1902 - 08.06.1929.
He was born in Moscow in 1902 in the family of an employee. The father - an accountant, with a very modest material wealth, tried to give his son a good education, "bring to people." Volodya successfully graduated from school, and then entered the Technological Institute. My father’s hopes seemed close to being fulfilled. But the revolutionary storm broke old ideas and instincts, especially among the youth. The old fell, the new was born. Life changed decisively, became different, past values were reevaluated.
The years of the revolution fell on Vogel's youth. The close, monotonous world of the family deprived him of the opportunity to see life, to understand it. Volodya finds the strength to break with the past and abandon the future it has prepared for him. He's leaving home for the big life. Volodya goes to the people, joins his thoughts and worries. He wanders for a long time but to the villages, is not alien to physical labor, works as a lumberjack. He's looking for his place in life.
Vogel comes to the decision unexpectedly. Today it is difficult to determine what prompted him to do so and not otherwise. Volodya returns to Moscow and enters the State Cinematography College. He chooses the path of a movie actor. But along the way, he does not show indifference in the choice of means for penetrating the screen. He is attracted by innovative research, and he enters Kuleshov’s workshop.
Kuleshov turned out to be the seed of the future, which fell into the soil of the past. He appeared in the cinema before the revolution and managed to suffer for his innovative quest. He was fired from a studio that produced films according to old, proven patterns. In order to create the new, it was necessary to destroy the old. Kuleshov hated the pre-revolutionary film actor - the "experiencer" and wanted to replace him with a "model" - a well-trained person who clearly reacts to everything around him and what happens to him. Instead of “fine” movement, he demanded correctness and accuracy. The actor had to act, not pretend to act.
However, in Soviet film production at first, most of the directors and actors who came from pre-revolutionary cinema continued to use the old proven means. The new man had yet to prove his right to exist. Vogel immediately believed in the new and did not hesitate to join him. The new one was in Kuleshov's workshop.
Kuleshova was not embarrassed by the lack of equipment and materials. For the practical development of his theories, he put “films without film”, cinematic plots played out without words, on a cramped set, without a filmmaker. Fogel with heat is included in the experiments of the team, delves into the still little-known originality of new art. Here Vogel understood what cinema is. .
In the first feature-length feature film Kuleshov’s “Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. West in the Country of the Bolsheviks” (1924), Vogel first appeared on the screen as an unnamed performer of a small episodic role. More noticeable was the role of the fascist Fogh in the next film Kuleshov “Ray of Death” (1925). The first performances showed the young artist a diligent follower of the principles of the Kuleshov school. He was one of the members of the group, one might say, just like the others.
And at the same time, Kuleshov’s workshop combined quite diverse talents. They mastered the basics of innovative film art here, and then diverged in different directions and went their own independent ways. Moreover, in these foundations, as in almost every new case, there was still much that was controversial, immature, and even contradictory. Vogel's talent was versatile, he did not fit into the school curriculum. This became evident already in his third performance in the cinema, in the short comedy Chess fever (1925). The film was directed by V. I. Pudovkin, "Right hand" Kuleshov. He left his teacher, reaching independence and maturity of creativity.
Chess fever was a work that promptly responded to the World Chess Tournament, which took place in Moscow at the end of 1925. Chess became a universal fascination, and this suddenly engulfed passion film showed with merry ridicule.
Vogel played the main role of a young hero, gripped by an insurmountable chess fever. A beautiful scene was held in which Vogel himself, in complete ecstasy, plays a game of chess, and the viewer seems to be playing two people. The whole action was filled from beginning to end with witty and funny scenes, showing how chess captured everyone, from visitors to to toddlers sitting on night pots. . .
Eccentricity and caricature were characteristic of the Kuleshov school, and Pudovkin and Vogel widely used them. Along with this, both the director and the lead actor noticed deviations from the basics of the school. More spontaneity, simplicity and softness of humor opened new, characteristic features that were invisible to that edge of creativity.
A small, modest film could not, of course, open a new page in the history of Soviet cinema. But Vogel attracted the attention of the audience, aroused interest with an obvious comedic talent. In the future, comedic roles occupy more and more place in his work. Immediately after the “chess fever”; Fogel starred in the satirical comedy The Trial of Three Million (1920) directed by Y. L. Protazanov, one of our most popular comedy films. With good humor, Vogel played a small role of a man with binoculars.
In the three-part adventure film “Miss Mend” (1926), Vogel appeared “melancholic by nature, a momentary photographer by profession”. The directors of the film, F. A. Ocep and Kuleshov’s student B. V. Barnet, proceeded from the techniques of the American adventurous genre, but presented it in a comedic refraction. The action was full of chases, fights and sharp plot positions that required great dexterity and thorough training from the performers.
Fogel felt here in a well-known element. Raised in strictly cinematic principles, he was markedly different from his partner Igor Ilyinsky, committed to stage grotesque in facial expressions and gesture. Fogel is restrained, concise, which was considered a characteristic feature of the film actor, as opposed to theatrical. In Miss Mend, such restraint corresponded to the melancholy of the actor, but it is generally noticeable in many of Vogel's roles. However, sometimes she came into conflict with the sharpness of the reaction that Kuleshov demanded from his models.
Vogel's parting with the collective Kuleshov occurred in the next film - "By law" (1926). Kuleshov himself put it on the story of Jack London. In the script written by Viktor Shklovsky, the plot of the story underwent some rethinking, and this markedly changed the essence of the role that Vogel played. In Jack London, Michael Danin decides to kill his comrades for mercenary motives. Shklovsky introduced revenge for insults and neglect of comrades.
The role of Michael Deinin is absolutely exceptional in the world of cinema. It is unlikely to be possible to count many roles in which the artist for most of the action lies tied hand and foot, devoid of expressive gesture and movement! But the basis of the Kuleshov school just included the active actions of the model with accurate gestures and body movements!
Vogel coped remarkably with the difficult task before him. Perhaps, he could be reproached in several frames for excessive "pressure" facial expressions. However, such “pressure” differed and his partners, proceeding from the techniques of the model. In general, the role was performed with true skill.
The main action of the film is an excruciating conflict in which three people were involved - a husband, wife and one of the miners who were part of the group of gold miners abandoned in a distant Klondike. Husband and wife are to represent the Law, immutable, with a capital letter, and to bring justice to the third, the murderer. He lies wrapped in a rope, and the couple guards him day and night. Everything is sustained by the letter of the law, and life goes its own, purely everyday ways, knocking justice from the heights of inviolability. Carriers of Crime and Punishment together are enclosed in a dilapidated house, cut off by endless tundra, and then by the spill of the vast Yukon from the whole world.
The administrators of justice are united with the criminal by a common way of life, the duty to feed and care for him, to share their meager and irreplaceable reserves. They are people of the same circle and the same interests. But the inexorable law weighs on them, determines their relationship. Hence the complex and heavy obligations that make an already difficult life utterly unbearable. Therefore, it is quite understandable to be exceptionally demanding on acting expressiveness for revealing the states of people in such unusual circumstances at an extremely close place of action.
Vogel conveyed the incredible circumstances with a rather convincing truthfulness. He unleashed a whole gamut of feelings, their movement and change, from hatred to guilt, with reconciliation evoking friendship and even appreciation for caring for him. After all, his judges could have killed him at the scene of the crime, as he himself killed his comrades. All this Vogel expresses only facial expressions and mainly views, since actions and movements are inaccessible to him.
The shaving scene was performed with tremendous force. The couple are preparing to celebrate the holiday, and Michael - the criminal to be punished - is the only living soul, an unwitting "guest" at the wretched festive celebration of his judges. He asks his husband to shave him. And when the razor touches the throat, there comes a terrible moment - it is so easy now with the press of a hand to end the murderer and all the painful, protracted, confused relationships. Vogel’s gaze expresses simultaneously, in a fraction of a second, horror, prayer, hope, and at the same time a clear understanding of his complete helplessness. . .
Reconciliation followed. Transferred shocks and suddenly appeared sweet festive mood smooth out the contradictions. Three people in a small house became equal again, softened and as if returned to those days when a terrible crime had not yet been committed. Michael is different than he has ever been seen, soft-hearted and even sentimental.
But the law is the law in the conception of a married couple who have assumed the duties of judge and executioner. And in the final episode, after the execution of the death sentence, Michael, who broke off the gallows, again appears bitter and angry. However, his attitude towards his executioners is different. It is tinged with anger and contempt when he tears the noose from his neck and throws it in the face of his judges - "for good luck!" After all, there is a belief that the rope of the hanged is a happy talisman. . .
"According to the law" largely testified to the retreat of Kuleshov himself from strict observance of his theoretical principles. To an even greater extent, the departure from school is noticeable in Vogel. He not only performed the proper functions of a model, clearly reacting to the environment, but also deeply penetrated into the feelings of his hero Michael Danin.
However, Vogel did not have any conflicts with his teacher, either creatively or personally. He did not challenge or deny Kuleshov’s theoretical views or put forward any principles of his own. There was no tear. They just went their separate ways. Kuleshov was concerned about the future of his team. And Fogel had a lot to do. He gained success, he was offered roles in various films. Material difficulties, the inability to provide himself with work in one team forced him to agree to participate in the shooting, regardless of who invited him to what. .
These seemingly accidental and incidental circumstances had quite significant consequences. Vogel had to work for various directors, each had their own artistic opinions and requirements for actors. He was filming with various partners. Some came to the movies from the theater. Others denied theatrical techniques, tried to look for new means, or adapted to the peculiarity of working in front of the camera.
In addition, in the newly emerging new, revolutionary Soviet cinema, there was no leading direction of acting, which could be guided by a significant majority of creative workers. If Kuleshov wanted to replace the former theatrical actor with a model, then Eisenstein generally refused professional artists, selecting random people for filming solely on their appearance.
Vogel was forced to reckon with all this, perform the tasks of directors and adjust to partners. So life and creative practice took the young artist further and further away from his teacher.
By coincidence, almost all of Vogel's roles mentioned here so far have been on foreign material. Meanwhile, the creation of images of Soviet people was the primary task of our film art. This task arose before Vogel in the next film - "Third Meshchanskaya" (1927), directed by A. Room.
Paradoxical as it may seem, the Soviet theme in those years was the most difficult, and many filmmakers suffered serious failures on it. Images of Soviet people were new to art, the experience of their embodiment is still insignificant. It is extremely important that the show of contemporaries was closely connected with many, not yet solved life problems of the new way of life, morality. Works of art sometimes had to give answers to questions far from clarified in everyday practice. The audience demanded such works, they had a huge social and educational value. And despite the difficulties, such works appeared, causing heated debates, sympathies and objections.
Just one of these films belonged "Third Meshchanskaya". The film raised complex and largely controversial issues of love, family, new relationships of people of the first post-revolutionary years. And if the three characters who made up the traditional triangle did not come to solutions that are not in doubt, they made the viewer think hard about everyday problems. The name of the hero of the film, whose role was played by Vogel, was Vladimir Vogel, as well as the name of his partner - N. P. Batalov, was Nikolai Batalov, and the role of the heroine - Lyudmila was performed by Lyudmila Semenova. This seemed to emphasize the vitality, the ingenuity of the content.
However, this is not the first time Vogel has performed under his own name. The photographer-momentalist in "Miss Mend" was also called Vogel. Of course, he had no intention of bringing a permanent character under his name. But today, remembering all of his creative path, it is impossible not to notice that in many of his roles, no matter how different the characters were, Vogel in some way remained himself. Most often this was expressed in restraint of character, expression of feelings, manner of behavior. Such was “melancholic by nature” in “Miss Mend.” And about the same he was in the "Third Meshchanskaya".
At the school of Kuleshov, Vogel was imbued with hostility to the demonstration of "experiences", acting "game". He firmly grasped the naturalness of action, avoiding the appearance of action. Already in "Miss Mend" the difference between Vogel and his partners was striking.
His partner in the “Third Meshchanskaya” N.P. Batalov is a magnificent artist of the Moscow Art Artist School. The images he created in a number of films entered the classics of Soviet cinema. Lively and succulently he performed his role in the Third Meshchanskaya. But next to him, Vogel makes a somewhat strange impression. Batalov is always presenting something. He has a lot of brilliant acting finds, carefully thought out witty characteristic details that contribute to the bright disclosure of the image.
There's nothing like Vogel. He looks like the most ordinary person, simply and routinely living in the film, as if he came here directly from the street. His behavior on the screen is extremely artificial. This is the artistic art of Vogel. He is extremely restrained, economical in the use of expressive means, in the manifestation of his feelings.
Already at the first meeting on the street of Nikolai and Vladimir, friends on the front of the civil war, Batalov violently shows joy. Vogel is obviously happy too, but his joy is expressed without temperamental gestures and facial expressions. It may even seem that he is a little confused, embarrassed by the strong emotions of his friend. Batalov is always active. This is clearly seen in his behavior at work and at home, in his communication with others. Even during the lunch break at the construction site, he effectively shows that he eats with appetite and rests with pleasure.
Fogel doesn't show anything. He lives his life peacefully. At work in the printing house, he monitors the progress of printing the next issue of the journal. He does not stand out from other workers. Here he stands with his back to the audience and looks at the finished copy of the magazine. And although he does not attract attention, it is clear that he is completely absorbed in his usual, everyday work. Kuleshov’s principle of acting, not pretending to act, was especially strictly observed in his team when performing professional, industrial work. The modeler must professionally possess the movements necessary to perform a certain work task. Vogel observed this rule in good faith.
Returning home from work, Vogel does not deliver any interesting spectacles to the viewer.39 He sits on the couch, reading, not even trying to express the impression of reading. It's just how he spends his time. Then he solves a chess problem. You can see that he is passionate, although he does not use special acting techniques.
In the years of the formation of Soviet cinema, there was a decisive demarcation of the artistic means of cinema and theater. Filmmakers were wary of theatricality as the main danger, looking for specific features of their art. And the actor wasn't supposed to be theatrical. The best silent film artists achieved high skill by immobility and silence on close-ups, carefully thought out details that spoke more than wordy speech.
The true artist of silent cinema was Vogel. The beginnings laid from the first steps Kuleshov had a decisive impact on all his work. His best roles are distinguished by the lack of effective acting techniques, restraint and conciseness. He perfectly understood the originality of artistic means of cinema and took them into account in the work on the set. This allowed him to take a prominent place among the new actors of Soviet cinema.
The persistent desire to abandon the generally accepted theatrical techniques was reflected in the performance of film artists on the screen without makeup, in its natural form. It was even accepted, if the role required it, not to glue a mustache, a beard, but to grow them specifically for filming. It was believed that in the cinema everything should be real, without falsehood. Indeed, the make-up borrowed from the theater was rude, very noticeable on close-up plans, and among real things against the background of true nature made a disgusting impression, destroying the sense of truthfulness. Fogel many times filmed without makeup, in particular in "Miss Mend" and "Third Meshchanskaya". But at the same time, he showed great interest in makeup.
If theatrical makeup is bad in the movies, it does not mean that you can not make up for filming. There were convinced adherents of cinematic identity, who believed that the cinema needed a special makeup, more subtle, invisible, taking into account the features of filming.
Vogel enthusiastically conducts various experiments with makeup. He designs and diligently designs makeup for his roles, achieving great naturalness and impressive expressiveness. At the same time, he was not limited to the needs of current filming, but created interesting makeup for the roles he would like to perform. These plans, which remained unfulfilled, constituted a whole gallery of artistic images. As an example of makeup, radically changing appearance, we can mention the small role of a young man in the film Who are you? (1927), directed by Yuri Zhelyabuzhsky. This makeup was cited in our film literature as a sample of real skill.
In recent years, Vogel worked with great overload, in 1924 he acted in one film, in 1925 - in two, 1926 - in three, and in 1927 and 1928 he starred in four films annually.
He played very different roles in nature - the failures of a livid young telegraphist ("Girl with a Box", 1927, directed by B. Barnet), a housewife-barber, exploiting his housekeeper ("House on Trubnoy", 1928, directed by B. Barnet), a foreign adventurer who came to Moscow in pursuit of inheritance ("Doll with millions", 1928, directed by S. Komarov). In addition, he starred in the director V. I. Pudovkin in the "End of St. Petersburg" (1927) as a German officer, the director F. Ocep in the "Earth in captivity" (1928) as the son-in-law of a rich landowner and the director G. Roshal in the film "Salamander" (1928), where he played the role of a reactionary baron, leading a fierce struggle with an advanced scientist.
Such work required a terrible effort, and the artist could not withstand it. A serious illness of the nervous system for a long time constrained him. In 1929, during an acute attack of illness, Vogel himself tragically ended his life. He was only 27 years old. .
Volodymyr Vogel began his artistic activity when Soviet cinematography was on the path of the first decisive victories. His talent as an innovative film artist blossomed in these heroic years. And he gave them his short life.
Uh. Arnoldi, 1968