The destructive power of words Ah, "Crosses", you are my "Crosses",
Spread over half a verst.
Behind the brick and behind the wall
I'm the one who's been hurt.
Anton Yakovlev
The Imperial hand with the native Russian generosity scattered over the wide expanses of many prisons, and among them "Crosses" are especially famous. Since time immemorial, St. Petersburg SIZO No. 1 kept political prisoners in cold stone dungeons, and from Stalin’s repressions to this day – criminals (who were indiscriminately accused, of course, too) of all kinds. Severe camp romance, sung with a syllable, did not cancel the passionate desire of many inmates to break free, which for this would not have to go. Each of the few escapes became a feat of prison art, while ending for daredevils, as a rule, deplorable. No exception was the attempt of the famous Soviet raider Sergei (Ali) Maduev, in which he was helped by a seduced prosecutor. Not ordinary and, we can say, piquant by Russian criminal standards, the case of a prison-sentimental connection attracted the attention of two famous filmmakers, Yevgeny Tatarsky and Sergei Solovyov. So on the virgin lands of the post-Soviet screen and grew uncomplicated, however, not tasteless picture.
Whether for ethical reasons, or for artistic reasons, but the character of Alexander Abdulov, evaluating the convenience of the camp skonyok, acquired not only a name different from the prototype, but also another “specialization”. Instead of a charming robber, known under the nickname Chervonets, an equally attractive “currency exchange” fraudster Artynov appeared to the eye. However, the characteristic arrogance of the burned criminal, contributing to the ability to convince, remained intact. Tatarsky was enough plot "caught - sat - charmed - tried to run" to build the film through the chamber prism of dialogue between the thief and the female investigator. For all the inconceivability of such a story, it is believed even more willingly than in a newspaper article - Abdulov has such a strong connection with Marina Neelova. An experienced seducer against a mature woman, unhappy in marriage - who do you think will? Other events appearing in the picture, whether it is a sluggishly advancing investigation, full of confusion of the meeting in the investigative bodies, a demonstration of the life of the prosecutor is nothing more than a background. The director is interested only in a psychological duel, colored by the romance of deaf camp tones.
Between the screen Artynov and the real Maduev similarities, frankly, not too much. However, Tatarsky did not aspire to this, otherwise his painting would not be called “romance”. Abdulov is insignificantly hesitant to exploit the well-known image of the “genius” from the tape of the same name, which in places of detention feels comfortable. Similarity to the paintings adds flashing in both the untempered figure of Yuri Kuznetsov, who as if fate is prescribed to play the litter for wiping criminal legs. However, it is not necessary to talk about universal borrowing. If in "Genius" the romantic line did not reach the level of the film itself, then in "Prison Romance" - exactly the opposite. With the apparent ease with which the heart of the lady investigator is subdued, the vessel of drama is only beginning to fill with a deadly poison. The romance of such different people is doomed initially - and it was clear to them both, but enveloping each of the lovers atmosphere of Novorossiysk hopelessness prolongs the sweet taste of illusory happiness. A woman who did not know affection, imperceptibly for herself begins to idealize the image of a hardened criminal. She, fueled by Artynov’s subtle psychological play, does not understand how dangerous a word can become that gives vain hope and puts a huge number of people at risk, because there is a lot of money in the case.
They are the main villains of real-fictional history - the damn banknotes with overseas power lovers. “Prison romance” was released when the version of the “price of the question” in the case of a romantic escape had not yet become known. It is likely that the real criminal and investigator did not have any feelings, but was an ordinary mercantile calculation. The truth is not easy to find, and even then, in '93, it was impossible to get to it. Tatarsky, in the spirit of a humane judge, repeatedly gave his “defendants” chances to defeat the system for their own sake. Moreover, the low-budget tape automatically saved the director from the desire to grab everything in a row. What can we say, if the climax of the organization of the escape turned out to be everyday, especially in comparison with the ending. Deceptive calm is not able to retouch the play of excellent actors who clearly showed how easy it is to lower the degree of tragedy thanks to personal charm. People are still people on the other side of the barbed wire. Who is supposed to guard, interrogate, “split” and so on – sometimes they themselves do not notice how they find themselves in the “one territory” with criminals. That is why the picture of Tatarsky will not be denied naturalness, and as for the artistic exaggeration of individual moments, they can be treated with condescension.