The film takes place in 1988-1989, at a time when the majority of the population watched with alarm what was happening in the country. Failed experiments in the socio-economic sphere could not be leveled by liberalism in the cultural and educational sphere: the availability for reading the rich treasury of Russian and foreign literature could not push the queue for the main goods of the light industry sector to the background. The weakness of power was most often captured by representatives of the criminal world. For them, it became a high point: without much piety, strong young people most often with a direct relationship to sports began to claim their rights. And the closer the agony of Soviet power approached, the more progressive the movement of these guys forward became. This is the city of Krasnogorsk, where officer Yerokhin arrives after a fifteen-year absence. Quickly realizing that his native city is literally entangled in mafia structures, which the valiant police want, but can not arrest red-handed, a brave and strong-willed person decides to fight criminals.
Since the cult Soviet film “Pirates of the XX century” Nikolai Eremenko Jr. played in many films, but to surpass his role in the film, which made him a cult figure among Soviet teenagers who escaped from school to have time for the next screening in the cinema, and failed. Here, he again plays a kind of hero - a man ready for decisive action, despite the possible consequences. But the story told by Yarpolk Lapshin is difficult to believe. And it is not the fabulousness or the incredible degree of naivety presented on the screen. Once again, the magnificent play of the cast in a monstrous way contrasts with everything else: the tie, pulled by the ears; intrigue, which disappears as soon as the viewer sees the main antagonist – an absolutely helpless figure, especially against the background of the confident hero Eremenko; the slow development of the plot, and finally, the main scourge of domestic products of that period: weak technical equipment. It is possible that if the picture did not have the above-mentioned disadvantages, it could become a classic of perestroika cinema along with “Fan”, “Katala”, “Thieves in law”, “Pulp Quartet” and others. And so the output was a weak attempt to be original and bring the plot closer to domestic realities. The attempt failed, but it is still worth getting acquainted with the picture, if only out of respect for the talent and memory of Nikolai Eremenko Jr. and Yarpolk Lapshin.
One of the last "hellos" of the bygone era is the film "I declare war on you." Before the collapse of the country remained another year, were still "comrades", still "Blue" moral appearance. Probably, then it looked not so funny (although the laughter is sad), it was already boring Soviet stamp, but now from viewing becomes a little uncomfortable. On the one hand, the Union seems to be still Soviet, but from the screen they are already directly talking about the mafia, about what you want to live - know how to spin, let the state not interfere with us, if it cannot help, and similar things, for which in the 60s the director would have been put in a madhouse.
On the other hand, this excessive optimism at the outset of the film does not spoil. Erema plays his Eroch perfectly, the officer turned out not quite Soviet, but rather, the tsarist army. Seriously, very intelligent was Lieutenant Colonel Yerokhin. Not a spetsnaz, not a “remba”, not a schwartz, but a strong professional who “in his hands everything works”, as they say in the film “Pokrovsky Gate”. Although for the “underground” somehow it is naively painful. He believes in court and justice, although the film is already THEN (!) the justice of the courts and in general the effectiveness of the law enforcement system calls into question (and who is this surprising now?). A person with ideals, without any internal contradictions. The hero is obviously positive and still to the brain of the bones Soviet, but without Soviet delicacy.
In general, in my opinion, the film was slightly ahead of the time when it appeared, and perhaps that is why it is still periodically played on TV. I recommend watching.
The value of the film, in my opinion, in the date of its production is the last year before the death of the USSR, and, probably, it is worth watching for the sake of Nikolai Yeremenko, it is good here. The movie looks realistic. In terms of reflecting the realities of his time, perhaps, does not lie. In 1990, when the Soviet Union was alive, it was possible to build a militant on an intrigue with a single revolver. There is a country, there is a law enforcement police, there is a shortage problem and co-operators making money from it. Cooperatives are not just a new phenomenon for the USSR, they contradict the essence of the socialist property system. The rebuilding system does not yet know what to do with them. And an empty niche of power watch is immediately occupied by bandits-extortionists. In general, the bandit showdowns of the 90s in my opinion are just a reaction to the power inaction that followed the destruction of the state.
The bandits in the film are not the scumbags of a ruined country. The state is still in place, the guys are replacing it as much as they can where it has self-removed – in the matter of the co-operators. And here comes the charismatic and honest hero Yeremenko. Lieutenant Colonel, 25 years in hot spots, Soviet special forces: Afghanistan, Cuba, Africa. Now he's back home. It is logical that the main character will cope with the spawn. A logical and practical reward for the hero is the leading place. The other thing is that it won't change anything.
This place can no longer be empty, the winners will take the place of the defeated. Now the cooperators will have to be covered by a handsome special forces officer, if not a fool. He's not a fool, and he has good connections. For the sake of the prosperity of the co-operators in a year the state will be destroyed And to new viewers the whole noble story will seem naive stupidity. Because there was the same regulator that was absent in the USSR, but now will handle all the controversial issues – money. We know that retroactively. The director still seems not to know what creates the impression of naivety and fabulous film today. And he's not fabulous, he's just Soviet, or he's hoping for it.
The main character in the Soviet way is flawless in everything, up to an exemplary moral appearance - a concentrated man who suddenly descended from a poster about the builders of communism (“alive” such in the 80s hardly anyone saw) and fell into the era after developed socialism, where co-operators and racketeers for some reason began instead of communism. It is interesting that such a hero appeared even in 1990 (the year of the release of the film) - there was still an opinion that everything was fine with the Soviet system, in general, and if it were not for bribes in storage rooms, not soft-bodied policemen, not living hotel administrators ... Mayakovsky expressed this best in his immortal poem about Lenin: "... the extraction of coal and ore is expanding - and next to this, of course, there are many, many different rubbish and nonsense: you get tired of fighting back and chewing back ... a lot of different scoundrels ..." The hero, who defeated the bandits, needed to become the boss himself to arrange everything properly. Life has shown that this is not the problem. The movie looks tortured. There is no desire to revise it – there are many others that reflect the “perestroika” period in the USSR more adequately. And shot with great skill.
Sometime in the early 10s, I watched the 1990 Soviet crime drama I Declare War on You. Now, in 2017, I thought that if I went to the page of this film, I would see a low rating and one or two negative reviews. Well, it's been a long time since I've been wrong.
(At the time of 13.06.2017) The estimate is 6,928. That is, the average viewer treats this film as “hardly average, rather good”. Seven reviews, all positive. It's incredible -- honestly, I'm surprised. So let’s start with the analysis.
Criminal drama is an imperative genre (like comedy, like action). Regarding personal drama/social drama/thriller/horror/fiction, some exculpatory phrases can be issued. “This movie is not for everyone”, “the plot is unusual”, “buddy, you didn’t catch the message”. Criminal drama can not be average, criminal drama is either good or bad – a third is not given.
The film "I declare war on you" is rather bad.
The problem is that it is too realistic. Why do we like, for example, “Pulp Fiction”, “Brother”, “Cards-money-two-barrels”, “Brush” or “Jack Reacher”? The reasons can be different, but the listed crime dramas have at least one thing in common - healthy surrealism. These colorful situations, these charismatic / funny characters, these radically pragmatic dialogues, these original pontiffs, this light cynicism is what the viewer loves this genre for: for all the sharp things that will never (probably) happen to him.
“I declare war on you,” on the other hand, is the dream of complex nerds with a flawed perception of art. Because the movie is too realistic. Too much, you hear? When I watched it, I believed what was happening on the screen, but should it be so, gentlemen? We believe in the seller of balloons or the view from the window, and in the cinema we immerse ourselves in order, on the contrary, not to believe, but to enjoy healthy surrealism. This is the meaning of feature film - to distract from not too bright reality and immerse in exciting virtuality.
When viewing, it seems that the film is based on real events, and the writer sought to ensure that the details did not contradict the source. Here, the man Yerokhin returned to his native town - not Schwarzenegger's body, not Bruce Lee's technique, in a word - an ordinary servant of the USSR Armed Forces. How do you empathize with such a protagonist? Here, the town seems not particularly from the bandits suffers - only businessmen suffer, well, how - suffer? - they are already accustomed. Residents of a gang of passers-by are not beaten, women are not raped, banks are not robbed - how can such antagonists be hated? Here, there is a gang leader of Thomas, faded like a statist of the Bodaibe city theater - how can such a villain be afraid? Here, Erokhin has friends – not the same warriors, not alcoholics, not residents of the gang of Thomas (and why not?), but ordinary gray workmen, even more gray than the town in which they live – how can such accomplices of the main character be respected? Here, there is a dummy provocateur who needed to seduce Erokhin and put him behind bars - not a lush-breasted beauty, not a cunning krill, not a Byronic loner, but an ordinary slut, which from the Pyrenees to Kamchatka cannot be counted. Really? These questions can be asked for a long time.
Even the actions of Erokhin for a kilometer give the smell of everyday life. He shoots realistically, runs realistically, beats realistically. Yerokhin is not able to keep his word: he promised Nikita to break her hands - as a result, he just painfully struck with a steel rod. I am already silent about his reprise - they are epic, like a physical assistant fight with a laborer. Is this the main character in the crime drama? Mda-mda-mda...
I advise you, reader, not to watch this movie. Look better those films that I threw in the section “Don’t miss” – “Angel City”, “Man in a green kimono”, “Nowhere to run”, “Gringo” – there is the same canvas, but the implementation on a fundamentally different level. Pay special attention to the film "American Fight" - shot around the same era, but, unlike "I declare", sound and even a little legendary. By the way, it is very strange that these films have lower ratings than I Announce. Very, very strange.
Very atmospheric cinema, to a greater extent to represent the rigidity of time, which is characteristic of the perestroika period and those very "nineties". Although, at the same time, the film was released in the 90th, and was created in the 89th - this once again suggests that the "time of change" overtook the former countries of the Union not just after the signing of the Bialowieza agreement, but long before it. But this film is not specifically about the powerful of this world, namely about ordinary people, in this case – the residents of Krasnogorsk.
... Someone lives and wants to live just like everyone else. Someone's completely wrong. That is why he tries to establish his own rules in this chaos of lawlessness and relative ruin. Logically, there is a conflict between the criminal and popular world, in the person of Thomas (Sayfulin) and Erokhin (Yeremenko), respectively. The eternal conflict between good and evil. Between darkness and light. Between a just and honest, but unarmed people, and organized, as well as supported from all sides, crime. The people, in the person of a former officer, an officer for whom honor and justice are above all else, enter into a battle with the notorious criminal Thomas, on whose side at such and such a time power, law, and force.
Of course, the film does not claim to be unique. Moreover, it abounds in clichés of such heroic films, although here, the scale is of course depressing. And in general, by and large, it is standard even for Soviet cinema semi-action. A standard, uninventive, but very atmospheric film. But personally, I did something for myself. First of all, I was imbued with that cruelty of time and really lawlessness, when everyone is for himself, when everyone is an enemy to each other, when you walk along the evening street of the city with a trembling heart, when the strongest survives. I wasn’t alive at the time and wasn’t even born yet. But thanks to this "I declare war on you", I can build for myself at least a general portrait of the time and, as other films of the time and simply films about the time prove, by and large it was so. And that's really terrible.
Superhero urges from the very first Soviet film hero - Nikolai Yeremenko - are visible almost immediately. As I said, the film is standard and typical, which means that first we will be introduced to who is the hero, then, knowing that we know that the hero is the hero, he will be remembered, and then (the culmination) – he takes revenge and everything is foldable. As in the best traditions of the classic action movie, foreign or ours. Therefore, the originality is not visible here. The film takes the unique behavior of the character Eremenko, quite characteristic, I suppose, and Nikolai Nikolaevich himself, as well as the spirit of that very rigidity. Still, a fairy tale and a fabulous ending now no surprise, but an intriguing film about one of the most controversial periods of our history, in my opinion, deserves at least once, but attention.
8 out of 10
The "Voroshilov shooter" is ahead, and for now the tapestry, a couple of burned cars, and bruises. Then there will be mass orders and OCGs. In the meantime, the hero just wants to live and love. The role is played as if Yeremenko wrote the script, directed and performed. And the main thing: this is the time of the first cooperatives, and the last hopes that there will be no more big trouble, and these young guys in the “varenka” will not arrange real criminal wars.
You really enjoy the film, but how else – after all, not only justice triumphed in a small town, but also love! And all this without expensive foreign cars, cowboy shootouts, crazy money, and beautiful “abroad”, and diamonds are not the best friends of girls.
This film is an organic link in the development of the country, to the drunken conductor of the German orchestra.
I don’t remember a single one, not that bad, but average film from maestro Yaropolk Lapshin. It's almost a masterpiece. Is the movie "Ugly River" bad? Or "Demidovs." About "Saluted, extended, charm", generally silent. One of my favorite paintings. Five years after the publication of the film “I declare war to you”, Yevgeny Matveev, will shoot something similar to “Love in Russian”, but I liked the movie Yaropolk Lapshin more. Nothing can be done: from the charisma and brutality of Nikolai Yeremenko Jr. can not escape. And he's playing really well.
What's the movie about? That every man is a warrior, a defender of his small homeland, why the land and home. It is not necessary to give in to difficulties and obstacles that seem insurmountable at first glance. About the character of a person, about his craving and love for life. About the correct upbringing and laying by the parents of the necessary foundation, which was the hero of Nikolai Yeremenko. And all of the above looks not only convincing, but also coolly done, as if the artist painted a great painting.
Vladimir Yerokhin returns to his hometown from a difficult military service. I ruined his life. Hardened. Made a real man. The soldier’s burden is heavy, but it did not knock out the ground from under the feet of the hero Yeremenko, did not anger him to the whole white world. Just made it a little tough, a little sharp and sullen. There. Vladimir Yerokhin returned home and what did he see? His city, as if replaced: went to serve in the army, there was one city, and now it is simply not recognized. And these changes are not for the better. People are frightened by the violence of the local mafia, led by Thomas (Gennady Saifulin). Corruption and lawlessness flourish. Naturally, all this is not to the liking of Vladimir Erokhin, the military past and Crimea and Rome. When he finds out who's in charge here, and he finds out and he meets Tom, it's not going to be a childish confrontation. It is a struggle between the forces of evil and the forces of righteousness. Who do you think will win in it? Yeremenko's super game. In general, all the characters are well written. The film is still relevant today. Highest score.
The film is very good - the script, actors, music.
Eremenko is incomparable, I love him very much! . .
Women are cute and... feminine, not as an example of glamorous modernity. In the eyes - emotions, feelings, expression ...
It's just a good view of nature.
In addition to the dynamics and tension, there is a certain aesthetic.
Yes, after the current “fighters”, it may seem like a children’s film. But for the viewer, a good children's film is much more useful than a psychotic modern pseudo-cinema, where in the first place - scenes of violence, then there may be at least some script, and only somewhere on the side a weak hint of acting.
Thank God, in this film everything is exactly the opposite: the script and excellent acting come first, and then everything else.
Thank you to everyone who worked on this film. For positive heroes and worthy people, for faith in the good and respect for the viewer!
