to think, to comprehend how it could be paid on the screen, well, iskrima copes with the means that she has at hand, and almost sets the theater on fire. magas, city of the sun, wait for us! each ingush clan had to have its own ancestral fortress, the erzi tower complex arose back in the 15th century. how do you have fun? well, the most important entertainment is, of course, going to relatives, friends, guests, and of course , eating delicious food. the dessert is considered traditional in ingushetia - hingle with pumpkin, the dough is rolled out thinly and filled with sweet pumpkin, well, now let's take care of that very wild garlic pride of this region, i will have it in two versions, i am in charge of lamb, you are in charge of fish, we are starting the premiere, cooks on wheels, on sunday at the first, the suspect is approaching me, i repeat , he comes to me, all the pps outfits. and

the attached units are declared in full combat readiness, i’m calling, i just wanted to say, please be careful, okay, i’ll try, leave toolya alone, let me build a new life with her, or what do i tell you? i have to help with this somehow, don’t interfere, undercover taxi, premiere, from monday on the first, yes, vyacheslav mikhailovich, there is, i’m already eating. let me remind you that this is a podcast called witnesses from einstein, where we talk about who and how created classic, cult, little-known, forgotten soviet films, and today we are talking about one of these films, it can be called a cult film, shine, shine my star, we are doing this in connection with the ninetieth birthday of its director alexander naumovich metta. basically, it's unusual a film for soviet cinema, also because it is, well... multimedia, it has

a story about theater, it has cinematography, and the third aspect is painting, you can even say frescoes, it is sculpture, that is, visual art static, and this was helped to be brought to life on the screen by the wonderful production designer boris blank and two artists from the soyuz cartoon studio, who actually created these incredible colorful drawings and statues.

how was it accepted in soviet cinema? let's see exactly how this one is an artistic style that partly came from animation and was embodied on the screen. well, well, i understand that you want me to leave quickly, but i’m just in the mood to sit and chat. come on, sit down. honor, well, well, well, come on, step aside, step aside, it’s interesting, it’s interesting

that different directors are acting in small small cameo roles, what do they want to tell us with this, what kind of circus is this, but nevertheless, it was precisely this scene that these three artists had... the life of an artist of the revolution, and his for example, the reviewers perceived him with some caution, he seems to be negative, but somehow leonov plays him somehow contradictory, we like him, we get used to him, we, in general, also understand his pain and his desire to survive ,

with the passage of decades, yes, and aleksandromich mita, turning his gaze to this film, remembers this... leonov’s phrase to survive, as, in general, what was the task of the soviet artist, well, to survive in art, yes, so that your the film was not closed, so we need to change the actor, we need to go to some editing corrections, but you have to maneuver all the time, the trick is that they couldn’t just close the film, it was quite difficult, because the reporting is complicated, and money, a bank loan was taken, and in order to make any film, any studio the soviet one took out a loan from a bank, which then , after the film was accepted by the state... goskino was compensated with the help of goskino funds from goskino and this money was, as it were, returned by the studio to the bank, so it was a rather complex system, so just refuse from some kind of project, well, it was practically impossible, but that is, this is a loss, and who will cover this loss, and for mita,

this is of course a school of life in a certain sense , this film, because he had to fit into a limited budget, otherwise what we see on the screen is, in fact, in many ways a compromise on how to save money. money and at the same time make a good film, he did it perfectly, mita then developed a combination for himself, then the reviewers also used this, that on the one hand it is a film of reflections, its theme is generally quite serious, even if he sees his viewers, high school students who know nothing about the artist in the revolution, a topic of reflection, a film of reflection, a form of entertainment, an attraction - this is all bright, this is any format, any material that somehow affects you, it could even be a fire, smoke, a loud shot in the film, yes, this is everything that breaks us out of some familiar feeling from watching, everything that twitches us, everything that touches us,

let's now watch that fragment with proclova , where she plays just jeanne dark, and where the smoke starts, the fire on the screen, this is the very attraction, as bezenshtein said, which... very often, speaking about iskremas performed by oleg btabakov , they said that it was izenshtein who is such a prototype of the hero who created oleg tobakov, everyone here, she raised it, because of this, the exploiters of the dazhliya people are at the stake, hotel townspeople, we will eat her slayer and witchcraft.

and the main characters leave for the horizon to new creative achievements, discoveries, to the creation of new theaters, and looking at the fog, elena proklova, the girl kysya says that look, it’s a very poetic comparison, we call it all that the hare brews beer, and the beskremas agrees with her, they gave some dialogues and they seem to be hiding behind our horizon, in the film the bescreas dies , saving kysya, drives away the cart, actually dies from the bandit...

they also die, and iskremass must also die after them, only lyonov remains, in many ways alive, these are real artists, like the artist performed by efremov, and like iskremass, so they die we, unfortunately, have a tragedy in this a revolution that does not spare anyone on its path, even its creators and those who create its artistic world, the artistic underside, again a tragic ending, it was approved, the film turned out, but how was this film received? how did mita’s contemporaries evaluate him? well, this is a complex story, still a little mysterious for me,

because mita himself says that the film went on the shelf. what do we see from the documents? according to documents , the film was accepted at the end of 69. the film was shown at the opening of the seasons at the cinema house, it at that time it was also called the comedy about askrimas. then they showed it to the secretariat of the union of cinematographers, where people gathered who still remembered quite well the beginning of the twenties, sergei yutkevich was there , he reacts to them, somehow they don’t like all this, it feels like our hero is the eye of a drinker in the desert, well, your ending

, why does your hero die, said anatoly smut, the green one kills him, but this is a work of art, that means it means something, that’s what it means, in principle, this is how artists are treated, such generalizations, which didn’t give andrei torkovsky any peace from all the people who were watching. the era treats artists very differently, sometimes in a very unpleasant way , but it was impossible to say so frankly then, so metta convinced everyone that it was just such an accident, a tragedy, he dies there several times during the course of the film, and this reality, which interferes with our game and so on, but nevertheless its art continues, and it is precisely connected with this continuation of art change of name, because the film had already been accepted, suddenly... in the production documents at the state cinema a letter appears signed by alexander metta, this is already

the beginning of the seventies, the letter was addressed personally to the head of all soviet cinematography, alexander romanov, and mita writes that we talked to you, you advised us to change the name, and we gathered here and thought that in one of our scenes our heroes-artists sing an old romance, burn, burn my star, it seems to us that this is burning, this is stardom, yes, it's some kind a symbol of this very art , which continues to live, does not die, no matter what, and so on and so forth, let us change the name, and there is a remark, i don’t mind, it seems normal, the film changed the name, but it even had a premiere in irkutsk, yes, the film crew went, it was in the winter of the seventies, then there was emptiness, then there was some kind of failure, there were reviews, but there was no film in cinemas. according to alexander metta, the film was lying on the shelf. according to the documents this is not very noticeable,

not very visible. meta remembers that no one could write a positive review, everyone just scolded, but this is not true, everyone generally praised the film, not everyone understood it. a shelf is when a film goes down, they actually put copies of the film in the state fund on a separate shelf and from there it no longer makes it onto the screens, that is, copies of the film are not... you cannot watch it in more than one cinema, but according to the documents the film was released in the third category, this means that it simply had a very limited release, it was shown in a very small number of copies in a very small number of not central cinemas, and not immediately after this very premiere in the winter of the seventieth year, it was released already in the autumn of the seventieth year, that is, of course, it was marinated, kept, shown a little, and there is one clipping, for example from an irkutsk newspaper, where the reviewer writes such a wonderful: the film is very useful for a wide audience, and interesting, fascinating, but unfortunately, if you want

to watch it, its rental has already ended, although there are still those who want to watch it, let's return this film to the screens of irkutsk, i don’t know, i will return it whether or not well, i think that the same story happened with the film, as with many other films that today are considered cult thanks to reruns on television, color cinema, after all, it’s the same for color tvs. makes an even more spectacular movie, well, a typical situation for a capitalist economy, not for a socialist one, but mita took on his obligations and fulfilled them, and the film had an interesting distribution fate abroad, because when it got to germany, as san-mita recalled , he quickly gained cult status there, so two such films that were valued by german

youth are tarkovsky’s stalker, and woe is my star, why should we actually watch it now... rewatch this film, or maybe watch it for the first time, in order to generally think about what challenges we face what an artist must face, and in general, how to remain a creative person if you consider yourself an artist, and what models of behavior exist, well, this is what our predecessors and contemporaries offer us in the twenties, in the thirties, in general, in any difficult era. to me it seems that it can also be watched as entertainment. of course, of course, yes, he absolutely does not hide it that he always makes films that will not make you bored, alexander mita, by the way, is also a wonderful film teacher, he taught in europe, taught in moscow for a very long time, and his method is namely the creation of an effective work of art, well, he’s talking about

a film, we can be talking about any work that has a plot in its composition. knowing the laws, how the market works, how it works economics, being able to count money, he understood how to really create a film that will sell itself, and this is the main thing for cinema, but the producer does not consider cinema as an art, he measures money in money, if he bought it two, three, four times for himself, then the film is good, this is the main criterion, but the director’s task is to make a truly interesting and exciting spectacular movie, and at the same time not to upset the investor, that is, the burning star is for us an example of how a work of art is created, and an example, showing

the person who is this work of art creates an amazing combination, a multimedia combination: he tries to somehow free it, this inner freedom, it seems to me, this is ultimately what you need to watch this film for. this was a podcast of witnesses from einstein, where we, film historians natalya ryabchikova and stanislav didinsky , talk about who and how created famous, unknown, forgotten cult soviet films, about why you need

to watch them now, how to find new meanings in them and how to get the most out of them. this podcast was dedicated to. great, among the emperors we have two people, catherine.

catherine was the last accident on the russian throne after the era of palace coups, which means the last coup, the last accident, that’s how it happened, how catherine became great, let’s try to figure it out today. hello, this is a historical podcast russia-west on the swing of history, with you pyotr romanov and sergey solovyov, today our topic is catherine ii. here , summing up the reign of catherine the great, karamzin, a classic of our national history, he wrote that peter surprised europe with his. victories, and catherine taught europe to these victories.

in general, there were many very solemn statements about the reign of catherine and that peter was just the dawn, that catherine brought light to russia, there was a statement of this kind that peter created people in russia, it was catherine who put her soul into them, well a little pompous, so to speak, pathos. but in principle , the pre-revolutionary russian encyclopedic dictionary is still the same thing, but more calm speaks in language, but the essence remains the same: her reign is one of the most remarkable in russian history, its dark and bright sides had a tremendous influence on subsequent events, especially on the mental and cultural development of the country, with this reign in russia began...

catherine’s father, or rather, then sophia, augustus and frederick of angalserb, christian augustus served in the prussian service, rose to the rank of general filmmarshal, although he received general filmmarshal under the patronage of catherine ii. in 1742 he inherited this the principality of angalzerbst after the end of the senior line of the dynasty, and catherine’s mother was johanna elisabeth of holstein-gottorp, she is such a very interesting lady, she was simply kicked out of russia under elizabeth. there was even a moment that they could expel catherine along with her, yes, yes, this lady served, she served frederick the great, as such

an informal diplomat on special, including not quite, so to speak, correct instructions, and it so happened that catherine was her second cousin to her husband pyotr fedorovich, or rather karl peter ulrich. ekaterina, this is not the first and not the last woman in russian. throne, but she , of course, was radically different from everyone else, if we talk about the number of favorites in the era of catherine the great, then she probably had more than all other empresses combined, we must remember how it all began, catherine in at a very young age they married pyotr fedorovich, the heir to the russian throne, since elizabeth was bezet, he was discharged from galshtinia. they tried to raise him as a russian heir, but i must say, it didn’t work out, he was a german, a german and remained, the relationship between the spouses did not work out, at the beginning there seemed to be a warm

period, at the very beginning, but then everything went to hell, i must say that from the very beginning catherine dreamed of crown, she was still in germany, being in her duchy, and the principality of angalzerb, she dreamed of being lucky, she was reconciling. herself, including the russian crown, and, as klyuchevsky wrote, catherine liked the russian crown much more than her fiancé. necessary to say that life at elizabeth’s court was downright bad for catherine. she was oppressed by elizabeth, that is, she was treated as an appendage, an heir to the throne, which led her, firstly, to participate in palace intrigues, she became a master of palace intrigues, on the other hand, to search for lovers on the side, not even by chance... ... the birth of her son pavel, and many associated it with a special kind of activity of sergei soltykov. the husband was generally indifferent to her, consulted with her, by the way, even about favorites, but they

they were completely alienated from each other, they didn’t even hate each other, they lived separately. elizabeth, dear aunt, yes , she oppressed catherine in every possible way , just to understand to what extent she was once forbidden to cry for her father when her father died, that they say the loss is not great, the ranks are not great, and therefore mourning.

at the same time, this brought her up, brought up duplicity in her, of course, that is, the ability to pretend, the ability to intrigue, and the ability to see one’s own benefit, and to pursue it steadily, despite this, an attitude of truth it changed a little after not even a little, but quite a lot changed, freedom became greater, when she gave birth to the heir paul, in russia some considered catherine to be frederick’s creature, well, such an exile to russia, so to speak prussian, she was at court in berlin. yes, being a german, she, she wanted to be not a german on the russian throne, she wanted to be a russian empress, russian, one might even say, in her essence, in the essence of her politics, in essence her attitude towards russia when she ascended the throne , that it turned out that frederick’s mood, in general, deteriorated quite badly,

because instead of... catherine tried very hard to be nice to both the court and the russian people in general, she didn’t want to.

russian interests. catherine, in fact, wrote: “i wanted to be russian so that the russians would love me.” and she learned this ability to please even before she ascended the throne. she realized that in russia you need to give gifts, and if someone liked something, including from the item. her everyday life, she gave it, she, as she herself wrote, with her head, plunged into all the squabbles of the court, delved into court gossip, intrigues, became at the court of elizabeth, well, how can it be, and how can one not take care of outfits, began to take care of outfits, gave gifts, scattered money left and right in order to get supporters, from her it worked out, though the money that was allocated to her for maintenance was 30,000 rubles, in general this is a substantial amount, she began to not have enough , she got into debt, she took on debts, took on loans

for this... hanbury williams, who is very clear, so correct , correctly assessed the potential catherine, and gave her quite apt characteristics, foreign influence in russia

is not new. in principle, the participation of foreigners then, mainly the french, in the coup carried out by elizaveta petrovna is well known, but here the british helped catherine a lot, with the funds that she spent on bribing the guards, let’s say, yes, and with some advice, and so she wrote to april. 756, just to the english envoy, what do i not owe for the conduct that sent you here, like a guardian angel, and united me with you by bonds of friendship, here, here, here, you’ll see, if i ever wear a crown, then i will partially owe this to your advice, so it’s very curious that, despite this foreign support , influence, i

don’t remember that any of the historians really emphasized this, in a negative way, that they contributed to putting her on the throne, in general with peter ii. it’s interesting, on the one hand, the person seems to be, well, the traditional point of view, yes, that he seems to be empty, in general, a rather pathetic ruler, and this is largely true, on the other hand, he was a very active ruler, uh, he tried to delve into state affairs, even tried to imitate peter i, but he immediately aroused hostility to himself because of this mania of his to imitate prussia, because for the shameful end of the seven-year war for russia, although, by the way, catherine had already withdrawn the troops from prussia, yes. peter ii wanted to fight with denmark for the holstein lands, and for this he tried to withdraw the guard from russia on this danish campaign. the guard didn’t want to leave st. petersburg at all, let alone more on some kind of campaign for some kind of holstein,

and then there is this gopthorpe question, yes, connected with the disputed territories, and between, so to speak, the homeland of peter, peter fedorovich and denmark, respectively. he wanted to fight the building already in alliance with prussia. the decrees that were prepared under peter were, in many cases, prepared under elizabeth, one of the commissions established under elizabeth . there were also commissions established under elizabeth petrovna. in particular, this is how, perhaps partly by chance, on the initiative of elizabeth’s former associates, the famous a manifesto on the freedom of the nobility, according to which the nobles received the right not to serve, the most important, by the way, the most important document, which catherine would later develop into a salary.

strangers, the fool shouted at the courtiers, and he even wanted to arrest her, but he was dissuaded from this at the last moment, in general, peter ii was informed about the danger of a coup, he simply did not take it seriously, he did not take many things seriously, including this, when the coup began, firstly it was supported by significant parts of the capital’s residents, not only the nobility, not only in the case of elizabeth, these leipkumpans, yes, including the ordinary population of st. petersburg, and this distinguishes the palace. as a result of which catherine came to power from previous russian palace coups, after the overthrow, peter, who showed lack of will, refused to resist, he tried to flee to kranstatt, then he revealed that kronstatt had already attacked catherine and

so on, he signed a renunciation and wrote plaintively to her, already under arrest in robsha, your majesty, i also ask you, which according to you fulfilled my will in everything, to let me go to foreign lands, with those that i am your majesty... yes, about the third letter, the second letter is in a similar spirit, the third letter, famous, with the message about the death of peter, mother, it is not in the world, but no one thought of this, and how could we think of raising our hands against the sovereign, but the sovereign was in trouble, we were drunk, and

he also argued with prince fyodor, boryatinsky, before we had time to separate him, he was no longer there. there is a version that he died naturally, but this is only one of the versions. and we continue our historical podcast, today our topic is catherine ii. there is an interesting point here, she didn’t just learn russian well, she spoke it brilliantly, spoke this language brilliantly, and became one of the leading writers at that time. and she wrote that she just didn’t write, plays, and articles, fairy tales and parables, and so on. and it’s interesting that even in these fairy tales, parables, and... there is an element of this catherine’s philosophy, in this regard, she was, well, in my opinion, she was a successor, in this case, of the views of peter the great because she's with...