How the movie “The Draft” denigrates our history and country

162
The screen version of the eponymous novel by Sergey Lukyanenko "The Draft" was released for rent on 25 in May of this year. Directed by Sergey Mokritsky.





The plot of the film is simple and not particularly intricate. Young Muscovite Kirill is a talented designer of computer games. One day he turns out to be completely erased from the memory of all he knew and loved. Kirill learns that he has been chosen for an important and mysterious mission. Its mission is to become a customs official between parallel worlds, of which there are dozens in the universe. Will Kirill be able to unravel the mystery of these mysterious worlds and who controls them and why? This viewer should find out by looking at the picture.

Everything seems to be all about the case. The plot develops. Cyril is defined as the owner of the Customs Tower, which opens doors to other worlds. For example, the author’s technique is interesting: to show all worlds through the opening door with a view of Red Square in Moscow “at different times”. This is what the viewer has to face more than once when viewing a picture.

I am not a judge of the game of actors, and this is not the task of my material. I want to say about the ideological "bookmarks" in the picture, affecting the mood of the public and, it seems to me, not at all contributing to the consolidation of our society.

It turns out that independently of us there are many parallel worlds, among which there is one ideal - Arkan. And all the other worlds are created in order to take into account the mistakes of the "rough" sketches of the parallel universe when building an ideal life in an ideal world.

And what is this ideal world, in the opinion of the creators of the picture?

The first thing that catches your eye is the pagodas on Red Square in Moscow. Chinese restaurants with Chinese servants. Levitating (flying) automatic guards in the form of Russian transforming nesting dolls with terrible, twisted malice faces, ready to kill all unwanted by the wave of the moderator's hand of this "ideal" reality.

After what he saw on the screen, the anecdote he heard in his youth somehow emerged in his memory. Meet Nixon and Brezhnev. Leonid Ilyich says to Nixon: “Today I had a dream. White House, and above it flies a red flag! And why would it be? ”Nixon kept silent, and then suddenly said:“ You know, Lyonya, and I, too, recently had a dream. I see Red Square, and a huge such poster hangs over Lenin's mausoleum ... That's just what was written there, did not disassemble ... "" Why is that? - asks Brezhnev. “I don’t know how to read Chinese, I don’t know hieroglyphs!” Nixon replies.

Apparently, the same "dream" had a dream and our directors when setting the picture. (Taki will be swallowed up by “our Rush” Chinese dragon, and the fire-breathing will not choke!)

Well, this Arkan is a perfect world. And what about the other worlds?

Excuse me Here, for example, one of them. We are shown a distinctive Moscow, isolated from the rest of the world, where there is no electricity, internal combustion engines, gas, oil, and all technical progress is frozen at the level of the 18 century and is based on the use of steam engines. Apparently, the authors seriously considered that this was a lot of our intellectual capabilities. And the rest of the technical progress was provided by the West.

But that's not all. We are shown what would have happened with the country if we had followed the "Stalinist path of development." In this world, the spectator is met by Vasilisa the blacksmith (either a woman or a man — you can't figure it out right away!), The mistress of the world Nirvana. But compared to such a "Nirvana" GULAG - pioneer camp "Artek" in comparison with the St. Petersburg "Crosses"! Hypertrophically pretentiously shown "free labor" under socialism. All the pictures of this world are sustained in severely sullen, gray-dirty colors. The work is exclusively manual, exhausting, killing all living, thinking ... And those unfortunates who do not perform the daily production task are surely executed, and in the best traditions of the Inquisition - publicly, on the square!

And all these worlds are created by the imagination of the "chosen" inhabitants of the Earth, possessing supernormal abilities. The main character, Cyril, also applies to them. He is the chosen one! He is also able to create his own worlds by the power of thought. What does he create? And everything is very simple: the sea, palm trees, sand and oranges from a tree. Consumerism without any frills, so to speak, in the nude! And it does not cover up the fact that they, with his beloved Anna, dreamed of a rest on the shore of the warm southern sea. It turns out - consumerism and emptiness ... Everything is only for myself, loved one, and the rest is somehow even thought of! Here is the ideal, here is the current attitude to the values ​​of society, the needs of others. All right! Today, every man for himself. One Christ for all!



So it turns out ... Putin is talking about respect for the national stories, about spiritual bonds, about the continuity of generations. And masters of art see the problems of their people differently ...

Then I naturally have a question: who are you, the masters of the “most important art”? I would very much like to be with the people, and not with refined cosmopolitans, personalities without the family and tribe, who consider our country as a source of enrichment and personal well-being. But for this you need to create for the people, and not for the sake of fashionable transatlantic trends!
162 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +18
    12 June 2018 05: 02
    The author raised one of the main issues of modern cinema .. why it used to be possible to make good films and now it turns out either tearful melodramas or as a Draft there’s just a movie about nothing ...
    1. +23
      12 June 2018 06: 22
      Quote: Vard
      The author raised one of the main issues of modern cinema .. why it used to be possible to make good films and now it turns out either tearful melodramas or as a Draft there’s just a movie about nothing ...

      Our cinema died back in 1985, when this one struck, not be remembered by night, but “perestroika” could be done in the morning. Since then not a single talented film has been shot, not a single favorite has appeared, I emphasize, an actor beloved by the people. these mediocrities, as it were, directors and screenwriters are only involved in stupid money-cutting and imitation of actions! Well, we don’t have a normal movie for normal people! It remains only to review old Soviet films. am eh!
      1. +11
        12 June 2018 06: 32
        Quote: Phil77
        Since then, not a single talented film has been shot, not a single favorite has appeared, I emphasize, an actor beloved by the people

        The people have less time to “get impressions”. Do not find? Somehow not to "love for actors" more request
        Quote: Phil77
        Well, we don’t have a normal movie for normal people

        Lungin's “island” is an example to you. Criticize Yes
        1. +12
          12 June 2018 06: 56
          [quote = Golovan D what zhek]
          Quote: Phil77
          Since then, not a single talented film has been shot, not a single favorite has appeared, I emphasize, an actor beloved by the people

          The people have less time to “get impressions”. Do not find? Somehow not to "love for actors" more request
          Quote: Phil77
          Well, we don’t have a normal movie for normal people

          Lungin's “island” is an example to you. Criticize Yes[/ Quote]
          To begin with, Lungin is the director of the Soviet classical school, and not the product of the current consumer cooperation, secondly this film is drawn by the super talented Peter Mamonov. Well, and thirdly, you must admit this film seems to be good at the level of current crafts called movies! ?
          1. +7
            12 June 2018 07: 06
            Quote: Phil77
            this movie seems good

            I do not know. IMHO is just a good movie. It does not seem".
            All the rest - I accept, but the film was shot in the 2000s already.
            What am I all about: yours
            Quote: Phil77
            ... not a single one appeared ...

            ... and so on - a weak statement. It is because of its "universality."
            Quote: Phil77
            Convinced?

            Nah ...
            1. +2
              12 June 2018 07: 19
              Okay. Let the bad word "pluralism of opinions" sound! smile
            2. +5
              12 June 2018 07: 35
              About a single film, I thought and decided I agree, I’m wrong! Sorry, got excited hi
      2. +6
        12 June 2018 06: 33
        Well, at least Brothers first and second
        1. +8
          12 June 2018 06: 57
          Quote: Camel
          Well, at least Brothers first and second

          To be honest, it’s very amateur! hi
        2. +2
          13 June 2018 10: 35
          Quote: Camel
          Well, at least Brothers first and second

          Well then, “Boomer” ... I don’t watch anything, but I don’t like films that praise everything that is base and glorify criminals ... Gangster romance is not mine, because I know several inveterate criminals (from thieves) who have half their lives in the dungeons, quite authoritative in that environment, but in fact - rotten people with whom to make friends is more expensive for yourself.
      3. +5
        12 June 2018 13: 10
        Quote: Phil77
        Our cinema passed away as far back as 1985, when this one struck, not be remembered by night, but in the morning it could be “perestroika.” Since then, not a single talented film has been shot,

        You got excited. “Kill the Dragon”, “Friend”, “Tank” Klim Voroshilov - 2, “Cold Summer of the Fifty-Third,” “Tomorrow Was the War”, “Mr. Decorator”, “State Borders” several episodes, “Ten Little Indians”, “On leash at the runway "," It's hard to be a god "- this is offhand, from the late Soviet. There are also films from Russian, not so many, but these are Brothers, Voroshilovsky shooter, Mom," Island "," Stoker "is also not bad ....
        1. 0
          14 June 2018 07: 46
          Monk and demon - a strong picture!
      4. +3
        12 June 2018 16: 20
        these mediocrities, as it were, are directors and scriptwriters who are only involved in stupid money-cutting and imitation of actions! Well, we don’t have a normal movie for normal people!

        Highly recommend Legend of Colovrates и Skif.
        1. +8
          13 June 2018 03: 47
          Fierce trash in the near-Slavic shell is ...
          1. +1
            13 June 2018 05: 36
            To taste, to color ...
        2. 0
          14 June 2018 08: 14
          Well, yes, yes, especially the selection of an actor for the main role)))), such a hero !!!! As in a joke about a hedgehog ....)))
        3. 0
          14 June 2018 12: 10
          You sho, oststitsya! Everything is already laid out there. Films from the category of "Russian fantasy" ...
      5. +1
        13 June 2018 10: 31
        Quote: Phil77
        Our cinema passed away as far back as 1985, when this one struck, not be remembered by night, but in the morning it could be “perestroika”.

        I love old films, yesterday I enjoyed watching “12 Chairs” 71 years old on Culture. I often watch the military, but you must admit that these paintings are ideological pumping, which is not bad for educational purposes.
        Now there are also good films, I enjoy watching them and reviewing them. Here are those that I like: "Legend 17", "Upward Movement", "Poddubny", "28 Panfilovites", "22 minutes", "Sobibor" ... They make good pictures, not often, but there are ...
        1. +4
          13 June 2018 12: 41
          Quote: raw174
          "Upward movement"
          About “upward movement” there is an excellent review from BadComedian, where he showed well how the authors distorted the history of Soviet basketball and poured shit on talented Soviet basketball players. And all this in pursuit of the dough.
          1. +3
            13 June 2018 12: 57
            Quote: Greenwood
            how the authors distorted the history of Soviet basketball

            I don’t know, I didn’t watch the review, I don’t perceive feature films as a documentary, not modern, not Soviet, this is primarily the point of view of the authors, even if it has a basis.
            Quote: Greenwood
            doused with shit talented Soviet basketball players.

            I did not see anything in the film that would belittle the honor and dignity of Soviet athletes ...
            1. +3
              13 June 2018 13: 02
              Quote: raw174
              I do not perceive feature films as documentaries, not modern, not Soviet, this is primarily the point of view of the authors, even if it has a foundation.
              But the authors swore that everything is based on real events. lol
              Quote: raw174
              I did not see anything in the film that would belittle the honor and dignity of Soviet athletes ...
              Here you are, look at your leisure.
              I wanted to go to a movie with a girl in the winter, as a result, I didn’t go, because I decided, since the film is Russian, it’s crowded, but there weren’t any American tickets. After watching the review of the film, I realized that my intuition did not disappoint me then. lol
              1. +1
                13 June 2018 13: 07
                Quote: Greenwood
                But the authors swore that everything is based on real events.

                Yes, but this does not oblige the author to make a documentary, the film "22 minutes" is also based on real events, but in fact 99% is fiction ... Films about the Second World War are also based on real events, but the plot is fictitious for everyone. This is the point of view of the author ... You will not deny that "Purgatory" on real events? Yes, there was real war and there were prototypes of the characters, but the output is that ...
              2. 0
                13 June 2018 16: 55
                Quote: Greenwood
                Here you are, look at your leisure.

                And why not a link to the film "Crimea" from Eugene. Is it more "interesting" for analysis?)))))
            2. +1
              14 June 2018 12: 13
              All right, Greenwood wrote. Look at the debriefing, it is not unfounded but with examples. And the hype that was around the wives of the already deceased basketball players. Which in an interview said that it is outrageous that they will show in the film. And the director actually sent them why, while he himself said in an interview that everything was agreed with relatives.
        2. +2
          13 June 2018 16: 09
          "Salute 7" forgot to add ..
        3. +1
          13 June 2018 18: 40
          Already apologized. I got excited. At your recommendation I will try to watch these films. Thank you! hi
        4. 0
          14 June 2018 08: 16
          "Salute 7", "Time of the First", add
          1. +1
            14 June 2018 12: 16
            Pure water anti-Soviet, just a spit in the face of all generations of Soviet people. But Leonov is a traitor and Russophobe, it’s a pity that by the decision of the court he cannot be deprived of the title of Hero of the Soviet Union, he is not worthy to wear it.
      6. +1
        13 June 2018 12: 39
        Quote: Phil77
        Our cinema passed away as far back as 1985, when this one struck, not be remembered by night, but in the morning it could be “perestroika”.
        Well, I do not agree. In perestroika times of the USSR, and in the dashing 90s, and even at the beginning of the 00s, they made quite good, sometimes very vital films (even numerous gangster series and films adequately showed Russian reality and were appreciated by the audience). Here are the new Russian films - really refined slag.
        1. +1
          13 June 2018 20: 23
          "Gangster Petersburg", very, very. good
      7. 0
        13 June 2018 16: 53
        Quote: Phil77
        Well, we don’t have a normal movie for normal people!

        But what kind of TV ... do not come off, then you have a thriller and action and melodrama and science fiction and bedtime stories.
        1. AUL
          0
          13 June 2018 17: 58
          Quote: Semen1972
          But what kind of TV ... do not come off, then you have a thriller and action and melodrama and science fiction and bedtime stories.

          Are you talking about a straight line?
          1. +1
            14 June 2018 09: 48
            Quote from AUL
            Are you talking about a straight line?

            No, this is for aesthetes .. like a game of thrones .. once a year .. And I'm talking about everyday life. Solovyov, Sheinin, these .. about 60 minutes about Ukraine, Baboyan and others ..)) I love them, so fiercely hate the whole world for 3 consecutive years .. that’s people’s nerves, they’re working in such an environment .. they even give milk ?)))
      8. 0
        15 June 2018 21: 41
        Because the love of actors and films is not normal. They do not need to be elevated. Some just do their job, films are just a commodity.
        And now and then we have so-so.
        In general, an actor is not a profession. It would be better for each new movie to recruit NEW and unknown people. Not necessarily actors. How to watch dozens of films with the same faces.
    2. +5
      12 June 2018 12: 43
      A foolish attempt to pour a tub of slop on us.
      1. +1
        14 June 2018 08: 18
        Like the "Viking", by the way, tubs are in the 10th degree, as I recall ....
        1. 0
          14 June 2018 09: 57
          Quote: SLAVA
          Like the "Viking", by the way, tubs are in the 10th degree, as I recall ....

          You do not like all our movies? And, probably, music .. and literature and government and officials and large companies .. and football and other sports? What do you like, why are you in this country?
    3. 0
      13 June 2018 08: 51
      In my opinion, the author of the article, the ideal world did not match the world shown in the film. so he was offended!
    4. 0
      13 June 2018 10: 05
      Quote: Vard
      The author raised one of the main issues of modern cinema .. why it used to be possible to make good films and now it turns out either tearful melodramas or as a Draft there’s just a movie about nothing ...

      Well, actually, before, there was enough slag denigrating Russian history.
    5. 0
      9 July 2018 11: 45
      Yet again. A fairy tale is a lie and a hint in it. Now there is a fashion for dystopia and similar genres. Again, you need to compare with the original book. After all, the protagonist is not necessarily Danko, people are fed up with it, people want to look at these too.
  2. +16
    12 June 2018 06: 16
    It has long been embarked on going to the cinema and watching modern "masterpieces". World cinema has been dead for a long time. Instead of at least some interesting films - one-time crafts. It is a pity that our cinema does not lag behind these harmful trends. But before, domestic films could be watched dozens, if not hundreds of times! There is clearly a systemic problem.
    1. +3
      12 June 2018 06: 59
      Quote: Ivan Petrov-Vodkin
      It has long been embarked on going to the cinema and watching modern "masterpieces". World cinema has been dead for a long time. Instead of at least some interesting films - one-time crafts. It is a pity that our cinema does not lag behind these harmful trends. But before, domestic films could be watched dozens, if not hundreds of times! There is clearly a systemic problem.

      I absolutely agree with you! I try to watch only the old Soviet cinema!
      1. +19
        12 June 2018 07: 10
        Remember the "man from the Capuchin Boulevard" A. Surikova? two distributors, one carried love and beauty, the second - destruction and cruelty. apparently won the second, not only in the movies.
        1. +3
          12 June 2018 20: 16
          "Remember" the man from Capuchin Boulevard "A. Surikova? two distributors, one carrying love and beauty, the second destruction and cruelty. apparently won the second, not only in the movies."
          Remember. How not to remember! .. Good and bright film. By the way, they filmed they say somewhere around the corner here, but now it's not about that. There is honestly no desire or strength to watch the current opus.
        2. 0
          14 June 2018 12: 28
          This is just a shifter. Look at what shit Surikova shot recently. Man from the Boulevard of Capuchin. And you can’t say that this is the same person.
    2. +5
      12 June 2018 12: 45
      The problem, I think, is that humanity is trying to be stupid. And "our" figures of pen and spotlights do not lag behind the western ones.
      1. +1
        13 June 2018 08: 58
        Well, it’s not possible to make a big stupid, especially those who do not want to be stupid. More or less classical literature is freely available.
    3. 0
      13 June 2018 09: 27
      They try to show you the diversity of the world to whom it is close that he chooses and no one calls you into their reality! Each live in his own and do not demand that everyone adapt to you!
  3. +16
    12 June 2018 07: 06
    It is correctly said that world cinema is dead, especially in Russia. As for the drama, then everything is not easy, but rather everything is bad. In domestic paintings, the drama is based on the way a bloody gebnya, a totalitarian regime crushes people who are originally needed by this state, you do not need to follow examples. The main characters are at best dissidents, at worst criminals, gopniks. Soviet soldiers vilify, the Russian soldier in large paintings show stupid, blind, and indeed clowns. And the saddest thing is that the state gives money for the removal of these masterpieces. In general, the situation resembles the 90s, when in the movie the main characters were all kinds of bandits, and “evil garbage”, “corruption”, etc., opposed them. And with Boomer’s appearance, this topic of pouring police mud would end, but not , filmmakers swung at the whole state, how bad and wrong it is, and wrong from the very beginning. All the same, we need censorship, although in order not to give money for all indecency and frankly garbage.
    1. 0
      13 June 2018 09: 00
      censorship? only ruble for Capitalism!
  4. +10
    12 June 2018 07: 42
    It’s good to be a critic - sit yourself, do nothing, just take care of others and their work. Would the author have something to read first and Draft and Chistovik, he would have tried it himself, at least imagine (I’m not talking about filming - there isn’t enough strength) how it would be on the screen, and then sit and get clever.
    1. +3
      12 June 2018 08: 23
      In general, it’s not clear to me why interfere in what you do not understand and Sculpt articles from your bell tower and teach others how to live. It became fashionable to watch, so you can bring anything up to execution.
    2. +3
      12 June 2018 08: 34
      And right there in the forefront the wise men begin to scribble their banal reflections as everyone around them knows nothing.
    3. +1
      12 June 2018 08: 50
      Even for the seed, during the opening of the Crimean bridge, Vladimir Vladimirovich did not buckle up, how much can be sucked out of a finger for the tragedy of the country. The author, and you are here on the little things.
      1. +5
        12 June 2018 12: 49
        The defenders came running. Have you read and watched it yourself?
    4. +5
      12 June 2018 20: 20
      I read both the draft and the clean ... the lasso there really is, with Moscow and happy faces. there was the 18th century - but the author never painted him like Moscow, nirvana - that’s the gulag)), but there everything goes the other way around on relaxation (such air). the beach, by the way, was also in the book - but only the functionary didn’t very much depend on where he opens the door. that’s actually all the worlds that he discovered (like 4 from the book). as a person who liked books - now I think whether or not to watch a movie ...
      1. -1
        15 June 2018 05: 07
        "He, too, is capable of creating his worlds by the power of thought."
        Then the top starter didn’t understand anything at all - the customs officer could open the world-location closest to his thoughts / mood, but only one of the existing ones
    5. 0
      12 June 2018 21: 52
      Sorry, but “Draft” by Lukyanenko, to put it mildly, differs from the described film production.
      And “Chistovik”, even in the original, is such an awesome lover that you don’t even want to imagine an adaptation.
    6. 0
      13 June 2018 05: 34
      The fact that the Cinema Fund gives money for dubious projects has already become an axiom, forgive yourself, your reputation has been tarnished, to the point that it seems that you don’t need any talent or effort to make a movie. If the filmmaker still has a conscience, they will try to come up with something themselves, write a crappy script, if there is no conscience, they will take the first boulevard consumer goods. Criticism is not born from scratch, indeed, few watched the film most likely, but you just watch the poster, you see the FC badge there and you think: “And again, the state money was cut.” Our associations are all. The point here is that someone is tired of making dubious pictures with disruptive ideas at the state’s expense, but it’s even more annoying when they say to you, go get it, and then criticize. No! Now, when they rise in our eyes, cease to sow dirt with history, then we'll see.
  5. +11
    12 June 2018 07: 51
    I don’t want to criticize what I didn’t see .. In my opinion, this is a general trend ... You watch old films, not only Soviet, European, American, yes it was art .. Now, for mass consumption ... I remember foreign artists , at home in Western Europe, at one time they beat the drums, they say strangling our cinema, American ... they say it’s not spiritual, it’s consumer ... The same can be said about American cinema, consumer cinema in the USA, first killed its high-quality , got to Europe, and now to us .. Basically, we strive to take off as they have, forgotten their identity ... And on the other hand, what to shoot about and about ... unless the Rich also cry .. or about how deputies or managers of oil and gas state corporations decided to abandon their high salaries, and the president and the prime minister are shocked .... You can also film how the retired minister returned to the government again, a comedy like Mimino, where the pilot was eager for a big aviation, and then to the government ... But I think funny will not work ...
    1. +2
      12 June 2018 12: 56
      Neither modern literature nor cinematography love entrepreneurial exploits. The last memorable film on this subject is Territory, based on the novel by Soviet writer Oleg Kuvaev. Now in society it is customary to solely nightmare entrepreneurs. But many interesting projects are being implemented! And working in "market conditions" is much more difficult than before, when the whole state was in the rear. This is an extensive thematic field.
      1. +3
        12 June 2018 13: 28
        Yes, I noticed it right. I liked the film based on the novel by O. Kuvaev. But again about the main thing, there is no children's movie, but it was. Animation today does not count. Without children there is no future. And the children should have something not only gadgets and Computers and clothes. Do not know what to talk about with the language of the movie.
        1. +2
          12 June 2018 15: 09
          Good day to all! Something I did not understand about Kuvaev. The novel was published in the magazine "Roman-Gazeta" even before my birth, the year that way in the 78 --- 80m of the last century. In geology --- in every house was. All the time the words were --- "" like ours? How is it now? "". At 91m they returned to Leningrad, brought. And here they moved 2 times. Lost. Then I read of course, sighed, remembered, but did not watch the film. At work, he sometimes met people from Pevek, from Magadan. For everyone --- dear !!!
          1. +2
            12 June 2018 17: 16
            The impressions of the book are stronger than those of the film - a talented writer! But I’m talking about entrepreneurship. There are a lot of this now, but the difficulties are no less, plus commercial risks have been added - this is very serious, there is no state insurance. These would be modern heroes who showed positive images. But neither literature, nor dramaturgy, nor cinema pull — they are afraid. Because the society is shy: an entrepreneur (businessman) means a damned oligarch! They will sympathize with his defeat, and not with luck - a paradox! Such is the public twig.
            1. +1
              12 June 2018 21: 35
              The society wasn’t obstructed, the society wasn’t interested in it, it was taught fast food to haw, it also haws ... It's me about movies and literature ... Come on, guardianship, bread and circuses .. Remember, the movie is Gori, burn my star .. hero Leonova says , and he has spectacles, and they give me bread .. By the way, the current film is still in many ways ...
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. +1
                  13 June 2018 09: 57
                  There is no Leonov in the mountains!
                  "Burn, Burn, My Star" (working title - "Comedy about Iskremas") - feature film, tragicomedy directed by Alexander Mitta, 1969.
                  Oleg Tabakov - Vladimir Iskremas
                  Elena Proklova - Khristina Kotlyarenko (Rat)
                  Evgeny Leonov - Pashka, the master of the illusion
                  Oleg Efremov - Fedor, artist-nugget
                  Vladimir Naumov - Head Captain
                  Leonid Dyachkov - Ohrim
                  Leonid Kuravlev - Commissioner Serdyuk
                  Marlene Hutsiev - Prince
                  Konstantin Voinov - white officer
                  Boris Boldyrevsky
                  Alexander Milyutin - escort
                  Alexander Porokhovshchikov - white officer
                  Lyubov Sokolova - wife of Fedor
                  Alexander Filippenko - “shooter”, white officer
                  Anatoly Eliseev - Vakhromeev, the killer of Fedor
                  Tatyana Nepomnyashchaya - Margarita Vlasyevna, dancer
                  Lyudmila Khmelnitskaya - Anyuta, tall dancer
                  Irina Murzaeva - tapersha
                  Pavel Vinnik - husband in silent movie
                  Michaela Drozdovskaya - wife of the captain
                  Nonna Mordyukova - Madame
                  Rogvold Sukhoverko - “green”, Ohrim's assistant (not in the credits)
            2. +1
              12 June 2018 22: 03
              The reason for the disgust of society towards entrepreneurs is not exactly named. It’s not that someone “posed” someone, but in a fundamentally different motivation for the “industry captains” than under the previous regime, some of whom celebrate their deliverance today. It is strange to expect sympathy for the surplus value withdrawn in one's favor from the one from whom it, in fact, is withdrawn, especially if there are many who swear by their own wealth against the background of glaring poverty. I admit that not all entrepreneurs are like that, maybe they are not even the majority, but one black sheep spoils the whole herd, and we (and everywhere) have quite a lot of them ...
              1. +3
                12 June 2018 23: 19
                Living in a poor region I wonder: where did you see the terrifying poverty? Do not exaggerate it.
                And surplus value: where did it go to the USSR? According to K. Marx: it was formed - and then what?
              2. +1
                13 June 2018 10: 27
                The construction of a gas processing plant on the Yamal Peninsula is no less important for the country's economy than the construction "as well as the construction of the BAM tunnels and the Crimean bridge. If construction with the involvement of convicts is a feat, then why construction with hired employees is not a feat?
                As for the assignment of results, before and now the direct participants have little to do, the owner appropriates the main things, and ultimately, after redistribution, the state budget receives its indispensable piece.
                It is NECESSARY to change the attitude towards entrepreneurs (businessmen) in society.
                1. 0
                  13 June 2018 10: 55
                  It is NECESSARY to change the attitude towards entrepreneurs (businessmen) in society.
                  Unfortunately, this is possible only after a change in the attitude of entrepreneurs (businessmen) to society.
  6. +5
    12 June 2018 08: 27
    Actually, it is not clear why it was necessary to break the main line of the book and turn the plot into a farce. It's offensive.
    1. +7
      12 June 2018 09: 33
      Mne-uh. This is a long tradition of directing - to cut the foundation and make some kind of Frankenstein. What Tarkovsky clocked up with Solaris and Stalker. It turned out brilliant films with the source code connected a little less than nothing.
      1. 0
        12 June 2018 16: 20
        Very often the vision of the director and the author of the plot is two big differences
      2. +2
        14 June 2018 12: 37
        Such a work as "Stalker" did not exist. Tarkovsky made the film Stalker based on the Strugatsky’s book "Picnic on the Sidelines."
    2. +2
      12 June 2018 09: 34
      This he (the director) sees so. Surely the money for his "vision" was received by the state. Thanks Medinsky.
    3. +3
      12 June 2018 11: 57
      Quote: Selin Andrey
      Actually, it is not clear why it was necessary to break the main line of the book and turn the plot into a farce.

      Strictly speaking, I remember only one film made from a literary work and turned out to be better than the original - "My Enemy"
      1. +2
        12 June 2018 15: 16
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: Selin Andrey
        Actually, it is not clear why it was necessary to break the main line of the book and turn the plot into a farce.

        Strictly speaking, I remember only one film made from a literary work and turned out to be better than the original - "My Enemy"

        Yes, Andrey! This film made a HUGE impression on me in due time! Probably a culture shock !!!
        I started reading early, about travel, I immediately fell in love with adventure. In my opinion, a cartoon about Vrungel, as well as cartoons and films by Jules Verne, is better than books of the same name.
        1. +4
          12 June 2018 15: 39
          Quote: Reptiloid
          In my opinion, a cartoon about Vrungel, as well as cartoons and films by Jules Verne, is better than books of the same name.

          Yes, how to say? I would speak of parity at best, to be honest I don’t see a clear advantage over books (especially in the case of Jules Verne). But - I respect your point of view! hi
          1. +1
            12 June 2018 17: 40
            yes, "My Enemy", this is a very strong film ... when I looked, I remembered the analogy, our soldier and German during the Second World War, almost in the same situation (forgot how the book is called already) ...
        2. +1
          12 June 2018 22: 05
          Well, you turned down with Vrungel, although this is a matter of taste, and Jules Verne is really not quite a writer, he is more in charge of popularization.
      2. +1
        12 June 2018 23: 23
        The dawns here are quiet. The film is much better than the original
        1. 0
          13 June 2018 09: 44
          Quote: Glafira
          The dawns here are quiet. The film is much better than the original

          Mom said that before under socialism such a performance was in Leningrad, in the theater near the Gorkovskaya metro station. What went whole groups ---- classes, groups .......
  7. +8
    12 June 2018 09: 04
    The author is right, but at the same time I want to note what you expected from the current "artists" who are ardent supporters of the consumer society and fans of "Western values"! Everything is carried out according to the previously written scenario for the destruction of Russia: first, to replace our literature, art, history, and then the basis of all of our-ORTHODOX, and finally turn all the citizens of Russia into a champing flock. And what can you expect from this so-called "elite", which Lenin called very accurately: "... shit of the nation ..."! So now they are taking revenge on their own people for not accepting their ideals ...
    1. +6
      12 June 2018 09: 09
      When was Orthodoxy the basis of our everything?
      1. +2
        12 June 2018 13: 15
        Quote: Ayratelinsion
        When was Orthodoxy the basis of our everything?

        Until the seventeenth year of the last century, if you forgot. And after that it played an important role.
        1. +4
          12 June 2018 20: 44
          When? When it turned into a state institute, the next ministry under Peter? Or when they adopted Christianity, so as not to lose part of their military booty under Vladimir?
          The only moment when the church could become the church of the people was at a split, but the opponents of the "rich church" successfully slapped that moment.
          1. +2
            13 June 2018 12: 28
            Quote: Ayratelinsion
            When? When it turned into a state institute, the next ministry under Peter? Or when they adopted Christianity, so as not to lose part of their military booty under Vladimir?
            The only moment when the church could become the church of the people was at a split, but the opponents of the "rich church" successfully slapped that moment.

            When it became the basis of the Russian attitude, harmoniously replacing Slavic paganism. Almost all the great scholars and statesmen were Orthodox.
            Peter's church reforms on the impact on our history can be compared with the impact of the XX Congress on the further fate of the USSR. But even after these reforms, Orthodoxy was the basis of Russian civilization.
            1. 0
              13 June 2018 16: 41
              Harmoniously - is it through burning something?
            2. dSK
              +1
              13 June 2018 17: 32
              Quote: EwgenyZ
              Peter's church reforms on the impact on our history can be compared with the impact of the XX Congress on the further fate of the USSR.

              The process of destruction was "launched" by Peter I, abolishing the Patriarchate and transferring power over the Church officials of the Synod. He violated the basic religious canons, making the immortal soul dependent on the mortal body. Synod officials monitored that civil servants regularly attend Liturgies and receive communion during fasting, violations affecting their careers. As a result, the strongest formalism that destroyed the Romanov dynasty two hundred years later. Before the seminary revolution, many teachers - theologians did not believe in God. And their pupils, seminarians, capable and talented young people did a lot for the VOR. Nicholas II was asked to restore ten years Patriarchatebut the officials of the Synod, who did not want to lose power, were able to dissuade him, in addition, there was no consensus on the candidacy of the Patriarch. Only in 1917, when it became clear to everyone that after the Thief, the Patriarch was a "shot" position and "fellow travelers" were eliminated, did the Council choose Tikhon (Belavin), who was able to bear the difficult Cross of the salvation of Orthodoxy in Russia, as Patriarch.
              Of the 17 Patriarchs in the history of the Russian Church, since 1589, the Councils canonized of three: Tikhon, Hermagen (in 1612 encircled by the Poles, in the "Time of Troubles") and Job (the very first Patriarch).
              1. dSK
                +1
                13 June 2018 17: 55
                Godunov’s death in 1605 and victory of False Dmitry I meant the fall of Job. Job refused to recognize the impostor as the son of Ivan the Terrible and demanded that Muscovites be loyal to Fyodor Borisovich, False Dmitry and his supporters, “who had betrayed the sovereign, and that thief and apostate would be followed and called him Prince Dmitry”, were betrayed by the patriarch anathema. After the murder of Fyodor Godunov, Job was arrested for worship at the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, the patriarchal vestments were stripped of him and sent into exile as a simple monk. Job lived for two more years in Staritsa and died in 1607. Before his death, rehabilitated under Vasily Shuisky, he visited Moscow, but for health reasons (completely blind) refused to return to the patriarchal throne. In 1652, under Patriarch Joseph (1642–1652), the incorrupt and fragrant relics of St. Job were transferred to the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin and placed near the tomb of Patriarch Joasaph (1634–1640). According to the testimonies of believers, healings came from the relics of St. Job, was canonized in the face of the saints at the Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1989. (wikipedia).
            3. 0
              14 June 2018 10: 20
              What do you mean by "the basis of attitude"? The adoption of Orthodoxy at birth is not a choice, not a worldview, it is simply a cultural environment characteristic of a period of time. She can not be called primordial, she was discredited, and more than once, just the same representatives of the clergy.
              EPT ... Yes, because the vast majority were Orthodox in the Russian Empire and the kingdom.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  8. 0
    12 June 2018 09: 08
    Yes, you got over socialism, uncle. Read the source first and try to understand
    1. +1
      12 June 2018 22: 07
      Well, I read, so what?
      There described obstinacy by anti-socialism is not worth a penny.
  9. +3
    12 June 2018 09: 12
    “Art owes a great debt to the people.” So Kostik said in the famous film of M. Kazakov. I will not risk discussing a film that I have not seen. But the general tendency in today's cinema is known to me. There are films for the masses, but there are
    Films created for the elite, mostly for the Academy Award. I remember the criticism I received.
    the film "Moscow does not believe in tears." And this film received an Oscar. What goods in the store, such and art. If "Cherry
    garden "put on display at the theater, where the scenery is taut, and the characters play in jeans and mini skirts, I don’t understand such a sight, and theater-goers are delighted. As a famous director said how to make a film,
    to be watched "It's very simple. You need to tell the viewer an interesting story."
    1. +8
      12 June 2018 10: 44
      Quote: nikvic46
      I will not risk discussing a film that I have not seen.

      Alas, on Sunday I watched "Draft" with my wife ...
      He came home, took out a disc with "Only old people go into battle" and regained his peace of mind ... And sometimes I look through the "Volunteers", "Officers" ... so as not to lose "faith in humanity." Yes
      So then, theatrical brother!
  10. +5
    12 June 2018 09: 21
    The author said a lot of things, but did not bother to understand that the film was shot according to the 2005 book, the 2005 storyline, the created worlds are the author’s fantasy of 2005, and not 2014 or 2018, as the author apparently would really like
    1. +5
      12 June 2018 17: 29
      Quote: Vol4ara
      the created worlds are the author’s fantasy of 2005, not 2014 or 2018, as the author apparently would like very much

      I don’t know what the author wanted ...
      But personally, I’m all the same in what year they tried to present the history of my Motherland as a complete concentration camp, and the CHINA !!! am
      1. +3
        12 June 2018 20: 47
        I have not read it, but I condemn it. Commendable position, laudable. Take the pie from the shelf
        1. +4
          12 June 2018 20: 54
          Quote: Ayratelinsion
          I have not read it, but I condemn it. Commendable position, laudable. Take the pie from the shelf

          Let me remind you: we are talking about the film. Therefore, "read the movie", sorry, did not qualify ...
          Lukyaneko is not my idol, rather weak. More Isaac Asimov to his liking. Well, to each his own ...
          And with the pies - finish: you're not in the market after all. They could have pretended to be intelligent brow. laughing
          1. +2
            12 June 2018 21: 42
            I, yes intelligent? Not, of course, I can, sir, but is it worth it? Not sure.
            And I did not register as admirers of talent. Just, it seems to me, when evaluating the film adaptation, it’s worth familiarizing yourself with the original source for making a more accurate and complete judgment.
            Watch movies are a rare muck.
            Dozor books are quite nothing to themselves, rustic, but not bad.
            The Dark Tower Movie is such a funny third-rate action movie.
            The dark tower of the book is a powerful layer in King's work, comparing favorably with most of his books.
            Something like this) to criticize, it is worth looking from different angles)
  11. +4
    12 June 2018 09: 23
    Do you still know how to be surprised with our films? I'm amazed.
  12. kig
    +3
    12 June 2018 09: 44
    I haven’t seen the movie yet, but I’ve read the book, and the second part too. And I don’t understand where the author has noticed the denigrating of our history. His fantasy is even better developed than Lukyanenko’s. Let them review, he will take a chair there to combat the outlines, begin to drag authors into his office and torture them there on the topic "what did you mean", enthusiastically looking for the hidden meaning of each comma. By the way, why did the author of this opus not touch the author of the book?
    1. +3
      12 June 2018 12: 01
      Quote: kig
      I haven’t seen the movie yet, but I read the book

      Sir! If you have not seen the film, then how can you argue with the author? Does it taste like that !?
      When you watch a movie, write, plz! do you agree with how NIRVANA is shown in it. Personally, I strongly disagree with the way people of my generation who built socialism are shown in the film!
      Better yet, listen to how values ​​have been “gently” exchanged for us! And a great idea with a great purpose was replaced by the idea of ​​enrichment-consumerism.
      Six!
      1. kig
        +1
        12 June 2018 14: 21
        Sir, the author accurately described the plot of a fantastic story! Therefore, I ventured to disagree with him, because the film, judging by his words, repeats the general outline of the story. Matryoshka, however, was not in the book. Nirvana is an allegory, one of many. If the author does not understand this, then this is only his problem.
    2. 0
      12 June 2018 21: 43
      Did he know that this is a film adaptation?
  13. +4
    12 June 2018 09: 47
    Once I was greatly impressed by the book “draft”, “clean” - Lukyanenko (after that I re-read all the works of this author, but I admit “draft” and “clean” as the best). When I found out that an adaptation of one of these books was released, I was delighted. The cinema has not yet been watched - maybe it will be brought to Europe - then I can express my opinion here too ... But judging by the article and the comments to it, the filmmakers apparently added a lot of "author's gag". However - fiction is always difficult to shoot from famous works - the point of view of a particular book is too different by the author, the readers, ... and the director (who has taken to film it). Here Fyodor Bondarchuk made a beautiful film - "9th Company", and now "Inhabited Island" (of the Strugatsky) in my opinion - he did not succeed. I can say the same thing about the two adaptations of "It is difficult to be God" (of the Strugatsky) - gray, faded, "nothing." But ... it’s good that at least it is - if only the Hulk and Captain America would be watched - so do not shoot the pianist - he plays - as he can :-)
    1. +1
      15 June 2018 04: 38
      ... and the collection * depth * Lukyanenko read? ..
      1. 0
        23 June 2018 14: 27
        .. often reread * Depth * Lukyanenko and * The Chronicles of Siala * Alexei Pekhov .. Sometimes I wander * Harry Potter and the Shadow Forest *, * Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix *, Harry Potter and the cells of the Alchemist * Radomir Vastepelev (Constanse_Ice) .. Pekhov has Great rating .. Reading while relaxing ..
  14. +1
    12 June 2018 10: 37
    "Draft" he is a draft ... At the box office is weak, and the obvious "dummy" ...
  15. +3
    12 June 2018 10: 53
    Karen Shakhnazarov in an interview said: "The lack of ideology is one of the main reasons that we have few good films."
    1. +7
      12 June 2018 11: 40
      Come on, there is a state ideology, manipulation of the truth ... is called ... Hence the films are ... In this case, the director made a film based on the aforementioned book ... And this does not always work out, especially in our time, with such an ideology ... Well, you probably have no complaints about the cartoon “Treasure Island” filmed in Soviet times, and it was shot based on the book, moreover, there was still a parody crammed into the film for 17 moments of spring. Or take two films that were also created during the Soviet era authorities, under Stalin, and also based on the motives. The First Treasure Island of 1937 or 1938, there was only one storyline left from the novel, the search for treasures, and much not from the novel, but the film even now looks with interest, there is an imprint of ideology, independence fighters Ireland set off in search of the treasures mentioned. The second New Gulliver, just an ideologically seasoned film, seemed to be about a revolution in the land of Lilliputians, but again .. a masterpiece. I saw several animated cartoon versions of Gulliver’s adventures, but the best one in my Soviet look ... I also saw an English film, horror, the storyline is based on how Gulliver fell in love with the Queen of the Lilliputians or she, I definitely don’t remember .. The market, the movie should be profitable ... the main thing is that people hawala. About the totalitarian regime, the heinous, bloody, later many artists of the cinema spoke, they didn’t let me shoot, they cut me, I couldn’t express myself, however, for some reason they shot good movies, even masterpieces. Now, complete freedom seemed express yourself, but no, it doesn’t work out, and why whoever feeds the girl dances her .. Well, by the way, as a result of our discussion, no one noticed that there was no children's movie. Not at all. It’s good. Jumble is released, but some something vulgar in my opinion.
  16. 0
    12 June 2018 10: 55
    Quote: Vard
    The author raised one of the main issues of modern cinema .. why it used to be possible to make good films and now it turns out either tearful melodramas or as a Draft there’s just a movie about nothing ...

    I absolutely agree with a friend. Now it’s not movies, but grandmothers and more.
  17. +4
    12 June 2018 11: 08
    Alas, a very common disease today is incorrect self-identification. If I recognize myself as a descendant of those who have always lived in this territory and created this state, then by birth I must love and respect my ancestors. But not as abstract "ancestors", but as cute, always loving me, their distant grandson, grandparents. Whoever they are! Since I am, I am involved in the great and the negative in the past. Other offspring were not given.
    If a person does not accept the PAST in all its diversity - he is not ours, but from those who have come and joined. ALIEN.
    We need to understand this in order to choose friends correctly, to regret and help YOURSELF, and not to anyone in vain.
  18. +3
    12 June 2018 11: 38
    The author apparently did not read the original, I read both the Draft and the Chistovik of Sergey Lukyanenko.
    In fact, all parallel worlds (including our land) were supposedly created to identify errors in the development of their own world, which is the so-called Arkan. The lasso in these books was not an ideal world, parallel worlds used as test sites allowed to solve some problems, but completely different ones appeared instead. Moreover, it is not always clear what was worse.
    In the book, each of the worlds is spelled out in sufficient detail, and not as shown in the film, in which I met only the familiar names of the worlds. On this, the similarity of the film with the book almost ended.
    As the scriptwriter and director conveyed this ... Well, what did you want from Sony Pictures? The book is quite popular with science fiction lovers, so they decided to film. But in fact, the script is written for squeezing money.
    1. kig
      0
      13 June 2018 01: 38
      the author generally has a sick imagination, turned on the theme "our truth is truer than all other truths."
  19. +2
    12 June 2018 11: 41
    The draft film is just the case where you do not need to look for malicious intent, when everything can be explained by stupidity)
    The fact is that all these worlds were already invented by Lukyanenko in the book. So, the backwardness of the world of the 19th century (not 18!) Is explained not by the isolation of Moscow, but by the lack of oil in that world, the whole world is there. The Chinese in Arkan - to replace the blacks, whose theme was raised in the book, apparently the authors of the film felt that now the Chinese will be more relevant. Nirvana is really a concentration camp, but ideology has nothing to do with it, and especially Stalin. There are just drugs in the air. And the female smith of Vasilisa is also from the book. Of course, the changes made are obvious, but again, not with a great mind, it seems, made. But initially the problem was that Lukyanenko himself could not reveal the meaning of the existence of a fan of worlds and ended the dilogy with the fact that the main character spat on everyone and began to live an ordinary life.
    1. +2
      12 June 2018 11: 58
      Quote: unBEARable
      The draft film is just the case where you do not need to look for malicious intent, when everything can be explained by stupidity)

      "It's worse than a crime. It's a mistake."
  20. +1
    12 June 2018 12: 31
    Did not watch.
    But I condemn.
  21. +3
    12 June 2018 12: 34
    I don’t know if the film is good (I haven’t watched it yet, but I have read the book). The book is interesting, but the article is in the best traditions of the harsh editorial of the newspaper Pravda of the 70s. Comrade Avelyanov, this is fiction, a game of the mind, variations on the theme "what would happen if ...". Do not be so serious!
  22. +1
    12 June 2018 12: 42
    I read a bit, I decided to look, but I didn’t have the urine to look, I ran diagonally, the impression was vile. The same merde, like a similar Hollywood.
  23. +3
    12 June 2018 12: 53
    I didn’t read a book, I didn’t watch a movie. Be sure to do both!
    I advise the author to stop looking for Masoidon plots under his bed.
    Threat - and it seems Mos qua 2042 The author did not read Vladimir Voinovich.
    1. +1
      12 June 2018 16: 17
      I’m already downloading the movie from torrents, I'll watch it in the evening.
  24. +2
    12 June 2018 13: 15
    I have been living for a long time.
    There were periods when I was looking forward to an adaptation of a book.
    There were periods when, after watching the film, I wondered: Screen adaptation of what? Must read.
    The second option was much less common, but it was. The first option was often not in favor of the film. But this, you understand, is purely individual. I really loved science fiction and adventure. My childhood dragged on - I still love. But, again subjectively, I think that cinema was killed by technology. These special effects kill modern cinema for the sake of effect. They don’t even kill, but ALREADY killed. The film "Stalker" by Tarkovsky is a vivid example of how you can achieve the highest result with a minimum of fine means. Although I confess that when I found out that “Picnic on the sidelines” was being filmed, everything imagined how “witch jelly” would “have a special effect”. But the ingenious Tarkovsky was able to make his film ...
    Before reading the comments, he noted to himself that there was no desire to read the book of Lukyanenko. Now the opinion has changed - I’ll read it.
    I didn’t like the film. Soother.
    IMHO.
  25. +2
    12 June 2018 14: 04
    There are people who are ready to suck out any meaning from any picture from their fingers, their imagination is limitless, such people were very much welcomed at one time in the NKVD and the KGB, at the wrong time the author of the article was born. I read the book, ordinary science fiction, not bad by the way, although I disagree with the author in many respects, he is a hard-working liberal and promotes his views in his books. Take for example the "Alphabet" ...
  26. +3
    12 June 2018 14: 37
    Obviously, the meaning of this "craft" as much as possible "squeeze mania" from the foreign "connoisseurs of the country, all the more so as to nibble Russia for any reason and without ... as if in a" trend "... That is why" rush ... with accomplices will integrate into the money rocking chair, even on the basis of the floor of the intellectual nurturing of his country ...
  27. +3
    12 June 2018 15: 31
    The author apparently wrote an article with nothing to do, this "Draft" science fiction film, what do you want from him? What denigrating history and countries? What the hell?
  28. +3
    12 June 2018 16: 34
    Draft - the film is very much about what. The author is right. Once again, to exalt the egoism of the main characters, who think only of themselves and their pleasures, and once again kick their former socialist country with the dirtiest boot. Although everyone knows that simple workers then lived much easier than now.
    It has become fashionable to make films about socialist time, and whatever the film is about, the main characters are always spread rot by the ubiquitous NKVD officers chewing in the mornings of newly born babies. The policy here is clear. To convince the people that liberal culture is the most liberal in the world. And everything Soviet is black and terrible. And it seems they are succeeding. Thriller "Cherovika" I liked. But when I watched the movie, I spit all evening. A blooper on a blooper and a blooper drives. In addition to the director’s mistakes, there are a lot of errors in the script. Well, people do not behave like the main character. Nor do their masters behave like that. And the Sinan Arcanum against the backdrop of the Kremlin causes outrage. Do we really live in order to one day lose our identity? Interestingly, the author of the film himself understands what he shot? And it is very similar at the end of the film that there will be a continuation of this nonsense if the film collects a denyuzhka from an unenlightened viewer.
    1. +2
      12 June 2018 17: 16
      Quote: indifferent
      if the film collects denyuzhku from an unenlightened viewer.

      In vain did you take such a nickname for yourself!
      "Indifferent" such crafts swallow and do not even notice where the authors took them and what they offer to take for granted. Because they don’t read books, there is no ideology, but such figures "from the bushes" draw and feed them through the media, and then adult uncles from the State Duma will be killed: and where did such spiritual unpatriots come from!
    2. +1
      12 June 2018 17: 23
      Will not collect from the audience - the Ministry of Culture will issue.
    3. 0
      12 June 2018 20: 54
      This is just a belated reaction. Previously, it was possible to make films about the valiant NKVD officers and the villains opposing them.
  29. +4
    12 June 2018 17: 29
    Lord, why did you cling to them .. In the USSR, cinema was essentially a source of knowledge. In addition, the cinema almost did not have any competitors, and the USSR could afford to experiment with the creation of a really high-quality smart educational cinema. However, this direction in the cinema has long since died out both in Russia and in the rest of the world. No one will go to such a movie. All that is being filmed now is a teenage show. Teenagers are the target audience of these masterpieces. And they really are not interested in the experiences of Gosha or any other character from Soviet history and even from high-quality films from Hollywood.
    Remember yourself at age 15. Where would you go? to War and Peace or to Gentlemen of Fortune?
    1. +3
      12 June 2018 18: 40
      what gentlemen nafig, before all bruce and jean claude van dame watched on cassettes in video salons.
  30. 0
    12 June 2018 17: 47
    Quote: AwaZ
    Remember yourself at age 15.

    Well, 15 not 15, but at twenty I went to Andrei Rublev. Almost a whole week ...
  31. +4
    12 June 2018 18: 33
    The old-timers that earlier the grass was harder and the tarragon tasted better. It’s the eternal cry of Yaroslavna. They even complained in Russia that everything is different now but nowadays .... and even the youth were not talking then ....

    I don’t share much interest in the current cinema, but I react to it calmly. There is simply a demand, and therefore there is such a cinema. The cinema is now a recreation area and not a school of life. This is because cinema is now fun without knowledge. This is a global trend. Now This is conveyor riveting. sharpened solely on quick profit. Therefore, you just need to understand and calm down. For 20 years now, how to understand it, but the old-timers do not calm down and whine. I myself enjoy watching Soviet films. But I understand that the world has changed. And with it the film industry. In the USA, to For example, too, there are no special masterpieces for a long time (especially if you remove the graphics so generally calm for a long time). This is all because people just want to consume now and don’t want to bother and understand or think something. Nobody bothers taking their grandchildren and children and downloading You can turn on and show a good Soviet film on TV, interest in books, etc. You can cut this bad taste yourself, and then it will work out. Harosh already hopes for the state. The purpose of the state is the most stupid population, the main thing is that they know the alphabet and can count to ten roughly speaking. If everyone is competent to reflect and think critically, then power will not last a year.
    1. +1
      12 June 2018 21: 04
      Well, do not be so off the shoulder. I watch movies from time to time, but among Western films worthy of them during the period 90-00x are much more than domestic ones.
      The silence of the lambs, Flying over the cuckoo’s nest, The Green Mile, Fight Club, Requiem for a Dream, Amelie, Eternal Taki, 200 Years Old, Truman Show, Avalon Mists (yes, a controversial film adaptation, but a different perspective on the classic traditions of the British Isles), Ring Nibelungen, Sin City.
      This is just what I remembered right away, like great films, maybe departing from the original source, but filled with meaning and raising serious questions.
      On the part of the domestic industry, I recall only Return, the Island, and the Master and Margarita.
  32. +1
    12 June 2018 20: 03
    But why should I suck out topics from my finger? The director works with the book, more precisely with the script. By itself, that movie is boring that the book is so-so. There are no hidden meanings or riddles or promises. Just weak everything from fantasy to execution)))
  33. +4
    12 June 2018 21: 03
    Actually the book Lukyanenko Draft is very interesting and with meanings, the film is not watched, but be sure to watch and compare with the book. The main meaning of the book is in conscious choice and in the hard work of development and evolution.
  34. +4
    12 June 2018 22: 52
    Quote: daodejin
    It’s good to be a critic - sit yourself, do nothing, just take care of others and their work. Would the author have something to read first and Draft and Chistovik, he would have tried it himself, at least imagine (I’m not talking about filming - there isn’t enough strength) how it would be on the screen, and then sit and get clever.


    Critics forget, IMHO, the main thing - THIS IS A FANTASTIC WORK. And then you can say whether it denigrates our history or not. The same Lukyanenko has a novel, "Everyone capable of holding weapons" EMNIP, So there is a part of the novel that describes Russia, which lost the German war in the 40s. Then it became the land of the Reich and finally an independent state. The truth has lost its integrity and began to consist of two parts - Russia and Siberia. What about this novel can we say that it denigrates our history ?? Maybe you shouldn’t put an equal sign between science fiction and ordinary action games, action films, horror films and other things? And most importantly, maybe you should not look for enemies under your own bed ???
  35. +5
    12 June 2018 23: 20
    I did not watch the film. So far ... But it seems that the author of the article has a persecution mania. Fiction, like a fairy tale. Everything here is figurative, mostly fictitious. If I am not mistaken, Lukyanenko is the author of the novels "patrols ..." Why does the author not smash the utilities involved in non-direct duties, the evil spirits that drive around Moscow and crow flocks interfering with Aeroflot flights? After all, what is happening on the screen in the capital? In general, the article is a minus and the question is to the moderators, but what does the article have to do with the MILITARY review?
  36. +1
    12 June 2018 23: 36
    laughing Well now what happened? winked Okay, historical films afftors are trying to pour mud, have already reached fiction laughing Once again, a pancake of inconsistencies was found. I advise afftors not to watch Star Wars or something like that, otherwise they’ll have a heart attack laughing Well, a normal film, judging by the reviews and attendance. In the first week I brought 55 lyam at the box office, in the second it was already more than 150. That is, people went, recommended to friends, and they also went. I didn’t watch it, now I'm not Russia, I do not like to watch movies in poor quality. And as I will be in the territory of the Russian Federation, I will definitely look, purely out of interest, what is so terrible there. laughing
  37. +2
    13 June 2018 06: 06
    Feature Film. Fantasy screenwriter. His fiction.

    At school in Russian, I also wrote essays.

    And how many drafts were written ...
  38. +1
    13 June 2018 08: 31
    It seems that the author has never heard of an alternative story. There is such a genre in fiction, if that.
    1. +1
      13 June 2018 16: 57
      Quote: vvv-73
      It seems that the author has never heard of an alternative story. There is such a genre in fiction, if that.

      The author of the film should apologize on his knees for insulting the feelings of the cheers-patriotic public !!!
  39. +2
    13 June 2018 09: 54
    To understand how you can spoil a work, you must read Lukyanenko's “Draft” and “Chistovik” before watching the film. Not only were the ideas of the film and books mostly not nearby, but they also distorted everything. And the types and situations have nothing to do with books.
  40. +1
    13 June 2018 10: 10
    ... I did not watch the movie :), but I will express an opinion on the article ... What surprised me in it is that we have been building for more than 25 years? If I'm not mistaken, capitalism ... and the fact that Putin sees it as the supremacy of liberal ideas and a cohesive and friendly society connected by common supranational and supraconfessional ideas is his personal, even as head of state, vision. As for the views of filmmakers - everyone can offend the artist :), they see it this way and if they took money from the state, then he, and if not, they have every right.
    1. 0
      13 June 2018 16: 58
      Quote: Nikolay73
      they see so and if they took money from the state

      And if Rosneft takes money from the state and raises gas prices, then what?
      1. 0
        14 June 2018 09: 21
        You’re strange, you take care of your selfish interests yourself, and reproach Rosneft. And in general, what does Rosneft have to do with it? There are funds (state), and if they take money there, they must carry it out in the right direction, if not, then not. The state gives money and collects taxes from NK, excise taxes on sales, exports, what doesn’t suit you specifically? Rising fuel prices or concessional lending to NK during crises?
  41. +1
    13 June 2018 11: 11
    Without this article, I would not even suspect the existence of such a film. Specially looked yesterday.
    Brief conclusions:
    The film to the book Lukyanenko has a very indirect relationship.
    I do not see any ideological diversions against the "unity of society". Just the film is frankly weak. Sorry for the time spent.

    “Putin speaks of respect for national history, of spiritual bonds, of the continuity of generations. And masters of art see the problems of their people differently ...”
    Well, there's really nothing to be done - masters of the arts are not accustomed to walking in systems. Rather, this: not all masters of art are accustomed to go about the system. request
    1. 0
      27 June 2018 04: 18
      ... Klitschko put it more interesting = hell I can even remember, but I remember that without a mat, I simply and succinctly * stick * nowhere ..
  42. 0
    13 June 2018 11: 11
    "But the masters of art have a different view of the problems of their people ..."
    Or is it the order of the top? It hurts from all the films rushing anti-Soviet .....
    Movement up, first, arrival .....
  43. -1
    13 June 2018 11: 46
    Quote: AwaZ
    Lord, why did you cling to them .. In the USSR, cinema was essentially a source of knowledge. In addition, the cinema almost did not have any competitors, and the USSR could afford to experiment with the creation of a really high-quality smart educational cinema. However, this direction in the cinema has long since died out both in Russia and in the rest of the world. No one will go to such a movie. All that is being filmed now is a teenage show. Teenagers are the target audience of these masterpieces. And they really are not interested in the experiences of Gosha or any other character from Soviet history and even from high-quality films from Hollywood.
    Remember yourself at age 15. Where would you go? to War and Peace or to Gentlemen of Fortune?

    “The genius of judo. '' ,, New Centurions. '' ,, This crazy, crazy, .... world. '' ,, Oh, lucky !!! '', etc.
  44. +1
    13 June 2018 16: 55
    By rating, the worst movie is Crimea.
  45. 0
    13 June 2018 19: 49
    The film for the man who read the Strugatsky brothers, Stanislav Lem, Jules Verne finally, The film is a complete vulgarity especially matryoshka to get me this director he made me pee in panties, Full Russophobia,
  46. 0
    13 June 2018 22: 44
    Hypertrophically fancifully shown "free labor" under socialism. All pictures of this world are sustained in severely gloomy, gray-dirty colors. The work is exclusively manual, exhausting, killing all living things, thinking ...
    I do not know the age of the author. Perhaps he just did not see the television series "How Steel Was Tempered" with V. Konkin as Pavka Korchagin. Scenes for the construction of a narrow gauge railway from Boyarka station to Kiev. Here there is exclusively manual labor, exhausting, in the pouring rain. However, these scenes were not ideologically enough, when the film was made, they didn’t scare or excite, they didn’t denigrate, and here it was immediately slandered by social reality. Or maybe the author is very middle-aged and some retired department head of the ideology of the CPSU Civil Code?
  47. 0
    14 June 2018 21: 18
    Misha labeled and EBN removed the meaning of life from the life of the country! Now Russia does not have a core, there is thieves, grabbers and graffiti!
    1. +1
      25 June 2018 06: 44
      ... EBN board closed ... But the tagged ... is quite worthy to sit in the passages and collect spitting ..
  48. +1
    15 June 2018 13: 16
    I recommend reading the original to the author. S. Lukyanenko’s book "Draft." And all sarcasm from the article will disappear. The book is not bad. The film has not yet been watched.
  49. +1
    15 June 2018 18: 23
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Lungin's “island” is an example to you. Criticize

    For me it’s such a junk movie
  50. +1
    17 June 2018 13: 39
    And can one stupid question - well, at least one of the authors of the posts "Draft" Lukyanenko read so to speak in the original source ???
  51. 0
    17 June 2018 16: 36
    It’s a pity that the article cannot be downvoted. The author is an ideological pseudo-patriot. So what's wrong with worlds with palm trees and oranges? Where do a good half of our country go on vacation? That's right: palm trees and oranges. And the rest of the time he works quite well for the good of the Motherland in his native Siberia. I would criticize the film for something completely different. Firstly, and most importantly, the film, as is now customary, has very little in common with Lukyaenko’s work. Yandex, having invested in the film, stuck out its own advertising, which looked generally obscene. And, of course, nesting dolls... This is completely beyond comprehension! What, they haven’t come up with anything else for the role of cyborg killers??? Or is this a nod to the West: well, how will they decide to show the film there - and here it is just the national exotic - a nesting doll with a predatory grin. They caved in - you can’t say anything. No. As for the artistic value... Well, so-so, to be honest
  52. The comment was deleted.
  53. 0
    25 June 2018 07: 00
    Man, have you seriously done all this? The book is 12 years old...Who is to blame that our reality has changed so much that now a political moment awaits around every corner? Then thank God that Chechnya did not fall apart, and about Arkan everything looked very real. Well, creative thought can’t keep up with reality. Orwell wrote about the communists, but to put everything in Britain closer to the skin, they say, feel how it is, imagine all this on Buckingham Bridge, and on the fjords of Scotland. And the infection hit the target right, only they did without the communists. You stop exclaiming “Masters, who are you with?!” at every occasion. I don’t see anything anti-patriotic here in this book, much less in the movie. There the question is a little different: who are you to conduct experiments with people and worlds? Supercivilization?
  54. 0
    11 February 2024 11: 40
    I'm tired of watching the bold experiments of untalented people who imagine themselves to be great directors. Film adaptations of science fiction are frankly unlucky. Starting with Solaris, mutilated by Tarkovsky, and Stalker (Roadside Picnic), and an endless series of experiments with the Strugatsky texts. For some reason, it is considered normal to take a decent novel and spoil it with “your vision.” A film script and a novel are, as they say in Odessa, two big differences. I think that to the question why, we won’t get a clear answer other than muttering about the director’s personal perception. True, for some reason the realization is not at the expense of his beloved.