Deputies defending the Republic/Valkyria of the Provisional Government/Amazon of Ober-Officer Bochkareva/Geteras of Kerensky Mason/Kedesoma Fyodor Sergeevich
Before proceeding to my modest opus, I would like to apologize at once for several expressive variations of the title of the review, for I did not in any way wish to discredit the respectable heroism of the women's battalions of the Russian Army, albeit at times of its degradation, but only allowed a minor contextual digression, not related to events that unfolded in the inter-revolutionary historical era.
' Battalion' as I understand it, was timed to the centenary of the beginning of the First World War. Such glorious pages of it as, for example, the Vilno-Molodechnensky operation or the Brusilov breakthrough, as well as other Russian victories, the filmmakers somehow ignored, and decided to concentrate on its post-monarchist phase - ' time of trouble, chaos and despair'.
Mid-17. Having perfidiously overthrown the Russian sovereign, the Freemasons of the Provisional Government, corrupted by permissiveness, launched a systematic campaign to disintegrate the Russian army, in particular, introduced soldiers' committees and began to dismiss officers professing monarchical beliefs. Instead of keeping professional and combat-ready warriors in the ranks, the Kerensky brethren did not come up with anything better than to create women's military formations in order to raise the morale of the army' (involuntarily, the notorious patriotism as a sublimation of lust, which took place in Bondarchukovsky'Stalingrad').
The film Meskhiev, who in the idea of the artistic embodiment of the phenomenon of women’s battalions certainly put his subjective meaning, in fact, is a kind of mix from the ' Admiral', ' Ninth Company' and ' Heter Major Sokolov' (even it seems that the actresses are the same). Having appeared among the bearers of demonic black-scarlet chevrons ' thinker ' Kozhevnikova, who bore like a shoemaker in ' and then suddenly transformed into a well-bred Countess, in my mind suddenly frivolous thought crept in secret - interesting, but it would be spectacular and watchable if she was joined by other thinkers ' - Zhurova, Ivanovna, a firewoman from the upper house of Kirozhenka, if the head of a wardenovka, in the first place of Kerozhenka, a priestlyovka, etc.39? Nevertheless, with the role of the Russian 'caliph for the hour', deservedly and far from being outsider entrenched in the rating of evil geniuses of Russia, Marat Basharov coped well, very naturally conveying the same nasty facial expression that we are used to seeing on old photos that captured the insidious physics of Alexander Fedorovich.
P.S.
It is a little annoying that Ekaterina Vilkova and, perhaps, Ekaterina Spitz did not play in the Meskhievko-Bondarchukov film, who would certainly have overthrown the enemy with a fork and a spoke here in a fit of frontal frenzy, respectively, like the kainits of angels in the apocryphal & #39; Book of Enoch' (pardon me for maybe not quite appropriate urgantism).
Finally, we waited for the premiere of the Russian historical drama Battalion and the feelings he evokes are mixed. On the one hand, the concentration of attempts to cause catharsis on each millimeter of the frame is quite successful. On the other hand, I couldn’t help feeling like I was being shown another version of Soldier Jane, which was transferred to Russia in the year 17.
I would not like to go into the historical truth of the tape, since the authors, apparently, did not set such a task. What really disliked was the disproportionateness of the storylines in terms of their historical location. If the viewer is not familiar with the history of Russia, then he may well have the feeling that almost the only event of the military company in the seventeenth year was the creation and operation of a women's battalion.
What I really liked was the accents that are clearly visible in the film. It's not the masses that make history. They begin to change its course when the so-called elite hide their heads under their pillow. For me, this is a story about how the inner core of a very small number of people is able to bring order to the mass of surrounding cattle. A lesson for those who complain about circumstances - do not like, strip off the epaulets and do it yourself.
The rest is a very secondary movie. Those wishing to drop a tear welcome.
The controversy surrounding this film boils down to the question of whether it is possible or not to make patriotic or, moreover, jingoistic films in modern Russia.
Fans of the "Battalion" insist, following the Russian military-historical society, that not only it is possible, but also should, opponents - that it is not necessary or at least that it is not necessary in such a vent.
This polemic is certainly fascinating, but it has a rather indirect relationship to the film of Dmitry Meskhiev, since the Battalion released by him is not a patriotic, not a military mix with historical and even a battle film.
The Battalion is an extremely rare example of social criticism in our time, when the focus of revealing attention is not a person, not an organization, but a whole socio-political practice, i.e. a very abstract phenomenon that requires special artistic sophistication for its detection and disclosure.
In other words, “Battalion” is a movie about what PR technologies are and why they turn out to be an absolute evil for everyone who somehow falls into their stinking orbit.
Therefore, the closest analogue of Meskhiev’s film is the classic “The Tail Wags the Dog”, which, however, shows the world of PR, rather, from the technological side, without raising the question of price: everyone does this and always, to what unnecessary reflections.
Why was “artistic sophistication” mentioned? Because the development of such ephemeral themes can be carried out only on extremely specific material, when all approximation is erased and a history repulsive in its clarity appears before the audience.
So, according to the opening credits, spring 1917 is in the courtyard. The Russian army, exhausted by more than two years of war and mortally wounded by Order No. 1, is gradually disintegrating, turning from the second most important military force of the Entente into a million-strong collection of latent pacifists and potential deserters.
To stop the degradation of this last strap of the disintegrating state, extraordinary and extremely unpopular measures can be taken: the restoration of the death penalty at the front, the introduction of accelerated military field courts, the dissolution of soldiers' committees and the arrest of their leadership, and, if this is not enough, the organization of protective detachments in especially problematic areas.
This is a bitter medicine and a retribution for everything at once: for the sins of the previous command, for the honeymoon of February freedom, for blindness, infantilism and Order No. 1. To go this way means to keep the chances to reach the moment when the Central Powers, slowly strangled by the blockade and futility, will be the first to throw the white flag.
For military professionals, the choice is obvious: keep the army or lose everything. But over military specialists there are politicians, personified in the film by Alexander Kerensky, who see a step further.
Emboldened by field tribunals and shootings before the formation, the army is not only able to hold the dilapidated front before its eyes, but also, in the name of saving the Fatherland, to assume the fullness of state power.
Military dictatorship in this situation is inevitable: relying on millions of newfound fear and obedience of gray coats, the generals will very quickly ask the Provisional Government for all its many shackles, including indulging in left-wing extremists.
Therefore, it is absolutely impossible to allow the strengthening of the army. But the war continues, one way or another it must be led and preferably not to a separate peace - what to do, how to solve this difficult, or rather impossible task?
The answer is simple: active PR events, then – kindling the sacred patriotic fire through the demonstration of desperate exploits, or, in relation to the picture, the creation of a shock female battalion of death, which, by example, should awaken the necessary fervor in men tired of the war.
At first glance, the scheme looks spectacular: ashamed soldiers, having learned that now the German is beaten by women, are unable to sit in the trenches, tore as far as Berlin.
There is no need for draconian measures; revolutionary enthusiasm will do everything by itself. And the crackers of the General Staff, who do not believe in the hard-won freedom and spirit of the people who have thrown off the tsarist fetters, will be ashamed.
But, and this is the main discovery of the film, turning it from an ordinary film about the war in a brilliant social pamphlet, a consistent demonstration of how the highest idea is actually realized, completely turns the meaning embedded in this project.
The longer we watch how voluntarily shaved aunts hastily master military wisdom, learning to walk in formation, shoot from the knee and freeze at the command "Attention!", the more obvious becomes all the madness of this idea of the Minister-Chairman Kerensky and junior non-commissioned officer Bochkareva.
Kerensky, sandwiched between the demands of the generals to really wage war and the expectations of Russian society at least some success of his army, and Bochkarev, who so fervently wanted to receive officer epaulettes, and no other possibility to do this, except to send three hundred tempted fools, really found each other: it was their efforts and became possible soon unfolding tragedy.
The aunts who did not smell gunpowder were sent to all the Kahals to one of the sections of the front stretching from sea to sea. Usually, soldiers who come with replenishment are distributed in platoons and companies that already have combat experience. Our battalion, with the exception of Bochkareva and several attached officers, was a clean board: no skills, no instincts, no experience, just unafraid cannon fodder.
On the same side of the neutral strip, they were waiting for German infantrymen, rightly having a reputation as one of the best in the world, who had behind them not the accelerated course of a young fighter, but three years of the Great War - no illusions, no pity, no doubts.
What could have ended their clash in the first fight (and this is not counting the fact that the men, in general, are just physically stronger - for hand-to-hand combat, a factor of no small importance) is quite clear.
It, in fact, ends, only the authors, pitying their heroines, give them the opportunity to experience fate for a second time and graciously cut off the story when all this Kerensk-Bochkarev adventure is heated up with one large German hex – in a trench dead end.
However, Bochkareva, having received the coveted stars of the lieutenant, retains the remains of a human and, through fanabery bursting with ambition and habala, at the last second decides to repent, asking forgiveness from aunts lured by her into this slippery trench trap of blood and impurity.
But it is too late: the soldiers she put in awe (the captured first line of trenches will have to be given - and immediately, because there are simply no resources to retain the bridgehead, and even more so to expand it), neither Russia, which did not respond to this cannibalistic experiment, nor Kerensky, who was grieved by generals who did not seem more dangerous, but former comrades in the revolutionary struggle.
The authors, of course, try to beat the depressing aftertaste, inserting in the final of the rental version of “Battalion” spirit-lifting scenes, but they are not able to lubricate the main impression: PR on blood is disgusting and terrible.
So, the Battalion came out of Dmitry Meskhiev not only sharply social, but also anti-militarist. This means that the tradition of depicting the First World War as a senseless slaughterhouse, a tradition that originated in Soviet cinema and which was not in early Russian cinematography – for reasons of censorship – is successfully continuing, overcoming the jubilee temptation to make an exemplary peef-puff on the wide screen.
I'll tell you right away that I didn't cry at all, and I'm a sentimental person. I started counting until the end of the movie 15 minutes later. Sad, very sad! A film for women.
I will try to explain as well as possible why I do not consider this film worthy of high praise and praise, and also why I should not set an example.
Let me start with: 1 the idea of the film. A historical war film. Indeed, it is necessary to make films that will remind us, the children of (relatively) calm and peaceful times, the time of a different attitude to each other and to the things around us, what is the strength of spirit, what is love for the Motherland, the love of a man and a woman (boy and girl), what is the steadfastness of convictions, what it is to go against everyone, knowing, feeling with your heart, that it is right, that it is impossible to do otherwise! But I did, because the emphasis is different. The main idea of the film is that women are not weaker than men, and sometimes stronger and not only the spirit is measured (but about this separately further).
2) the play of individual actors, which is notable more often than actors not of the first, but of the second plan. There were 30 seconds from the 2-hour film, where the performance of two actresses touched me the most of all the tantrums and high words.
3) picture. I tried again to highlight something else as good. As a viewer, it’s very important how the film looks. I am tired of watching cheap movies.
... I think that's it. I can't remember the positives anymore. . .
I turn to everything that prevented me from perceiving the film, and therefore from feeling everything that I wanted to convey.
(1) comparison of men and women. The whole second part of the film was devoted to the contempt and humiliation of men and the elevation of women. The battalion was formed in 1917 after the coup d’etat, the change of power, in a difficult time for all of Russia, when, indeed, there was desertion, and refusal to fight, and not understanding what and why to die. I personally understand and have no right to condemn the men who shed their blood three years of war between Russia and Germany. So, the second part of the film can be characterized by two quotes:
': And there is no one to fight from all over Russia? - No, there is one battalion (and show the women's battalion)' and ' these are not men, but bastards and cattle!' And so they showed, of course, with the exception of the main characters-men.
It was very unpleasant for me to watch. Why generalize? Why do we all need one? Remember that women are not angels either. And it turned out that 50 men 5 heroes, and 50 women 5 antiheroes.
I do not understand the ideas of the authors of this creation.
2) the second part of the actors. It didn't bother me, it annoyed me. Some actors of the first plan then overplayed, then vice versa. But acting can pull even the most unsuccessful film; it is the actors who create the mood, perception and understanding of the film by the viewer.
(3) the reality of events. Both historical and, say, everyday I noticed periodically. Distraction! I think if you want to find and read about them in detail, I'm just saying that they were and it was difficult not to notice them. If a film claims to be a historical film, let every little thing be thought out in it, because today both younger and older generations watch movies and TV series more than they read, therefore, it is necessary to make films as realistic as possible. But there was too much blood. She was everywhere. I wonder how Soviet films managed to convey all the pain, cruelty, horror of war without a sea of blood. The art of directorship is lame in the country, alas.
4) heroic text. I didn't pay attention to the words at all. That's not the best indicator for me. There were no phrases that would later become winged or grind into the heart forever. It wasn't. And they should have been, if only because the film claims to be high marks, but in fact pulls only the idea of a terrible war. You don’t have to listen, you don’t have to watch.
Once again, I am convinced that the more advertising, the lower the quality. Here, only I did not fall for advertising, but for reviews that I heard from random people in the minibus, store and so on. And now I wonder!
Showman from the nineties, Igor Ugolnikov, feeling the strength, continues to exploit the military theme. But the third time, as well as the first, was bad. Only in the Battalion there is no Bezrukov, who, embracing with a birch, drags women to cinemas in packs. What to do, women decided to catch on women. I don’t see any reason to watch this movie.
The team of writers wrote this creation armed with two powerful machines – stamping and tear pressing. It is impossible to get rid of the feeling - "it was already in the Simpsons", all the plot twists are predicted one or two times even by a single-celled organism. But that's not why we go to the movies about the war! That's right, and then the authors kick in a second car and push like bastards. They squeeze everything you can squeeze out, every damn tear, but they do it voluntarily and compulsively, that you begin to unwittingly feel like the last bastard, leaving the hall with a dry handkerchief.
But if all of a sudden, I don’t know, but I don’t know, you decided to go to the cinema not in order to have a good time, then there is probably nothing to do there. All claims to epic battles dissolve in low-budget pavilion shooting, where crooked operators aggravate the situation, not friendly with geometry. And the director does nothing but add fuel to the fire, being clearly at odds with cause-and-effect relationships, leaving time after time a silent question on the viewer’s lips: why? . . .
Beyond that, I tried for a long time to understand the film’s message, for all the painfully long 129 minutes it didn’t even slip a thin red thread. What the viewer sees: all the men on the screen are fallen bodies with an atrophied sense of duty. All they do is booze, sell their homeland and shame the human race. And their words resemble frank nonsense - incoherent, illogical and humiliating for the speaker of a set of words. And if the viewer, by some miracle, did not catch the brilliant idea, then the heroes of the film tell him directly, to the forehead, that men are slugs. Thank you, now it is clear, because there were doubts to the last. But do not be upset, because in front of us comes out on a war horse (oh, here the bad guy came out, because stupid peasants managed to drink all the horses, so without a horse, sorry) the Russian woman with a gun at the head and in one fell swoop raises the level of patriotism from her knees, and leads yesterday’s alcoholics, beating husbands and other negligent soldier, who at one moment at a time rallied and repulses the enemy! Is it not a miracle, Hallelujah?
But you have to wonder who a Russian woman is. Despite the complete discrediting of men, we are constantly reminded that a woman is a woman after all, about which a good half of the film is evidenced by the scenes of the inadequacy of a woman as a soldier. Watching Russia, which has moved away from revolutionary events, through the prism of dementia and courage in the ranks of the “baballon”, it becomes simply ridiculous and a little ashamed of all those who put their hands in the creation of this “masterpiece”.
I doubt this movie is even for women. Yes, he is a rabid vat and victims of Russian TV propaganda should not like. So it turned out, a bad, completely untargeted movie. Who? Why?
Oh, how long have I not written reviews! But "Battalion" hooked so that I can not speak. I have read the opinions already published here, it is clear that people savvy, educated, well-versed in history, familiar with the world of Russian cinema from the inside, agreed with many, even in contradictory statements. All so competently, on the shelves laid out, calculated the budget, but, as I think, the main and said no one.
Most lacked emotion. I was crying. And I did not pay attention to any scripted roughness that takes place, I do not deny. But I can say with full right that Russian cinema is reviving. What is the purpose of any film? Art at all? In the second place, everything that is connected with form, in the first place, that is connected with content, that is connected with feelings, response in the soul. Historicism, realism, all this is important only if it lies, interferes with full emotional perception. Battalion is an honest film. The writers had a chance to make it much more melodramatic, staged, heroic. For example, they could promote the love story of the charming heroine Valeria Shkirando and make the death of her and her lover more dramatic, more pathetic. Or to give the soldiers more strength, masculinity, and the film – “fighting”, so that yesterday’s recruits demonstrated in all their glory everything they were trained in real combat. Or the heroine of Aronova could give such a surrender to the flimsy husband that he wriggled in a pool of blood, or she could shoot him at all, causing the approval of the hall and a flurry of applause. All these movie clichés seemed to be asking for, were expected, but, fortunately, did not meet expectations. And just these unexpected plausible deaths, this certain awkwardness of girls in battle, this female weakness Bochkareva at the time of conflict with her husband – all this, on the contrary, gives the picture more vitality, more truth than any special tricks. And on an emotional level, they affect the viewer much more than the usual Hollywood cliches.
I cried. I loved every heroine, was proud of them, was proud that they really were such women that they went into a real hand-to-hand fight with healthy men and died for real. I thought I couldn't do that. I would not go to any front, especially if I wanted to. I couldn’t even play in the movie. So thank you very much. All the cast, the creators of the film, separately - for the footage of the real chronicle in the credits. Thanks. Personally from me, a mere spectator.
It just so happens that lately in Russian cinema (unlike Soviet cinema), too few films about our successes in world history are made. The viewer is forced to pay for the ticket and then watch the victories of Western countries in science, sports, wars, while forgetting under an hour what we have achieved. So movies like 'The Battalion' are just necessary. Don’t forget your story.
However, many critics think otherwise. The creators of the film they blame that ' was shot to order', historically wrong, and just bad.
Well, first of all, tell me - and what is being filmed now not ' to order '? You mean without funding? And how is that defined? Indeed, the film will make a series and show on the Federal channel. Indeed, certain people will benefit from it. It's such a time, gentlemen. Unfortunately or fortunately, that is another matter. Or watch the art house.
As for historical authenticity, it was not always in art. Of course, this can be attributed to the disadvantages of the film. But, judging by how many blunders there are in Hollywood and in European cinema, ' Battalion' fits into the modern norm.
Acting.
Maria Aronova played brilliantly - this is an indisputable fact. I think none of the Russian actresses would have played the commander like her.
The new Kozhevnikova opened. Now it is no longer the stupid Allochka from the University & #39, but a woman-mother ready to defend her homeland. At least for me, the actress of one role she ceased to be.
Overall, the film left a very pleasant impression. It’s not easy to watch it.
The recent anniversary of the First World War has raised fears that more tons of sludge will be poured on our history from movie screens. As, for example, on the anniversary of the war of 1812, we were “pleased” with an abomination like “Rzhevsky vs. Napoleon”. Expectations were fully met, although, I must say, the form is now chosen more original.
I have previously written several reviews of Western cartoons, where I pointed out that they are filled with propaganda of homosexuality. Which comes down to the fact that the characters behave uncharacteristically for their gender. "Princess", more like men, destroy everything around, with special pleasure beating male representatives. They are depicted as weak, weak-willed degenerates or scoundrels, who, of course, have to save the world from brave women without fear and reproach. Therefore, I was not at all surprised when I saw in this film the same standard cartoon plot, which I have seen many times.
Of course, the authors could not be interested, for example, Russian pilots who flew unique aircraft "Ilya Muromets". Or submariners. Or sisters of mercy who worked in the horrific conditions of frontline hospitals. Who needs men who behave like men or women who look like women? But the murky story about a battalion of representatives of an indeterminate sex and orientation (because they do not pull on women) is cool. Modern, European, most importantly. You see, they'll give some statuette at international festivals, there's a bearded Conchita who collected a lot of them. What are we doing worse?
I was especially mocked by the image in the film of the queue of candidates for a place in this battalion. Yeah, right now, nice ladies dressed in fancy clothes are going to kill. Protecting their children, of course, at least someone will go, but here they are not threatened, so it is unclear what they have forgotten in the army. It would be interesting to look at historical photographs, if any. Probably, the applicants did not even have to waste time on haircuts, they always went short-cut and in men’s clothes. Because of known perversions, thanks to which they enjoyed murder in general and men in particular. But if you just kill a guy on the street, they'll go to jail for it. In the army, on the contrary, the order will give. You can, so to speak, combine the pleasant with the useful. This, apparently, was the main reason that prompted women (according to documents) to join this battalion.
The plot is not necessary to retell, here is a completely standard Hollywood stamp - the division of heroes into "good" and "bad" by gender. In what way, everyone understands. And also ridiculed the comparison of the main character with Jeanne D, arc in some reviews. France, by the way, ranks first in Europe in Islamization and extinction of the indigenous population. Fans of Jeanne have long thrown into the trash old regime junk like family and children. Russia is lagging behind, apparently, so we need our own Jeanne. In order not to lag behind the civilized world, because Asians are not enough in Moscow.
The only positive thing is that such creations can serve as a kind of test for mental health. In any healthy person, manly women (as well as effeminate men) are disgusted. And if after watching such films / cartoons you feel nauseous, then congratulations, you are all right. If not, you can only be sympathetic.
What we saw on the screens is a truncated version of a 10-episode television series that will soon be offered to us by one of the federal channels (as in the case of At Nameless Height). Now sit and guess what is better: a series cut down to 120 minutes or an extended 500 minutes (most likely, the series will be about 50 minutes). In general, this is purely Russian, through ... done "know-how" - to shoot material for the series, make a film version of it to make money at the box office, and then launch on TV entirely ... In the United States, a long time ago, it was the opposite, without turning on its head! The same Lucas first shoots a full-fledged "Star Wars", and only after a successful release, they begin to shoot television series, sequels-prequels, and this is already separate work, even with other actors. In Russia, greed has brought our filmmakers and television producers to the point that, once spent, they manage to eat a rolling “fish” and sit on a TV-series. It works! Old lady "Columbia Pictures", under whose label and performs (including in the likely world box office) our "Russian" "Battalion" may have been surprised by this arrangement, but calmly scooped up everything like an antelope crocodile - business is business! We will also pay attention to the rather acidic budget of this, not particularly visually and specially impressive modern viewer of the military drama (10 million dollars). For two hours, the movie screen is above the roof! I know it's all in the series! This is how money is made in Russia! Well, “we’ll see” and think about whether it was worth forking out for a trip to the cinema.
Now about the movie itself. I have read many of the reviews on his page and have put “likes” on many of them. I am not going to duplicate them, so I will write, in my favorite summary manner, only about what escaped the view of the reviewers or about what they did not think about properly.
One should not dispute the obvious fact that the picture was prepared and released for the round date - the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the First World War. But for some (technical, financial) reasons, she was late to the "peak" of the celebration (and so very poor!), therefore she will look like a spoon, which was actually the way to dinner.
... After watching The Battalion, I remembered how we were graded for writing in school by teachers. There were also such things: for the composition – “5”, and for the Russian language, literacy – “2”. Here I have something similar, but fundamentally different: for the drama, the theme itself, the play of individual actors, the production, the shooting – 7, and for the position of the filmmakers imposed on us, for another attempt to rewrite Russian history in favor of modern bourgeois liberals – 2! That's what I mean. The people who worked on this film are terribly far away from that war and don’t really know anything about it! By and large, they created a custom urapatriatic agitation, seeking to please support the general “set” on patriotism. I am a Russian patriot myself, but when the desire to wag your tail before the authorities becomes an end in itself and goes against the historical truth, I do not accept this! I am writing a book about my heroic grandfather, who at the time described in the Battalion fought as part of the Russian Expeditionary Corps in the Balkans, on the Thessaloniki Front. My grandfather described everything in his memoirs, and I, my granddaughter, told the TRUTH: that ordinary people, soldiers (Russians and enemy Germans, Austrians, Bulgarians, Albanians) did not need this war! That’s why they fraternized, because the Albanians and the Bulgarian brothers did not slaughter Russians at night in the trenches like the same French! And so it was in 1917 on all fronts of the First World War!!! And only the governments of the countries involved in this massacre wanted to continue it at all costs! And they did not go to the bayonet on German machine guns, did not feed lice in the trenches! And here, in our film, tired of the bloodbath, Russian soldiers are exposed as cattle, drunk with German schnapps from German intelligence (!!) and beating their wives in public - St. George's Cavaliers (even under the Tsar, the officer did not dare to hit a soldier with "Egory" on his chest!). And all, of course, are encouraged by the cursed Bolsheviks who sat in the Soldiers’ Committees (my grandfather in the Balkans was also elected to the Soldiers’ Committee, where there were no Bolsheviks, and everyone just wanted the end of the war and sent home!!). In general, I had the impression that the Battalion was written and filmed, as it were, "by order" of the then Provisional Government and personally its Minister of War Kerensky (first "For God, the Tsar and the Fatherland", then - "War to the Victory"). But they have not been in our world for a long time. And the order and one-sided interpretation of undesirable characters, it turns out, remained? God is the judge of you, gentlemen of the contractors!
One local review gives a solid list of historical “blunders”. I'll fill it up a bit. Yes, in the barracks, our "warriors" run in the "nights", like their commander. There could not be such a thing in the Principle, since the ladies under the Charter were uniformed in a male soldier's uniform, to which underwear was attached - a shirt and underpants! Next. The whole film commander Bochkarev, even at meetings with high officials, walks in a belt. Did the entire Russian army not have a belt on its belly, or did Kerensky allow it? Nonsense!! By the way, the epaulettes of lieutenant our non-commissioned got just after those fights, and not before them (no doubt, in the film, the battalion should be commanded by an “officer”). The film didn't sound the right name either. "Women's Battalion of Death" (the last of them tried to defend the Winter Palace on a known day). Bochkareva herself was shot by the Reds for her connection with the whites in 1920, and I sincerely feel sorry for her - she was a great Russian boy-baby! Are there any such people in Russia?
You know, when I saw the trailer for this film, I immediately felt like a moviegoer to go to this film as soon as possible, which tells about such a historical fact that existed in the history of our state. The film didn’t impress me, it disappointed me. I rarely underestimate movies, but I’ll make an exception here. So I want to share my pros and cons:
PLUS:
- Of course, a big plus of the picture was actress Maria Aronova, who just brilliantly performed the role of Maria Bochkareva, I was very surprised at how much she was almost like her character. Indeed, this role was the most successful of all the others.
- The second plus I would like to call the musical accompaniment of the picture, which was at a fairly high level.
- The third and last plus is the tightness of the plot, everything happens quickly, clearly, there is no time to be bored. That's where the pros end. . .
Now the cons:
- The biggest drawback in the picture is Maria Kozhevnikova! Why was it even necessary to include this character in this picture, and why this role was given to such in my opinion a non-professional actress who is familiar with the whole role of Allochka from Univer. Absolutely, in my opinion, not a professional actress and she also played unprofessional, she was more annoying than me. Well, I can't imagine her anywhere but at University. Her role ends in the middle of the film. . .
The second downside is one violent scene near the end of the film. The 12+ rating is clearly wrong. Such cruelty should not be seen by children under 14-15 years of age. It's really the toughest scene. She closed her eyes when I looked at her.
- The third disadvantage is that there was not enough action.
The film must be seen, but in my opinion it is a one-time film. I looked and forgot. Totally my assessment:
The historical consultant of the film ' Battalion' was seen on the set of another fir (from the letter 'n' - er) film 'Admiral'. In fact, this is the conversation about ' Battalion' you could end, but this film is interesting not in itself, but as a worthy representative of the fashionable Russian historical cranberries - one of the two surviving historical genres (there is also a parody of the type ' Hitler Caput!' and it is unclear which genre is worse).
In fact, the entire Russian historical cranberry (abbreviated - RIC) differs only in the brightness of the wrapper, directly dependent on the budget. She is stretched on a plot frame, assembled around an axis of patriotism of half-truths, assumptions and first-class stupidity, after which a trailer is quickly made before everything falls apart. As a result, instead of a strong and integral artistic statement, something shaky and crooked is obtained, spectacular from afar, but poor near. In addition, rusty wire sticks out of this attraction for children from 12 to 90, useless for the construction, but you can not throw it out: these are spiritual clips. Okay, let it stick out, the main problem is another: how much you put into the project, even if you make a wrapper out of velvet - inside the same crutches and fittings. Even the target audience, more precisely, those who do not quite confuse the Second World War with the Trojan, notice sharp corners and drum voids.
And the worst thing about RIC is that it usually closes the topic, leaving a scorched earth on which something will not grow soon. Will there soon be a new film about Kolchak, the real Kolchak, and not this shallow Khaben misunderstanding? Hardly. That's about the women's death battalion Bochkareva honest film we can hardly wait. It’s just going to be 5D...
This could be tolerated if the Battalion & #39 were bright and talented, even at the expense of historical truth. The internal logic in RIC usually dies along with the historical logic. What was left of the corpse, the authors sacrificed for greater emotionality, cutting the space of the world war to the St. Petersburg courtyard, so it seems that in Russia there is nothing more than Kerensky’s bet, derived by an arrogant fool (Basharov tried), and the segment of the front where our Amazons are fighting. So, one of the heroines goes to the battalion, learning about the death of the groom (from which the letter was delivered to her, and not to the parents of the fighter - the author ask), but finds him wounded unconscious before being sent to the front. Picturesquely hesitating, she still leaves to fight with the cursed German (A CHO Oni?!), and the stained fighter goes to serve as an adjutant... Basharov, where else? There, on the screen, he accidentally sees a chronicle of hostilities (nothing other than watching the chronicles, Kerensky is fundamentally not interested), where he recognizes his bride, picture-dropping tray. Naturally, he will go to the front from this rotten den of imaginary freedom. Where exactly? You know. Ah, it's an interweaving of fate! Schoolgirls cry about heroines, Bollywood about authors.
Alas, the narrative gives India, only instead of dancing here the fighting, decorated rather rigidly. Corners and the company spilled liters of cherry juice, trying to give cardboard heroines life at least in death, but the film did not become more adult from this. However, this is not required in RIC - it should not make you think, for reflection is the mother of seditiousness. It must inspire the idea of a patriotic direction, which in a primitive form boils down to the fact that one must die for the Motherland, and it is desirable not to hesitate with this. Never in the whole film pops up through, all-pervading thought of the First world & #39; And why, in fact, we die?' Why are we drowning in mud, why are we gassed, why are we killing soldiers like ourselves? What Paul Boimer constantly thought about when he was not busy with survival, the authors of the film clothe in the unwise & #39. The Germans, in confirmation of the sufferings of the Russians under their boots, are shown to be complete moral freaks, fraternizing exclusively for the sake of a cunning plan, which, unfortunately, is not a damn clear, since before the arrival of the Bochkarev Valkyries, Teutonic dogs could illegally occupy all the Russian trenches. Russian soldiers, who do not want to fight, diligently discredit the idea of pacifism, but fundamentally politically illiterate soldiers (there were a couple of proletarian faces, but they were stuffed and kicked out) desperately fight with an extremely vague motivation, which would be good to disassemble for real, but the format of the project will never allow. Don't stain our clean shirts.
No, of course, from the viewpoint of the viewer, everything is not so bad. Maria Aronova is great and deserved further career - top roles in the role of a boy-baba she will stake for one or two. The shooting quality is high, the budget is visible on the screen, the diligence and diligence of the film crew deserve all praise. However, this is also characteristic of RIC - the creators are convinced that they are doing the right thing. Patriotic. I want everyone to understand.
So the Supreme liked it. Allegedly, the movie is very inspiring and relevant.
My President, the Trojan War is over. I don't remember who won.
I would like to speak positively about the military tape 'Battalion'. I understand that I will definitely be severely minus the ardent opponents of the film, but still take risks.
If you’re expecting a massive spectacle from ' Battalion', you’re wrong. Of course, there are three five-minute and well-made fighting scenes (he is a war film), but they are not the main components of the film, but such important topics as self-sacrifice, defense of the Fatherland, heroism, love, etc.
Thanks to the good performance of the actors, and the fact that such fragile creatures as women are at war, I empathized with them. It was sad to see their suffering and suffering in the war.
A separate respect to the creators and for the fact that the Germans here, unlike them in 'US-2', really cruel and merciless, do not spare even the fair sex.
I didn’t like the fact that most of the Russian soldiers in the film are deserters, traitors and bastards. It seems that only women participated in the First World War, and men were fooling around. The scene of the beating also struck.
But, I must admit, otherwise ' Battalion' turned out to be a worthy military (and indeed Russian) film, which you can safely go to the cinema. As a patriot, I bet:
The film is beautiful. The director was able to perfectly describe the events of not only 1917, but also today. Few men can go to war like this. I am sure that 99% will become those “soldiers” who simply betrayed their homeland. They made a deal with the Germans while the Women's Battalion was preparing for war. On the other hand, the same Germans were much braver than ours. They did not send women to fight, but climbed under bullets.
The shot, I think, is wonderful. The feelings during the scene, where the battalion attacks the Germans and the flames burn from behind, are indescribable. The director and director did their best.
Actors are also very well selected. I have heard a lot of discontent about Maria Kozhevnikova, but I cannot agree. She played her part very, very well. As always, Maria Aronova was on top. It turned out to be a great Bochkarev.
For me personally, the most memorable scene was the one where they all began to pray together when they realized that the Germans were on both sides and they had nowhere to retreat.
But it was also minus. The end was closed, I would like to see the defeat of the Germans.
Again, the film is beautiful.
P.S. A lot of our men could use a shake-up like that.
To create a directorial magic with Kozhevnikova failed
Great Russian cinema, claiming to be large-scale, and even more so taking a certain tragic historical era as its basis, always resembles a huge charity auction, in which almost everyone seems to have participated. Due to the risks of commercial failure in the production of such tapes involved a lot of patrons, which sometimes have nothing to do with filmmaking. And because of such production features, such films are most often shot from the very beginning with a background for broadcasting on federal channels, and they are all very similar in structure. The main scourge of such works is the constant feeling during viewing that you are shown a five-part historical biopic glued into a full-meter format and from this greatly lost in its plot integrity. “Battalion” absolutely repeats these common mistakes in all articles, but at the same time, it turns out to be a good historical drama in places that can captivate you without the ubiquitous advertising of powder and gaskets between series.
The First World War is coming to an end. Tired of a protracted senseless trench slaughter, Russian soldiers begin to fraternize openly with German soldiers, drink endlessly and refuse to follow orders. The main leitmotif of their frosty melancholy is the desire to return home as soon as possible and not participate in all this madness, started by a country that very soon will not be on the world map. In order to somehow excite the minds of tired soldiers, the provisional government recruits a special women's battalion under the leadership of the charismatic Maria Bochkareva, who for two months of military life becomes a real mother of women who voluntarily went to war. The contingent of the Death Battalion is quite typical for such ribbons - the daughter of a general, a noblewoman, a simple peasant woman, a former thief, etc. All these motley characters have to find a compromise in their internal strife and become each other’s true brothers in arms.
No matter how hard the expert on good military dramas Dmitry Meskhiev tried to remove a holistic work, the Battalion was still full of plot inefficiencies and frankly unnecessary drawn-out scenes that do not carry any semantic load. An extensive part of the film dedicated to the preparation of the female battalion, which should gallop to show the viewer all the main characters and immerse him in the atmosphere of real confrontation, lasts almost an hour and a half, and by the time of the battle scenes you begin to feel that you know almost everything about the heroines, while not empathizing with them and do not see in them live people. Spreading a whole bunch of little clues on really interesting dialogues and turns, the director in some creative impotence simply can not bring any of them to its logical end. Here the battalion commander is handed over by his own subordinates, here the overzealous Russian soldiers enter into an open confrontation with the women's battalion, but the Germans, who wish, from their own words, only good to our fighters, begin to poison them with deadly gas. Everything turns out somehow confused, incoherent and sometimes frankly ridiculous. Perhaps in the television "director's version" all these flaws will turn into a finished picture, but in this form the movie is more like a costumed buffoon than a harsh military drama.
All the inconsistencies of the script is trying to pull out Maria Aronova, for whom this tape became an obvious starry hour. A very talented theater actress, familiar to ordinary viewers by her roles in any slag such as the series "Soldiers", here unfolds to its fullest. Her character really believe, empathize, and it seems that the actress herself just returned from the theater of war. For this role, she would definitely get an Oscar if it was given to actors of non-English-language cinema. The rest of the film crew looks like nondescript extras, designed only to play their roles and die beautifully. Most of all, Maria Kozhevnikova was disappointed, who said so much in all interviews that the Battalion became a new breath of air for her in the profession. Unfortunately, she does not even cope with a specially selected for her character, a dummy, who, despite all her tenderness and closeness, still strives for the front. To create with her directorial magic Meskhiev failed.
For all its shortcomings, Battalion still looks advantageous against the background of other Russian films of the last year. There are here, albeit a few, but still heartfelt scenes, an interesting plot message and even some kind of passion. If our filmmakers continue to train in this format, perhaps we will soon be proud of something, in addition to the horrifying tastelessness of Stalingrad. After all, such stories are true for us: where on the battlefield the word “Fatherland” is repeated as our Father, and go ahead in spite of everything. There is still a good movie to learn to shoot.
Watched the premiere. The impression was heavy. Not from the quality of the film itself, but from the drama and experiences of the gagging of the female share. The film tells about the creation and fate of the first female battalion (death) during the reign of the Provisional Committee and the First World War. The plot is fashionable and quite fresh in terms of these pages of history. Read Akunin 'Battalion of Angels' Involuntarily compared. Akunin won in terms of drama and spelling of the era, characters and love line.
But back to the film, the main emphasis, as it seemed to me, was made on patriotism, heroism, war.
Some scenes seemed strange, such as the father quietly saying goodbye to his only daughter, as if he were seeing her off to college. How the brawl started over the bed in the barracks. As a husband takes his wife to war, and she & #39; unexpectedly & #39; took, and died there. Sorry for the cynicism... how the heroine of Aronova (Bochkareva) is always ready to cry.
It must be said that the film is bright thanks to Aronova, although her sentimentality seems sometimes too much. Reading the biography of M. Bochtareva, this great woman, becomes immensely sorry for her. Pity her vain heroism, courage, love for the Motherland, which so basely betrayed her.
The motivation of many heroines is not clear, since each has its own destiny and reason to go to war. Some artists overplay or underplay, do not believe.
The scene when Bochtareva is beaten by her ex-husband in front of others ' men' and their boss at this time cries quietly, hiding in a pillow is very symbolic - about Russia itself, for which there is no one to stand up.
The final scene is full of hope and faith in male soldiers, in their help.
In general, I believe that such films should be made, our history should be covered, our heroes should be known, especially for young people.
No matter how much they criticize Russian cinema, all the directors and screenwriters combined, no one will shoot about Russia better than Russians. Only our nature is given to show beautifully not only color, but also blood with dirt.
Throughout the film shows the courage, valor, heroism of women. It's weird, isn't it? We never think that these nouns can be combined with such a fragile and tender word 'woman'. I don't think even a lot of people have heard of Bochkareva's death battalion.
And here it is, the main thread of the plot, female heroism, female strength and courage, female blood and women's tears. And so much for it clinged that at one point almost rolled the whole victory on themselves. So strong was the attitude of our ladies, that they raised all the power of the Russian army, they forced to fight.
Is not unity the strength of the Russian people? Aren't we only winning when we're all together? Is it worth it to pull the blanket over yourself?
In short, the film makes you think. And, as always, not about warfare, but about psychology and drama. The story is really exciting, to watch such a movie is definitely worth it. Of course, it is impossible to avoid the fact that the emotional load played a big role, individual scenes of the whole picture, from which you want to just sob, lament and nothing more.
But the film is not perfect, as in any other there are blunders that do not go unnoticed. For some reason, the streets of cities looked so implausibly clean, the operator constantly shooting material for the report and so on.
However, the film left only positive impressions. It is difficult to talk about such pictures, but it is possible. Despite the blunders and ambiguous assessment of the actions of the army in the film, the picture amazed me, ' punched ' to the depths of my soul.
Look at this.
10 out of 10
I am not a fan of supporting a domestic manufacturer. But lately, the hope has not let go that ours too can take the camera in their hands and will into a fist and create something so large-scale, spectacular and patriotic.
Well done, that took up, raised interest in those sad historical events, but from 'sopley' and inauthenticity did not escape anywhere.
Nadia's picture farewell to the groom under the horns of a ten-minute train departure, complete relaxation and unprofessionalism in the detention of German spies, absolute improbability in the examination of the battalion. They cry spectacularly and die spectacularly. All right, women's. And in contrast, a kind of cowardly and cruel male essence. Bochkareva is beaten, men stand. And why did they run to help when the Germans surrounded the battalion? Sobered up, or conscientious? Or maybe the director wanted to prove that not all is lost in the male system (as in Russian cinema).
The main thing that I would like to wish ' the domestic manufacturer' - not to slide when creating such tapes in full Hollywood, and there in Bollywood. You’re doing it for your own people, aren’t you?
6 out of 10
P.S. And about Kozhevnikov I want to say: was she not accidentally squeezed into this film, on request? She has a very uncertain role there.
It is no secret that war cinema is the only movie in Russia. They know how to make war because they know it. Sadly, of course, but we have nothing to do with it, so human nature is arranged - everything ' bad' we see much brighter than the brightest ' good'.
And now on the screens of the country appeared a new film by Dmitry Miskheev 'Battalion'. There is nothing to say, again a direct hit to the most sensitive parts of the viewer’s heart. Operating work at the level, acting... Let's just say there is. However, it is worth saying that Maria Arovnova simply shocked, the look permeates to the bones. There is nothing to say about costumes and scenery, perfect. The only thing that bothered me was the presence of electric razor machines in the film, set in 1917. The story tells us to empathize, to feel this oppressive atmosphere of general confusion, war, hunger and fear. Hope.
It is a drama with a capital letter D. Everyone cried in the cinema, and this is not surprising, because there is something to cry about. People are dying, lives are broken – isn’t that the worst thing? After all, the most precious thing is that we have this life. There are certainly controversial scenes, such as the scene where Bochkareva is beaten by her husband. It is too obvious that it is aimed at bluntly squeezing tears.
I think a lot of people didn’t like this movie. No wonder, now such an unfashionable word ' patriotism' say crooked face and equated with, God forgive, nationalism. Now there is no real army or citizens. People find it hard to believe in true love for their country. But I believe and, very much hope, I am not the only one left so passionately loving her country.
10 out of 10
How to remove “patriotic” and “tasteless” or “Pilite, Dima, saw”
After the revelry of films about the "Chotsoki boys" in the 90s, it was decided that ideologically directed cinema is necessary, this resulted in the emergence of active state support for films for which private investors will not give money, and it was not about arthouse and experimental cinema. A considerable number of domestic directors can not create a talented film “not for everyone”, nor commercial films. From the point of view of market relations in the film industry, such creators are likely to be left without work, or to shoot commercials and cheap hacking for cable networks. State support is their only chance to stay afloat, spilling their talents on the audience, but still have a stable income and media significance. The most important thing is to follow a certain recipe so that the customer likes it, and everything is ideologically correct. Then it does not matter how much the film collects, no one will ask, the salary will be issued, advertising will provide, everything will be “on the ointment”.
To shoot on the “right” theme for such under-directors becomes the meaning of life, because all your flaws and shortcomings can be easily hidden. The main thing is to present the viewer correctly: more patriotism, a couple of melodramatic moments, more tin in the form of intestines and fake blood - you see, no one will notice the flaws and inconsistencies of the script, mediocre acting and historical inaccuracies.
Unfortunately, Dmitry Meskhiev, the creator of the anti-Soviet film “The Own”, belongs to this category of directors. His politically correct “Battalion” is fashioned according to the best American recipes, when a minor military episode is taken, but with some peculiarities, and an almost turning historical event is sculpted from it. The absolutely passing moment of creating a “women’s battalion” to increase morale at the fronts turns into one of the most important moments of the First World War. We will not be told how this idea came about, will not be presented to non-commissioned officer Bochkarev properly, and will immediately be shown the actively ongoing recruitment of women volunteers. Then there are magnificent in its grandeur and unusual plot facts, on a scale worthy of the late creativity of one lover of the “declassified archives of the NKVD”, namely:
1) In the General Staff, the only way to explain the situation is a video presentation from the fronts, in which “depraved by schnapps and slogans” Russian soldiers dance strange dances with the Germans (the style of the Bar “Blue Oyster” detected – what were they added to schnapps?!) ;
2) In 1917, in the most difficult conditions, all recruiting stations were equipped with electric (!) hair clippers, and personal cards were filled in Russian - the one that appeared AFTER the reform of 1918.
(3) At the recruiting station, they are very strict about the passage of medical commissions, while they do not find a pregnancy in one of the volunteers, and the moment that when Bochkareva was built, she could not run 400 meters, it seems that they do not care at all;
(4) The entire male population is a stupid lazy soldier who only thinks who to rape and beat, while they categorically do not want to fight. But the female half seems to only dream to die (by the way, the dream of Fedi Bondarchuk about showing the scenes of a threesome almost comes true, because there is Irina “Snow White” Rakhmanov, and lustful men, but the director of “9 companies” is only one of the producers, again did not grow together);
(5) The most effective way to practice combat techniques is to put two women opposite each other so that they start beating each other. Is it okay that they haven't been shown any tricks? How was a fragile woman supposed to stand up to healthy men? Elements of used 'catfight' there would not work;
(6) In order for the arrested commander to be released and his powers restored, it is enough to stand overnight with the whole team in the rain.
7) All female cadets in the barracks walk in nightgowns with panties, while addressing each other exclusively “hey, listen, you what?”;
(8) Transfer a dangerous spy on foot should be entrusted only to two female recruits of the most frail complex;
(9) Once at the front and knowing about the possibility of a gas attack, all gas masks should be put in a box and carried away so that during the next attack there were dead (more drama, more!);
10) After the command to “let gas” both sides must attack each other (gas masks), the machine gunner should be used only at the very end, shooting at all the fighting (even more drama, we begin to cry);
(11) The heroine of Aronova, a boy-baba, yelling at her subordinates and not only, whipping a sergeant from the “All Metal Shell”, capable of putting down any opponent, suddenly very easily becomes a victim of domestic violence by her former husband, a vain and half-meter-long man named Athanasius, whom she could knock out with one blow. At the same time, no one will stand up for her, women will watch silently, and male officers will plug their ears with a pillow.
12) The whole “battalion” does nothing but constantly give out its position (more drama). Even the effect of a sudden night attack on the Germans is offset by the absolutely idiotic idea of burning hay to cut off his way to retreat, and the enemy could safely see the number of attackers (but what a spectacular picture!);
13) And of course, only collective prayer can save everything, we know from the creativity of our “creators” that it shoots down aircraft, lays mines on enemy ships, and much more.
14) “Able to smell everything” cadet, being on patrol, could not “sniff” the approach of a bunch of Germans, and also sang to accurately give their location (we are already crying, eating a cactus).
In addition to all these absurdities, you wonder why one of the characters was given so much time at the expense of revealing other characters and was taken out of brackets in the middle of the tape and never returned.
If you discard tons of shed tears, hugs to pathetic music and a few scenes of attack, you get a disappointing picture. A very secondary tape (hello 9 company) does not reveal either the characters of the characters (all as if a collection of identical extras), nor presents an interesting story, nor strikes at least with technical performance. Regarding the latter, the fighting scenes are filmed very raggedly, almost all the time in the fog, and at some of the most exciting moments they are completely cut off (just like in the style of Mikhalkov’s “Tired”, where everything consisted of smoke and a couple of explosions of cheap firecrackers). I can only note the restrainedly satisfactory performance of Aronova and Dyatlov. Kozhevnikova, as I expected, will never play better than her “outstanding 3-minute monologue” from the film “Duchless”.
It is surprising that such a segment as the First World War, consisting of many heroic exploits of Russian soldiers, is almost untouched by domestic directors. If this was explainable in Soviet times (ideological aspect), then it is not clear why now, in the absence of it and with a lot of technology, it is impossible to make a worthwhile film, but instead, with the development of budget money, such a non-kino is filmed with cowardly lustful men, led by vile “pro-revolutionary” elements, cowardly officers, and absolutely flat (in terms of revealing characters) heroines. Shame, Dmitri, shameful!
“Battalion” is the classic case when the shell prevails over the content.
The storyline runs through the fate of the Russian follower Joan of Arc - the strong-willed and militant Maria Leontievna Bochkareva, as well as her female battalion, infamous for its fate. History tells us about women’s choices and their consequences.
Maria Aronova, who played the role of Bochkareva, is a very experienced actress, but more theatrical than cinematic. Even despite this, a small track record of film roles is replete with its comic role, which has long been boring to the viewer. Bochkareva is the brightest example of the versatility of Aronova’s talent, because not every actor manages to try on such opposite “masks” in essence.
The film depicts a woman’s totalitarian struggle with society, and she loses the battle. A woman is depicted to the point of impossibility of being powerless: before a man, before the leadership, and even more so before the war. The eternal question of feminism is raised. Even a century after the First World War, nothing has changed. The woman is still a secondary being, forced to defend her human and personal rights, not only in the past, but also in the modern, seemingly rather developed society (not to mention the countries of the “third world” of Asia and Africa, where the female gender is often not perceived on a human scale at all).
What awaits a woman outside the front? Maybe a mercilessly beating husband for any fault or maybe a funeral for a loved one or something even more terrible - loneliness? Of these who do not reconcile with their fate, the battalion Bochkareva is formed. Each of them has its own motivation, its own incentive to go to war to protect, perhaps, the only thing they have left - their homeland. As much as it would be unusual for a woman to carry the rank of soldier, to take up arms, to fight and kill people, she does it against her nature, because there is no one else. Most of the men are deserters. It is reflected so clearly, so blatantly unsophisticated that instead of the alleged hatred of the male sex, one involuntarily begins to understand that this does not happen. It’s not like “all men are assholes!”
One of the producers of the film was Fedor Bondarchuk, an ardent adherent of the military drama. To challenge his influence on the Battalion would be foolish. Among Bondarchuk’s paintings, the earlier “9 company” and the fresh “Stalingrad” are not unknown to the Russian viewer. These films touch on different time layers, unfolding two different wars on the screen in front of the viewer. And if the first story covers events of social significance, going far beyond the personal perception of the surrounding world, the second is the search for a plot in the life of the canonical layman of that time. Simply put, the same emotions and feelings could not necessarily be revealed in the perception of any particular person or events that happened to them. In the period of any war, people always suffer and what is it like to act as a kind of measure - who has had better and who is worse?
It is impossible to put the Battalion in one line and with the Brest Fortress. It would seem that time is rapidly moving forward, which is especially fruitfully expressed in the development of new for Russia, hitherto unseen, cinematic techniques and artistic solutions, but united by a common producer Igor Ugolnikov, these two paintings can not even compete with each other in their schedule, visualization, or even in entertainment.
Referring to the theme of the First World War is the least frequently used theme in Russian cinema, however, “Battalion” is very difficult to attribute to its best works.
Finally, the theme of the First World War reached the Russian cinema. Last year we celebrated 100 years since the start of this epochal event that upended the world order. It was after 4 years of bloody and painful trench slaughter that the powerful and ordinary people realized that war would no longer be a plaything behind the scenes of intrigue. It will no longer be possible to shoot, take a couple of fortresses, get rid of a few thousand killed, and then make new alliances with those who used to fiercely hate on the battlefield. No, brothers, technology has reached new heights, no one knew what would turn out seemingly ordinary on the fields of Europe party. Now the war takes not only people, but also the fatherland, the human mind and fundamentally changes the idea of how people should live on the planet. And the authors showed the most bitter period, without delving into the characters conveyed the hopelessness of the situation, and the seeming inefficiency of the fates and images of the heroes is compensated by the atmosphere of fatal despair.
Yes, it was possible to make a movie, for example, about the glorious Brusilov breakthrough, which entered the textbooks of military affairs of all countries of the world, as one of the most talented operations in history. Then it was 1916, the tsar was in power, strong morale carried the brothers forward, it seemed that we were on top, on the rise. But the authors took it higher and deeper, trying to show all the impending darkness of the foreboding of the death of a great empire. 1 year separated fame from collapse. And at this moment the flower of the loving maiden heart, the main treasure of our Russia, blooms. He is absolutely bright, he does not see politics, he loves his homeland.
The feeling of some absurdity and bewilderment, heroism sometimes seems unnecessary, I want to shout to them that everything will only get worse, that the country will soon be completely different, you will wake up among the red commissars, and the infected Russia will betray you. But you know, they wouldn't listen, they live here and now, their homeland is here, not in the future. This is not enough for the current generation, who love to speculate, dream, insult everything and everything, but do nothing with their own hands for the country today.
Special thanks for the battle scenes. There are questions only at one point, where the battalion goes into the bayonet when the enemy advances, despite the fact that ours had machine guns. I think it's rash and it didn't happen in the war, but cinema is cinema. No one will show how soldiers spent months in trenches in their own shit, playing football with opponents, and then going to kill when the truce was over. But true naturalism is shown, and shown qualitatively. It is good that they gave place to the gas attack, which became the "innovation of extermination" & # 39; this war. I would like to see in more detail the throwing of newcomers in gas masks, but still better than Remarque in ' On the Western Front without change' no one will describe this, it is worthy of a separate long stage. Thank you for having it. By the way, this book I often remember when watching, at the age of 15, it changed my idea of war, forever fascinated me with this horror, while making me an outspoken pacifist in life. And the authors were good, they turned to Remarque and to historical circles. The First World War was distinguished by its unique trench bloody realism, let me not be caught laughing at the terrible, but did not forget to dip the heroine in the garbage, because the soldiers went to the toilet right in the trenches.
It’s all about technology, the film is about something else. . How hard it was for these people, the country is a mess, but you go to war, the gray mist passing through the whole film stalks and whispers & #39; get out of here & #39; Who knows if modern society is capable of cultivating such selfless patriots. Indescribable feelings. The pain for the country remained after watching. This is a truly unique episode of our history. A year of confusion, and only real heroes could gather their strength. The feeling of hopelessness sometimes breaks the soul, because it is a great mystery what our country would be now if not for the revolution. The period is probably more painful than World War II, but such films should be made and made. We must look into the eyes of our history, which shows how complex and multifaceted Russia is. It's not easy. . .
I put this film on a par with the beautiful drama 'Moonsund' where the Bolshevik and the tsarist lieutenant leave class strife to defend their last frontier.
I'm not evaluating. Everyone will find their pain in this film.
Sincere human thanks to all those who took part in the creation of the film “Battalion”: from producers to editors.
Today 27.02.2015 I watched the Battalion. When the credits went after the film, the audience in thoughtfulness still continued to sit and did not disperse, usually at the first final chords jump from their seats and run to the exit. In the process of watching the film, there was no thought and desire to analyze it by cinematic “molecules”, because it looked whole, emotional and smart.
Thank you and a low bow to I. Ugolnikov, who was the ideological inspirer of this topic, the screenwriters who managed to tell about many things and about each hero separately in 2 hours, to convey the tragedy of that historical period in words and action. Why, while watching the film, I had analogies between the representatives of the soldiers’ committees with red bows on the lapels of overcoats and the notorious modern white tape characters.
It seemed to me that all the actors in the film did not play, but lived their stories. Aronov was incomparable and looked authentic (no falsehood). Valeria Shkirando and Nikolai Auzin are simply a discovery, an example of how the acting talents and skill of the director are able to convey truthfully emotionally the strong feelings that broke out between the characters of the film without the use of physiological techniques. Auzin and Shkirando with one glance managed to tell the story of the originated love between Lieutenant Seleznev and Vera.
Most importantly, after watching the film, I wanted to revisit that historical era. The scene of tearing off officers’ epaulettes impressed not only with the acting, but also with the depth of thought about the Russian people and their choice.
In a word, the film is worthy and thank you to all who were involved in its creation. I want to review it again.
“There are women in Russian villages” and not only in villages.
Less than an hour has passed since I left the cinema after watching the film 'Battalion' - I am already sitting at the computer and recording emotions pouring directly over the edge.
Needless to say, the film by Fyodor Bondarchuk (a year ago shot ' Stalingrad', which received a variety of reviews), about the First World War, about which there are not so many truly fascinating films, cannot but intrigue. Therefore, having watched more than once quite interesting trailers for the Battalion & #39, without hesitation went to the cinema.
The first thing to note is that 2 hours of the film flew by incredibly quickly. Only you have time to recover from one event-shock, immediately, as a bright spark, another flashes, and so on. That’s how, I think, a film about perseverance and courage, endurance and courage, and will be remembered – as the brightest flash about such an extremely interesting but little-known phenomenon on the eve of the Civil War, as the existence of a women’s battalion, the Death Battalion.
Two. It is impossible to keep silent about acting in this film because it is, in my opinion, the most suitable key to the hearts of the audience. To say that Maria Aronova shocked me is to say nothing. I remember her as a sweet aunt Dasha from the Russian version 'Sesame Street' ... and here she appears before us as 'Mrs. Chief' - harsh, tough, but so kind in heart. By the way, some scenes, especially with Maria Aronova, seem to go beyond 12+. There were many moments when tremors ran through the body - in difficult, cruel moments.
I still remember the role of Yanina Malinchik - here he is, the image of a Russian woman who will enter a hot hut, and the horse will stop at a jump.
Musical accompaniment is at an average level. I wanted to look at such a serious picture under more piercing, or what, music, where it is needed, of course.
I read in previous reviews of the film that ' open' the end is a mistake by the writers. I believe that in this regard everything is more than worthy - the film is finished on the most appropriate note, which involuntarily leads to all sorts of reflections.
In general, films like 'Batallion' must be present in our cinema. I’m not talking about dragging kids to theaters for patriotic education, because the movie is really hard, not for everyone. But it is worth watching it anyway, the film crew did a great job, so
If people put good results on one side of the scale and destruction and suffering on the other, that is, bad results, there would never be wars or revolutions.
The war with Napoleon. Civil war. World War II, also known as the Great Patriotic War. All of them are reflected in the works of both Soviet/Russian writers and filmmakers. However, our compatriots are not in a hurry to raise the topic of the First World War. Why? Was it because the Russians were defeated in the war? No, I don't think so. After all, any defeat can be turned into a victory, showing the heroes that fought and shed their blood at that difficult time, as Americans do. Then what is it? The answer to this difficult question will give our guest today. So this is the Battalion.
1917. While the world converged in a bloody battle nicknamed the First World War, a Russian soldier lies on a stove, eating free bread and no less free vodka, which brought the kind Fritz. Naturally, high-ranking officers are not satisfied with this state of affairs, because if this goes on, then the army will not remain, and therefore desperate attempts are made to somehow improve the situation and solve this problem. And the solution was found (Who would doubt?), and his name is the women's battalion, which will inspire the peasants to exploits and the desire to fight the bad Germans. Will this plan work? Look and find out.
And yes, there is something to see, as the creators of the picture made a bet on the emotional component and did not lose. Tension, hopelessness and fatalism can be seen in every frame and even if humor flashes in the picture (and it flashes with noticeable periodicity at first), then it causes nervous laughter, because you know - then there will be blood, dirt, and death. At the same time, the scenes do not look far-fetched or artificial, there are two girls who go to serve to avenge the Krauts for a loved one, and there is another girl who went to serve only to be near her lover. Yes, of course, the creators of the picture do not go into the past of this or that girl, the characters of women can be described in a few words and therefore you feel a certain understatement, as if the creators had something to say about this or that heroine, but they did not, but this has its own charm. As is usually the case with films about war? We have several people on whose behalf the story is told and the truth that the characters of the picture adhere to for some time becomes the truth of the viewer. And we're used to it and we think that's how it should be, but are we right? It is difficult to say with certainty, especially when it comes to artistic works. And the creator of the Battalion expressed a different point of view, in which people are the background, while the main character is... not even war, but indifference. The indifference of the high command, which has played at the soldiers and sees no further than its nose. The indifference of male soldiers who do not want to fight simply because they have nothing to fight for. Homeland? They don’t know if they’ll get it or if they’ll take it. Fight for your families? So they're home, warm and safe. So why fight? No need. The indifference of others, when a man beats his wife half to death, so that she “knows her place.” And how paradoxical it is, but the antihero of the picture is the same battalion, led by Bochkareva, which is a kind of family and which is desperately trying to change something, give hope, make people fight, only will they hear them?
As for the actors, despite the fact that the characters of the picture turned out to be as impersonal as possible, they play very well, perhaps the situation in which the girls found themselves affected, but in general they believe. In particular, the acting of Maria Aronova was impressed, here her creators did not depersonalize, and Maria Bochkareva turned out to be a whole, interesting and at the same time absolutely tragic personality, which causes respect from the very first minutes as it appears in the frame.
Nor did the visual part fail. No, of course, this is not a Hollywood movie, but it turned out very spectacular. Explosions, shooting, gas bombs and hand-to-hand, in which women, no matter how strong they are, lose to men and therefore look with horror like young girls, most of whom have never even had men – strangle, cut and beat. It is not possible to remain indifferent to what is happening on the screen. Isn’t that a sign of quality?
Outcome? Severely shot and high-quality film about the First World War and the women's "Death Battalion". Yes, of course, this is a film for once and a second time it is unlikely to want to review, but this time will leave a long memory and that's why "Battalion" is not ashamed to advise their friends and acquaintances. I recommend it to you, dear viewer, because good films dedicated to the war in recent years have become a rarity.
To be honest, I already have a preconception for modern Russian cinema. A friend offered to make her company, but I went into the auditorium ready for the fact that I will not finish. The film exceeded my expectations.
Yeah, there's a lot of stuff going on. In some places, patriotic pathos go off the scale. It's a bit of a naturalism. But still, there are many beautiful scenes in the film that are emotionally catchy, and I wanted to live to the final. I was glad that our producers little by little learned to shoot an edible film product. I think the movie will pay off at the box office. The ride was a success.
But personally, I don’t expect movies to just splash adrenaline. I want to live the life of my favorite heroes and become a little better with them. And in heroes 'Battalion' I, unfortunately, did not believe. After all, their characters are flat, black and white. Still, the script is too straightforward and fantastic. Therefore, the choices that the characters in the film seem to make in the course of the story did not surprise me or inspire me. When I was talking about how to evaluate the film in the end, the Soviet black and white film ' Forty-first' came to mind. There were no special effects, there were primitive scenery, costumes and dialogue. It's a very simple story, filtered out by communist censorship. But there was the truth and the mystery of human choice, and I gave the film a 6. A & #39; Battalion & #39; alas, I put the score below half. Or, as the teachers at school used to say, ' a hard three'.
So, if you watch movies to get only an emotional shake-up or just want to rejoice for the growing quality of the modern domestic film industry, then watch 'Battalion' If you are looking for real drama and new meanings, this movie is not for you.
When I saw the movie, I immediately wanted to go. But I only managed to do it today.
All right. I won’t write much, I don’t think it’s necessary. I consider this film a masterpiece. No one can remain indifferent to this film. The film tells us about the First World War. 1917 - Soldiers refuse to fight, but a women's battalion is created to fight. Women leave their families to fight. Having gone through trials and difficulties, their battalion is still part of the active army. Women deserve respect and fame.
I was very happy with the picture 'Stalingrad' and now I am madly satisfied with this picture.
The film also touches on a theme that is not less important today. Women do everything for men. They are ready to defend the country for them. There was a moment in the film when Marina Bochkareva, Russian soldiers called 'bitch'. I really liked her answer and she was right. To what then the country descended, that 'babs' ready for the peasants to go to the front and defend their homeland. Battalion Bochkareva, bravely and heroically, goes to the front in the first lines of defense. I was very offended when the Russian soldiers #39 refused to go to the aid of the women's battalion. But I cannot say the same about the moment when the officers tore off their epaulettes and went to fight. It was respectable.
Also, this movie is very tragic and I'm sure a lot of girls cried watching it. There was a lot of ' crying' moments. But that only makes this movie better and better.
I don’t think I’m going to make this movie.
10 out of 10
To fight is not a woman’s business, nor is it a man’s.
For a long time, I thought whether or not to express my opinion about films in public, besides having experience on film sets. And, probably, this time came when there was a great desire to share his opinion about the picture “Battalion”. The picture left me a good impression and I even want to advise others to watch it. “Battalion” will definitely not become a passing film, and will cause great interest among viewers, especially among women.
In recent years, filmmakers have often used military themes in their work, particularly the role of women in war. The Battalion movie is based on real events. And to my shame, I personally did not know the details of the women's battalions from 1914-1918. Therefore, the picture has a cognitive function, and is addressed to the younger generation. The film, as it seems to me, is not propaganda, but on the contrary, shows how terrible and senseless war is.
Of course, the script of the film is not perfect. There are episodes that “slip” the general conceived dynamics of the genre of “war drama” with combat actions. I lacked the “movement” in the battalion training episodes. It seemed that even some shots were repeated several times, for example, “cutting” the legs, coats, etc. I should have paid more attention to them.
The film has a good dynamic setting, in which two bright episodes are remembered. The first is, of course, cutting girls. Personally, I was emotionally moved. Those who have beautiful hair will understand me. And the close-up of the cameraman Ilya Averbach and the eyes of the actresses – it all really impressed. While watching, she took a strand of hair, heard comments to this scene like “Nightmare!”. And the second episode is the first formation of the battalion after trimming. He was accompanied by jokes, some girlish humor, which gradually began to fade from the film. I lacked dialogue, conversations between characters.
I followed with great interest the news from the set of this picture. It is good that this picture was not around long before the premiere of unnecessary “yellow” conversations. Perhaps the main intriguing point was who will play the role of commander Maria Bochkareva. We must pay tribute to the producers and the author of the idea that Maria Aronova was chosen for the role of Maria Bochkareva. After watching the trailer, I went to this actress. I think it’s the best role in her filmography. With great interest, I watched the actress play on the big screen: gait, facial expressions, close-ups, even as Aronova’s character screams – it all looked organic. Sometimes it seemed that the actress is a little uncomfortable to be disciplined in the army, to command, but, nevertheless, the actress coped with it perfectly.
The film “Battalion” leaves a good “aftertaste”, a feeling of pity for the characters because of what you want, but there is no preparation, and experience and no one wants to help them, etc. The picture is addressed to a greater extent to girls aged 16-25, who, for example, did not see the film “A Dawns Here Are Quiet” in 1972, dir Stanislav Rostotsky. But they'll see, it's a remake. And I'm looking forward to the premiere and will definitely go to the movies. This will be another review.
Hey, everybody! Today we’re going to talk about a film that premiered last week, but which definitely deserves attention. As you can see, this is the Battalion film, which received not only financial support from various state bodies, but also a wide advertising campaign. The film takes us back to 1917. At the helm of the Provisional Government, the First World War is coming to an end, and Russia has decided to recruit the so-called women’s death battalion, headed by Maria Bochkareva. In fact, this battalion is discussed in the film.
It is noteworthy that one of the scriptwriters and producer of the film is Igor Ugolnikov. Yes, the same one who hosted “The Corner of Show” in the early 90s on central television, boldly shouting “Bledin!” from millions of blue screens, parodying advertising on the dry mix of the company of the same name. Now Igor is a major producer in the track record of such a film as “Brest Fortress”, which, judging by estimates, fees and traditional screenings for Victory Day, is very popular with the audience.
As I have repeatedly said, I am not a fan of Russian cinema, and I believe that the patient is more dead than alive, although it is worth admitting that the level of military-patriotic films has grown significantly over the past few years, only I cannot judge the acting of Maria Aronova, who embodied Maria Bochkareva on the big screen. But given the fact that most of her roles were humorous in nature, the effort on herself probably made a giant. Nevertheless, the head of the women's battalion of death from her turned out to be excellent: where you can regret, where you need to cry out, and this view, which clearly reads that only death awaits ahead of everyone, is incomparable. And the resemblance is striking. Although, it is worth considering the fact that the real Maria Bochkareva at the time of the film was about 28 years old, while Maria Aronova is more than 40 years old.
The merit of Maria Kozhevnikova, around whom the main advertising campaign was built, is extremely doubtful. Having played a small, one can even say episodic role, Maria created a lot of information noise, with her act of shaving her head. Yes, and no matter how she tried to build herself an actress, in memory she will forever remain Allochka ' Kick-Ass' from the series 'Univer'.
Recently, in Russian cinema, and in particular in films dedicated to the First World War, the revolution and other events of the beginning of the last century, there is a clear preference for tsarist Russia and the White movement, the heroes are shown as true patriots who are worried about their homeland, and the Communists are represented by squabbling, bringing their ideals closer defeat in the First World War and eager to gain power in any way to snatch at the “building a bright future.” And the saddest thing is that, judging by the historical literature, everything was exactly the same, and the Communists, after the next film, can only dismiss the portrait of Stalin from the shit thrown on the media fan, although Stalin’s activity itself requires a clear and honest distinction between actions that positively affected the country and actions that can not be called except crimes. Let's not talk about politics.
“The Battalion” as a whole tells a very small story from the First World War, although it is from such moments that our life consists, but I think the plot could be expanded and more extensively, transferring most of the film to the front line, although the scenes telling the stories of the main characters and life in the training are just as important. It is a pity that they did not tell only the story of Maria Bochkareva herself, whose service and activities raised people on the front line and forced them to go under bullets. “The Battalion” is a fully dramatic film, provided, if not by acting, and by the very situation shown on the screen. Of course, it was not without love lines, both successful and not, without betrayal and without devotion to both his commander and his homeland. To be honest, even I had tears in separate scenes, and after the film was over, I was impressed for a long time.
In conclusion, I want to raise one important topic, which I think is the age limit for films. Recently, I began to notice that our valiant Ministry of Culture, which, as it turned out, does not like films about Rashka - Shit, is deliberately overestimating the age limit for foreign films. An example of yesterday. The film “Focus” in which there is one shot and a small pool of blood has an age limit of “18+”, “Battalion” – a film in which violence, murder and other charms of wartime have a limit of “12+”.
Everyone understands that most Russian creativity cannot compete with Hollywood production, but why play dirty games by introducing quotas and deliberately inflating age restrictions when you can try to improve the quality of Russian film production? Oh, yes, I completely forgot, it is easier to ban, otherwise you will have to work.
To be honest, before watching this movie, I had a feeling that I would not like the Battalion movie at all. (Most likely, this is due to the fact that for me “Russian Cinema” is boob-perdil comedies a la “Gorki”, “Rzhaki”, “Carlosons” and other horrors from “Gooseberry to Andreasyanov-Petrosyanov”.) But it turns out I was wrong. I just didn’t get an impression from this movie.
I was initially frightened by the presence of F. Bondarchuk as a producer (Thank God that not as a director, because he already had Stalingrad). In general, the film is a good, well-chosen cast (Maria Aronova is on top!), good camera work, excellent costumes, perfectly conveyed the image of Petrograd sample 1917, but in my opinion the film turned out to be average, only because, I repeat, he did not make any impression on me. It's very hard to say something when there's not much to talk about, but I'll try. The film did not turn out exciting (and again, did not make any impression on me), what did the director want to say when filming the episode of beating Maria Bochkarev by her husband? I felt sorry for her, but did not understand why no one stood up for her and left her lying in the mud. I do not like the presence of Maria Kozhevnikova, who played Countess Tatishcheva, who wished to join the women's battalion, and in which she was beaten in the face during the training (this is the only thing I remember, since I have a personal dislike for her, do not be offended), and then suddenly became pregnant and she was released home, not only because of this, but because her father also dies, and no longer appears in the film and is not mentioned.
Although the film is about well-known ideals and standard clichés, but very necessary for all of us. They are like fairy tales of good and evil, which should still be told to children, so as not to forget about the main things. The film raises a lot of themes and after watching the film, thoughts run away, think about the cruelty and senselessness of war, and about true patriotism, and about domestic violence, and women’s share, and about the civil war, as a tragedy of Russia, and about the right to choose everyone, and about love and betrayal. ' War has no female face', especially acutely feel the cruelty of war in contrast with maiden curls, hats, flowers, talk of first love, the destiny of a woman to bear and raise children. ': The evils of the cause of the state to which women stand up' A state in which husbands beat wives to death, the army does not stand up for their country, and society is divided into their own and others. The film turned out to be very emotionally heavy, cruel, sad, tense, intense and most importantly optimistic. So thank you to the creators for the hope, for the child Natalia carries under her heart, for the possible meeting of lovers after the final battle, for the heroes who inspire others with their courage, for patriotism and faith in Russia.