The scandal surrounding the not yet released film about the first love of Emperor Nicholas II unfolded with renewed vigor. Why is the film, which is still in production, so outraged by the public?
At the center of the plot of the historical melodrama, as the creators called the genre, is the love of Tsarevich Nikolai Romanov, the future last Russian Emperor Nicholas II, and the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya. The romantic relationship did not last long - until his coronation with his future wife Alexandra Federovna. By the way, they say that the ballerina and Nicholas II even had a daughter (!)
After a relationship with Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich, she was the mistress of another Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich, and later married another representative of the royal house - Grand Duke Andrei Romanov. She raised an illegitimate son. And after the revolution of 1917 she left Russia forever. In Paris she had her own ballet school.
The fate of Kshesinskaya itself is curious - she lived a long life, almost a hundred years. She is a prima ballerina of the imperial theaters, an influential person.
Polish actress Michalina Olshanskaya was invited to play the role of the main character; German theater and film actor Lars Eidinger played Emperor Nicholas II. Among the star names: Ingeborga Dapkunaite, Evgeny Mironov, Sergey Garmash, Danila Kozlovsky and Grigory Dobrygin.
Nicholas II and Matilda Kshesinskaya had a daughter.
Meanwhile, from the first day, the picture was conceived as a large-scale historical reconstruction: the Assumption Cathedral, the Palace on the River Pontoon and the interiors of the carriages of the Imperial railway train were specially recreated. Filming took place at the Mariinsky Theater, in the Catherine, Alexander, Yusupov and Elaginoostrovsky palaces. According to some information, 5 thousand suits required 17 tons of fabric. The total budget for the film is $25 million.
Where did it all start?
The fact that director Alexey Uchitel began filming historical films in 2014 was known and did not cause any protest. And when production was in full swing, to say the least, the public suddenly began to actively object to filming, demanding a complete ban. Perhaps the first trailer for the film seemed provocative. But since its appearance, complaints have poured in. Among the main initiators is the social movement “Royal Cross”:
“In the film Matilda, Tsar Nicholas II is not portrayed as who he really was. The love between Matilda Kshesinskaya and Tsar Nicholas II was platonic, not lustful. Also, during the reign of Tsar Nicholas II, the economic and social situation was better compared to the current situation in Russia,” the social activists said in an official statement. And they turned for support to Natalya Poklonskaya, now a State Duma deputy, and at that time the prosecutor of the Republic of Crimea.
Natalya Poklonskaya twice sent a request to the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation to check “Matilda” for extremism. The inspection found no violations. In 2016, a petition appeared on the Internet on the website Change.org, the goal of which was to ban the film. “The content of the film is a deliberate lie,” it says.
“There are no facts in history of Russian tsars cohabiting with ballerinas,” the petition says. — Russia is presented in the film as a country of gallows, drunkenness and fornication, which is also a lie. The picture includes bed scenes between Nicholas II and Matilda, the tsar himself is presented as a cruel, vindictive libertine and adulterer.”
At the end of January 2017, letters of complaint were sent to cinemas across the country. Natalya Poklonskaya sent another deputy request to the Prosecutor General's Office to check the legality of spending budget funds allocated by the Cinema Fund for the creation of the film. And in April 2017 - to an expert commission consisting of doctors of psychological, legal, philological, cultural, historical sciences with up to 28 years of expert experience to evaluate the script and trailers of the film.
The commission members noticed a lot of critical comments: from, again, the moral character of the Russian Tsar to the ugly appearance of his beloved. And the verdict is the same: the film imposes a false image of St. Nicholas II and offends the feelings of believers. The results of the examination were once again sent to the Prosecutor General's Office.
Who supported the release of the film?
The main thought heard by most cultural figures and officials is that it is premature to make an opinion about a film that has not yet been released. But aggressive attacks from public organizations also could not go unnoticed. Many cultural figures considered it their duty to speak out in support of the film: film director Stanislav Govorukhin, chairman of the Duma Committee on Culture, criticized the idea of checking the film, adding that such initiatives should be stopped in the bud.
An open letter was written by more than forty Russian filmmakers, including Pavel Lungin, Alexander Proshkin, Alexander Gelman, Vitaly Mansky, Andrei Smirnov and others. Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky, who visited the filming of the film several times, also supported “Matilda” on air on the Komsomolskaya Pravda radio.
Finally, Dmitry Peskov, press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, commented on the situation around the premiere. According to him, evaluating a film that is not yet ready is, to say the least, strange. “And then, frankly speaking, I, unfortunately, do not have information about which experts evaluated the film - there are differences between experts. Therefore, without knowing who exactly evaluated the film, within what authority, it is probably difficult to talk about anything,” Peskov said.
What do the descendants of the Romanov royal dynasty say?
Representatives of the House of Romanov do not agree in their assessment of the film, which has not yet been released. But many people clearly didn’t like the idea of the film. The director of the chancellery of the Russian Imperial House, Alexander Zakatov, on Radio Baltika, called “Matilda” a low-grade fake that has nothing to do with real events: “It is quite possible to discuss the personality of even a holy man, even a tsar, but for what purpose? To show it in some perverted form, to make money on low emotions and instincts? This is not good".
The representative of the association of members of the Romanov family (another branch of the family) in Russia, Ivan Artsishevsky, believes that there is nothing offensive in the film. “Nicholas II became a saint for his martyrdom, and to show him as a man, I think, is absolutely normal - this is my personal position,” Artsishevsky told TASS.
The filmmakers are tired of the controversy
Director Alexey Uchitel called the discussion around “Matilda” useless and unnecessary. “Honestly, I’m already tired of Mrs. Poklonskaya’s war with me and the entire film crew. Instead of calmly finishing the film, I am forced to be distracted by nonsense, nonsense and insults,” the director told RIA Novosti. “The film will be released, everyone will watch it, and only then will it be possible to discuss it.”
The film’s producer, Alexander Dostman, also believes: “People who have not seen the film, and no one except the working group has seen it, cannot draw any conclusions - it’s funny, some kind of comedy, amazing stupidity. And what’s also surprising is that everyone follows Natalya Poklonskaya’s lead and takes her opinion into account; I’ve already stopped being surprised by her. This is a film about beautiful love. Regardless of whether Tsar Nicholas is Tsar or not, he is a man, but what, a man cannot love?”
According to TASS, Konstantin Dobrynin, the lawyer of director Alexei Uchitel, appealed to the ethics commission of the State Duma of Russia with a complaint about the activities of deputy Natalya Poklonskaya, substantiating possible violations of the rules of parliamentary ethics, manifested in “unfounded accusations” by Poklonskaya against Uchitel, as well as in the “use knowingly false information and calls for illegal actions" against the creators of the film "Matilda".
When is the premiere?
The premiere is scheduled for October 26, 2017, it will take place at the Mariinsky Theater - where the main character of the film, Matilda Kshesinskaya, performed at the beginning of the 20th century. By the way, the musical producer of the film was the artistic director and general director of the Mariinsky Theater Valery Gergiev.
The film, directed by the famous director Alexei Uchitel ("Walk", "Portrait of His Wife"), tells the story of the relationship between the future emperor, and at that time Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov, and prima ballerina of the Mariinsky Theater Matilda Kshesinskaya. A dancer with Polish blood literally drove the Tsar's son crazy with her beauty. On his part, it was a real passion that Nicholas was forced to give up in exchange for the crown. Although the future emperor loved his Matilda so much that he was ready to give up the throne.
Agree, this is a story that really deserves the attention of cinema. The state allocated $25 million for this grandiose project, most of which was spent on scenery and costumes, and more than 5 thousand of them were made. The geography of filming is grandiose: they filmed in the most protected places of historical St. Petersburg: in the interiors of the Mariinsky Theater, the Catherine, Alexander, Yusupov and Elaginoostrovsky palaces - so this film, with just its picture, is a guide to history. In addition, the scenery of the Assumption Cathedral, the Palace on the River Pontoon and the interiors of the carriages of the Imperial Railway were built for the film. Well, that is, the scale is clear to everyone. Plus, the soundtrack was ordered from the most fashionable Hollywood composer Marco Bellamy, and everything that the Hollywood Italian wrote was played by the expanded composition of the symphony orchestra conducted by Valery Gergiev. Yes, we also forgot to say about the actors, in all roles except the main ones there are only the most fashionable names, Danila Kozlovsky, Ingeborga Dapkunaite, Sergei Garmash, Evgeniy Mironov. To be honest, Khodchenkova’s name is asked to be included on this list, but by some miracle they managed without her.
But as for the leading actor, here the creators, as they say, screwed up. In pursuit of an actor's appearance that was as similar as possible to the face of Nicholas II, the producers cast German actor Lars Eidinger for the role. And it must happen that it was this handsome 39-year-old blond who at one time managed to star in a porn film, in particular, in the art-porn film by Peter Greenaway “Goltzius and the Pelican Company” (2012), which seemed to be It was shot on biblical and ancient subjects, but still, it is considered a film that simply cannot be called erotica. Well, it began.
"Nicholas II and Matilda Kshesinskaya had a daughter"
The grandiose film project, of course, has enemies, for example, in the person of the former prosecutor of Crimea and State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya. Prompted by representatives of the social movement "Royal Cross", Poklonskaya accused the film of "distorting historical events" and "anti-Russian and anti-religious provocation in the sphere of culture" and has already sent two requests to the Prosecutor General's Office so that the relevant authorities check whether the creators of "Matilda" are using the selected budget funds, and at the same time checked the plot for the presence of sedition in it, defaming the memory of the imperial family and the feelings of the Orthodox.
In response to these actions by Poklonskaya, the Head of the State Duma Committee on Culture, Stanislav Govorukhin, noted that such initiatives should be “cut off in the bud,” since, firstly, it is impossible to verify something that does not yet exist (the film is still in the process of filming), and , secondly, as Govorukhin said, “it is not clear why the real story from the life of Nikolai Romanov, who, by the way, was then only the heir to the throne, should cause indignation in certain circles and result in similar checks.” Priests also call the process of persecuting the film a dead end and the wrong path, although they condemn the film itself.
The descendants of Matilda Kshesinskaya herself also do not see any reason to contact law enforcement agencies. The ballerina's great-grandson Konstantin Sevenard said that there is no reason for this yet.
Nobody has seen the film. It’s difficult for me to say that there are inconsistencies with historical events,” Mr. Sevenard comments on the situation. - Nicholas II was close to Matilda Kshesinskaya - this is a well-known proven fact. There is nothing to dispute here. I don’t like that the film captures the events from the moment Kshesinskaya met Nikolai and ends with his coronation. This story is long. We know that Matilda Feliksovna and Nicholas II had a daughter in 1911. Our family has photographs to prove this. Matilda received the title of Most Holy Princess later. In the spring of 1917, she was an intermediary between Nicholas II and the Provisional Government. She tried to save the Royal Family.
The other day, the director of the film “Matilda” Alexei Uchitel finally responded to the attacks of disgruntled Orthodox Russians. Although, it seems, he appreciated the problem too late. The teacher said that the filmmakers are preparing two letters to the Prosecutor General's Office - one about Poklonskaya herself, and the other about people who send letters to cinemas calling on them to refuse to distribute the film.
In general, the scandal is not a joke. And there are very big fears that 25 million budget money will fall into the abyss. We are no longer talking about the work of thousands of people who put their efforts into this film - who appreciated it and when. One thing is clear: the film's premiere was recently postponed to October 25, so both sides have time to maneuver.
Alexey Uchitel in the center
"Matilda"
I am not filming a biography of Matilda Kshesinskaya. My first feature film, “Giselle Mania,” released in 1995, was in its purest form a biopic of another ballerina, Olga Spesivtseva. “Matilda” has a different genre, it is a lyrical story about how a little woman could significantly influence the fate of Russia. It’s hard to believe, but we were one step away from everything turning out completely differently. There are a number of mystical and mysterious incidents that influenced the course of historical events. For example, the crash of the royal train near Kharkov shown in the film. Dozens of people died, were injured, and the train was scattered along the railway embankment, but not a single member of the royal family was injured. Alexander III held the roof of the mangled carriage with his hands, giving his wife and children the opportunity to get out. However, it was then that he damaged his kidney, which led to the death of the emperor at the age of forty-nine.
This is a film about the sincere and mutual love of the future Emperor Nicholas II and Matilda Kshesinskaya against the backdrop of turbulent historical events. I am now very interested in the figure of the last autocrat. When preparing for the film, I read a lot of historical documents and memoirs about this man, and in my opinion, he is very often misunderstood among us as a weak-willed monarch who ruined Russia. Not everything is like that. He didn’t really want to accept power, but when he took it, by 1913 he made Russia first in Europe in all economic indicators, not to mention the development of art and culture - the country was then the strongest in all the years of its existence. According to my feelings, he was a man who did not outwardly have power; he could speak quietly, but he chose people very correctly. He had one drawback: he was really influenced by women, in particular Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Right up to the wedding, even before the coronation, Nicholas II was torn between two women. The film is about this too - about a situation where duty wins, but love remains on the sidelines. We are making a feature film and did not set ourselves the task of restoring historical justice, but I hope that my personal view of the personality of the emperor will be interesting to the viewer.
Kshesinskaya was indeed the first Russian ballerina to perform thirty-two fouettés. But it cannot be said that she was an incredible beauty - Matilda Feliksovna was incredibly attractive with her charm and energy. She helped the heir Nikolai Alexandrovich, a man generally complexed and uptight, to liberate himself - he gained both internal and external freedom. In addition to these two main characters and the emperor's bride Alix, there is another important character in the film, officer Vorontsov, played by Danila Kozlovsky. This is a real person who was driven crazy by his love for Matilda Kshesinskaya: he was so obsessed with her that he tried to hang himself and hatched plans to attack Nicholas II. His presence will give the film a thriller feel.
In addition to large-scale scenes, disasters, and a large number of costumes, we show that time from an unexpected side: in Russia even then they wore jeans, rode motorcycles, and rolled on roller skates. Nicholas II was a fan of photography and cinema, he was the first in Russia to have a compact camera and a film projector, the handle of which the Tsar himself turned - he absolutely loved watching films, and we show this in the film.
For a very long time I could not find an actress for the main role; both famous and less famous actresses auditioned, they searched all over the country and far beyond its borders. As a result, the performer was found, but for some reasons we still do not reveal the name of the main actress of “Matilda” - all this gave rise to a wave of rumors, even anecdotal ones.
Before filming began, we organized a synopsis competition, in which twelve authors took part, and everyone pushed the action towards a biopic, but I wanted some kind of story unusual in the genre. And this was revealed in the script proposal of the writer Alexander Terekhov: on several pages he had a lot of insertions of individual scenes from the future film, written in a very unusual language and at the same time extremely visible. It is always interesting for me to work with a talented writer: it is easier to see a scene when it is written not just technically, but also in a masterful style. It was easy to interact with Alexander, given that this would be his debut as a screenwriter.
All the choreography in our film is staged by Alexey Miroshnichenko, chief choreographer of the Perm Opera and Ballet Theater. I considered different candidates, but made a choice when I saw Alexey’s stunning ballet “The Blue Bird and Princess Florina” staged by Adan, which incredibly subtly recreates the atmosphere of the late 19th century. About seventy artists of this theater and students of the Perm Choreographic School came to us for filming. When you see fifty ballerinas on stage with light bulbs burning inside their packs, it makes an impression even on a modern viewer, and at the same time everything is historically accurate: such costumes already existed at that time, and now our artist Nadezhda Vasilyeva has reproduced them.
There is practically not a single palace in St. Petersburg, except the Winter Palace, where they would not film: Ekaterininsky, Elagin, Yusupovsky, Alexandrovsky in Tsarskoe Selo. The role of Kshesinskaya’s apartment is played by a real-life apartment we found on Zagorodny Prospekt - its owners turned their home into a museum of everyday life at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries.
We filmed at the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow for only one day, but the Alexandrinsky and Mariinsky theaters showed special generosity - we actually had the Mariinsky Theater entirely at our disposal for eight days during the troupe’s vacation, and this is the first such case in all the years of the theater’s existence. Valery Gergiev is the musical director of the film, and the Mariinsky Theater is a partner in the creation of the film. We have three more large episodes ahead of us to film on location this summer, in particular the stampede on Khodynskoye Field - we are building sets for this near St. Petersburg - and the film should be ready by spring next year.
How Matilda became the most scandalous film before its release
Filming of the film under the working title “Matilda” began in June 2014, “but, as planned, was interrupted several times due to the busyness of the performers and waiting for location,” says the website of the Rock Films studio. In 2015, work resumed, and the film crew planned to release the film in the fall of 2016.
April 20, 2017. Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky criticized the situation surrounding the film, calling the situation “an orgy of democracy.”
“This is an orgy of democracy. How can you judge a film that no one has seen yet?
April 25, 2017. First Deputy Minister of Culture Vladimir Aristarkhov, that when issuing permission to rent the film “Matilda”, the conclusions of the expert opinion will not be taken into account, and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev officials will not interfere in the creative process of creating works of culture and art and will not explain to the artist what he should do.
“If we don’t want to return to the times when culture was strictly regulated from above, then we all need to take this into account, including officials and politicians. In general, any person in power needs to suppress the temptation to explain to the artist what he should do.”
May 2, 2017. The Russian Orthodox Church comes out with new criticism of the film, the head of the Synodal Department for External Church Relations, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, for its “blasphemous” and “apotheosis of vulgarity.”
“It seems to me that this is about our national heritage, about our history. We shouldn't spit on our history. We should not subject people of such a level and magnitude as the last Russian emperor to such public humiliation.”
In the same year, deputy from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Valery Rashkin addressed the leadership of the FSB with a request about the activities of the movement. According to the opinion, the deputy answered.
August 1, 2017. A prayer vigil against Matilda took place in Moscow. Deputy Natalya Poklonskaya called for people to stand the day before. The event brought together 500 people who prayed “for the enlightenment of the creators of such a “cinema.”
August 8, 2017. The head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, sent a letter to the Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky with a request to prevent the screening of the film “Matilda” on the territory of the republic.
“To live with honor, we must remember our history, be proud and honor those who fought for us. This memory is sacred and noble. We, the descendants of the victors, must not only sacredly honor the memory of the defenders of the Motherland, but also educate the younger generation in the spirit of respect for our history. I ask you to exclude the Chechen Republic from the distribution certificate for the screening of the film “Matilda”.
Kadyrov's teacher should personally watch the film before asking for it to be banned.
The next day, the Ministry of Culture received a request from the Dagestan authorities to ban the film.
August 10, 2017. The Ministry of Culture will screen the film to viewers over 16 years of age throughout Russia. Natalya Poklonskaya, in the decision of the Ministry of Culture, provides the basis for holding ministry employees accountable “for violating the law on countering extremist activities.” Meanwhile, regional authorities still have the right to limit the demonstration of “Matilda” on their territory. In addition, distributors can do this: for example, the only film distributor in Ingushetia refused to show the film due to fragments that offend the religious feelings of believers.
Alexey Uchitel to the Minister of Internal Affairs and the head of the FSB, demanding that they ensure their safety after the attack on his studio in St. Petersburg, as well as the safety of the audience who are waiting for the premiere of the film “Matilda”.
September 4, 2017. Channel One announced that it would show a four-part version of the film. Shortly before this, the director announced that a series based on “Matilda” would be released on television in 2019, but did not specify on which TV channel the premiere was planned.
On the morning of September 4 in Yekaterinburg, a minibus loaded with barrels of gasoline and gas cylinders arrived in the lobby of the cinema, after which the building began. According to eyewitnesses, after the collision, two people ran out of the car, one of them threw a Molotov cocktail into the building. Man suspected of arson canceled "due to technical reasons." “The show is postponed to October 25, 2017, 18:00,” the website states.
On the same day, there are two cars at the office of Uchitel’s lawyer Konstantin Dobrynin. “Burn for Matilda” leaflets were scattered at the scene of the arson. About what happened
Tatarstan residents are buying tickets due to the excitement around the film; cinemas have switched to enhanced security
Today, Alexei Uchitel’s film “Matilda” was released in wide release throughout Russia. In Kazan, the scandalous film will be shown in all cinemas almost from morning to night. Realnoe Vremya's correspondent witnessed how at lunchtime cinemas are filled with people wanting to watch the story under discussion, who said that they became interested in "Matilda" mainly because of the hype that arose around it.
Matilda hits the big screen
Starting today, the most anticipated and discussed film of the year, “Matilda” by Alexei Uchitel, will be rolled out across Russia; the film not only caused a strong reaction from State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya, but also led to hooligan attacks from haters of the film.
At the same time, a month ago it was discussed whether all cinemas would decide to show the film, which had become scandalous even before its release. In Kazan, Elena Cheburnykh, the manager of the Rodina cinema, spoke unequivocally on this matter, and told Realnoe Vremya that they would have Matilda, however, with additional security.
Now, at least in Kazan, “Matilda” is, perhaps, the main film of the week on the billboard. In all cinemas in the capital of the republic it runs every hour or two hours; in some cinemas the number of screenings reaches 15 per day. Apparently, the expectations of rental companies will be justified, for example, according to the Yandex. Afisha” at 10.30 am, in “Korston” more than half of all tickets are booked for evening screenings, in “Kinomax Club” in “Yuzhny” - one third.
Cinemas decided to play it safe and really beefed up security.
As the chairman of the Union of Cinematographers of the Republic of Tatarstan, film director Ildar Yagafarov, noted, tolerant and educated people live in Tatarstan, so provocations and extremist actions should not be expected, but nevertheless, the cinemas decided to play it safe and really strengthened security. Another interesting point is the almost complete absence of advertising. Matilda is not advertised on TV. In Kazan, it was replaced by announcements on street video screens. “Matilda” cannot be seen either on banners on the street, or even in advertising in the cinemas themselves.
Matilda is heavily guarded
At the Kinomax Club in Yuzhny, as well as at Rodina, Realnoe Vremya was informed that they would strengthen security at the shopping center in connection with the screenings of Matilda. In the morning, several guards were already on duty on the floor. During the day there was no excitement at Rodina, but a vigilant security guard kept order on the floor.
At the “Karo” in the “Ring”, all visitors were greeted at the entrance by a security guard; in the area of the cinema itself there were no other security guards noticeable, but according to the stories of those present, they saw security guards patrolling the entire shopping center. At lunchtime, almost all visitors went to the 12.45 screening of Matilda.
“Of course, the decision to go see this film was more because of all the hype.”
By the time the correspondent of Realnoe Vremya approached, students and friends Yan Nazyrov and German Kargin were just discussing the situation around the scandalous film and agreed that it should be watched at least in order to understand what the film is and why There was such a stir around her.
Yan Nazyrov and German Kargin were just discussing the situation around the scandalous film and agreed that it should be watched at least in order to understand what the film is like
We decided to go see the film because there was a lot of hype around it and we wanted to understand whether it was a PR stunt or real hysteria. And it’s interesting to understand what the film really is, since it caused such a stir among people,” said Yan Nazyrov.
He considers the story with the mistress of Nicholas II, described in “Matilda,” to be true, and considers the assertion that the plot of the film discredits the honor of the Tsar and offends the feelings of Christians to be a consequence of hysteria. The publication’s interlocutor himself is a believer, but this story does not offend his feelings.
This is hysteria, paranoia and schizophrenia in people who say this. This is the truth, such as it is. Distortion in favor of religion always leads to bad consequences, says Yan Nazyrov.
Vladislav Tyunkin came to see “Matilda” with his girlfriend - the couple also wanted to see the film, which became, without exaggeration, the most scandalous and anticipated this year.
I heard today that Poklonskaya made another appeal. Of course, the decision to go see this film was more because of all the hype. I’m not a historian and, for example, before filming this film I didn’t even know that Nicholas II had a mistress - they don’t teach this in school. Naturally, we want to show with our decision that any film, no matter what it is, has the right to be shown in wide release. Whether it's true or not, whether it's a good film or not, that's another matter. But in my memory there was no such excitement. Now it’s interesting to watch the film itself and understand what all the excitement was about, says Vladislav Tyunkin.
Of all the respondents who agreed to comment, only one young man came to see “Matilda” not because of the hype, but because of his love for historical films
According to the young man, he heard that in Yekaterinburg, amid a discussion of “Matilda,” a cinema was burned, and that in Moscow, opponents of the film burned several cars near the office of lawyer Alexei Uchitel. When asked whether they were afraid of history repeating itself in Kazan, the publication’s interlocutor answered boldly and categorically.
I think a lot of people are afraid, but I'm not afraid. On the contrary, if something suddenly happens now, I am ready to assist and help detain all the hooligans.
Of all those interviewed who agreed to comment, only one young man came to see “Matilda” not because of the hype, but because of his love for historical films.
I didn't follow this whole story. I decided to go because I'm interested in historical films. I just haven’t observed such facts in history, so it became interesting to see,” said Shamil Mazitov.
In his opinion, in Kazan there is no need to fear any extremist actions related to the release of the film, because more tolerant people live here.
In addition to the students, the older generation also decided to go see Matilda for lunch. However, these people refused to discuss the scandalous picture.
The credit for increasing the excitement around “Matilda” can be safely awarded to Natalya Poklonskaya. Photo kremlin.ru
From arson to criminal cases
The credit for increasing the excitement around Matilda can be safely assigned to Natalya Poklonskaya, who not only spoke very categorically in the State Duma and on social networks, calling for the film to be banned, but also, on the eve of the premiere, recorded several video messages addressed to the chief prosecutor of Russia, Yuri Chaika. Previously, the former prosecutor of Crimea sent many requests to the prosecutor's office, but they did not reveal any violations in the film.
In parallel with Poklonskaya, work against the film was launched by the leader of the Christian State movement, Alexander Kalinin, who was arrested in September in the case of pressure on cinemas - we recall that on behalf of the organization threats were sent to distributors demanding not to show Matilda. Information about the detention of 10 people involved in the arson of the cars of the film crew of the studio of director Alexei Uchitel and the cinema in Yekaterinburg, among whom Kalinin was, appeared on September 20. Later it became known that Kalinin was suspected of wanting to make money from a campaign against Alexei Uchitel’s film “Matilda”. According to one version, Kalinin and his supporters hoped to receive large sums of money by imposing on film distributors the services of a private security company associated with Orthodox activists.
Modest “#Stop Matilda Kazan”
In August, dissatisfaction with the Teacher’s film reached Kazan activists, who stood outside the Chaliapin Hotel with homemade posters against the film.
"Matilda" is a false film about our holy king. #Let's stop Matilda,” read the inscription of one of the activists, next to whom stood a second one with “#Stop Matilda Kazan” with the signature in the corner of the banner: “False film.”
In August, dissatisfaction with the Teacher’s film reached Kazan activists, who stood outside the Chaliapin Hotel with homemade posters against the film. Photo vk.com
Photos from single pickets are posted in the “#Stop Matilda Kazan” public page, which consists of only five VKontakte users, two of whom have their pages blocked. The correspondent of Realnoe Vremya contacted the administrators, who are also the remaining members of the group, for a comment, but at the time of publication no response was received.
Maria Gorozhaninova
The story of "Matilda" is not ideological (religious), but political. For most believers, neither the film nor its showing bothers them. Or they interfere no more than girls in minis or sex shops, for example. At most, they simply won’t go to the film. A Politicized freaks and “Orthodox” militants are “protesting”- with the support of influential circles in the Kremlin and the Russian Orthodox Church. If it weren’t for Matilda, they would have found something else to “offend”, something to destroy and ban.
The religious procession in St. Petersburg is traditional (in memory of someone there). And most of the participants did not come because of Matilda. But the organizers (read representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church and local authorities) either put freaks in the forefront with slogans against “Matilda” (some “Cossacks”; “St. Petersburg Cossacks” is an obscene farce in itself), or did not dare to remove them from there, contacting the police. The result is a false picture of the mass of believers who are supposedly all against Matilda.
In just a few days, Russia has crossed an important line that it has been approaching for a long time: Orthodox extremists have carried out two actual attempted terrorist attacks. ...
Russia was accustomed to religiously motivated Muslim terrorist attacks, but despite the often common citizenship of the killers and victims, they were perceived as terrorist attacks by strangers against their own, of minorities against the majority. The current attacks are attacks of one's own against one's own, carried out in the name of the majority. There was a struggle for independence, here - the struggle for power in the form of the right to determine the boundaries of what is permitted for everyone.
The Russian regime belongs to the type where discipline is more important than consent, and the authorities do not need co-authors of the political agenda and prefer to accept support in a passive form of submission and order. ... And the fact that the authorities are unable to discipline the indomitable Poklonskaya testifies not to how her ideas are growing stronger, but how she is weakening under the pressure of her own ideas.
The upward flow of “initiative in exchange for loyalty” (according to the formula “we define the goal, you lead us”) works well between the lower and middle levels, but does not always or with a delay reach the upper level. When the seething grassroots initiative finally reaches the very top, the Kremlin no longer has to deal with an extravagant individual who wants to be holier than the system, but with a full-fledged social phenomenon.
This is the paradox of the situation with “Matilda”: the top link, although it prefers statics to dynamics, does not always suppress excessively active enthusiasm in the early stages - this is petty and out of order and it’s a pity to pull back useful enthusiasts. When the initiative grows to a scale at which the Kremlin has no shame in noticing it, the cost of pacifying it grows, now it is fraught with the alienation of valuable support groups and the demonstration of a split within the patriotic majority. As a result, it is no longer the Kremlin that tests the grassroots movements for loyalty to itself, but they test the Kremlin for loyalty to the ideology it proclaims.
The President of Russia is strong enough to pull back the novice deputy Poklonskaya and the team of investigators who opened the Serebrennikov case and thereby complicated his relations with many potential confidants. But at the initial stage, descending to the level of the Poklonskaya or investigative group is too shallow. ... When the issue rises to a level that is not embarrassing for the Kremlin, the campaign participants are much more numerous and enthusiastic than at the beginning, and influential figures already appear in its ranks. It’s one thing when Poklonskaya attacks the Teacher’s film on her own behalf, it’s another when she is joined by Bishop Tikhon Shevkunov, who for many years has been considered the confessor of Putin and some high officials from the Russian special services.
One of the problems with the personalist regime built in Russia is that there are no checks on it except Putin himself. His word, spoken ex сathedra, that is, in a throne-like, managerial situation, is still taken seriously, but precisely because the words of other high-ranking functionaries are becoming less and less binding.
In this respect, the current elite really does not resemble a courtyard more than a Politburo. Putin cannot devalue his royal word by appealing to Poklonskaya or the investigative team, and the word of almost any other functionary, even if he claims to be speaking on behalf of the Kremlin, weighs too little to stop a patriotic campaign that has already built up muscle mass . Neither the Minister of Culture Medinsky, who finally came out with a very categorical condemnation of Poklonskaya’s “hullabaloo,” nor the presidential press secretary Peskov, nor Prime Minister Medvedev and his deputies are authoritative enough for this: for participants in national-patriotic campaigns, they themselves are a potential object of public or private struggle and the desired replacement with more patriotic officials.
For the organizers of public patriotic campaigns, there are no ideologists in the country except Putin and themselves. But Putin answers evasively, not exchanging his high rank even for the slight risk of becoming one of the opportunists, which means that all that remains is to find the “right priest” and receive a blessing. The Russian Church (as well as lay opinion leaders), like the world of Islam, is now quite diversified at the average level. And the middle level, having united with activists from below, gains the ability to impose the will of the highest: and on the candle boxes in the parishes there are subscription sheets against “Matilda”, and it doesn’t matter who put them there, it’s important that they are not removed.
Apart from the obvious confusion of martyrdom as the result of life and holiness, simplistically understood as an “A” for behavior, it is not always clear to outside observers why the last tsar, who slept through the empire, is so revered among imperial nationalists. This tradition has two roots. Even in Soviet times, the authenticity of the Orthodox spirit was measured by many by the recognition of the holiness of the last tsar: the emigrant Church Abroad had long revered him as a saint, while the Russian Orthodox Church and its, by all accounts, hierarchs recruited by the KGB, under pressure from the atheistic authorities, did not recognize this holiness. So the neophyte was asked to make a choice between real and conformist Soviet Orthodoxy. For this reason, the cult of the martyr Tsar existed in the Russian Church long before Putin, in the process of unifying the Russian and Foreign Churches, made it official.
At the same time, in the late USSR, the cult of the White Guards as real (unlike the Bolsheviks) patriots began to spread in the special services, paradoxically combined with respect for Stalin and Dzerzhinsky.
at the moment when Poklonskaya appeared in Moscow with her exotic project, the political center here had already been shifting towards the former region for two years, approximately where the philosopher Dugin had long worked, the Athos brotherhood met, and Orthodoxy was turning into a collective identity, giving the right to superiority over victors in the Cold War. The vectors of Russia and Poklonskaya coincided and gave a multiplying effect, and now it is difficult to stop Poklonskaya separately without calling into question the ideological movement of all of Russia in recent years.
For those who have developed a conservative maneuver for the country, Deputy Poklonskaya is restless, but on the whole, one of their own, and her critics, although more balanced, are strangers. It is contraindicated to beat your own for the joy of strangers.
Putin found himself in the classic trap of a novice ideologist. Having proclaimed an ideology, he created a new point of reference for an impersonal coordinate system, but a set of ideas is indirectly connected with a person, and Poklonskaya can embody this set no worse than he himself. In the old, non-ideological Russia, loyalty belonged only to him. In the new one, it is also a set of ideas that has an independent existence.
At the point of crystallization of ideology, a not yet clearly defined union of priests, representatives of the special services, businessmen and government functionaries who are faithful not so much to Putin, but to his proclaimed ideals, gradually emerges, which can be conditionally called a union of cassocks and shoulder straps. Mid- and lower-level officials are beginning to diversify their loyalties, dividing them between the president and this new vaguely personal ideological center. So, local leaders, security officials, and directors suddenly begin to speak out in favor of banning “Matilda,” especially since it seems to them from below that such a high-profile campaign is unlikely to proceed without approval from the very top. As a result, after Minister Medinsky’s statement against Poklonskaya and in support of the distribution of “Matilda,” several distributors in Kamchatka decided not to include the film in their repertoire, clarifying that this was their “civil position,” and the local Ministry of Culture posted their manifesto on its website: double loyalty , true to the ideals, the middle level argues with representatives of the higher, making a convenient choice at the fair of authorities.
(Certain passages in the quotes have been highlighted by me.)
MOSCOW, November 2 – RIA Novosti. Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Security and Anti-Corruption Natalya Poklonskaya appealed to Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika with a request to check the new film by director Alexei Uchitel “Matilda”. The Kremlin refused to comment on the film before its release, and the creators of the film called the claims far-fetched.
Alexey Uchitel: “Nicholas II is an underrated personality”Director Alexey Uchitel told Pavel Gaikov about the search for a performer to play the role of Nicholas II for his new film and about the desire to change viewers’ perceptions of Russian cinema.The film "Matilda" is scheduled to be released in March 2017. The film tells about the fate of the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya and her relationship with the future Emperor Nicholas II.
Social activists are against
The film, dedicated to the last Russian emperor, was criticized by activists of the social movement “Royal Cross” even before the official presentation. In their appeal to Poklonskaya, they called the picture a “threat to national security.”
Having received the appeal from the “Royal Cross”, Poklonskaya sent a request to the Prosecutor General’s Office asking for an assessment of the film “in accordance with Article 144 and 146 of the Criminal Procedure Code.”
The deputy and ex-prosecutor of Crimea explained this formulation by the need to conduct numerous examinations - art history, historical and others. According to Poklonskaya, a normal deputy request would significantly complicate the procedure and delay the process, while within the framework of the Criminal Procedure Code it will take less time and be more effective.
© TPO Rock Still from the film "Matilda"
© TPO Rock
The Kremlin does not comment
Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov, whom journalists asked to formulate the Kremlin’s position on the Matilda controversy, refused to assess Alexei Uchitel’s new film.
“We are not able to voice the Kremlin’s position, because there is no film, it’s not ready. Therefore, unfortunately, we do not have the opportunity to form a position on this,” Peskov noted.
Position of the creators
The producer of the film "Matilda" Alexander Dostman considers the claims of the "Royal Cross" to be far-fetched. In his opinion, social activists come up with problems “out of the blue.”
“There is a historical fact, and everything is clear to any sane person. The young emperor was in love with a girl... So we can find a lot of interesting things in both Chekhov and Turgenev,” Dostman told RIA Novosti, adding that he was surprised by Natalya Poklonskaya’s reaction.
Director Alexei Uchitel, in turn, said that the film is not ready yet, and he called the appeal of public activists “insanity.”
“For God’s sake, let them appeal, what do I have to do with it? I don’t comment on nonsense, it’s insanity. Firstly, no one has seen the film. The fact that they are appealing is impossible, because no one has seen a single frame, the film is still being made , he’s in the works,” the director is quoted as saying.
