Military Review

Finals "Stalingrad"

155
Finals "Stalingrad"



“Drama Fyodor Bondarchuk“ Stalingrad ”did not make the short list of nine candidates for the Oscar in the nomination“ Best film in a foreign language ”.

The film "Stalingrad" Fedor Bondarchuk initially had no chance of winning, said Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky at a press conference held on Friday in Moscow. “From the very beginning, I told Fyodor Sergeyevich:“ You don’t even hope. ”Firstly, in“ Stalingrad ”, Lend-Lease, where the American stew is not shown at all, is not focused on the American role in the victory, not enough politically correct selection of actors”, - the minister said, noting that “Oscar” - “is an extremely politicized история".

Medinsky compared the situation with the Bondarchuk film with the story that took place at the Cannes Film Festival with the film “Burnt by the Sun-2: Imminence” by Nikita Mikhalkov in 2010. "15 minutes standing up all clapped and only thought: it will be the" Golden Palm "or" Grand Prix ", but in the end does not receive any prize at all," - said Medinsky. In his opinion, this is because the film "shows the greatness of the Russian spirit."

On the given opinion of Medinsky about the American stew and Lend-Lease, I would like to note that the picture in the picture is the American stew with soldiers in the trenches, and, for example, burning tank M3 "General Grand", would reflect the help of the Allies, which was at the end of 1942. So the showing of such a contribution to the victory by the Allies, I think, would go only for the good of the picture.

And I would like to say that we already have a certain tradition when sending any projects for competitions. If the product is of high quality and receives a prize, the officials are all right. If, however, we expose a frank hack like “Burnt by the Sun - 2” and this is followed by the expected failure, immediately begin talking about “extremely politicized stories”
Author:
155 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. saag
    saag 10 February 2014 07: 53
    +21
    And there are no blacks there, people of non-traditional orientation, what an Oscar, for example, in Brazilian TV shows there’s a complete set - gay, prostitute and black, in addition to the main character
    1. sds555
      sds555 10 February 2014 07: 59
      +50
      That's what you need to make films !!! And what Bondarchuk-bullshit shot !!
      1. Shurale
        Shurale 10 February 2014 08: 40
        +52
        Bondarchuk the cattle and the bastard is gradual, I’m ready to knock him off just for the Inhabited Island, which I won’t touch, the Pagan will ruin everything !!! am
        1. alex-s
          alex-s 10 February 2014 09: 41
          +1
          Bondarchuk the cattle and the bastard is gradual, I’m ready to knock him off just for the Inhabited Island, which I won’t touch, the Pagan will ruin everything !!! am

          That's for sure! I think at the Berlin film festival his film would be a success!
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. rolik
            rolik 10 February 2014 10: 42
            +5
            Quote: me by
            , I’m only ready to beat him for the Inhabited Island,

            Well, yes, the Inhabited Island, he messed up nobly. I looked only at the beginning, then I did not begin to look at this guano.
        3. I do not care
          I do not care 10 February 2014 10: 04
          +26
          but in general the best final scene of Stalingrad is
          1. rolik
            rolik 10 February 2014 10: 46
            +19
            Quote: me by
            the best final scene of Stalingrad -

            The most accurate review was given to this film by the respected "Goblin".
            1. runway
              runway 10 February 2014 12: 19
              +8
              This video gives a very accurate, detailed, and most importantly, true assessment of the film Bondarchuk. Fedya! DO NOT SHAME SURNAME!
            2. Charley
              Charley 10 February 2014 13: 32
              +2
              damn! neighing to tears !!!
              1. rolik
                rolik 10 February 2014 14: 08
                +4
                Quote: Charlie
                damn! neighing to tears !!!

                Really funny (goblin in his style), if it weren’t so sad. I wonder where our cinema school went? Or she died in the 90s when films (the majority) began to appear on the screen, which you won’t look at without tears and which you turn off and forget after three minutes of viewing.
                After all, there were war films that even now you watch with pleasure "Officers" "Confrontation" "White Sun of the Desert". And suddenly, at once, everything disappeared somewhere. Now on TV there are only serials about cops, where you do not switch, everywhere is black and wet. I just got sick of this guano.
                1. operrus
                  operrus 10 February 2014 15: 13
                  +3
                  And you forgot about the theater, where they put such things for state money that there are no words at all. And what’s interesting, all these directors are indignant when they are told that they don’t put it, they are free artists and they can do anything, find an answer who will give you money for this obscenity and bet it, and let other people create state money and educate young people.
                2. The comment was deleted.
            3. st.lt
              st.lt 11 February 2014 20: 26
              +2
              damn and got sick
        4. Col.
          Col. 10 February 2014 10: 20
          +9
          Quote: Shurale
          Bondarchuk cattle and the bastard gradual

          It may be sharply stated, but essentially true. I could watch his "Inhabited Island" for no more than 20 minutes, then I spat and turned it off. In my opinion, he is simply obsessed with the fixed idea of ​​surpassing the Americans in the number of special effects, and sneezing for the content. I am sure that if his great father was alive, he would quickly shake out of him any desire to even think about directing!
          Veterans have already spoken about the film "Stalingrad" many times, calling it a spit into the soul of the people. I myself saw somewhere in the Internet a poster with the inscription: "Fedya, we understand everything - you removed the fascist propaganda"!
          1. Andrey57
            Andrey57 10 February 2014 11: 59
            +5
            I am sure that if his great father were alive, he would quickly shake out any desire from him even to think about directing!

            His father also shot a "masterpiece" called "Quiet Don" with Western clowns in the lead roles, he also fucked up everything that is possible in Sholokhov's novel, does anyone remember this "masterpiece"?
            My great-grandmother was right, who said that they would not be born from aspen oranges!

            Veterans have already spoken about the film "Stalingrad" many times, calling it a spit into the soul of the people. I myself saw somewhere in the Internet a poster with the inscription: "Fedya, we understand everything - you removed the fascist propaganda"!


            My grandfather, who reached the Zeelovsky heights near Berlin and reached Port Arthur in the war with the Japanese, would spit Bondarchuk in the face, and he would be right !!!
          2. Shurale
            Shurale 10 February 2014 12: 55
            +3
            I am sure that if his great father were alive, he would quickly shake out any desire from him even to think about directing!

            In my opinion, Bondarchuk is an actor, and an actor of the same role, we have such ones also abroad, well, they get one role well, for example, Louis de Phineas, Pierre Richard, for example, Tabakov, whoever he plays, he is the same everywhere same. Well, what am I talking about, Bondarchuk has one wonderful role, in the movie House of Fools he plays the down perfectly, PERFECT. I'm amazed. I suggest that he still stop doing directing and leave to work by vocation, his downs are perfect.
        5. kris
          kris 10 February 2014 11: 41
          0
          Quote: Shurale
          Bondarchuk the cattle and the bastard is gradual, I’m ready to knock him off just for the Inhabited Island, which I won’t touch, the Pagan will ruin everything !!! am

          Putin's united Russia is good: Bondarchuk, Mikhalkov, Moses, Kadyrov, etc.
          Who licks the power of zhoo poo, he is at the trough!
        6. kot11180
          kot11180 10 February 2014 20: 08
          -2
          But his father fought, he was a good man, "They fought for their homeland" and now I look, the bastard betrayed his father's memory
      2. leks
        leks 10 February 2014 10: 26
        0
        What can I say about the film, the veteran has already said everything, there is nothing to add.
        Unfortunately, this is a commercial project, and this project was successful, all the costs for the adaptation of this film were worked out, the film was recognized as successful.
        In total, the box office of the film amounted to 66,7 million dollars, including 51,7 million dollars in domestic rental. "Stalingrad" thus became the highest grossing Russian film of the post-Soviet era.
        The estimated budget of the film was 30 million US dollars, 10 of which were allocated by the Cinema Fund, and the rest were received under an investment agreement with VTB Capital.
        1. Col.
          Col. 10 February 2014 14: 37
          0
          Quote: leks
          In total, the box office of the film amounted to 66,7 million dollars, including 51,7 million dollars at the domestic box office. "Stalingrad" thus became the highest grossing Russian film of the post-Soviet era.

          But I generally consider this bourgeois style to evaluate films at the box office. Well, let's say Roma Abramovich will buy some movie for 100 million and watch it alone on his yacht ... One spectator - but the highest grossing movie! .. NUMBER OF AUDIENCE - this is the main indicator of success.
          1. leks
            leks 10 February 2014 21: 08
            0
            Col.
            But I generally consider this bourgeois style to evaluate films at the box office. Well, let's say Roma Abramovich will buy some movie for 100 million and watch it alone on his yacht ... One spectator - but the highest grossing movie! .. NUMBER OF AUDIENCE - this is the main indicator of success.

            Something I do not understand you Colonel, but is it that box office is not formed on the number of spectators !?
            On average, the ticket cost 350 rubles was for this film, using the calculator you can find out approximately how many people visited the film, and so here you will find out your main indicator !!!
            But for you all still remark gentlemen of criticism)))
            According to a public opinion poll conducted by VTsIOM at the end of 2013, respondents called Stalingrad the “2013 Movie”. 12% of respondents spoke for this, three times more than the runner-up movie "Legend No. 17" (4%)
            I myself honestly admit that I like Legend No. 17 the most.
            Further statistics:

            According to various aggregators of reviews, about 60% of film critics approved of “Stalingrad”:
            According to the Kinopoisk portal, 64% of positive reviews (based on 55 reviews).
            According to Megakritik.ru, 58% of positive reviews (based on 24 reviews) [50].
            According to Criticanism.ru, the average reviewer rating was 63 out of 100 (based on 66 reviews) [51].
            On the site Imdb.com, the rating of the film in the voting of users was 5,2 points out of 10.

      3. 0255
        0255 10 February 2014 16: 28
        +1
        and here's another opinion of Dmitry "Goblin" Puchkov about "Stalingrad"
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 10 February 2014 08: 04
      +36
      To hell with him and Medinsky, I will express my opinion on the film. I watched the film and I didn’t like it, there was so much noise and advertising before the release. Too much unrealistic and frankly cinema-like and again Jews. And then for whom we make films for ourselves or for amers. Any film about a warrior is the history of the country, and they are chasing Oscars for their own PR.
      1. dimarm74
        dimarm74 10 February 2014 08: 14
        0
        Our point of view to the west also needs to be promoted. And then they are all sure that America won the war. And it’s good that the Western audience has already watched this film. Europeans will not watch another format. This must be taken into account.
        1. Refund_SSSR
          Refund_SSSR 10 February 2014 08: 46
          +27
          Quote: dimarm74
          Our point of view to the west also needs to be promoted

          What is the point of view? About the commander hysterical? About idly staggering boobies (the language doesn’t dare call them wars) in front of the windows on which the Fritz machine guns are aimed? About fighters who fight not for mothers, sisters, wives and daughters ... in the end, for the opportunity for the Red Army soldiers to cross the river, but fight for a girl?

          No, we don’t need such a kin ...
          1. Normal
            Normal 10 February 2014 09: 10
            +11
            Quote: We refund_SSSR
            No, we don’t need such a kin ...

            I agree. In general, after the 9th company and the Inhabited Island of Bondarchuk, I do not look - there is enough Americanism in the original.
            And Medina is not an authority. Of course, politics is politics, but as a rule, those films (from foreign ones) that are not made according to Hollywood cliches are nominated for the Oscar, those films whose directors go their own way and do not make another pseudo-Hollywood blockbuster.
            1. cosmos111
              cosmos111 10 February 2014 09: 56
              +14
              Quote: Normal
              another pseudo-Hollywood blockbuster.


              (((((der blockbuster >>>> watched exactly 20 minutes >>>> spat towards the screen >>>> sent his wife to >>>>> came home drank a glass of whiskey >>>> thought, lay down to sleep >>>>> Fedya B dreamed of a Nazi uniform and horns, had a headache >>>>> got up, rolled another glass, felt better >>>> went to write comments on the site VO (((((((
              Eh, Fedya, Fedya, I'm not tired of taking off guano >>>> al boblo doesn't smell.
              For the next film Fedi, I will be ready ((((((
              1. Normal
                Normal 10 February 2014 10: 30
                +6
                Quote: cosmos111
                (((((der blockbuster >>>> watched exactly 20 minutes >>>> spat towards the screen >>>> sent his wife to >>>>> came home drank a glass of whiskey >>>> thought, lay down to sleep >>>>> Fedya B dreamed of a Nazi uniform and horns, had a headache >>>>> got up, rolled another glass, felt better >>>> went to write comments on the site VO (((((((

                Thank! Laughing to tears. In the morning we cheered up. good

                Don’t look at Fedya B. ... don’t ... negative
          2. dimarm74
            dimarm74 10 February 2014 09: 47
            -3
            At least that there was such a battle as Stalingrad in general. And then they don’t even know this.
            1. st.lt
              st.lt 11 February 2014 20: 28
              0
              the Germans remember he heard
          3. alex-s
            alex-s 10 February 2014 09: 50
            +3
            "Call of duty stalingrad" is much more realistic !!!
          4. Fin
            Fin 10 February 2014 11: 01
            +4
            Quote: We refund_SSSR
            About fighters who fight not for mothers, sisters, wives and daughters ... in the end, for the opportunity for the Red Army soldiers to cross the river, but fight for a girl?

            "Battle for Masha" (in my opinion Rogozin said). It's bad that the film went to other countries to distort reality. Because of such Bezdarchuks chasing Oscars, our grandfathers and fathers will soon begin to be presented as militant homosexual barbarians, to please the West. I hope this is his last film.
            1. Ruslan
              Ruslan 10 February 2014 13: 24
              +2
              dreaming. the film paid off, now Fedya will not calm down soon-)
          5. leks
            leks 10 February 2014 11: 18
            0
            About fighters who fight not for mothers, sisters, wives and daughters ... in the end, for the opportunity for the Red Army soldiers to cross the river, but fight for a girl?

            In your opinion, it turns out that the soldiers protecting this girl did not fight for the daughter of their sister or future wife, do you think that this girl is not the daughter of the Soviet people? and future mother of Soviet children?
            You contradict yourself, write about fighting for mothers, daughters, sisters, and the girl she is so-so no one, you had to either bang her as an enemy of the people because the Germans were there before us, or drive her into the neck from her own house where all her relatives died.
          6. dimarm74
            dimarm74 10 February 2014 13: 10
            -3
            Bondarchuk made the film for foreign audiences as well. Well, they will not watch "Only old men go to battle" or "And the dawns here are quiet" ... not that mentality they have. And it's time to understand that we can't make such films either. Well, we have no more people like Leonid Bykov. Here I see a lot of hunters with bile. Easy to criticize isn't it? So? Maybe if they are so smart and can do anything. Then make a decent movie about the Second World War. What is the problem then? You look here know everything and know how. Why don't you shoot anything. Your films are not visible, dear opponents.
            1. Armata
              Armata 10 February 2014 13: 46
              +5
              Quote: dimarm74
              Then it’s bile that I’m watching a lot of hunters. Is it easy to criticize? So? Maybe if they are so smart and you can do everything. Remove then a decent movie about the Second World War. What is the problem then? You look here know everything and know how. Why don’t you remove anything. You can’t see your films, dear opponents.
              The reason is simple. There are no clowns here, there are people who have the word conscience in the first place. But this word is by no means familiar to any bondarchuk. It is perfectly legal that people here talk about the films "The Dawns Here Are Quiet", "Only Old Men Go to Battle", etc. Try to look at them, and after that if your language turns to call modern creators geniuses and lovers of truth, then a stone in your eye.
            2. Fin
              Fin 10 February 2014 13: 54
              +4
              Quote: dimarm74
              Bondarchuk made the film, including for a foreign audience. Well, they won't watch "Only old men go to battle" or "And the dawns here are quiet" ... not the mentality they have. And it's time to understand that they won't be able to make such films here either.

              Budget money was given to him on patriotic a film, not a melodrama for the west. Do you think there are no normal directors? Enough, only the loot, as always, leaves the approximate.
            3. rolik
              rolik 10 February 2014 14: 24
              +3
              Quote: dimarm74
              Well, they won't watch "Only old men go to battle" or "And the dawns here are quiet" ... not the mentality they have.

              It appears that we need to adapt to their mentality ??? Will it not be too fat. It is they who, watching our films, must understand our mentality. Well, who will not watch, then he does not need. And to make a movie in order to please only them, while emasculating the very greatest feat of our people, who won this war. It means not only to be a opportunist, but also to spit at those who won this victory. When the father of this bald "genius" was filming War and Peace, he, it seems to me, first of all thought that this would be a real movie about the feat of the Russian man, and last of all he thought about getting an Oscar. He did not try to adapt to the mentality of the Western man in the street, but showed the mentality of the Russian man, and got to the point. This film will forever remain in the history of cinema as a great picture, and the film of his son will simply be forgotten in a few years.
            4. Walk
              Walk 12 February 2014 09: 36
              0
              The fact of the matter is that they not only watch, but also reshoot. In particular, a remake of "The Dawns Here Are Quiet ..." is being filmed in the west. And Bondarchuk really spoils everything he touches. He destroys and distorts the very idea.
      2. Kapitan Oleg
        Kapitan Oleg 10 February 2014 09: 25
        +9
        I also watched, the impression was a computer game, although I don’t argue the film was made soundly, but it was made. He is CREATIVE, but he is not at all attracted to cinematography. After the epic "Liberation", I cannot watch modern films about the war.
        1. acute
          acute 10 February 2014 10: 12
          +8
          Why? And "They Fought for the Motherland", "Hot Snow" but you never know. It's just that those films were created based on the works written by the participants, this is not an invention, but the truth of life. Yes, and the directors had other tasks, not box office, but a truthful show. Yes, and they shot films, not stepping far from the primary sources. And Bondarchuk put a fairy tale that in no way corresponds to reality, based on his view of events
          1. PANZER
            PANZER 10 February 2014 12: 19
            +2
            Quote: akut
            And the directors had other tasks, not box office, but a true show.

            The task was to show the feat of the soldier, the feat of the victorious people. The film about the war carried an ideological burden that, despite everything, the people survived, in the test of the great war, deprivation, hunger ....
            such films that were shot in Soviet times about the war will no longer be
            1. dimarm74
              dimarm74 10 February 2014 13: 30
              +1
              Was much truth in Soviet films? My grandfathers, both front-line soldiers ... otherwise they were not called fairy tales. Yes .. they shot well, sincerely, but they had little to do with front-line reality. Be objective.
              1. acute
                acute 11 February 2014 17: 17
                0
                So what would they say about Stalingrad then?
          2. rolik
            rolik 10 February 2014 16: 41
            +1
            Quote: akut
            But Bondarchuk set up a fairy tale that is in no way true

            He did not stage a fairy tale, the fairy tale is "Avatar" of Spielberg, but shot the product for profit. That's all.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Armata
        Armata 10 February 2014 11: 57
        +4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Any film about a warrior is the history of the country, and they are chasing Oscars for their own PR.
        The film "The Dawns Here Are Quiet" was awarded this award. "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" was also awarded an Oscar.
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 10 February 2014 13: 44
          +3
          Quote: Mechanic
          The film "The Dawns Here Are Quiet" was awarded this award. "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" was also awarded an Oscar.

          Zhenya, but the directors of these films did not chase the Oscars, they filmed for the country. And the fact that the Americans liked it later, well, not probably, but the films are good. Ask the people here on the website. What do they think about these films and see the reviews about " Stalingrad ".
          Hi hi
      5. smersh70
        smersh70 10 February 2014 12: 03
        -4
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        . I watched the film and I didn’t like it,

        after all the comments, he sat down and looked at the film from the point of view of an amateur of patriotic Soviet films about the war. 1. He did not make a film about battle scenes, as was the case with Ozerov.
        2. In general, the film rigidly reflects reality, that is, the cruelty of the Germans, the rigidity of Soviet soldiers.
        3. The fights were made in Hollywood, but could be done in the best traditions of the Soviet Belarusfilm or Mosfilm. Like the Dnieper border.
        4. Well, the fact that the German fell in love, well, to hell with him. The theme of love is relevant now))) I wanted to make ilm fashionable.
      6. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 10 February 2014 16: 29
        +1
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        and again the Jews.

        Well, where without them. But compared to Hollywood, Fedya is a child, almost all of the main characters there are called David, but if the character is Sarah. laughing
    3. tomket
      10 February 2014 08: 49
      +7
      Quote: saag
      And there are no blacks there, people of non-traditional orientation, what an Oscar, for example, in Brazilian TV shows there’s a complete set - gay, prostitute and black, in addition to the main character

      but there is a failed Swedish family
      1. CALL.
        CALL. 10 February 2014 11: 37
        +4
        Soon we will bury the last warrior of the Great Patriotic War. At the thought of this, my heart squeezes in a chilling longing. Our veterans are leaving, leaving. And already there is no one to expose in lies and outright "even" those moviegoers who drove the stream of films "telling the truth" "Stalingrad", it is difficult to convey the impression of this "masterpiece". It is difficult to contain profanity. One thing is clear: the filmmakers lack not only elementary knowledge of the realities of that war, but also the elementary ability to think logically. "Humpbacks" and "bloopers" follow here in almost every episode. Bondarchuk did not need to tackle the Stalingrad theme. It's sacred. A far-fetched relationship, a pretentious situation on the verge of idiolism, vulgarity and contempt among our fighters, tedious details that are provided by a voiceover - all this is an extremely unsuccessful attempt to exploit the military theme.
    4. AVV
      AVV 10 February 2014 10: 56
      +2
      Quote: saag
      And there are no blacks there, people of non-traditional orientation, what an Oscar, for example, in Brazilian TV shows there’s a complete set - gay, prostitute and black, in addition to the main character

      Yes, in Stalingrad there was also LGBT people, not enough, with Obama on the tank and with McCain in the kitchen eating the American stew !!!
    5. jjj
      jjj 10 February 2014 11: 24
      -1
      I didn’t look, but I condemn ...
    6. mirag2
      mirag2 10 February 2014 13: 05
      0
      And most importantly, they wouldn’t have approved of him either on Echo or on Rain, if they had shown how the Communists-Stalinists drove the Jews to the Arctic Circle, all their intelligentsia, who suffered there along with the rest of the convicts-criminals (!) - would have returned to themselves to the podium of Latynin + Khakamada and the same, they would stand listening to them with their mouth open and say: yes, we are such fools, they tortured and tortured everyone, forgive us, do you want a little gas? can this help atone for our guilt?
      “Then we would have grabbed the prizes, and the Madonna would have come to the Kremlin to shake hands with Putin.
      Only to us such popularity, to the detriment of our national interests, to hell is not needed.
      And Bondarchuk-. Long tell why.
      1. alone
        alone 10 February 2014 19: 33
        0
        And the point is not in stew, and not in lend-lease, even in blacks. The Ministry of Culture of Russia was obliged to say so. It is necessary to justify the costs of the film. And the film did not get there, because it really does not roll. I remember father Bondarchuk, truly the Great chelovek.Odin "The Fate of a Man" is worth something. But the son is not good enough for him so far.
  2. domokl
    domokl 10 February 2014 07: 54
    +5
    I’m not a specialist in the field of cinema, because I will only express my personal opinion. I do not agree with the author. Not because Russian films do not receive anything, but because in recent years the results of this competition generally do not reflect the true state of affairs in the cinema. viewers. Vote with their ruble, dollar, euro ...
    1. Hon
      Hon 10 February 2014 09: 10
      +8
      Quote: domokl
      I’m not a specialist in the field of cinema, because I will only express my personal opinion. I do not agree with the author. Not because Russian films do not receive anything, but because in recent years the results of this competition generally do not reflect the true state of affairs in the cinema. viewers. Vote with their ruble, dollar, euro ...

      So in the audience vote Bondarchuk and Migalkov crap
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Greenwood
      Greenwood 10 February 2014 11: 07
      +3
      People just turned on loud advertising, that's all. The same situation was with the Upcoming, which went to a lot of people in the movies and who later spat on what they saw * a ram.
      1. kaktus
        kaktus 10 February 2014 11: 45
        +1
        "dude takes everything boldly
        everything turns into g ....
        and if for ..... taken
        it just spends less energy " wassat
        from the Internet poems
  3. invisibility
    invisibility 10 February 2014 07: 56
    +33
    I have a feeling. that Medinsky is thumping! For he is not adequate.
    “From the very beginning I said to Fyodor Sergeevich:“ You don’t even hope. ”Firstly, in“ Stalingrad ”Lend-Lease is not shown at all, where the American stew is not focused on the American role in the victory, there is not enough politically correct selection of actors
    Not! Posto Fedkin movie about anything! Of course, I don’t give a damn about the opinion of some movie actors, still there was, albeit a scanty hope, that the film was shot for Russia. Fedya, do not touch our story! Reorient on video clips, shoot some science fiction! Do not touch the holy! And review the roles and films of the father ...
    1. stroporez
      stroporez 10 February 2014 08: 00
      +6
      Quote: invisible
      Reorient on video clips, shoot some science fiction! Do not touch the holy!
      ----------- Well, or let them read books .....
    2. Cetegg
      Cetegg 10 February 2014 08: 39
      +11
      "Nature rests on the children of geniuses!"))) And Bondarchuk the elder was undoubtedly a genius! After watching the film adaptation of "Inhabited Island", films where Bondarchuk Jr. I don’t look at the director in principle!) PS Maybe he just wanted to surpass Mikhalkov's insanity with his "citadel" ?!)))
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 10 February 2014 08: 45
        +12
        Yes, his father knew how to shoot a movie, "They Fought for the Motherland" to shoot like during the war!
        1. Cetegg
          Cetegg 10 February 2014 08: 53
          +13
          I argued with young friends (from 18 to 23) in the gym about which films about the war are better. Convinced them to watch: "They fought for their homeland" and "The battalions are asking for fire." Everyone agreed with me that the films that are being filmed now "were not lying around"!) We wondered why they had not seen them earlier. Now almost everyone is hooked on Soviet military cinema) ps Here they say one - there is not enough special effects)
      2. Djozz
        Djozz 10 February 2014 11: 42
        0
        Nope! Bondarchuk (senior) at the end of his life, also shot a frank hack "Quiet Don" with an actor - a fagot in the title role, "And on the old woman, there is a hole!"
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. invisibility
          invisibility 10 February 2014 12: 11
          +2
          It’s hard to call that film Bondarchuk’s film. Italian producers, English, imagine Sholokhov in wretched English request ? And take into account that no one has ever seen the original, it remains with the Italians!
          So, to figure out how much of the film from Bondarchuk Sr. is very difficult. The fact that the film is not Russian is a fact.
          1. acute
            acute 10 February 2014 13: 13
            +3
            A purely commercial film for profit
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 10 February 2014 11: 44
        0
        And in the role of Vronsky is the glamorous Zverev.
  4. Jeka
    Jeka 10 February 2014 07: 58
    +18
    Medinsky compared the situation with Bondarchuk's film to the story that happened at the Cannes Film Festival with Nikita Mikhalkov's film Burnt by the Sun-2: Anticipation in 2010. "15 minutes standing, everyone clapped and just thought: it will be the" Golden Palm "or" Grand Prix "

    This is the saddest thing. The Burnt by the Sun film series is simply wretched and disgusting. And our government gave money for these films. They applauded probably not because the film was good, but because they made themselves look like idiots.
  5. stroporez
    stroporez 10 February 2014 07: 59
    +3
    but cho, he said everything correctly. but how is a victory over fascism without an American stew ....... and, in general, an American stew --------- the basis of democracy .......... .. wassat
    1. kavkaz8888
      kavkaz8888 10 February 2014 08: 09
      +3
      stroporez (2) Today, 07:59 AM
      "... American stew --------- the basis of democracy ..."

      But what about sneakers? Got it! Snickers stew must be jammed. So that heartburn does not torment. Particularly loyal are sasa solas.
  6. predator.3
    predator.3 10 February 2014 08: 00
    +14
    Until now, I have not had the luck to see the entot "Stalingrad".
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. invisibility
      invisibility 10 February 2014 08: 13
      +5
      For your happiness!
      Five times I tried to do it. After each idiotic blooper, he spat on and off.
      View turned minutes on 10 ...
  7. kamis51
    kamis51 10 February 2014 08: 04
    +12
    The film is an honest hack, with a claim to please the West with special effects, etc., but nature is breathing on the children of smart, talented people, so all talk about clamping an allegedly magnificent work is nonsense!
  8. sigizmund472
    sigizmund472 10 February 2014 08: 11
    +11
    "Burnt by the Sun-2", "Stalingrad" ... What Oscar ??? For what??? For this blatant crap? Rather, Nikita will receive an Oscar for the stage with the carrying of the Olympic flag laughing By the way, did you notice that the commentator called him in this scene a "classic" of Russian cinema? recourse
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. invisibility
      invisibility 10 February 2014 08: 15
      +6
      This is because he likes to play hopscotch. Still...
    3. stroporez
      stroporez 11 February 2014 10: 22
      0
      You don’t tease the jackal, otherwise it’s not far from the "Olympic Games" trilogy .............. and this is not easy to endure ... ....
  9. Humpty
    Humpty 10 February 2014 08: 18
    +4
    saag SU
    "And also there are no blacks, gay people, what an Oscar, for example, in Brazilian TV shows there is a complete set - a gay, a prostitute and a black man, in addition to the main character"

    I’ll clarify a little, in a real African movie, there should be a black man with a decent family, an intelligent and strong-willed woman of Jewish appearance, a decent p * or, a wise Jew and a drunk white man.

    Bndrchuk should be judged for fraud.
    1. tomket
      10 February 2014 08: 53
      -1
      Is all this in Ryan?
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Hon
      Hon 10 February 2014 09: 34
      +1
      "Thin Red Line", "Flags of Our Fathers", "Letters from Iwo Jima", "Pianist" is there that too? Stop thinking in stereotypes.
      Winners in the category “Best Foreign Language Film”
      1. “War and Peace” (1968)
      2. "Dersu Uzala" (1975) Akira Kurosawa (joint production of the USSR and Japan)
      3. “Moscow does not believe in tears” (1981) by Vladimir Menshov
      4. “Burnt by the Sun” (1994) by Nikita Mikhalkov

      Award winners in the category "Best Documentary"
      1. "The rout of German troops near Moscow" (1942), directed by Leonid Varlamov and Ilya Kopalin.
      1. kavkaz8888
        kavkaz8888 10 February 2014 10: 25
        +2
        Hon (4) Today, 09: 34
        "... Stop thinking in stereotypes ..."

        "Thin red line" 98th year, only put the squeeze on the Union, took a breath and began to fully instill tolerant schizu;
        "The flags of our fathers" I will not say, I have not looked.
        "Letters from Iwo Jima" is a movie about the Japanese. "Afrojaponchik", I think, even for Hollywood too much (this is me on the topic of absence-presence of blacks)
        "Pianist". Is there something that is not clear? We have evil fascists and unfortunate Jews. All. Quite a self-contained set. (I liked the movie by the way)

        Next
        "... Winners of the Best Foreign Language Film category ..."

        1. “War and Peace” (1968) There are no questions
        2. “Dersu Uzala” (1975) by Akira Kurosawa (joint production of the USSR and Japan) here is a politician, the key word is Primorye.
        3. “Moscow does not believe in tears” (1981) by Vladimir Menshov There are no questions. Although I think the foreigners did not take the film in the same way as we do, there are not many other concepts.
        4. “Burnt by the Sun” (1994) Nikita Mikhalkov's 94th year !! Like, look! Only We gave the wild Russians freedom and democracy, they immediately learned to make films!

        Sometimes an Oscar resembles a Nobel Peace Prize.
  10. bomg.77
    bomg.77 10 February 2014 08: 19
    +5
    The more movie advertising, the worse it is! I noticed this for a long time with our films. After the films the next day, nothing remains in my memory!
  11. Lantau
    Lantau 10 February 2014 08: 20
    +10
    Fedor, there is no need to shoot a film about "Kursk Bulge".
  12. raketnik
    raketnik 10 February 2014 08: 21
    +8
    now the next blockbuster is being filmed in the states: American tanks storm Berlin in April 45 real story real heroes (by Amer’s standards of course) starring Mel Gibson, this movie will be - we’ll sell it. soon about the defense of the Brest fortress marines removed
    1. stayer
      stayer 10 February 2014 08: 46
      +7
      Quote: raketnik
      now in the states they are shooting another blockbuster: American tanks storm Berlin in April 45 real story real heroes (by Amer’s standards of course) starring Mel Gibson

      To go nuts! If this is true, then go to the cinema and they will also raise a striped flag over the Reichstag?
    2. Same lech
      Same lech 10 February 2014 09: 43
      +2
      Here's an interesting duel of the PANTHER AND American PERSHING tanks — rare shots.

    3. Ruslan
      Ruslan 10 February 2014 13: 38
      +1
      Did they storm? =) The Germans let them go themselves, so that not only the Russians were in Berlin. here ... attack heroes =)
  13. ReifA
    ReifA 10 February 2014 08: 25
    +12
    On the advice on the Internet, I looked at the German Stalingrad in 1993, if I am not mistaken, and then Bondarchuk in 2013. I think the film did not receive anything, not because of any conspiracies, etc., but the film is simply frankly weak.
    The film itself was repeatedly discussed everywhere, I personally became disappointed, expecting to see an epic about the defenders of the fatherland, and received shusi-musi, seasoned with effects and Jews ..
  14. NDR-791
    NDR-791 10 February 2014 08: 26
    0
    the film is positioned as a tragedy, so really in the history of the Battle of Stalingrad was not found for
    F.S. real tragedy? How much Americans love to distort a movie story and then their Enemy is at the gates
    built on the real story of the duel Zaitsev and Koenig.
    1. tomket
      10 February 2014 08: 52
      0
      "Enemy at the Gates" is a European film.
    2. sds555
      sds555 10 February 2014 09: 05
      +5
      Only this duel is more or less true, and everything else: the situation, the characters are shot in the spirit of Goebels cliches, how political workers are shown in the scene where they gathered Khrushchev would have envied Dr. Goebels and much more. In general, the film Enemy at the Gates is a typical anti-Soviet film
      1. Greenwood
        Greenwood 10 February 2014 11: 11
        +1
        It's amazing why our new films about the war have become as garbage as the same "Enemy at the Worth" ?!
  15. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 10 February 2014 08: 26
    +1
    The film turned out to be more than mediocre, and as for special effects, this is also a question for both place and place. The only thing that I remember was the ashes in front of the glasses.
  16. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 10 February 2014 08: 27
    +2
    "I would like to note that the display in the picture of American stew at the soldiers in the trenches, and, for example, the burning M3" General Grand "tank, would reflect the help of the Allies, which was at the end of 1942. So showing such a contribution to the victory from the side of the allies, I think I would have gone only for the benefit of the picture. "

    He put the author - because this idea is idiotic. Whatever the quality of the film, insert such crap into the film to show the US contribution to the victory? Well you know ... request Something I did not see in American films about WWII, even reminders that the allies feel so comfortable in Europe only because the Red Army grinds the most combat-ready units in the east.
    1. tomket
      10 February 2014 08: 33
      +2
      the thought just reflects who made what contribution, the Americans stewed meat and "Mass graves for seven" and we are the destruction of the Wehrmacht and thousands of lives, such examples for a long time would remove the controversy about whose contribution turned out to be more important in the end. By the way, in Soviet films, they neglected to show the "second front" - stew.
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 10 February 2014 08: 55
        +3
        Quote: tomket
        the thought just reflects who made what contribution, the Americans stewed meat and "Mass graves for seven" and we are the destruction of the Wehrmacht and thousands of lives, such examples for a long time would remove the controversy about whose contribution turned out to be more important in the end.

        Clever already knows everything, but stupid just thinks that the battle of Stalingrad was won thanks to the stew.

        Quote: tomket
        By the way, in Soviet films, they neglected to show the "second front" - stew.

        All this was organic in Soviet films, but to focus on this? ..
  17. Was mammoth
    Was mammoth 10 February 2014 08: 29
    +7
    I read in the newspaper:
    "My daughter is watching TV. Bondarchuk's program is on STS.
    I ask:
    - What are you watching?
    Daughter:
    - About Fyodor Burunduchka. "
    smile
  18. vjatsergey
    vjatsergey 10 February 2014 08: 32
    +2
    I personally did not like the film, and Fedor did not go to his father, he was a talent.
    1. Cetegg
      Cetegg 10 February 2014 09: 09
      0
      Here in the film "Downhouse" about the hero F.B. ml .... I think the same assessment of him as a director!)))
  19. demotivator
    demotivator 10 February 2014 08: 40
    +8
    The film was rated by a veteran general. There is nothing to add here. Bondarchuk screwed up in full. It’s the same from all Afgan that he got only "9th company", and so with this film.
    Quote: Humpty
    Bndrchuk should be judged for fraud.

    Judge not judge, but to return in vain spent state money on an unsuccessful film should be. And then both Mikhalkov and I settled down to satisfy personal ambitions at the expense of the state. And it’s necessary, as in the West - find sponsors who are ready to take a chance and invest money in your ideas, and then pay them off from the profits received. That would be more honest.
  20. Frate
    Frate 10 February 2014 08: 48
    +9
    Quote: invisible
    I have a feeling. that Medinsky is thumping! For he is not adequate.
    “From the very beginning I said to Fyodor Sergeevich:“ You don’t even hope. ”Firstly, in“ Stalingrad ”Lend-Lease is not shown at all, where the American stew is not focused on the American role in the victory, there is not enough politically correct selection of actors
    Not! Posto Fedkin movie about anything! Of course, I don’t give a damn about the opinion of some movie actors, still there was, albeit a scanty hope, that the film was shot for Russia. Fedya, do not touch our story! Reorient on video clips, shoot some science fiction! Do not touch the holy! And review the roles and films of the father ...



    Indeed, Nature rests on the children of talented people. Once upon a time, the children of the handshaking parents created a fight for creating clips. Naturally, the lion's share of orders and secured sales were provided by them. The money was spinning atomic. For a few minutes of talentless slicing, customers paid tens of thousands of dollars. Crises, defaults flew by, good uncles from the party circle helped to effectively manage the accumulated money. But, they would have lived in their own creamy terrarium. But no - you want fame. But, at the same time, even with money. And, behold, clip maker Fedor swung at "great" projects. But, inside, there is emptiness, a little soul like a moth of a party project. Sucking of conjuncture products from the finger began. Uncle Nikita treated our President to our President's family vodka Konchalovka on TV, and the next day we saw how the Main Cinema Spectator and Film Critic of the Country blessed and congratulated Fedya on the "masterpiece" of the 9th company. And the guys were invited from that company, who (what to do!) Confirmed that everything was in fact, like in a movie. Another expensive high-flown trick "Spy" could bring a smile of regret. But, Stalingrad ... True, Fedya, don't touch the sacred! Did you read the tushonka ?! Yes, at least ten Oscars were given to you, with the Palm Branches - what does it matter to us? You are a barren man! Shake the dust off the box and watch your father's film "The Fate of Man" and be ashamed of your vulgarity!
  21. stayer
    stayer 10 February 2014 08: 57
    +6
    Stalingrad did not like at all. Everything is sucked out of the finger (or whatever else). It’s just that before films were made based on the works or memoirs of the participants in the events, there were consultants (participants in the events). And now only consultants on special effects. I am disappointed. I think the politicization of the contest has nothing to do with it. Such a film cannot win. Or competitors (specifically at this competition) should be even more frank
  22. kind
    kind 10 February 2014 09: 01
    +2
    I didn't watch this movie. There are already films about Stalingrad that have become classics, and Bondarchuk did not bother working in the archives and communicating with eyewitnesses of those years. I decided that he would create a "masterpiece" himself, but the people cannot be fooled.
  23. tomket
    10 February 2014 09: 05
    +4
    Quote: Vladimirets
    All this was organic in Soviet films, but to focus on this? ..

    In my opinion, "Stalingrad" was originally sharpened for the Oscar, otherwise there would not be so much dirt. Medinsky laments that they did not give it because they did not reflect the contribution of the Americans to the Victory, well, they would show their real contribution in 42 in the form of stew and "steel coffins" against the background of our heroic struggle, I don’t understand that they will be shy about the truth if it they want to contemplate Medina's opinion in the West.
  24. ed65b
    ed65b 10 February 2014 09: 23
    +6
    Of course, in the film "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" there was also no American stew, but the film won an Oscar. You just need to shoot well and truthfully. if I took up large-scale cinema, I would have reviewed all Batin films for a start.
  25. sigizmund472
    sigizmund472 10 February 2014 09: 23
    +10
    After watching the film "Stalingrad" (it was hard to see it, to be honest), I reread the novel "Life and Fate" by V. Grossman once again, based on which this "masterpiece" was supposedly filmed. Nuuuuu, Fedya, it's not even motivated or even named. In my opinion, clips are your ceiling. Change surname. You have no right to dishonor her.
    1. ed65b
      ed65b 10 February 2014 14: 05
      0
      Quote: sigizmund472
      After watching the film "Stalingrad" (it was hard to see it, to be honest), I reread the novel "Life and Fate" by V. Grossman once again, based on which this "masterpiece" was supposedly filmed. Nuuuuu, Fedya, it's not even motivated or even named. In my opinion, clips are your ceiling. Change surname. You have no right to dishonor her.

      By the way, the series based on Grossman is much more interesting and truthful.
  26. UzRus
    UzRus 10 February 2014 09: 24
    +5
    There was information that a Russian director was shooting the film "Panfilov's 28" for public money. So let's compare a film for the state budget and a film for their own money. And something tells me that the second film will be much more interesting and even without special effects. And "Stalingrad" ... I think that this film should have been given some other name, then the sediment from watching it would have been different ...
    1. kavkaz8888
      kavkaz8888 10 February 2014 19: 23
      0
      http://28panfilovcev.com/

      Link to 28 Panfilov’s. Here you can help with money
  27. Tihas
    Tihas 10 February 2014 09: 36
    +3
    "Stalingrad Fedi B." - a libel on our Great ancestors. The hand does not rise to write separately "Stalingrad" as applied to this liberalistic hack.
  28. Pushkar
    Pushkar 10 February 2014 09: 51
    -1
    Dear, why is everyone opposing father and son? Not all dad's films are undeniable. Together with the talented Sholokhovskaya "The Fate of a Man" - a heavy, boring, super-expensive four-part "War and Peace". Try to watch it, you will fall asleep on the first episode. Even a bouquet of the best actors in our cinema does not help.
    1. ed65b
      ed65b 10 February 2014 14: 08
      0
      Quote: Pushkar
      Dear, why is everyone opposing father and son? Not all dad's films are undeniable. Together with the talented Sholokhovskaya "The Fate of a Man" - a heavy, boring, super-expensive four-part "War and Peace". Try to watch it, you will fall asleep on the first episode. Even a bouquet of the best actors in our cinema does not help.

      You shouldn't be so about "War and Peace" the film is full of tragedy and truly large-scale scenes. That only is the panorama of the Battle of Borodino.
      1. 11111mail.ru
        11111mail.ru 10 February 2014 20: 16
        0
        Quote: ed65b
        What is the panorama of the battle of Borodino worth.

        What are the wolf hunting scenes? They became classics (remember the comedy "Peculiarities of the National Hunt"). Here you will believe that history repeats itself: the first phenomenon = tragedy, the second phenomenon = farce (I mean genres).
    2. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 10 February 2014 20: 12
      0
      Quote: Pushkar
      - heavy, tedious, super-expensive four-part series "War and Peace"

      Yes, you are an esthetician, then read the book in your hands. By the way, I read it completely as a teenager, but the impression of the initial viewing, as the films became available for rent, didn’t get any worse, I mean that at first I watched the movie you didn’t like, and when I matured, I read the novel.
  29. iwind
    iwind 10 February 2014 09: 57
    +1
    Yes, Stalingradfilm is not really weak, it is far from the same "Breskaya Fortress".
    A medina .. he is mu @ # $%, I’m not the most patriotic person, but his words even killed the Minister of pancake culture.
  30. calocha
    calocha 10 February 2014 09: 59
    +2
    I believe that such serious films should be made only in the presence of veterans and with criticism of veterans. The time in which they lived is better than us. And then we’ll soon see how they will show how the Russians take off their pants in the front and fly to the Fritz to attack. palm branch in danger .....
  31. Kuvabatake
    Kuvabatake 10 February 2014 10: 07
    +4
    There are two "great" directors of films about the war in the country: Bondarchuk Jr. and Mikhalkov ....
  32. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 10 February 2014 10: 09
    +9
    Spielberg is a normal man and makes excellent films, I consider "Saving Private Rain" one of the best films about the war, there is no need to compare some Fedya Bondarchuk with him, the modern public is slowly degrading, they are not interested in watching films that make you think, but in this category all the Soviets immediately get there, then let's do something simpler, here Fedya gives what "people hawala", don't be afraid about gays and other evil spirits, soon they will appear, they will shoot some film about the love of the SS-sheep and the NKVD- Schnick, who met on a dark night because no one understood them, look here at once and "the relationship of the NKVD and the SS" and "acute problems of our time", then immediately the bag of Oscars will roll off and will still be standing for a long time applauding.
    1. Lantau
      Lantau 10 February 2014 10: 14
      +1
      "acute problems of our time"


      Well said!!!
  33. Poppy
    Poppy 10 February 2014 10: 40
    +1
    but I do not agree with such sweeping criticism
    I myself shot this film, saw how seriously they approached the shooting, saw how people reacted in the audience when watching and I think that although the film is not a masterpiece, it definitely cannot be attributed to failures, it awakens patriotism, as opposed to most modern films
  34. shitovmg
    shitovmg 10 February 2014 10: 59
    +1
    I'll put in my five cents. The title is loud (fucked up) and advertising. My friend came for the New Year, asked to put on a look, intoxicated with advertising. I warned right away that the film was about the manifestation of forms of love in extreme conditions, using the example of 2 couples. Only time and place are associated with the big name "STALINGRAD" ...
  35. bunta
    bunta 10 February 2014 11: 50
    +2
    Something in the movie "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" I have not seen American stew, Shermann tanks and lesbian love. Nevertheless, in 1981 he received an Oscar.

    So Mr. Medinsky is the same for me as Fedya.
    1. calocha
      calocha 10 February 2014 13: 50
      0
      Midinsky in shares !!!! Curator and accomplice Bondarchuk and Mikhalkov ....
  36. Rif
    Rif 10 February 2014 12: 16
    +1
    There is an opinion-study by A. Menyalov about this film, the video is interesting!
  37. Navy7981
    Navy7981 10 February 2014 12: 16
    +2
    Alas, I also bought an ad, and I was forced to watch like a betman, that is, in the middle I forgot the beginning, because there was no reason to think. The military component is the nonsense of a 2nd grade school graduate for the mentally retarded, everything else is a cheap comic strip for the same graduates. Bandarchuk once again confirmed the brilliant ability to give guano for a masterpiece.
    I have a wild anger from the fact that if in my current activity, I do something not with the quality that I guaranteed, then I bear financial responsibility for this, and this "genius" "creates" another frank joint and the whole pancake is in chocolate ...
  38. Altona
    Altona 10 February 2014 12: 19
    +1
    I will speak from the point of view of the face "I have not seen, but I condemn" ... How many I have not watched modern films on a historical theme, none conveys either the essence of what is happening, or the spirit of the times ... Everywhere they try to sniff a pseudo-humane idea with a pseudo-lyrical embodiment and it turns out impossible nonsense ... A film about Kolchak's "love" against the backdrop of the revolution and civil war; a film about the touring "drug addict" Vysotsky; a film about a "wonderful" tank that was supposed to stop Zhukov; Mikhalkov's "creations" are generally a separate song ... And they write about this film that they "fought" there for the girl Katya, nicely and in a philistine way ... Is it worth watching this creation?
  39. Ross
    Ross 10 February 2014 12: 22
    +1
    Quote: alex-s
    Bondarchuk the cattle and the bastard is gradual, I’m ready to knock him off just for the Inhabited Island, which I won’t touch, the Pagan will ruin everything !!! am

    That's for sure! I think at the Berlin film festival his film would be a success!

    Hypertrophied vanity of young adolescent consciousness! Love the special effects of Hollywood? Then I will come to you! The strange glory of Oscar eclipsed everything for him.
  40. EvilLion
    EvilLion 10 February 2014 12: 43
    +2
    To beat Bondarchuk on the bus and burn the bus with copies of the "sralingad", that would be a worthy reward for this brute.
    1. acute
      acute 10 February 2014 13: 10
      0
      You can not say that. In America, another film, set in the traditions of Soviet cinema, would not have been watched at all. This film is for them, but not for us.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 10 February 2014 13: 23
        +2
        Then let him take off in the USA with American money and not show up in Russia.
      2. kotvov
        kotvov 10 February 2014 13: 52
        0
        if the film is for them, then what kind of money is it for us. the next h..n. these figures of art have generally lost their sense of proportion. mashkov said: the state should allocate money, and the director should create what he wants.
  41. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 10 February 2014 13: 05
    +2
    <<< “The drama of Fyodor Bondarchuk“ Stalingrad ”did not make the shortlist of nine candidates for the Oscar in the nomination“ Best Foreign Language Film ”. >>>
    Outraged by some kind of servility, the ingratiation of our film bomber before the Oscars and other Western film festivals! The impression is that the main task of the creators of our films, moreover, shot with budget money, is to "please" the jury of these film festivals, and the interests, opinion of the Russian people, for whom, it would seem, the film should be made is of little interest to them. And since all these "juries" are extremely politicized, in them, as well as, in general, in the Western gamemocratic community, Russophobic sentiments dominate, our "filmmakers" are forced to "take them into account" when making films and for this distort the historical truth, the realities of the events that took place, to stick out all the dirt that defame the Russian people, while forgetting about its greatest historical role in world history!
  42. acute
    acute 10 February 2014 13: 08
    +1
    Quote: smersh70
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    . I watched the film and I didn’t like it,

    after all the comments, he sat down and looked at the film from the point of view of an amateur of patriotic Soviet films about the war. 1. He did not make a film about battle scenes, as was the case with Ozerov.
    2. In general, the film rigidly reflects reality, that is, the cruelty of the Germans, the rigidity of Soviet soldiers.
    3. The fights were made in Hollywood, but could be done in the best traditions of the Soviet Belarusfilm or Mosfilm. Like the Dnieper border.
    4. Well, the fact that the German fell in love, well, to hell with him. The theme of love is relevant now))) I wanted to make ilm fashionable.

    It's not that the German fell in love or not. the fact is that at that time the probability of such a fact was reduced to practically zero (due to many circumstances).
    And about cruelty in general is not clear? Cruelty is different. sometimes a brutal hand-to-hand fight, and sometimes the shooting or killing of civilians. what are you talking about? And then, do you know something about that cruelty more than ours? Have you been there? So do not shake the air. The whole film of Bondarchuk is fiction (cruelty as you understand it) is also a hundred percent fiction, a man who has never experienced anything close to war. All Hollywood movies are exactly that way. The conversation is about that. that the plot is sucked from the finger and made in the best traditions of Hollywood, i.e. This is a purely commercial film and Russian incomprehensible
    1. smersh70
      smersh70 10 February 2014 13: 15
      +1
      Quote: akut
      that at that time the probability of such a fact was reduced to practically zero (in

      by the way, the Germans also made a film a couple of years, I don’t remember the name how their soldier defected and fell in love with a Belarusian girl. It’s also a difficult film.
      Quote: akut
      And then, you know something about that cruelty more than ours7

      but how do you differ from me. I’ve even been at war, I’ve seen worse
      Quote: akut
      What were you there

      and what were you there winked at least talked a lot with veterans, residents of many villages in Belarus.
      Quote: akut
      the plot is sucked from the finger and made in the best traditions of Hollywood, i.e. This is a purely commercial film and Russian incomprehensible

      but I don’t mean that here you don’t have a historical chronicle of battles, like Ozerov’s. And the fact that the Russians are incomprehensible, be responsible for everyone.
      1. acute
        acute 10 February 2014 13: 23
        +2
        I don’t know what war you were in, but not for sure. if you have afghan then not one you were there. I am writing about the Great Patriotic War, and what you are talking about and how you position yourself are very indecent on your part. What did you see worse in the war (and which one) ?. I think the war was not worse
      2. acute
        acute 10 February 2014 13: 55
        -1
        Even in this, we (and I, too) have become different. We all began to measure the ruble. This is not always true (I think so). There are values ​​higher, moral (maybe a little arrogant), but it is
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 10 February 2014 13: 40
      +1
      Quote: akut
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      . I watched the film and I didn’t like it,

      This is my phrase, the rest is not mine.
      1. acute
        acute 10 February 2014 13: 52
        0
        Sorry, just a technical error.
  43. stalkerwalker
    stalkerwalker 10 February 2014 13: 08
    +2
    At least for the second time "Stalingrad" is being discussed at VO.
    The first time at the time of release on the screens, and now, when many watched it.
    I will not discuss it, much less protect it, since I myself am not enthusiastic about what I saw.
    As a commercial project, the product was a success.
    And in terms of reality, compliance with reality - "... do not shoot the pianist ..." (c). Fedya, with his creation, once again reminded the world of Stalingrad, of the epic, crucial battle not only of the Great Patriotic War, but also of the Second World War. In any case, no one filmed anything about El Alamein ...
    It is necessary to take into account the contingent of forum participants taking part in the discussion, most of whom know thoroughly the course of not only the Battle of Stalingrad, but the entire Great Patriotic War. And here, on the site, "battles of local importance" about the causes, course and consequences of battles and battles that took place in the USSR do not subside for a day.
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 10 February 2014 13: 34
      +2
      Quote: stalkerwalker
      And here, on the site, "battles of local importance" about the causes, course and consequences of battles and battles that took place in the USSR do not subside for a day.

      A mineseram Let me remind you that discussing the artistic values ​​of films on the military-political site, which is called "non-format".
      There has already been a similar precedent with the discussion of "Once upon a time there was a woman", the plot of which is much farther in time from the present day, and there is no one to ask "Was it all like that?" As a result, the discussion of the film turned to inter-party showdowns with the cry "So are you against the Soviet regime?"
      Separate the grains from the chaff ...
      Do not be Internet patriots more than you really are ...
      Learn to respect the opinions of others ...
      Do not look into someone else's closet in search of skeletons - clean up your thoughts.
      1. smersh70
        smersh70 10 February 2014 13: 47
        0
        Quote: stalkerwalker
        As a result, the discussion of the film turned to inter-party showdown with the cry "So are you against the Soviet regime?"

        laughing good
  44. Galinanp
    Galinanp 10 February 2014 13: 10
    +5
    I remember at a meeting with Russian filmmakers, Putin dropped them below the plinth with one brief remark, saying that everything rests on you to beg for money, and a lot of money has been invested by the state, but you can’t see the output. Over all these years, not a single painting was created that would be comparable to Soviet classics.
    1. kris
      kris 10 February 2014 15: 01
      +1
      Quote: GalinaNP
      and a lot of money has been invested by the state, but the output is not visible. Over all these years, not a single painting was created that would be comparable to Soviet classics.

      but they (the "filmmakers") don't care!
      the loot is mastered!
  45. Brother
    Brother 10 February 2014 13: 17
    -1
    Hmm, I watched "Stalingrad" in the cinema, people of different ages came to the film, an elderly woman was sitting to my left, and a man of about 50 to the right, no one said a word for the whole film (I’m speaking in general), silence, only once some the young ones behind me vyaknul something, but quickly calmed down (probably they confused the film with "American Pies"). When the film ended, the people sat for about 10 minutes, then got up and quietly went to the wardrobe, their faces were satisfied, the people liked it, no one squealed that they supposedly showed something there, everyone was fine, not Golden Palm, but the film is very good for the modern audience. I don’t know which cinemas you go to, but either you haven’t looked, or you have come to purposefully look for “not historicity, and not the truth” in the film, or you have come to a feature film as a documentary, or you are so fashionable, that "everyone is throwing mud, and I will throw mud", you do not understand that modern cinema with special effects and computer graphics cannot claim any kind of reliability (it is expensive, and there is no revenue). Modern cinema is a work of fiction, where fiction prevails over truth, but people like it, and this can and should be steered (educate new people), because everyone likes "Saving Private Ryan", and this is (my pointless and nobody's opinion) then the same as "Stalingrad". I love Soviet cinema, and I do not throw any stones in its direction.
    Here veterans are immediately asked "was it like this, or not," it was something like this - http://warfiles.ru/show-45954-yanki-gou-houm.html, not combed, not gloss, not a movie in general! In no case do I claim that I know more than a veteran of the Great Patriotic War, but human memory in the old years tends to be erased, and it needs to be refreshed. And I do not offend or insult the veterans (let the disease seize me if this is so), these are Holy People - Honor and Glory to Them, God grant them health!
    1. acute
      acute 10 February 2014 13: 34
      +1
      No, it's just that for Americans this film is clearer. For a Russian person (in my opinion) the film should be more truthful or something. I can't even get the idea right. Bondarchuk made a battle film, but it cannot be put on a par with such as "Hot Snow!" The battalions are asking for fire "," They fought for their homeland "," HIS battalion "," And the dawns here are quiet ", etc. Honestly, I don't even know how to explain it to you. These films are more powerful or something
      1. acute
        acute 10 February 2014 13: 48
        0
        So you would write why you minus. Really don't like it? So she will not get worse from this. And doctors do not recommend keeping emotions in themselves
        1. Pushkar
          Pushkar 10 February 2014 14: 01
          +1
          I like and agree with you. Therefore, plus.
        2. Brother
          Brother 10 February 2014 16: 28
          0
          I didn’t minus anything for you.
          Compare and overlay works of different EPOCH at least to look at the difference, at least it’s not logical (the well-established classics, the standard of picture quality, thought, acting are Soviet military dramas of 1972, 1975, 1985, 1989 and Russian cinema, which is still chosen from the ruins of this clay ear of the USSR), can it be better to compare Soviet cinema and Soviet cinema? The USSR has been gone for 25 years, and Russia as its main component is no longer what it is, what can I say, it differs even from itself 10 years ago. Nobody will just do anything. Russian cinema that everyone would like to see, be proud of him, but it is better that everyone advises him to die completely, hmmm, but what does everyone want then? What, directors are falling from the sky? Actors, scripts, post-production masters, make-up artists, stuntmen and so on? Where to get those who make movies? Where is the store selling the movie industry located? In Russia, when they show der_mo, everyone is outraged that they say it’s cruel, scary, terrible, and when they don’t show der_mo, everyone starts looking for him ...
          1. acute
            acute 11 February 2014 10: 07
            0
            I didn't get it at all. what you wanted to convey. here is a clay colossus and Soviet and Russian cinema, but I did not understand the main thing. In Soviet times, when, as the liberals say, "there was tough censorship," so many excellent works were born in all types of art. Now that there is no censorship, a great work is something out of the box. Where are they geniuses, where are they transferred7 everything was clouded by one god of the golden calf, well, people have become more undemanding "people hawala"
            1. Brother
              Brother 11 February 2014 12: 17
              0
              The people have become even more demanding, cinemas have appeared where they show only copyright, art-house, indie and other films, 4DX attractions have appeared, themed cinemas have appeared, demand creates supply, and as a rule, at the end of the week there will not be crowded there. Censorship now exists and it has not gone anywhere (the viewer himself is the censor, and not special colleges, as in the USSR, which decide what you can and cannot watch), and the success of Soviet cinema is only due to the fact that ANYTHING else was not shown. had its own, tailor-made filmmaking industry, which developed in a vacuum, the plots were the same, the people were constantly given the same thing, and they simply wanted to rest, and how from the 80s Rambo's "vidics" began to appear (who killed Soviet soldier) and others, hawala with a bang! Let me explain once again, compare Soviet cinema with Soviet cinema! With the collapse of the USSR, all the well-known studios that made the product (MosFilm, SoyuzMultfilm, etc.) rotted in their pavilions, dirt, devastation, no one wants to do anything, the bosses do not pay salaries, people who left, who died, who else survived where to get professional masters? There are no cameras at all, but when it turned out that an American or Japanese camera shoots ten times better, then you can go crazy. Filmed here in Russia some kind of action films for 3 kopecks, all sorts of "Brigades" and other nonsense appear, because there is no clay colossus, who will decide who will watch what? And the people are at a loss, there is no independence, it turns out there were so many things, their eyes run up, so people for 20 years slowly begin to decide for themselves what to watch and what not to watch, they don't like going on the Internet and write a devastating review, give a minimum score to thematic site and go further, look for what you like.
              Here is a wonderful Soviet film "Only" old men "go to battle", do you want to shoot a sequel? Prequel, sequel, remake? Or maybe we will leave Soviet cinema alone, so that it remains as you and I know it, maybe we don't need more Soviet cinema, it went away with the USSR, and if they shoot a Soviet film now, then what kind of Soviet will it be? What attributes of Soviet cinema do you know? If good, then Soviet, if bad, then Russian ?! About the calf - work for free, be a volunteer!
      2. calocha
        calocha 10 February 2014 14: 03
        +1
        Looks like we have a genius craving for justice ... But Fedka decided to the West .. to lick and enter the World History of Cinema ... Eccentric however.
  46. 31231
    31231 10 February 2014 13: 18
    +2
    Fedya made a movie for foreigners, but they did not understand him. As a result, many did not understand in Russia and did not understand in the West.
    Fedya, go shoot cartoons.
    1. I am
      I am 10 February 2014 14: 36
      0
      Cartoons ???????? What are you ???? Let the Germans better go help the true German cinema to shoot about plumbers and the campaign, and preferably under a tree, well, etc .......
  47. jjj
    jjj 10 February 2014 13: 35
    +3
    All these phenomena occur within a single scenario. The world is trying to impose the identity of socialism and National Socialism, Stalin and Hitler. Then come the artistic revelations of Soviet horrors and atrocities. And Hitler will already look like a defender of the civilized world from the eastern barbarians. The script runs with might and main. It’s just interesting, under what sauce will the Holocaust be handed over?
  48. The comment was deleted.
  49. JonnyT
    JonnyT 10 February 2014 13: 39
    0
    Fedya sold his soul for green candy wrappers. He made a movie not for the people, but for Ksyusha Sobchak
  50. ed65b
    ed65b 10 February 2014 14: 19
    +3
    My grandfather in Stalingrad fought in intelligence, managed to question him a little in view of his childhood, but I remember that he said that it was very scary. And I also remembered at first how to kill one of the Muslims from the units that in the district fighters were drawn out of habit of the deceased and there he says everything was shot, the Germans will wait and wail from the mortar for ten corpses instead of one heel. a couple of times since it stopped gathering. then the battles became fierce in general, everyone hadn’t had it before. He fought on the tractor, on the one hand, the Germans say, on the other hand, we throw a grenade sometimes, you will have time to throw back praise at you and you won’t have time to honor, you’ll squeeze into the ground. then he was hurt, he says yes, his own crawled under fire no one came out to help. I asked him why? because he speaks scary and everyone wants to live, and merit is not great to die. gradually the soul becomes stale hard you become.
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 10 February 2014 14: 26
      +3
      Quote: ed65b
      My grandfather in Stalingrad fought in intelligence, managed to ask a little

      Viktor Nekrasov, for his "unpatriotic" book "In the trenches of Stalingrad", at one time, as they say, was pressed in.