why do many things seem to me to be unfair to the laws of nature? it’s so touching to write about these leaves. yes, and he seems to be saying, well, what’s new to him is that, well, autumn found them, they fell, what else was there, like, they were supposed to. yes, new feelings, but he also had such pity for these loved ones that people forgot how much good and thoughts they all once gave. that’s even love, because alcohol understands that this is a law of nature. he says this is not justice , i think this is about what he was saying about dad about parents. yes, which are the highest courts, yes, then what is no longer there, that is, one must appreciate what people, leaves and nature and the past leave from this person, just in his fears there are a lot of such covenants. here, take care of your friends. it is unknown to him there, and after his death he has such a poem that those who are no longer alive, rather than cry , participate in it with me, you regret better than now

, protect no problems from troubles in any way. their. at any cost you understand, he was a friend to his readers, a man who he goes through some kind of experience, and he says, this happened to me. so it doesn’t do that either. yes , as a matter of fact, well, this is a continuation of the reasoning that we heard from the first in the first season. take care of your friends. he says i followed the rules of weakness, curbing evil. how many friends have i left in my life? how many friends have left me? i wanted to ask you, and i was a little uncomfortable. what if you remember little or don’t remember your father’s element, it’s so wonderful. i remind you that i am dmitry bak here and now literary podcast. let them not talk. let them read gamzatov was a friend of his readers. gamzatov was, naturally, a wonderful father , husband and son. and so on. but he has seen a lot of people. let's take a look now, just at these faces. eh, here is

muslim magomayev eh, quietly screenikov. yes, well, very recognizable people, that is, representatives of different types of art, beautiful. uh, photography. let's look at the photos already, but with other authors. this is konstantin , the already mentioned konstantin mikhailovich simonov, and chingi starakovch. and this is swearing. a it’s already international here. yes, this is fidel castro , uh, this is a photograph in the harbor. look at the conversation it is still unknown, who is more so compressed. yes, that’s how to act. then look, i read this in the memoirs of uh , one person who just talked to my dad during these years. dad was there. naturally, with a translator there, he gave fidel a burka and wrote a poem. well, when they talked, then it was like he was a bit of a plump

person, and fidel joked something to the translator. and dad saw it and asked. what is he saying? he says he thought he was joking about your figure. he says, say you gave evolution. we were also slim, beautiful , beautiful. well, fidel castro and rasul gamzatov, who listens to whom? you can’t even tell right away. eh, well, there were other meetings. this is the archbishop from makarius. first uh, head of the president of the republic of cyprus yes, a very famous dieter. well, finally. well, we have another beautiful photo. where does rasul gamzatovich talk to fellow countrymen? well, with ordinary people, apparently, and it’s clear that these elders are wonderful. they’re not. young people are already very attentive to rasul gamzatov, okay? why lenin's face was renamed, of course look at this

photograph, because he was not a stranger. yes , because he is one of his own, well, kondratov knows how to joke. he knows how to be witty, he knows how to be ironic towards himself, and he, of course, is always in love. or rather, his lyrical play is always in love. that's exactly what it's about. uh, says the poem, oh, which we will now hear performed. eh, anatoly prosallov, and if there are thousands of men in the world, then she is called anatoly prosallov. if there are 1,000 men in the world equipped i’m ready for you, matchmakers know that in this thousand men i am also rasul gamzatov, if a hundred men have been captivated by you for a long time, whose blood rushes with a roar, it’s no wonder to discern among them a highlander named rasul, if 10

true men of fire are in love with you, they hid among them, rejoicing, and i am grieving. i'm rasul gamzatov if i'm just crazy about you, not inclined towards ambassadors. know that this is from the cloudy peaks, a highlander called rasul. if you are not in love, no one is sadder than the gloomy sunsets. so he’s buried on the basalt plateau in the mountains rasul gamzatov and how did your dad feel about glory? he understood his scale , he understood the degree of his fame, he felt like a great poet, dad. he said that a poet should have more doubt than conceit, and indeed

one told me. here's a friend of mine who, uh , read my dad's poems. and so, uh, she talked. i also heard him say that when i entered the institute i thought that i was a great poet when i graduated. i thought i was just a poet. and now i think i'm a poet. that is, that’s how caucasian wit is. yes, floral. look how the person says, yes, and this one said it. she somehow, well, came to visit. he asked fain what do you think, that’s why i said that you are a great poet, that is, you understand what came out maybe more something is comprehended more he understands, but uh, as if this is the scope of this, but he that’s right here yes responsibility. he was just thinking about this, and he has a poem for his mother. he writes to his mother, as if delirious. i am slava a. right now i need

the night to be like burka and you to be like the dawn. that's what he i remember, he even once says, how is this the top of the head, except for the fresh master of the shirt. i don’t need anything else, yes, fresh milk, i’ll tell you in all honesty. i don’t need anything, to be honest, he and my mother had such an interesting union, and he was a creative person, and uh, at the same time , somehow well, they sealed it, and my mother, just like that, will be more organized, uh, the house , where we live in makhachkala, otherwise it was all built by my mother, he generally farmed, as if he had never been involved in it, and he didn’t delve into what it was and he really there was a person who could communicate and teach at a high level and was very like that and he was very friendly to people. and when , after his mother’s death, he was in the hospital, um, i

came to visit him, and he laughed and said this. today i am two hundred tarks of you from dismissal. they say they went to buy groceries during working hours , they were caught, they said, “we are carrying this because of gamzatov’s reason, he sent us,” and they went to him and said, “tell them that you sent us.” yes, well, he was a member of the president of the supreme council of deputies. well well, i see, there are even very mediocre officials who people are afraid of because of these, he was the kind of person to whom this woman could come up with something to come and say. tell me what we did for you. i didn't know that he would help them. all. he reacted somehow without asking him. well, in the same hospital there was a case like this , it’s not a coincidence, he was there, when all these intensive care nurses were there in the evenings, they sang songs to him , told him, remembered how they communicated with him. how he thought it and dad

told what he said. here he says i i thought that people had become so angry , these girls. they tell me everything about what kind of songs they sing and they raised him with this before themselves and themselves. well, you know, uh, this is a very good photograph. i would like to finish our conversation today, despite the fact that a person has traveled all over the world, reached the heights of glory, but still for real, but he feels at home. here in their homeland dagestan they are on horseback and this is a parting photograph that says that these rasula gamzatova it will be ok live. i thank you from the bottom of my heart. thank you, uh, alikhat rasulovna for this most interesting conversation. thank you very much. all the best , i'm sure i'll see you again. well, anatoly, i also thank you from the bottom of my heart, because you read

gonzat’s elements perfectly. well, to you, our dear interlocutors. i remind you that all episodes of the podcast. let them talk, let them read, you can watch it on the channel one website tv.ru. hello this is the podcast of st. eisenstein and its hosts, i am a film historian , stanislavsky and i are historians, but natalya ryabchikova why are einstein's witnesses sergei eisenstein is still one of the largest figures in the history of russian cinema and everything that makes up this cinema, as if revolving around him , eisenstein's witnesses are us, we are witnesses of how russian cinema was created and continues to be created. we want to make it so

that modern viewers have a pleasant, interesting and useful time watching classic , popular, little-known forgotten films of russian cinema, and today we will talk about gleb panfilov’s film the beginning, which came out in 1970. but despite the fact that he is famous, perhaps not everyone knows how he did everything, in what context? in what conditions and what could happen after him in the fate of panfilov churikova and in general children's cinema and panfilov himself , our hero as a director and as a scriptwriter is the person who launches, of course, this story, but it launches on his first full-length film of the sixty-seventh year, which is called in the fire of the ford. no, it’s churikova who already plays the main role panfilov comes to this film as a not very young man and his story. story. panfilova is also important for how the film turned out, because he started working

as an engineer. at the factory, not at all in moscow , he became interested in cinema, as an amateur activity, and began working in television. he entered the correspondence department at vgik, the camera department. and only then he came and graduated from the highest courses in moscow for screenwriters and directors, and was the first. actually , his full-length film was a film for him personally. far from the first, of course. and he read this story in a magazine in 1939. well, in the magazine red leg, it seems there was a story about the civil war about a nurse on a train , who is also an artist, and who was the author of this story in 1939, evgeniy gabrilovich, and who is evgeniy gavrilovich, this is the legendary soviet screenwriter. well, that’s actually the story we started working with. it was a story about the civil war. and this topic came up very often. ah, and in the works

of the gabrilovichs. and in general, how to give enough an important point was the civil war - this is the beginning of the new world, the beginning of the new world, yes, that is, the moment when some soviet truth was laid, so he said, from which in the future all young people who tried to live and preach some principles in his life, that is, for this story , which was written by a screenwriter of the previous generation, he needed an actress and somewhere in some television program, it seems, he saw innochka and uh, perhaps their acquaintance looked like it looked in the film the acquaintance of the director and actress began. i suggest you watch this piece now, yes, let’s get acquainted. here you are, pasha. who are you? oh, i'm a director, let's get acquainted. do you want to act in films? not dark but what about

who she is? the french national heroine, of course, read it, which is good. by this time, inna churikova had already starred in quite a significant number of films, but mostly her roles were small, for example in moscow how to draw a horse? how to draw a horse? yes, she was one of those pageant heroines creative, in which the character of nikita mikhalkov participated, who drew a horse and a race. there were two teams in one of which the heroine of churikova a appeared. you can’t seem to notice it unless you look specifically, but it’s still noticeable there. you can't miss it right away. yes, well, probably for a higher quality of viewers. she was remembered in the film morozko, now i’m listening. yes, my mother is a very good girl. oh, by the way,

he’s in his sixth year. she also starred in the role of such a minor friend of the main one the heroine in the film is her older sister. why is this important? why is this interesting, because our main character leonid kuravlev also played in this film. but they didn’t seem to converge , they didn’t combine their storylines, and leonid kuravlev had been acting since the late fifties, he was already a really famous actor in the mid-sixties in the leading role, but he has such a role. eh, a little strange. he’s not a victorious hero, like me, when in moscow mikhail’s lover is not a flame to mnisk, like the urban ones, for example, yes, that is, such a heroic trail does not appear behind him and does not appear in february. our glue is such a simpleton, rather such a guy, as a matter of fact, here in the film there lives such a guy, his one of the main roles and iconic roles that created, and strengthened his authority, his ampoules on the

film screen. eh, shukshina, in general, has already made the ship famous throughout the country. by that time, he was quite such an all-union star , yes, namely churikova, despite the fact that she played the main role in in the fire in the fire ford, no. she. well, somehow this film was not very successful with audiences, and when a couple of years later gabrilovich brought a new application to work with panfilov and to work with churikova , in principle, everyone said, oh, but this is, in general, a continuation, that is, of the story and this is again a heroine from the people, who is now a modern heroine for us, a factory girl who is ugly. this seems to me to be the right move, very direct, it is clear that inna churikova is an actress of special talent, and she is not a rosy heroine. yes she's something much more, but what was needed was panfilov’s eyes, and the pen of gabrilovich was needed,

to come up with one story and understand what you can write further, but then further. ah, the problem, because there is a legend about this film, which is not very clear how it fits with the documents, in some sources, everything is described, let’s say , contradictory, and sometimes just completely wrong, even in some books that exist, and these days is considered the basis of this story. sometimes they say that panfilov wanted to make a film about jeanne d'autre. he doesn't they gave it and he made the film. it really wasn't like that at first. and why are you so why did jeanne d'arc fail the beginning, in principle, are such strong heroines interested? and in general, the theme of his work, if you look at his subsequent films, in which, of course, the main roles are played, as a rule, by churikova - these are always strong women. yes, this is mother fire, yes , this is you, where are you iron? the rest is the merchant's wife. yes, that is, in general, these are always

some kind of heroines who rise above. at the average level yes, these are always people who have there is some kind of moral core. there is some kind of fundamental attitude in my soul. many, even if we take the very first film that we started talking about in firewalk. no, or whatever it was called, and in the literary script, the holy soul and it’s about a woman who changes the world, yes, well, of course, then in the sixties in general, in the late sixties it appears in soviet cinema. and the theme is that revolution is the work of artists who come up with what the new world should look like and and pretend this story in life or behind them. here are people inspired by this imagination, this dream, their creativity and begins to embody it all. and so, in fact, jeanne d'arc is about one of those characters who line up in this line, as we are now in a retrospective video , and how would she successfully complement the heroine

? arranges this entire female universe, let’s say so. here is the legend: panfilov wants to make a film about joan of arc; he is not allowed to do it, and then he comes up with the idea that his modern the heroine, whose name is pasha stroganova. the factory girl plays joan of arc in the film so she's a legend. this is a legend. in fact , at first there was probably an application, as often happened. well, somehow soviet cinema has always happened in practice. first there is a script proposal, which may have nothing at all to do with the film that we subsequently see and this is normal. so in this script proposal, which was prepared by gabrilovich , there was nothing about the genre. that's it. absolutely nothing. but when we tried to understand where true. yes, and on the one hand, we came across

later interviews that came out after the film was released, where panfilov said that this story is about a simple soviet girl. i came up with this idea when i was working at a factory. and so i looked at for such girls , inspired by this, i came up with this framework for an oner application, uh, for the film inception, only one name is gabrilovich. but in the first and only, actually accepted version of the literary script, a gendarme already appears. i think it's time for her to appear. and with us here we have a small fragment with inna churikova in the role of zhanna. that the true miracle on earth is a man who is woven from sin, mistakes, inability and weakness, but also the strength of valor and purity is too much for himself. i saw all this during the war. so you justify

the man you are sheva to me with one of the greatest miracles of god. yes, you are blaspheming, zhanna man. this is filth, meanness and obscene vision. and then it is unknown why he rushes forward. a rushing horse to save a child unknown to him. very uh this kind of sixties speech, in my opinion, is the person who becomes the focus of the thaw codes in soviet cinema. this is understandable. this is not a historical jeanne, this is jeanne as soviet filmmakers see her, but there is a mystery here. she appears from somewhere in this literary scenario, on which two authors gabrilovich are already standing. and panfilov first lets gabrilovich write the script. then he gets sick and writes a letter

to the studio. this remained in the archive for nothing, or panfilov’s degree, yes, and then it already appears zhanna continues in the interview. it seems to me that here, and panfilov dots. he says that at first we decided that there would be a scene of jeanne’s renunciation and that this is our heroine. we need to show her truly the height of nobility. this factory girl. yes, her inner world. we transmit through the gendarme. she plays and it’s one scene, and then they seem to start to creep apart, as if you still need to stage more, stage and stage again, and this is already noticed at the level of the director’s script by people at the studio, who are very kind-minded intelligent. everyone is discussing this, but it’s strange for them. why does so much of joan of arc appear in the script? maybe she still needs to be toned down a little, but the question arises. just this strong woman and

pasha stroganova, who are completely the opposite, and our main heroine should play both churikova. that is, she plays pasha playing zhanna, she evokes, on the contrary, a feeling among the editors, what is this? well, some too naive girl, but her relationship is with the main character, and the main character is married. she's lonely a girl who meets him on and somehow he turns out to be her. well, even now you can’t say he’s a boyfriend, because they very clearly write out, in my opinion, even applications, and he spends the night with a friend. and he spends all his evenings with pasha, and she perceives it as a family with a family history of nepotism, but it’s unclear how he perceives it. and this is pasha’s naivety, such absolute openness, and feelings to the world. apparently

the film raises questions among the very cynical employees of ellen's studio. well today we don't have any questions the heroine churikova herself calls because she looks absolutely organic and modern. that is, she is such a quite a girl of our days. here, uh, simple straightforwardness , the willingness to throw yourself headlong into filming a film. what they understand about is that they don’t understand anything about it at all, but it goes and does it. she does everything well within the image, maybe, but it seems to me that modern girls would not fully accept this heroine of pasha stroganova, because for her, uh, she has two parts of life. yes, but work, she immediately tells arkady hero kuravlev, i will become a great actress, and she plays baba yaga in the children's theater, she is involved in amateur performances. that is, she has a calling. she has this, this is the most art. the creator of life is this arkady arkasha, who also has a wife somewhere, who then comes.

uh, he takes him back home to get his things, and for pasha, uh, arkady is more important at some point, at least, uh in the script, than the role and they tell panfilov and gavrilovich about this that, well, somehow you have it not with the size uh, pay attention to this personality film. this is not one film, but three films one missing stroganov second shot and production and abandoned the way soviet cinema is structured, let’s remember at about the same time a wonderful cult film was released today, the film fyodor salievich, hitruka, where such a feature is a parody of filming, like once ivan the terrible, sergei from eisenstein well, as it is considered, nevertheless. in general, at this moment. eh, obviously there is a general awakening of interest in soviet cinema in the nature of cinema. as such as he does, yes? how is it created? here is a miracle on the screen. this is the magic of cinema. well, this is the desire to show the kitchen of cinema.

we have already seen a small fragment, the director of which, by the way, is played by a real soviet screenwriter yuri klebikov. or a real soviet director and student of einstein vladimir vengerov could play. and other characters appear there. they are even more important in the script than in the end. on the screen. they were also extinguished. price script appears incredibly important character own script. yes, which is clearly written off with gabrilovich. we started talking about the fact that gabrilovich is a person. even in the twenties and thirties, he actively came to cinema. he is a very interesting writer. he started out generally as a musician, he is a master, and from the point of view of a master, this character oleg gabrionovich appears in the script. he defends our heroine pasha stroganova, whom the director took on for the role of joan of arc, but someone doesn’t believe her. let's watch the snippet, come on. in my opinion, the situation is narrower. and, in my opinion, excellent. well i do not know. they even asked, begged, not

brothers for the main role. and i feel sick, look at my face. some kind of hooligan. the question arises: why is there an assembly gluing here? somehow everything looks very strange. yes, that is, why does the screenwriter give any instructions to the director, screenwriters in general. usually no one asks. he surrendered the script. that's it, goodbye. bye bye. we're filming a movie next. without you, in real practice and in soviet and modern practice, i am very little considered a screenwriter. yes, he has already transferred all the rights for use, certainly not in soviet film production. and if we look, well because the screenwriter, uh, in the thirties the screenwriter was the author of the film. yes, but in

the sixties, after all , the director was already considered by everyone to be the full-fledged author of the film. he's a palace. and here, when we look at the screen. well, a little bit of strangeness raises questions for us, because obviously all this was re-voiced, re-edited, and the character whose character originally plays vizbor can be seen both from the director’s script and from the literary script, there was a representative of the studio themselves. yeah and there are even such memories or stories about how some soviet officials who managed some geographies went around and thought that this was a caricature of them personally, that it was just a specially drawn parody, that it was impossible to do this, it didn’t appear in the film. as a result, in the version that seemed to be filming the script, hmm , the screenwriter did not appear, you did not appear. well, representatives of the film studio have appeared, who are trying to sort out all the problems that arise on the site today, and who are actually the director’s friend, and not his enemy

these are clearly written scenarios. but sometimes he is very sad that the director does not listen to him. and this is the kind of character that was originally played in the visa board throughout, and then he was remade, precisely because of this complaint from the scriptwriters. come on , the characters who are not in the script, by the way , it’s very interesting, but this representative of the head office is arguing with the director. and how do party members talk about the fact that why do you, uh, your heroine joan of arc is so sad, and her eyes are doomed. and so you would make it like chapaev’s film, to which the director says, well maybe chapaev’s film did not show the whole truth about chapaev, if we all knew how easy it was to accomplish a feat, then what would be the point of the feat. no, zhanna is just going to the feat, not suspecting that she can even do it. eh, and this dispute around chapaev is very interesting, actually chapaev a. it is no coincidence that he resembled chapaev, because he was created or the vasilyev brothers are also direct students from the inside. today we are specialists in

the film beginning by gleb panfilov. it was important to show in the film that our heroine. pasha is not comes to his success. we don’t even know yet whether success will be easy; it was necessary to show that she not only has problems in her personal life, but she always copes with filming, and at the same time we understand that it was precisely the relationship between director panfilov and actress churikova that was more less harmonious, because the script, in principle, was written for her, for her, and knowing even some of her habits, he spoke about it, even the director of the studio, he attended some event, spent 10 days with panfilov and churikova and said, well i realized it was you do it under it, maybe a little bit. take this down, maybe it’s a little more difficult for her to make it, but at the same time there are memories and they are amazingly clear that it wasn’t very easy for him on the set. do you remember that he actually complained that hmm, he

gave it his all. he tried to do something interesting on the set, but panfilov somehow spoke quite calmly. well , let’s redo it there, let’s do it, also kuravlyova, she really offended me, she really touched her and there are legends about it. yes, i heard stories from one of our producers about how wonderful soviet director or panfilov well, he behaved very ugly towards the wonderful soviet actor leonid kuravlev. this is simply retold, as if it just happens sometimes. here in the dialogue, when they tell some stories. that is , people’s imagination still lives on. yes , there is a biography of kuravlev, very detailed, where a separate chapter is simply devoted to this whole story about how hard it was for him on the set of the beginning. i wanted us to watch a piece where the director performed yuri kletkov is treated strictly on the set. no, they don't interfere. calm down.

which one is more annoying, left or right? why doesn't the hand bother me? no need, i understood everything. i understood everything, now i’m doing everything. right. i remember that this second director is playing, a real second director, really the characters are playing the second link of mosfilm, in fact, who worked on this film. yes, we talked about the fact that there is more than one film about this film. yes, not only a love story and pasha stroganova not only a comedy

about the peculiarities of filmmaking, but also the third film. this story of jeanne d'arc is medieval. yes, a heroic story, which seems to have its own laws. and this, of course, led to some bewilderment in general. that's when there's so much stuff mixed into one film. this always confuses critics and viewers. 60 very often you can find some reviews, uh, that call the genre that way. but how can these claims be depicted in a self-contained film, for example in the film take care of your car, when the critic does not understand. actually, with what movie we are dealing with a comedy with a detective story or some other film. here everything becomes even more complicated by the end of the sixties, and the director gives us three films for the price of one today, they would say, and this is the story about jeanne d'arc but where does the tape begin? yes look , they are deliberately deceiving us.

when the citro film begins, we see the story about the trial of joan of arc at this moment the camera after some climactic scene, and it moves away and we see general scenes that it turns out that this is actually a film set, that this is not true middle ages. and this is the truth of the filming , they show us how film production works. yes, that is, as if this sudden transition from azerbaijan to another is made to protect the camera work, but in fact completely changes the understanding of what kind of film we are watching and this happens very often throughout the film. we are suddenly transported out of the council. in fact, in the middle ages, sometimes you don’t understand how this is the real middle ages or this middle ages that we are shown in the movies , we see, really, like everyday soviet comedy enters into dialogue with medieval epic, and zhanna, of course, is the cementing image that ties everything together. these are all three parts of the story about filming, the story about reality

, the story about modernity. in general, it seems that she is obviously of the greatest interest to the director for gleb pamfilov. why do you want to believe so much? that first there was a film about the genre, and then the film inception seems to be very convenient and scopism. but to tell about something completely different and maybe under this sauce, as if to throw a new look at soviet reality, but this scopism, uh, which seems to be present in the genre, it is actually present in those pieces that seem to relate to the modern area. here is that same scene on the dance floor, suddenly the music playing there is really ruinous. funny music let's listen to you do you dance?