and the checks are already in flight conditions, just the same with the instructions with him compiled on different types of fly. there is a difference of type a of course there is, but starting from the number of passengers ending. well, including the comfort of passenger comfort, of course, the layout of the aircraft. naturally, somewhere there is a video system, somewhere there is no video system. yes , completely different designs are being prepared for someone else's board, of course, yes. we are exactly the same as if there was one, we are just trained in all the necessary checks. naturally, that is not the case. so what do you tomorrow they say that you are flying and at 7:37. and the day after tomorrow will be before the fishing trip, of course, this happens. well, this means that i am allowed on all these types of aircraft. but yes, yes, yes, yes, come on, well, it doesn’t happen that they taught you for 300-20, but they put it on 350 and they say to her, well, somehow you’ll figure it out. there, it's also a plane. of course not in so many films. there is

a relationship between flight attendants and pilots, right? and so ask a question, i do not understand the question. okay, good relationship between a flight attendants and pilots, of course, and they are, but it's exactly the same. mm, there are novels in the office. that's right, in the same way, we have some kind of novels, but i look precisely at uh, according to my personal statistics. here, as a rule, couples are pilots stewardess stewardess, then goes to work. here, well, nevertheless, everyone does not continue to live happily together now, but i think that hmm if you work as a stewardess, probably, personally, i would like to have, but a stable link that they spend the night every every day every night exactly houses. yes, unfortunately it does not always carry us. you can afford it sometimes and

maybe say dear, i will arrive, for example at 4:00 in the morning, and you are away, for example, for 12 days. here, well unfortunately there may be some delay, tag its terms or any other reason. or, maybe a change of rail is like this. i think for a woman, this is a heavier psychological load, this endless regimen. family life mode aviation life, they do not match. they don't match at all. it seems to me that this is especially expressed with women, who have children with whom something can constantly happen. they demand for themselves. there is even much more attention than a snowdrift or a spouse. yes, unfortunately, i understand that you still like it. well, of course, i like it. if i didn't like you, i wouldn't be here just for a while, of course i like it, naturally. i like the form. well , it's not really, of course, so beautiful, but it 's not a word

, a determining factor, see . relationship form, that's all together and even the fact that if the commander suddenly gives you a bouquet before the flight, just without why not? this is why i don't know which one. it was a pleasure for me to talk with you. and i would love to fly somewhere with you. thanks, i'll be glad to see you. only you will recognize me. of course not, i know. it would probably be wonderful if we recognized each other in the sky on earth. all the best, goodbye.

hello, my name is natalya ryabchikova, i am a film historian. and today we have a podcast that is called eisenstein 125, it is dedicated to the 125th anniversary of the birth of the remarkable soviet world director and teacher theorist sergei mikhailovich einstein my name is artyom sopin. uh, i'm a film scholar, and also welcome to the podcast from einstein 125, we'll start the conversation with who einstein is why do we all of a sudden mark him, well, not quite round, yes, then still, yes, why is he so important to us than he is important for the history of cinema, but for this it is necessary to say, in principle , about the moment when he appeared about, and where does he come from came and, in fact, what he did at that moment, when he came to cinema , eisenstein was born at the very end of the 19th century, when cinema was just beginning

, he was one of those who, in childhood , first saw both films and méliès. for example, and for him it was the discovery not only of the films themselves, but also of some new entertainment , not yet quite art, of course, from einstein in his childhood he was not going to become a cinematographer. yes, there was no such profession in his head, but he was born into a fairly wealthy family in the city of riga. his father was and they went forever, there were a lot of books about art around, and since childhood he loved, uh, to get into some folios of his father to look at, and there is an image. in principle, he was terribly fond of reading a person who, from childhood, just learned foreign languages. he learned english , french and german and had to follow his father in his path and become, uh, an engineer-architect. in childhood. at the same time

, there were various such strange addictions. he loved books from the history of the french revolution, he was interested in some such cruel sometimes grotesque situations in the past, but in general, he himself was not cruel by nature. in general. he, on the contrary, many people remember that in adulthood he was a rather sentimental person at times, and uh, the same from the field of fur coats, his girlfriend measured such on a documentary filmmaker, he said that u met such subtly, sensitive people as sergei mikhailovich was in fact, the heyday of all kinds of new trends in painting in architecture, and in literature in poetry, and einstein was in this and loved to draw from childhood, but not i saw myself in this , as in some kind of real continuation of a career, for example, if the revolution had not occurred in the seventeenth year, and from eisenstein she found a student, and he said that the revolution made not an artist.

first of all, he joined the avant-garde theater, the theater that overlooked the square, which vno momentary some news from the world of europe america into the inside of the work of the theater, which absolutely blurred the stage then the theater was something like a current blog. in a way, this is an interesting thought. yes and so he went to study, and after he left his institute and howled a little during the civil war. he went to study with vsevolod meyerhold , a remarkable director and innovator, and who opposed himself to the art of konstantin stanislavsky a and a student. wherein. in general. here, such a continuity , denial initially continued this continuity. and when he decided at some point to leave the merlind, and from einstein breaks the theater. first he wants to bring on the stage, and the boxing ring, then he brings uh

on stage circus performances and his own performance, which turns out to be a circus. ostrovsky for every sage, quite simplicity in the twenty-third year leads him to the cinema. he cannot but try to include in his performance, also a movie braid. and this is called glumov's diary in the text. for ostrovsky, this is a certain subject that plays a role in the development of the plot. and vision decided to take it off. here is a really absolute vlog and uh, he used his love for modern french adventurous adventure series for american adventure films and forced its actors. uh, the father of the fantomas, for example, the actor was grigory alexandrov, who will become his permanent assistant. and someday he will become a famous film director, he believed that the unit of theatrical action, and then any

action on the screen. and this attraction is what affects the viewer. this is something that , in fact, may not be related to the plot, as such, but it evokes some kind of feeling, some kind of emotion. even some the attraction produces a physiological effect for eisenstein - this is both the actor's dialect and the firecracker that he places under the viewer's chair, but in fact, later he concretized what he had in mind much more widely. and in general, everything that is a track, that is, everything that can affect the viewer, that is, in fact, any artistic medium is attraction to one degree or another, and the installation of attractions is all about the placement of artistic means, it turns out like this manner. generally. here it is catchy wording that is absolutely in the style of the twenties to the thirties. he realized that this is, in general, in fact, the desire to reveal, in general, such absolutely universal laws of art. actually installation. this term appears already in

the twenty-third year, the editing of attractions will remanufacture foreign films, and the lion, whom kuleshov initially called his teacher in but he is engaged in clarifying the laws of editing. how do we get information from a comparison of two frames, and according to kuleshov and according to him experiments, which were later called spectacular kuleshova, this meaning, as it were, is superimposed, like bricks one on another einstein, even before he became world famous, said that his installation is not a connection of meaning, this clash of meaning is a conflict, for example, in a strike film, it affects the viewer with shots that conflict with each other, even in the sense that some of them are fiction, and some are documentary. he needed to show it somehow on the screen. what is demolition? what's happened

crushing a demonstration? he needed to render a massacre, did he have that word in his head? how to show pain with montage? it is necessary to break down these very influencing elements to show that the workers are dispersed by the tsarist police and show a real real physical massacre, that is , to show the bull being slaughtered, and here we see the poster of just this film, this is the first film from einstein and, in fact , reflection began at the same time with it eisenstein about historical events. it's interesting that when we start talking about montage. right some other things are connected, if you are working with short pieces, for example , if you push them together, what is inside these pieces or who is inside these pieces, he was interested in avangard soviet kina. not just art, as such, he was interested in constructing art and life through this, but the connection of pieces. and if a is a person in our frame, then we

must immediately understand who this person is , the type theory appears. it manifests darkness, never necessary. show the mass we see in a short separate frame, well, that is not quite static, but in some separate frame we see the hero and we may no longer see him, but we understand what kind of person he is, what kind of biography he has in his appearance, because he holds himself, because he is dressed, then there is depending on how he shows himself, how he sees, for example, a teacher. yes, yes, we immediately understand what kind of person this was allowed. why should he use actors not actors and even his own mother. you bring potemkin. he fell in love to remember that his mother is there participated, but he used the editing for other purposes. it was interesting for him to scatter time and scatter space , such analytical constructions that are akin, perhaps, but i don’t know, to murders, and

his most famous, probably, piece of the potemkin odessa stairs. it's built the way he likes it. to speak, but it is absolutely unrealistic. yes, if, as he said as a student, if it were as long as i showed it, here in the action that is happening to me. it would stretch from odessa to romania to where they actually go rebellious armadillo. and we have some pictures here. including the fund of the russian federation for the wonderful provided these shots. and it is very important that, in general, this is a construction, it is made from einstein not in order to distort events, not in order to create something from reality, uh, obviously not existing, but on the contrary, in order to figuratively most prominently show what really happened on the odessa stairs, for example, we see e as uh, the protesters are running up the stairs. we see their faces. we see faces

people, and on the other hand. we see only the boots of these same cossacks who are marching down. on uh, without hesitation, following this cruel, uh, murderous order, and uh, the story of how eisenstein is known. eh, after many, many years they told about how e was shown in america in some small cinema. uh, the battleship potemkin, and uh, he was surprised to learn that there was only one spectator. once taken out. just in hysterics almost hall. this man sobbed. uh, and uh, couldn't stop at all and then uh the owner i asked this little movie theater. but what happened? why did you take it so painfully that your loved ones suffered there, perhaps you yourself were on that very staircase, to which the weeping man replied that he was not. he was one of those cossacks who walked and

fired at unarmed people. and in general, just when he saw this film, he saw people's faces up close, although they were already there. tell me, of course, the film was shot 20 years later, only then did he realize his guilt, only then did he understand that this was the order that he was carrying out was terrible when the film, for example, was shown in europe, they said, but actors from the moscow art theater were talking here, they are participating yes, but let's say, and we know that the ship's doctor was played by a local gardener, whom they found saw his squint so necessary for them in this role, on the other hand, he plays one of the most, brutal officers , that's nothing less than a permanent actor, and if the member 's theater of paralitcult grigory alexandrov is the future master of the stalinist musical, yes , there are no mkhatovites in the film, well, of course, there are no mkhatovites, there are none. we switched to darkness. we need to say. exactly how it turned out. and we were talking about

einstein's first film alone, it was about rather the events before the revolution. it was so new and interesting that he was commissioned to make a large state order to make a film for the twentieth anniversary of the first russian revolution in 905. and the idea actually is to show on the big such a large-scale film, what has been happening since 2005 in the russian empire, the film to say that, in general, it was that time. uh, when there were no such orders from which it is impossible was to refuse, that is, uh, and in general, soviet power was still not so straightforward, there was still no stalinist hegemony, the so-called yes personality cult, and therefore , in general, then these tasks were rather simple for him really curious. that's why he took c in the posters, where the name of the potemkin heroes is already there, in fact, sometimes this year 1905 was preserved, but it suddenly turned out that the deadline was much closer than it seems, and in the summer of 25. they

went to shoot in leningrad, the weather did not indulge and it was decided. one fragment a small 12 lines in a libretto not on gadzhanova, shutko where the action unfolded around blinov's potemkin, and from these lines into a libretto in such a tritment, but a script, and eisenstein built a whole film, which was adopted, which, uh, well, they sort of nodded, yes tasks completed on time were praised. and in general, they were ready to forget, and here the interesting begins, because in the soviet union it was perceived at first. like the majority, of course, not all, like this one. e order, which, for show, let's say, were, of course, people, which were immediately appreciated by colleagues. yes, because actually, when the film came out , there was a very curious cut of responses. eh, in the winter of 25-26 directly, when in the cinema newspaper e, on the one hand, his friends and

peers, young and even his younger young avant-garde artists are completely grigory cosine or not. from leningrad, dali’s review was good in just three syllables, but on the other hand , leningradsky is also the director of the older generation, alexander ivanovsky, on the contrary. uh, i wrote in the spirit that, in general, uh, the picture, of course, was done correctly, but young man. we still have to study and study. in general, the shooting is really because of the brevity. they were almost spontaneous on the other hand. uh, born from these few lines, the script from eisenstein uh, still could not afford to shoot without a script at all. he arrived uh, to the south, he locked himself in his room for several days and uh, he wrote down a fairly detailed frame-by-frame. here is this script, which konstantinovich kozlov alone is a wonderful story, the cinema published already in the thaw only years until the thaw

there was a legend that supposedly there was no script and, in general, the spontaneity of filming often really suggested. a private decision was also made during the production of the film, because the question arose of where to find the battleship itself, because the battleship potemkin was the most authentic by that time, but then two identical battleships potemkin and the battleship 12 apostles were released. and here is the battleship of the 12 apostles by the mid-twenties. e, still e existed, but he just stood in the bay and he could never swim already. it's just that it was in such a technical condition that here is the only frame in the film and, uh, we can also watch fragments from the film. e about how , uh, here, uh, the deck looks, that is, this is the only point from which it was not visible, but the rocks around. uh, only in this version, however, in the frame there is one single shot with uh, the whole armadillo is this frame, but uh,

this frame. hey, this is a layout. eh, because, accordingly, real. brings it was possible to shoot the only way, respectively, the layout. here was, uh, set. yes, in the sandunov baths, and there, uh, this wonderful shot was taken on the ninety-fifth birthday of vyacheslav well, katyusha consider that it's all over. a film that can be watched endlessly. well, let's go . in addition, he also used the chronicle

of some warships, which even caused official indignation, the statement seems to be in england when everyone was interested in the question. why are there such wonderful warships in the soviet state that we see on request and will be very amused, because that in fact, he took the old chronicle of the english fleet, but it is important here. history, not only photographic, but very important. this is the very model of historical processes that took place in different decades and in different countries. actually. why are potemkin these wonderful discoveries that eisenstein made? after all , not only aesthetic ones were important, but also ethical ones, because it is also the ethical masterpiece of potemkin's film that shows. very important accents in how a person e fights for his right to respect, for what can not be fed. with this very wormy meat

of people, that this is unacceptable for the existence of a person and unacceptable, uh, to mock people is unacceptable, and to treat them like slaves. and in general, this here, uh, protest against humiliation is an absolutely universal director. not even a communist idea. this is not an idea. this soviet idea is precisely the general civilizational world of any. yes, that is, this is, uh, such a general humanistic idea, absolutely, by the way, correlating with the idea of ​​\u200b\u200brussian literature russian culture of the 19th century, that is, the idea of ​​compassion for a small person, which we know, er, in gogol, which we know about turgenev, and this, in general, is absolutely continued by eisenstein. that is, despite the fact that a map, again, somehow, seemed to overcome many phenomena of the 19th century. uh, threw them off the ship of modernity.

actually. uh. they didn't throw the baby out with the water. they only e water. eh, the forms were changed, but the child, that is, specifically humanistic, but the positions were preserved, and therefore this one is so important here. here is the final meeting with the squadron, when we see this solidarity, the image of the brothers actually reappears. let's look at how here, once raised, and the guns of the admiral's squadron again. e. here, they first rise, we see how the sailors are worried. and actually in the credits. we see a shot or almost hitchcockian suspense here. uh, all the spectators are waiting for what will be shot at the remaining potemkinites or not, and the exclamation of the brothers. gives us to understand that no, that the admiral squadron lets potemkin through and lowers. uh muzzle, guns are very important here.

this solidarity, when people do not shoot at each other, because they understand that human life is the main value, and in general, these are the most seemingly banal things, but they are always worth reminding and zinshteina reminded her of them film on different continents in different countries in different decades and e. despite all the confrontations that were between the soviet union and e, bourgeois, as they said then , europe mixed up these confrontations, because uh, he uh showed that the main thing is the value of human life and uh, this is solidarity and uh, the absence of this fear of the uh admiral, there is some other someone, when these sailors saw , and potemkins in front of them, then they realized that they could not shoot at them. he leaves, but we know that he will be arrested, but, but this is not shown in the film , it is shown in the film that potemkin leaves proudly, flying a red flag. and uh, here's this rush to freedom with which the film ends

this is important. by the way, as for the red flag, unfortunately, in those e-copies that we can now show. uh, the flag does not look painted, because it was hand-painted by hand on the film, the very original films, and in which the flag was painted, they did not reach us and it is known that from eisenstein uh, just uh hmm to the first copy even a u- himself with his assistants. we were discussing how to color the flag. and then they already entrusted it, and the monters who did it, in general, must be told, after all, that when the cinema just appeared at the very beginning of the 20th century, then many films were tried to be completely painted by hand. it looked rather rudely lippy, but nevertheless, those technical employees who did it in the twenties are still natural. they were alive and worked in the cinema. and just here are those people who already had such experience, who there in 98-910 painted films entirely by hand. uh, it was they who were brought in

to paint. uh, this very red flag, it’s generally curious how cinema is in it, uh, cinema gradually lost color. this fully colored frames. here are these olubish ones in the ninth or tenth years, then in the middle of the tenths. eh, the frame began to be painted entirely in some one tone. and by the way, for example, with a wheelbarrow, eisenstein's first film was released on the so-called network. that is, he was, uh, one, painted in such an even beige tone, a potemkin. v. in general, something here from einstein is fundamental. i just gave up coloring films. generally. it was important, because, uh, you have to remember that in the mid-twenties, most films were still painted in some kind of tone. and uh, we're on these posters. and we see, for example, that, for example , potemkin is adjacent to films with a title. so, and under the black wing, these are such adventure films or melodramas, the famous du pont rita, uh. in general, they were all painted in business, which

was important to him, so that potemkin was purely black and white. it was a tougher picture. it was more of an uh, sympathetic decision what to show it was. here is a chronicle stylization. uh, it was the fundamental rejection of color throughout the film and the concentration colors. only here are some such red ones, but these accents, because the red flag. he's red as blood. it is interesting that einstein was interested not only in the fact that in the frames not only how they are combined, but also how the entire film work is organized as a whole, and here is a red flag. one of these rides, another one was supposed to be the finale of the film at the premiere at this solemn meeting, and in honor of the twentieth anniversary since the time of the first russian revolution, but initially i conceived, but the nose

an armadillo, like this one tearing apart approaching the camera, and such a dark wing is a dark corner that was supposed to, and physically tearing the screen further dispersed, as if in his imagination these halves of the screen, like a curtain, the curtain would part and this one would appear on the stage, and a festive table for meetings for a own people who survived that time and , unfortunately, such a showman's decision. it didn't work out, but it didn't. they had to prepare it , only this final one remained. e frame. uh, but a sub-battleship, but nevertheless it was organized. a big premiere in the artistic cinema, where the very facade of the cinema was. eh, processed. uh, an armadillo design was created. the whole team of koppeldiners and the people who handed out checked tickets handed out programs, and were dressed in sailor uniforms. we don't even have the penetrating footage from this premiere. it really was

. here. uh, an event for the public that was interesting enough to spend a film on anything at all , given that he was an avant-garde artist who they seemed to despise such a commercial cinema , a commercial direction from eisenstein , while very fond of, uh, avant-garde solutions that looked bright, that looked very visually interesting. they also worked in neon, but actually. that in itself determined. the desire to think in images and , by the way, to read between the lines, because not my cinema is much more multivariate in its e, meaning, and potemkin is also multivariant in genre. which is interesting, because uh hmm often cinema. uh, driven. here in such a set of genres, you know, like on kinopoisk when everything is there, either a drama, or an action movie, or something else the same, but in general, uh, potemkino can be perceived from different points of view from eisenstein himself, then brilliant will analyze how

the tragedy in pityas is an absolutely classical tragedy. e construction and by the way, an absolutely classic article, if einstein's structure of things, where he shows. uh, just visually how this work works, how it is perceived is another matter, which is important sometimes it is credited that he supposedly at first thought everything out absolutely rationally, in fact, as we were convinced by potemkin. it was not so, but rationally thought-out texts were rational analysis. only 14 years after the shooting of the film uh, another thing is that there can be different interpretations and uh, wonderful movie stories cinema, for example, offers a curious genre interpretation. eh, recall that eisenstein was fond of ancient theatrical forms and potemkin can be perceived as a mystery, because, uh, what were the mysteries in the middle ages. this reproduction e of any e biblical scenes so that viewers in the middle

ages could relate themselves to them when it is played out in front of them. eh, they emotionally perceive a certain biblical story as taking place here and now and feel their involvement. similarly, in the twenties, when the revolution had already happened , a new myth was created, a revolutionary myth was created, and here it was important not the myth in that sense. e that is put upside down to fool someone, and here it’s just the same in the sense of e that it is important to feel ownership of the really significant confrontation between oppression and freedom , he actually used everything that was suitable to create the impression that was needed, that very montage of attractions. he used the term field genre. here for this combination of different genres of visual work and in the same darkness, for example, here, uh, at a time when avant-garde directors were talking about the fact that we need a hero, they are love triangles.

yes, in the same potemkin viktor borisovichsky i saw just a love triangle and said about it from einstein. and you know that you actually made the same triangle, but on a different material. how is it done for which viktor borisovich, known for his wit, said, well, how do you have an armadillo, you have it, the city mass, and the population that supports it , they are separated by the tsarist troops, yet it’s directly logical on the other. einstein himself told the students that he used, and the editing techniques and structure e in the wester final on the american of what was absolutely here e, mass cinema of the twenties , thanks to the nep, is very widely spread eternally, of course. he himself watched it , his viewer watched it, but he said, i used it in such a way that no one guesses. i moved the editing structure. here is the acceleration of parallel editing, which was developed by another neck. this is the tenth year. their

idol is an american director. yes, i took this structure, but transferred it to these very ships that are rushing towards each other, and we don’t know. and how it will all end, in principle, such a construction we were called american montage, and in america they will be called russian montage, because only thanks to soviet cinema i will understand this and we remind you that artyom sopin, film critic natalya ryabchikova, is in the studio. and we are talking as part of the thesisenstein 125 podcast. i would like to return to this moment, and we talked a little about the perception of potemkin. eh, colleagues, but everything somehow calmed down, showed colleagues spoke out, calmed down further, and the film went to germany where? well, in general it was. uh, e communication center, uh, soviet cinema with world and, in principle, the soviet culture of the economy of politics, even eisenstein e, went to the tournament at the beginning of the twenty-sixth year,

to prepare a version of e editing and with new captions censorship, still i wanted something, of course, but he did not stay for the premiere and therefore didn't see. what delight this film caused, telegrams began to arrive in moscow, then letters that put the soviet officials from the cinematography in a kind of bewilderment, because, well, germany is full. the mood seems, yes, uh, but the film is not successful in working-class neighborhoods, where he was supposed to be successful, but in the bourgeois quarters they are watching him. the european intelligentsia, they are admired by people who should not have admired, and it was so strange. uh, the feeling that u, in general, played on the creation of the myth, yes, caused by the director, how he achieved this yes , universal values, but people who go to watch the darkness on and will watch prejudice in the same berlin, they u

perceive it in first of all, as a film about the russian revolution. they know exactly what they are for soldiers and against sailors and uh, such a biometric description of the perception of such a viewer, prejudiced , has been preserved in the novel of millions of fires. he's just writing down for a certain general who sits down. he knows who he is, but in the process he begins to worry about being a sailor. he is driven by some emotion. he is almost crying, it is described in such detail that the fechtwanger clearly understood what was going on in the cinema hall at that moment, with uh and eisenstein's talent, and here is an appeal to the very humanistic common values ​​that outweigh when he reminds them and it is important that in the twenties e from einstein and in other films. hey, i also tried