to blame for everything!
      2. marline
        marline 17 January 2018 14: 11
        +1
        Quote: rkkasa 81
        And secondly, are there, too, very often smearing their past with d ... m?

        They smear, even as they smear: both the past, and the present, and the future, and worse than ours. There are a lot of examples. Basically, of course, these are films of a predominantly low rating, i.e. little known to the general public (in such cases it is often said that they were banned from showing in the USA, but this is not their freedom, so they were simply given a low rating and shown in 2-3 movie theaters).
  5. Ravik
    Ravik 15 January 2018 07: 55
    14
    I saw the broadcast of the match in 72. I remember the cry of Eremina - We are the champions !!!
    Anyone who needs naked facts, I advise you to see it again.
    Movement Up - ART FILM. And I liked him !!!

    There are always critics, especially those who understand everything. Starting with Fermat's theorem and ending with hemorrhoids ...
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 06
      +7
      Exactly! Already in a row the article is about our "filthy modern films." The authors, like grandmas, sit and gossip at the entrance, simultaneously recalling that the sun shone brighter in their youth 50 years ago. They got tired of comparing all our contemporary films with their aty-bats and their ilk. The legend, like the crew, as well as the upward movement and union7 and the time of the first are excellent patriotic films, in the final of which the audience clapped heartily. And you, the authors of such articles, all that remains is to remember your days long past, and to blame everything modern.
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 33
        +3
        Is everything modern huah straight? Huh is stupidity and lies. But not modern .. you the author clearly wrote here, Most of all, it’s a shame for Modestas Paulauskas, exposed either as a traitor or a Russophobe. Ready to betray and run at any moment.

        This "fiercely hating" all Soviet people still rides from Lithuania to Russia twice a week and trains our boys in the Kaliningrad region. There would be more such Russophobes ... so they just remember the past and tell you that it didn’t happen that way. And they slip you a lie. and you are indignant. if you grow up in a lie, what will come of you?
      2. Gardamir
        Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 38
        +1
        "filthy modern films" the sun shone brighter.
        So make films about modern Russia, do not muddy the past! Not only contemporary films are discussed, but films where our past is presented exclusively in black light.
        1. Dangerous
          Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 49
          +3
          Have you watched a movie? What's in the black light ?? Party functionaries? Do you naively believe that the “that” elite had something different from today?
          1. Gardamir
            Gardamir 15 January 2018 10: 20
            +1
            did that elite have anything different from today?
            Voooot. at all times the functionaries are the same, no matter the princes or ministers .. So the film should be shot just about sports, and not make a secret meaning, that despite the interference Soviet sports bureaucratsRussian athletes won.
            My wife is a biathlon fan. In the year of the Sochi Olympics, there was a feature film about the preparation for the Olympics of Russian biathletes. Who = didn’t like it, the film was closed.
            So I generally support you, let there be a film about sports without claiming that Soviet bureaucrats are worse than federal ones.
            1. Dangerous
              Dangerous 15 January 2018 10: 30
              +1
              Previously, there was not so much information, only official. Now, little can be hidden. Therefore, we all know about the bargains of current officials, but we are surprised at the same state of affairs in Soviet times.
              1. jjj
                jjj 15 January 2018 12: 09
                0
                And the Americans say that they won, and it was the judges who illegally added three seconds. And they refused to receive silver. The decision to whom to give gold was made within a few hours
  6. sss
    sss 15 January 2018 08: 15
    +7
    I could not see the film to the end - there was not enough patience. In my opinion - cheap stuff with Hollywood stamps (and Hollywood modern, spoiled), a complete set: false tears, false looks, cheap sentimentality, lacking only tolerance and blue ones. I don’t know what Mikhalkov has to do with the film, but it’s strange to hear calls from such a cynic to go to the cinema and “cry”. In Besogon, right and fair words are spoken, but who speaks? A man who himself participated in all the exploits of the collapse of the Union. A person who scolds the regime with the last words, then suddenly becomes an ardent supporter of Joseph Vissarionovich. Pay attention to the situation in the office in Besogon - among the telephones there is only a “turntable” with a coat of arms, and among the statuettes of the reigning persons there are statues of Nikita Sergeevich himself. The conclusion suggests itself - a person with such ambition and such ambitions, urging people to cry over a cheap film, is at least insincere. Well, he cannot help but understand that the film is base. (whatever you may say, but Nikita Sergeevich knows a lot about high-quality cinema).
    Here we have the wrong modern art.
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 07
      +2
      Where is the lying there? Another sect "did not look, but condemn"?
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 37
        +3
        for that you looked from the sect, I didn’t understand anything ...
        1. Dangerous
          Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 50
          +1
          But you! lol lol Just like in kindergarten! On the topic, is there something to say? Or so, in the mainstream of comments, if only to unsubscribe in search of stars?
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 January 2018 09: 57
            +2
            it’s not worth projecting your complexes at all .. on the topic-read. have already written everything .. or Chukchi is he not a reader?
            1. Dangerous
              Dangerous 15 January 2018 10: 02
              +1
              Chukchi has long been in stock laughing But they didn’t write anything on the topic. He asked where the lying was. In response, only the transition to the individual. The trouble here is with adequate interlocutors
              1. long in stock.
                long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 22
                +2
                on the topic, I wrote a lot ... but you are not trained to read .. but with emoticons the order .. immediately gives a degree of intelligence ... and yes about the personalities .. whoever painted about the sect there ?? trouble with adequate people. ..if you can still put emoticons, then there’s not enough for the rest ... read the comments and the article. there’s already been said about lying.
                1. Dangerous
                  Dangerous 15 January 2018 15: 38
                  +1
                  Yes Yes. "I wrote, blablabla ..." take your head out of the sand already!
                2. Dangerous
                  Dangerous 15 January 2018 15: 55
                  +1
                  By the way, the specialist read your comments on this topic. Apart from Paulauskas, they did not write anything. So, piled everything in a heap. By the way, Paulauskas is finally shown there on the positive side.
                  1. long in stock.
                    long in stock. 15 January 2018 19: 45
                    +2
                    poorly read. very. it is clear that it greatly weakens the brain .. so by the way, what's on the topic of sectarians then?
        2. Rey_ka
          Rey_ka 15 January 2018 11: 28
          +1
          Get used to living under capitalism! where the most basic profit is from hire and only somewhere in the end is soulfulness and historical truth.
  7. parusnik
    parusnik 15 January 2018 08: 20
    +7
    Whoever dines with the girl dances her ... But the meaning is simple, there is no way to get away from the achievements of the USSR .. So that people don’t look much back into the past, it’s necessary to present these achievements with a sweet spot .. with the film 28 .. that's just a miss came out ... And the rest of the films made "ideologically" sustained .. As the doctor ordered ...
    1. domokl
      domokl 15 January 2018 10: 09
      +6
      good drinks Better not say. I just read a few comments from my colleagues and it became sad. What will happen to memory through 20-30 years? Or are we already beginning to look in the same direction as the West? Could the USSR be just a people's state? Was there a big camp?
      It's sad all this. Oh how sad. The Soviet will go through 10-30 years completely. Russian will remain
      1. Dedall
        Dedall 15 January 2018 21: 00
        +3
        Jews came out of Egypt with Moses, and after 40 years, Jews came to Palestine. So with everything that the “Soviet” press bears. But then Russia will no longer be there, but there will be a bunch of principalities warring with each other.
  8. erased
    erased 15 January 2018 08: 30
    +4
    To lie to everything Soviet, to expose the USSR in a negative form, even to show achievements through the prism of crap - such is the tendency, or rather the plan of non-ordinary movie tellers. It’s ridiculous that even such “masterpieces” are collecting cash, because the people want to see the victories of a great country, and not the convulsive jerking of the “shitty Russky”. Because the power and strength of the USSR is like a paradise from the point of view of modern hell. Well, that’s what happened, and why, thirty, forty, a hundred years later, the soul freezes.
    They can also make a film about the famous games of the USSR - the NHL team in 1981, show the legendary 6-0 and Myshkin's dry play. They can make a movie about the docking of spaceships of the USSR and the USA in 1975. Many victories and achievements can be found in the history of the USSR. Military, sports, political. And how many such or at least similar victories in the history of the Russian Federation? Two achievements have already been captured - South / Ossetia -2008 and Crimea-2014. And they shot a couple of films about athletes.
    And what next, what after these victories? The country is on the verge of a foul. And just about the harsh referee will show a red card. That’s why cinema, albeit with mistakes, about a great country, evokes such a response in the souls of people. The winners lived there. Now, for the most part, losers.
  9. Gardamir
    Gardamir 15 January 2018 08: 36
    +3
    I read it in one go. Of course, plus the authors. I understand. The economy is the blood of the country. Army = muscles. But culture is SOUL. Now the soul is being taken out of the country. For profit, for that. to integrate into the global world wallet
    When the Union was destroyed, we all went around in the ears, that all countries are the same, we must abandon these soviet complexes. You must be able to trade. What about conscience? Or let everything be sold and bought?
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 10
      +2
      “I read it in one breath” - as if a note from Truth is one thousand nine hundred or some year laughing laughing . You will see the film first, and then you will talk arrogantly about the Union, culture and other global things
      1. Gardamir
        Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 41
        +4
        like a note from the Truth
        Well, I understand that they offended you in the Union, probably they studied together with Chubais if you hate your past. And then many articles simply cannot be read either urry or approvals, just like in Truth. Only now, the unemployed supportive oligarchs are shouting approval.
        1. Dangerous
          Dangerous 15 January 2018 09: 55
          +2
          Not sure, but definitely studied! fellow Where do I hate the past ?? Try to think, not communicate stamps and labels. So you wrote about conscience, the destruction of the union, the soul, and so on. What does all this have to do with it ?? In the film, conscience please - Paulauskas is a prime example. The Union power is shown. You want to say that no one set high tasks in the committees? Not a hint of scoop and anything else. So may enlightenment come with you!
  10. Stas157
    Stas157 15 January 2018 08: 41
    +7
    . And it seems that the upward movement actually turns into a fall downward. Into the abyss of lies, lack of culture and substituted concepts. The whole question: who benefits ...

    Putin and the oligarchs! Who else? Who else needs to dirty socialist reality?
    Recently, our Guarantor noted that he aligned the ideology of atheist communism with Christianity, and compared the symbol of the victory of Socialism, Lenin in the Mausoleum with holy relics, which for some reason must be buried! I wonder why Putin needed to bury the "holy relics", do they bury them?
    In short, liberal Putin showed his true face, as it really is, without embellishment.
    1. flicker
      flicker 16 January 2018 00: 46
      +4
      In, the super task of the text is precisely in this.
      The task of the text is to show the striking difference in films filmed in Soviet times and modern Russian.
      And the super task is to present this difference (with a minus sign) to the policy pursued by Putin.
      You surely got it, the main message of the text.
  11. Vasya Vassin
    Vasya Vassin 15 January 2018 08: 41
    +4
    Guys, I’m now orienting myself very simply, if the movies are advertised, it means they shot another shit, for which you need to beat off the grandmother, for which I should not waste my time. laughing
  12. Loess
    Loess 15 January 2018 08: 49
    +3
    Normal movie, I liked it. There are anti-Soviet elements, and there are anti-American elements too.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 22
      +4
      and anti-American elements
      lol name American films where elements of anti-Americanism are present.
      1. BAI
        BAI 15 January 2018 10: 43
        +4
        What are the American films where elements of anti-Americanism are present?

        Rambo 1.
      2. Rey_ka
        Rey_ka 15 January 2018 12: 07
        +2
        easy. the same Avatar. replace indigenous Pandora with Indians and pzhlst
        1. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 14: 13
          +1
          Rambo 1 Avatar.
          I agree., Only this is a separate film, and after the Crimea, the anti-Soviet was pouring in ...
  13. igorra
    igorra 15 January 2018 08: 55
    +2
    The position of the authors is purely imperial, in the good sense of the word. But they are far from youth. Which of the young will go to the cinema on the "Kuban Cossacks"? For 30 years, starting from the video salons, Hollywood has been laced with them, and now, at the click of their fingers, the authors want them to watch our films with rapture, and still list what new ones can be watched. Say what you like, but slowly the audience is returning to our films. But what about the money ?, first we educated the youth in the spirit of consumerism, and now we tell her this is FI.
    1. domokl
      domokl 15 January 2018 10: 15
      +3
      And how do you explain the success of "Panfilovtsev"? Young people went to the screenings! Well, all the rest laughing Walked, watched and admired.
      Some part has really degenerated into consumers. But the majority are still people with a memory ...
      1. Mestny
        Mestny 17 January 2018 15: 14
        +1
        As yours everything is interesting. if Panfilov’s, then this is a success, despite so-so revenue at the box office. And if something else (especially Bondarchuk with Mikhalkov) - then no matter how much you earn, it will certainly fail.
  14. Belimbai
    Belimbai 15 January 2018 09: 08
    +6
    I read hmm ..... an article .... well, right the first liberal groan on "Echo of Moscow" ... a carbon copy. Personally, I liked it ... already cried a couple of times. Even Posner, in spite of the "Ekhovskaya Tusne", wrote well about the film .... It's CINEMA! ... and not a documentary. The authors do not like patriotism .... well, x .... to hell with them.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 15 January 2018 09: 27
      +2
      liberal groan
      fool anti-Soviet film is a liberal film, the more liberal Pozner liked it.
    2. pafegosoff
      pafegosoff 15 January 2018 09: 38
      +3
      I agree. Give them a documentary. And so - Ozerov! Lakes! It was real!
      By the way, I watched this match in a live broadcast, and the next day at a break, we ninth-graders were noisy discussing this miracle!
    3. Stas157
      Stas157 15 January 2018 09: 43
      +9
      Quote: Belimbai
      .... This is a MOVIE! ... and not a documentary.

      And does this explain everything? How easy!
      The work of art, of course, implies fiction, but here fiction was directed strictly in one direction - against the background of the heroism of people to show the gloomy Soviet reality.
      This trend is manifested in all recent Russian paintings, and is clearly custom-made. If in the 90s they denigrated the USSR very rudely, then this hour it is done much thinner, which means more efficiently. All this is designed primarily for young people who did not find the Soviet era, and do not have critical thinking. The Kremlin elite wants to create stable immunity in Russian society in relation to the socialist past. And this threatens with a loss of continuity and all the good that was ... Urengoy schoolchildren in the Bundestag have already shown this.
    4. long in stock.
      long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 27
      +2
      if posner liked it, this is already an alarming sign ... or maybe he just doesn’t want to quarrel with Mikhalkov. they’re all thought out there ..
  15. Varyag77
    Varyag77 15 January 2018 09: 19
    +4
    Here are just 28 Panfilov’s like a movie ... Well, just no. It turned out empty. no empathy and that's it. It looks like a documentary. There are pictures, but there is no filling. He looked and immediately forgot.
  16. Conductor
    Conductor 15 January 2018 09: 33
    +1
    And I liked 28 Panfilov’s, but this is IMHO.
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 40
      +1
      Cardboard heroes, cardboard replicas of posing as artists of people in the frame.
      Everyone is talking about anything, smiling cardboard, and during the breaks, "they calmly burn the tanks."
      What does this have to do with real living people before a tank attack?
      But, on the other hand, rivets where necessary, and the machine gun in the frame the way it should be - according to historians and consultants, of course.
      What kind of historical authenticity can we talk about? Nevertheless, in these circles of critics of Russian cinema this “film” cannot even be mentioned in any way reminiscent of criticism.
      Only as a sample.
      Only here is bad luck - people did not appreciate.
      Probably not the one.
  17. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 15 January 2018 09: 34
    +2
    the marriage of one of the participants in the USSR hockey team to a colleague from the women's hockey team. The fact that before the creation of this team in 1972 is another 23 years old does not bother anyone.
    And in which hockey women's team?
    "Mother - Vera Petrovna (1921 - 2004), a physical education teacher, played hockey with the ball at the Moscow championship as part of the women's team."
    This is about the mother of Vladislav Tretyak, about whom I read somewhere in the 1960s in Pioneer Truth. This is not 1972. But here are the times when Viktor Konovalenko and Singer (without a helmet) shone in Grenoble.
  18. kaschey
    kaschey 15 January 2018 10: 00
    +3
    In general, the film is good and necessary, watched by the whole family, not only adults liked it.
    Of course, one observes someone's (advisory) obsessive desire to spit, to shit into the past.
    I would advise this "nedotomom" to hold on to saliva and something else for yourself.
  19. BAI
    BAI 15 January 2018 10: 40
    +3
    Well, recently VO ran into the "Last hero". And the film raised 2 billion, at a cost of 400 million. This is a record of Russian hire. The film was definitely watched by several million viewers.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 15 January 2018 11: 40
      +3
      This is a record of Russian hire
      Watching what to measure? The villain Dobrynya, at the cost of his own life, is defeated by the positive hero Kashchei the Immortal.
    2. long in stock.
      long in stock. 15 January 2018 13: 30
      +3
      you know looked. a double opinion. the only thing that I personally really didn’t like was the last hero ... some kind of office manager ... and a coward besides ... the strange protagonist came out ..
    3. Mestny
      Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 35
      +3
      The adherents of the "28 Panfilov" ran over.
      This sect is very actively fulfilling the task of denigrating Russian cinema in any way and for any reason. Whatever was filmed - there is always a whole shaft of articles and screams about in the cinema tethered a foot, the film is UG, and "where our money is spent."
      An ordinary spectator, whom the vast majority simply went to the cinema.
  20. Rey_ka
    Rey_ka 15 January 2018 11: 21
    +2
    Let’s take a look at the Soviet films for balance, or have they completely sculpted movie masterpieces? In any barrel of honey you can find flywheel tar tar! The politicization of culture began with V.I. Lenin's "Party Organization and Party Literature." So if you recall "Die Hard" (a 1967 film with Vitaly Solomin) and even in "Alexander Nevsky" you can find a bunch of mistakes.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 15 January 2018 14: 19
      +1
      Let's for balance
      And let's not! Gentlemen, the Russians, leave us Soviet alone. Everything is good in your country, so shoot about what is good with you. Or isn’t it all about shooting?
      1. Dangerous
        Dangerous 15 January 2018 15: 43
        +2
        What does it mean "us soviet" Are you now living in another country ?? We have one homeland.
        1. Gardamir
          Gardamir 15 January 2018 20: 00
          +3
          live in another country ??
          When there are memories of the Union, everyone is divided into two, some were offended, others were fine.
          What about movies? Everyone is honorably trying to compare Soviet films about Soviet and Russian films about Soviet. Let's equalize. Soviet films about Soviet and Russian films about Russian. But we will not touch the Russian anti-Soviet.
          1. Mestny
            Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 32
            +2
            Not certainly in that way. We usually compare “Soviet fairy tales about Soviet” and “Russian fairy tales about Soviet”.
            Here the fact is that there and there are fairy tales. And if they undertook to criticize the Russians for "lying", then obviously contrasting them with the "truth"?
            In this situation, one can argue only where there is more untruth. And this is a completely different issue.
            At least if the Soviet fairy tale about the USSR has a right to life, then the Russian one has exactly the same right - modern Russia did not fly from Mars.
  21. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 15 January 2018 11: 50
    +6
    The current anti-people government is allergic to everything Soviet, from the mere thought of the USSR scabies over the body. After 91, at least one normal film was shot? I can’t remember.
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 17 January 2018 12: 26
      +2
      Under any government, in any country there will always be a part of the people who will scream that the government is anti-people.
      This is normal, and generally they do not pay attention to it.
      Another thing is when it is necessary to destroy the state, and the first is to destroy the current government.
      Then such screams become a serious weapon in the hands of the enemies of a particular country.
  22. Altona
    Altona 15 January 2018 13: 08
    +4
    I didn’t watch the film, but I expected this kind of analysis-review.
    1. woron333444
      woron333444 18 January 2018 11: 51
      +1
      Like "I didn’t look, but I condemn"
  23. turbris
    turbris 15 January 2018 13: 38
    +3
    Each generation is more understandable about films that correspond to the spirit of the time in which they lived. We watch Soviet movie masterpieces with pleasure, the younger generation with interest, but not more than 30 minutes, and the very young ones do not watch at all - they are interested in something else and this is right, it should be so. But who creates modern cinema, do you look at the age of the directors? Are they able to create a movie that would interest modern youth? Of course not, this should be done by people of the same generation. And our venerable directors create films about the past, and it’s great to distort it, according to the requirements of the present. Have you seen at least one movie about the war, without the presence of the vile NKVDeshnik and the depraved political officer? And if this film is not about war, then there are necessarily evil partocrats who do not let everyone live and weave intrigues, on which the plot of the film is tied. For some reason, it is believed that the viewer is interested in this, and not simple human heroic stories, which were not enough at that time. So young people go to watch foreign anti-patriotic films in which everything is simple and the effects exceed any content.
  24. Altona
    Altona 15 January 2018 14: 37
    +4
    Quote: turbris
    So young people go to watch foreign anti-patriotic films in which everything is simple and the effects exceed any content.

    ---------------------------------------
    In principle, foreign films rarely suffer self-flagellation. It usually features superheroes that save the world. If we watch a blockbuster, for example. And Hollywood is designed for an external consumer usually, for you and me. Many Americans are skeptical of Hollywood production, realizing that most of it is golimaya propaganda and a mismatch of reality. At the same time, there are many apolitical films, melodramas or comedies, where not a word is said about politics. Why do producers, directors and scriptwriters set the task of "making a few spits in the USSR"? Moreover, even if these spits contradict the plot and the image of the hero, they generally fall out of the context of the film. Here is a movie, for example, like "Thank you for being alive." My son Nikita spat on Dad so much that I was completely at a loss. What was the director's task? Show how the KGB hunted for Vysotsky? What's the point? Did Vysotsky threaten state security with the content of his songs or with black cash fees? Fees are to the OBHSS, songs are to the artistic council. Where is the KGB? As a result, Vysotsky himself was unrecognizable. In the ending, in principle, a wonderful artist, you now watch and listen with a vile sediment in your soul. In "Legend No. 17," for some reason, the trainers of the youth sports school were exposed as an alcoholic. What for? Type alcoholic trainer is from the USSR. Is it different in modern Russia? I beg of you. Such passages towards the USSR speak only of the secondary nature of our "cinema culture" and its full engagement. These "directors and artists" sit on their "skits" and poison the bikes as they were "choked by a scoop." You might think that a flawed rate of 8-10 thousand young artist does not strangle him in any way. But the prime minister is pushing everyone to go into business.
  25. rkkasa xnumx
    rkkasa xnumx 15 January 2018 15: 22
    +3
    AnpeL,
    Quote: AnpeL
    Something you turn everything that is possible. In your opinion, it turns out that generally it is better not to shoot films about Soviet sports and achievements. Why do you need this? Well, let's forget about all this and never remember

    What else is turning over? And why did you decide that you don’t need to make films about Soviet sports and achievements, and why you should forget about them?
  26. turbris
    turbris 15 January 2018 15: 44
    +2
    Quote: Altona
    Such passages towards the USSR speak only of the secondary nature of our "cinema culture" and its full engagement. These "directors and artists" sit on their "skits" and poison the bikes as they were "choked by a scoop."

    That's it, and then these same “honored” and “folk” are trying to portray themselves as free and independent in order to receive any prizes at international festivals, and there they give prizes only for how much “chernukha” you poured into your homeland, here therefore, such films.
  27. flicker
    flicker 15 January 2018 23: 43
    +4
    Yes, yes: modern films are about war, about space, about sports (that is, with what you could be proud of) - they are presented either in a sarcastic, then fanatic, or in a disgusting way to provoke a reaction, well like, "no, we don’t need this."
    Well, here is the text, it would seem about the same, but:
    And these films are advertised by very dignitaries, including President.
    We will answer the question “why and to whom it is profitable” in the second part of the material.

    The second part:
    So far, we can watch really great films on the TV screen, shot all in the same USSR, in which (again, almost quote gd) "There was nothing but blue hens and black galoshes."

    Draw your own conclusions. Everything according to the well-known pattern, Putin is a hacker who interferes in US elections, Putin is fighting with Ukraine, Putin is not defending the Donbass on the contrary, Putin has sent troops into Syria (second Afghanistan), Putin has withdrawn troops, so the base was attacked, etc. etc.
    And now he also orders low-trial films.
    Someone only Putin is to blame.
    1. Serhiodjan
      Serhiodjan 18 January 2018 01: 15
      +1
      What is there sarcastic and savage ?? We definitely watched the same movie ??
      Not a site, but a bunch of boring paranoids of some kind. Horror. You would see yourself from the side ...
      1. flicker
        flicker 18 January 2018 10: 11
        +5
        It's not about this film, but about films generally shot in Russia
  28. flicker
    flicker 16 January 2018 10: 56
    +4
    It was already necessary to write in the headline that Putin was to blame for everything, that it was necessary to walk in gardens.
    After all, this topic is the leitmotif of the whole article.
  29. turbris
    turbris 16 January 2018 11: 35
    +4
    Quote: flicker
    It was already necessary to write in the headline that Putin was to blame for everything, that it was necessary to walk in gardens.

    I specifically looked at the comments of bloggers, I waited who was the first to turn on Putin - this is Stas157 - who is he, if not the paid troll? If you read his comments, you will understand that everywhere in his statements, regardless of the topic of discussion, there is criticism of Putin - the guy is trying, he is in a hurry for the election.
    1. flicker
      flicker 16 January 2018 19: 00
      +4
      Yes, I noticed, moreover, criticism from such radical positions: well, like, you have to beat, smash, destroy, etc. although sometimes there is much more harm from such excessiveness than good ...
    2. Okolotochny
      Okolotochny 19 January 2018 12: 58
      +4
      Read Gardamira, too, from the same cohort - "I did not look and do not approve."
  30. yehat
    yehat 16 January 2018 12: 47
    +4
    I don’t understand one thing. the plot is the perfect story to shoot beautifully. You can draw the perfect picture in the style of anime or Hollywood, with the right emotions, the right morality, coinciding with the real story and with pride at the end of the film, but ... there are always some tar in the movie! It was possible to remove so that the whole generation of boys would rush to play basketball. why not do that? Why is there some kind of crazy creative search? I found those times a bit, just a little and I remember that basketball was interesting to watch!
    They played beautifully.
    1. Monetniy
      Monetniy 17 January 2018 10: 47
      +1
      Now they play even better and more spectacular and the boys from the playgrounds do not climb out in the summer!
  31. 1536
    1536 16 January 2018 13: 23
    +3
    I involuntarily recalled the episode from “The meeting place cannot be changed” (dir. S. Govorukhin), when Sharapov, once in the gang, “pierced” with his “white hands”, and he had to play the piano of either Chopin or Tchaikovsky. And one of the gang’s members, “Blotter,” seems to have exclaimed: “This is what I can do! ..” “Why play something?” asked Sharapov, puzzled. "A" Murka! "
    I had to play Murka.
    I mean that our country is large and the people are understandable, which you can’t do with a chaff, so you can’t feed everyone with tasty gruel that everyone likes, everyone understands. The grotesque "Soviet-party" figures were sometimes disguised in such a way that it became clear who they really were only after the general "waking up in another country." It was? It was!
    What about athletes? What are athletes? In those years, few people thought about them as individuals, about their feelings and aspirations. And isn’t it disgusting that the leader of a party determines the fate of a talented person? This, alas, cannot be thrown out of a song, and God forbid repeating this ...
  32. seacap
    seacap 16 January 2018 16: 24
    +4
    Our entire modern film industry is the result of a deliberate destruction of the general educational and cultural system, a fertile crowd of “advanced consumers,” excluding the upbringing of a creative and talented, broad-minded, patriotic citizen who knows and loves his Motherland and its history, which is impossible according to the textbooks of Soros and history, written by our "partners" back under Peter and Catherine, where we are represented by a young, wretched nation and not worthy of further existence, despite the fact that according to the Slavic calendar there are now 7000 with a penny a year. Where is our academic historical science, only to receive the title is sweet eat, reasoning picking his teeth and stroking his belly, what would happen if it weren't?
    If in the USSR, athletes played for the country and were proud to tears, standing on a pedestal, a hymn and a flag, now it’s for loot and PR to notice and offer a contract abroad, hence the attitude to the team and flag of their homeland. this is their personal business project, admitting that some kind of foreign chemical office decides whether it is possible to allow the country to compete or not, with a flag and in uniform or not, utter nonsense. Like the IOC, whose whole task should be to so that the athletes have a roof over their heads and there is something to eat and where to run and jump. And for what valiant services such are our so-called footballers (joggers with a ball) have mln contracts and live, behave like superstars, not crawling out with parties and banquets?
    The film industry, television and trash show business have already become completely dynastic projects, a stranger, not from the family and this circle is not there, except with a thick wallet at the “daddy.” On TV, dancing on graves all day, finding out who is with whom else I didn’t sleep, or, did I give it to and from whom did I give birth, who haven’t slept with my 5th wife? On the 1st half-day, the self-taught, self-taught leading Katya, who has gotten into circulation, yells, her remarks often not understanding what it’s about, preventing anyone from finishing her spits, all the merit of which is that she’s the wife of a friend of Ernst, who, it seems to me, has finally gone crazy after marrying a young “hunter”. Channel 2, generally female a club of rejected, abstained, but ambitious Rublev women who embody their dreams of revenge and inferiority of men in a series of series, moreover, writing at the level of schoolgirls is monotonous, a template plot, with a cool, emancipated woman in the title role, without knowledge of psychology, the realities of life , logic, common sense, often conflicting actions and wretched dialogues with a limited vocabulary. It is not clear what such world-class masterpieces are performed on our stage, so that these, the most uneducated, the most depraved and not educated, the most uncultured creatures in our country who believe that singing without a phonogram is personal insult and humiliation, received such fees that allow you to locks and buy villas in Miami and California?
    This is my personal opinion as a simple layman, it turned out long, you just rarely can speak out on such topics, anyway, no one reads who it concerns.
    1. Serhiodjan
      Serhiodjan 18 January 2018 01: 12
      0
      Very interesting opinion, only depressing so that nowhere else to go. Peter the First also knew everything from the West, and nothing took root, and then it also became part of the great Russian culture. It seems to me that you, with your depressing outlook on life, bring a lot of harm, it does not smell of any patriotism. The patriot must believe in his country and love it and not shout "everything is lost, we are all betrayed, we are finished."
      IMHO
  33. Monetniy
    Monetniy 17 January 2018 10: 26
    +4
    The author is a bore! With this approach, watch non-fiction films and documentaries. I liked the picture, it’s very good sincere and the atmosphere of the sport and the stadium is conveyed in the best way, I advise everyone to go to the cinema!
  34. Servisinzhener
    Servisinzhener 17 January 2018 11: 11
    +1
    Very many cultural figures live on the same principle as the old partisans who, despite the end of the war, did not stop letting the trains derail. Everything, as before, is desident and struggling with the Soviet regime, the cat more openly who is less. And they shoot in films in which there may not even be a discrepancy with the real event, but they are exposed so that after watching there remains a strange aftertaste, as if one had eaten all the well-known brown substances.
  35. Mestny
    Mestny 17 January 2018 11: 25
    +3
    Quote: Varyag_0711
    I definitely won’t watch the second time, it’s better once again to revise the soviet “Goalkeeper”.

    Well, that is, in the movie “Goalkeeper” is everything true? Probably this is how the citizens of the USSR spoke to each other then?
    Hero motivation, dialogs - is everything okay?
  36. AleBors
    AleBors 17 January 2018 12: 00
    +2
    Thanks to Roman for a sincere article. Then I will watch the film when it appears in the access, I stopped going to the cinema for a long time, because there is nothing to watch. Our current cinema, as well as the whole "current culture", in my understanding, became agents of influence. Therefore, they bake all chernukha.
    Recently I found out (with a terrible shudder) that the Ministry of Culture allocated money to create a film about Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya ... I really want to ask all kinds of figures like Mikhalkov, Bondarchuk and others: "Maybe not?"
    It’s scary to imagine what chernukha they spew ...
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 17 January 2018 12: 32
      +5
      Judging by the listed names and attitude to Russian cinema, are you a follower of Goblin?
      What reality do you live in?
      It seems that you still live in the USSR, and some "agents of influence" are trying to destroy your country through the cinema.
      Want to get rid of "terrible shudders"? Do not read the Operra website before lunch.
      Draw your conclusions personally based on what you saw with your own eyes.
      Otherwise, all your statements pass into the category of “not familiar, but condemn”, that is, into the category of faith, which your information idol is struggling fiercely.
      1. AleBors
        AleBors 17 January 2018 13: 33
        +2
        Apparently you are on a salary in a certain state structure. Which state is understandable. Not ours. This is evident by the tone and pulling out phrases from the context.
        I live in the present, alas. And here you seem to be somewhere else.
        I draw conclusions on the basis of what I saw, moreover, I was able to generalize the general impression.
        As I understand it, you are a fan of the works of Mikhalkov, Bondarchuk, etc. ... This is your right and opinion, and I do not care about him. Leave your advice to yourself what I should read and when I decide myself. Similarly, I reserve the right to draw conclusions based on all information received. If they do not suit you, your problems.
        And what kind of idol are we talking about? Be consistent and responsible for your words.
        1. Mestny
          Mestny 17 January 2018 15: 04
          +3
          Well then guessed. That's great. It remains to learn how to stop terribly shuddering when pronouncing the names of Russian filmmakers.
          And give advice ... God forbid, especially since there is obviously someone, and whose advice is so dear to you - obviously.
          We will remain - I am with your opinion, and you are with the goblin.
          I do not like it when someone is pouring dirt on something for money or for another mercenary purpose.
          1. AleBors
            AleBors 17 January 2018 17: 38
            +1
            Guessed? Did you win the lottery? It seems that they did not teach you to substantiate the opinion. As well as responsible for the words. But no need to be rude.
            I express an opinion that did not offend you. I consider such behavior a sign of cowardice.
    2. Serhiodjan
      Serhiodjan 18 January 2018 01: 08
      +1
      Here is the same advice for you, check your mental health, although in old age it is no longer a fact that will help. But without being a doctor, one can say that to see traitors, agents of influence and a secret conspiracy everywhere is paranoia. I quite believe in the existence of secret conspiracies, but the fact that it is somehow connected with the film "upward movement" is not.
      1. AleBors
        AleBors 18 January 2018 11: 45
        0
        Do your own health better. More good. Believe in something or not, your right, as, by the way, is mine. I do not need advice, leave them with you.
        And I sincerely wish you to live with mine ... Although ...
  37. Mestny
    Mestny 17 January 2018 12: 43
    +3
    Quote: Gardamir
    Voooot. at all times the functionaries are the same, no matter the princes or ministers .. So the film should be shot just about sports, and not make the secret sense that despite the hindrances of Soviet sports bureaucratic Russian athletes won.

    Well, that is, there was no hindrance, and the functionaries did not intervene in anything, and the athletes only “calmly burned the tanks”, that is, they went and played with pure warm hearts?
    So this is a lie. To show as described above is a lie, and even worse than showing a little distorted details.
  38. Sasha71
    Sasha71 17 January 2018 16: 18
    +1
    Quote: Mestny
    "Collective mutual assistance in the USSR" exists only in the cynically-lying lips of Yulins, Zhukovs and other historians from the wallet.
    In the same way they drowned each other, in the same way they climbed up their heads, ignoring the victims - as it should be in any human community. However, this was all covered by a lacquered lacquered socialist picture of social relations that had no connection to real life.
    This, by the way, is one of the direct reasons for the collapse of our state - a mismatch between real relations in society and the declared ones.
    In this sense, oddly enough, capitalism will be more honorable. If you are a wolf, then it is so, it is normal under capitalism.

    You exaggerate. The principle wolf to man is even lower than the primitive communal system (because, at least, in productivity it is lower than the plinth). You turn everything upside down, trying to elevate animal values ​​over human values. Animal honesty - whoever is stronger, more insidious, more cunning - that is right. (And then, even in wolf packs against chaos unite and punish). There is nothing more honest for a person. And it is incorrect to compare with socialism after Stalin, since, starting with Khrushchev, the Trotskyists seized power in the country, who covered socialism with a gradual return to feudalism and the drain of the USSR in exchange for feudal oligarchic tenure rights.
    As for Zhukov and Yulin, they, although not omniscient, are serious historians with a scientific and methodological base, supporting all their conclusions with factology. They should not be put on a par with liberal-Solzhenitsky myths, born and stimulated in the offices of the CIA, which you, apparently, believe. Herein lies the root - on which you rely - on historical research, supported by facts, documents, statistics, or on myths and the OBS agency.
  39. Serhiodjan
    Serhiodjan 18 January 2018 01: 04
    +4
    Another stream of useless, dull whining from the old Sovietologist, Communist, Old Believer. Do something normal already instead of such statues.
    The film is super, who sees not high-quality, soul-taking, inspirational cinema (my friend sobbed and repented and almost let a tear in the end), which - yes, I show the whole wretchedness of the Soviet system with all its prejudices, prohibitions, lies and closeness, and disregard for attitude to a person (and you say the system was somehow different ?!) and at the same time the strength of spirit, dedication and team spirit of the Soviet people. The film, where the characters are voluminous and interesting, the plot captures and intrigues, so if you don’t see all this, and you just get insulted that there is a piece of what you don’t want to take, then this is your psychological problem and not the film. The truth is always more painful than fiction, but it is real.
  40. Hadji Murat
    Hadji Murat 18 January 2018 05: 10
    +1
    They say a lot, good and bad. and all this is just a frank advertisement of the film)))
  41. horava
    horava 18 January 2018 08: 33
    0
    all modern cartoons, otherwise they can’t be called. to condemn and discuss the meaning does not have capitalism and the truth is incompatible Main benefits
  42. Berkut24
    Berkut24 18 January 2018 11: 30
    0
    And let's make a film about the current Russian biathlon and football. Only the names of sports officials do not change!
  43. Old warrior
    Old warrior 18 January 2018 11: 33
    0
    The state order is now one: as much as possible to spoil Our Great Soviet Past. As for Mikhalkin, it CANNOT be the Patriot director who made such films as weary of the sun and the citadel. I regularly watch Besogon TV but here's the bad luck - I DO NOT BELIEVE, not a penny.
  44. Altona
    Altona 18 January 2018 11: 52
    +1
    Quote: woron333444
    Like "I didn’t look, but I condemn"

    ---------------------
    Did I say somewhere that I condemn? I just didn’t look. And without spitting in the direction of the USSR, this hack would still not have come out.
  45. Radikal
    Radikal 18 January 2018 14: 00
    +1
    The authors of the article respect, as they say, and respect! good
  46. Radikal
    Radikal 18 January 2018 14: 07
    +1
    Quote: insular
    Quote: Gardamir
    For the past three years, it has already been an anti-Soviet Union. Gorbachev put in a lot of efforts to make people hate their country and step into “market” socialism with a “happy” system, no one spoke of capitalism then.
    It was still the Soviet Union, and it was precisely the party impotence that led the scum to power. Let's not move from the movie to such matters.
    Quote: Gardamir
    So what are you doing here?

    We are currently discussing not Soviet film, but Russian and it does not seem to you that it would be right then to compare it with Russian films?
    Although you distort and juggle the concepts of a cheater with the concepts of the USSR and Anti USSR, I already realized that you are just a troll. They even managed to divide one country into two (this is a good USSR, and this is a bad USSR, look here, but do not look here ... the logic is confused).

    It was the Soviet Union in name, but not in essence! sad
  47. bk316
    bk316 18 January 2018 14: 52
    +3
    A good film and feelings and questions are right.
    What spit in the direction of the USSR can we talk about if 80% of the audience have a sense of pride in their country.
    And half of them have the idea that if sports officials weren’t muddy right now, but TE from the 70s, nobody would have heard of Wada.
    Well, yes, they didn’t play basketball then, well, if you watch the movie the goalkeeper didn’t play football like that, and even Soviet films about boxing do not withstand any criticism. ONLY AMONG THE AUDIENCE 10% IN THIS IS DISASSEMBLE AND 5% THIS IS ANNOYING. In other words, the viewer is on a drum

    In general, in order to write such articles, one must either not watch the film or be completely blinkered.

    The most interesting thing is that the liberals attack the film, such as the "Soviet agitation" and "enemy image" There are legitimate questions ....
  48. Volodin
    Volodin 18 January 2018 16: 13
    +2
    So if you watch Soviet films through a magnifying glass, then there will appear no less questions when watching and many blunders will be discovered. A few examples: a flashing 130 ZIL in "17 Moments of Spring", the same pilot in one scene sits in the Yak-12, the run-up goes near Messerschmitt, and Focke-Wulf flies into the sky. But this does not affect the perception of the genius of this artwork. This is what I mean by talking about artistic ribbons, and there you can even find fault with the post with a special desire ...
  49. long in stock.
    long in stock. 18 January 2018 16: 47
    0
    Monetniy,
    you’re talking nonsense ... and the athletes were guarded by both officials and the KGB officers. yes and God bless her with caviar .. do you want to tell me that on the eve of the decisive match, the athletes quietly went to vain places where they were robbed and they ended up drunk? they’ve broken their legs? With your brains, then think about how this could happen? Who would release them? And most importantly, I’m asking you what this scene is for? What did the director want to show. Give conclusions ..
    1. bk316
      bk316 18 January 2018 19: 35
      +2
      most importantly, I ask you a question why this scene is what the director wanted to show with this. Give conclusions ..

      I will answer you.
      1. A secondary storyline was introduced about ordinary Americans who play basketball and ultimately recognize our victory.

      2. One of the main storylines was tightly strengthened, namely that the coach trusted his team (a pass of trust for the deaf 3 times said) even contrary to reason, rules and personal safety.

      3. The idea of ​​what psychological pit our players got out of is reinforced (it’s one thing to lose the pros, another thing is for teenagers from the street). Thus, the first story climax was created: after losing to the yard and drunken out of despair, they beat students without a key player.

      You better tell me why you need to chew all this - just watch the movie and be proud of the country.
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 19 January 2018 00: 16
        0
        you didn’t answer. it’s not about trust; it’s a lot of words but not about deed. I ask you again how the players before the decisive match were able to leave a foreign country at night to hang around. discipline? no, I haven’t heard ... besides the safety coach, special people looked after it ... it’s not the Russian national football team .. and yes, apparently I remember that country much better than you .. therefore I ask ..
        1. bk316
          bk316 19 January 2018 14: 55
          +1
          You did not answer.there is not about trust we are talking about. A lot of words but not about deed. Once again I ask you how the players before the decisive match were able to leave at night a foreign country hanging around. discipline?

          Yes no. You asked. I ANSWERED
          и most importantly, I ask you a question why this scene?what the director wanted to show with this

          And artistic is a fiction or a documentary fact You dig in the archives.
        2. bk316
          bk316 19 January 2018 16: 12
          +1
          Well, if you are such a connoisseur of cinema, then I will ask you questions about the scene of the meeting Shtirlitsa with his wife.
          what do you want to tell me that
          would the command so risk a valuable agent?
          and if
          did the outdoor match the views of Stirlitz and the unknown woman?
          think then how could this happen?
          How would she even be transferred to Berlin.
          and most importantly, I’m asking you a question why this scene is what the director wanted to show with this. Give conclusions ..
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 19 January 2018 18: 46
            +1
            to Berlin-could. through Sweden. what is the risk? that Stirlitz is looking at a woman? this is paranoia ... and the scene does not show the degree of risk .. but human experiences. well, almost identical to the experience of the loss of profit from caviar .... yes? so I made conclusions .. for you apparently loss of profit is more important than meeting with a loved one ..
  50. starshina78
    starshina78 18 January 2018 21: 12
    +1
    In any film filmed at the moment, there are American money. That's it. They will not allow you to make a normal, true film about the USSR. I will not mention here a man who everywhere speaks of his love for the Motherland, but it was he who betrayed his Homeland - the USSR, allowing him to make films defaming the USSR, not speaking in his speeches at the Victory parades about the role of the Soviet soldier, the USSR, but instead some incomprehensible words about incomprehensibly to whom belonged soldiers.