Paragraph 24. A person has the right not to understand anything. (Constitution of the Republic of Užupis). An indicator of the quality of a documentary is both its objectivity and what strong emotions the viewer evokes. The second is made for "hurrah", and with the first it is not so simple. It is based on a topic that is ambiguously assessed in the world. In Russia, we are used to saying that Saakashvili attacked innocent South Ossetia, that Russia was exclusively a peacemaker, and to say that this was not the case is considered to be a betrayal of the Motherland. Therefore, we are not surprised that in Russian the Wikipedia article about this war is called "Armed conflict in South Ossetia (2008)". In English, it is called Russo-Georgian War. And in French, it is not known under the pressure of which intra-Wikipedia lobby - Deuxieme guerre d'Ossetie du Sud. But in Ukrainian — Russian-Georgian wine 2008. As the article is called in Wikipedia in Georgian, I will not write (few will read), but how it will be translated, I think everyone will understand. In fact, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, which lobby wins, that will be the title of the article. We know that this war can only be called “the war in South Ossetia”, with an indication that Georgia was the aggressor, South Ossetia was the victim, Russia was a peacemaker, and we cannot have any other points of view.
What can we say - the Russians shot "Olympius Inferno", the Americans her "anti-remake" removed, "5 days in August" - these are two pictures essentially with the same plot, only in one war begins and brutalizes Georgia, in another war begins and brutalizes Russia, and the main characters know the "truth" and try to tell it to the whole world.
Of course, the residents of Tskhinvali will say one thing, the residents of Senaka (and this city is not located in Ossetia, but in Svaneti, so this war went beyond South Ossetia), but in fact the opinion of ordinary poor people in a small one does not care. For imperial ambitions are much more important, and the media will say what the order of the empire was, not how it really was.
Therefore, Yuri Khashchevatsky’s Lobotomy is not one of those films that can become popular in Russia. His documentary about Lukashenka, Kalinovsky Square, has much more potential in this regard. Khashchevatsky clearly has more sympathy for Saakashvili than Kokoity and Putin. Moreover, in this film we see Yulia Latynina, and at the same time "a little less beloved, but also very respected." Boris Nemtsov, who details how much Putin stole, what kind of culture of hatred for Georgia was arranged by Russian politicians long before the war. So Khashchevatsky can be safely enlisted in the ranks of those that Russian pseudo-patriots like to call “liberoids”. Saakashvili and Latynina – for many Russians (and not only for those who consider themselves an ardent patriot) are simply not people.
My first impression from this film was that it was stronger than Romm’s Ordinary Fascism. Then, unfortunately, it became clear that not everything is so simple that the picture, on which you can really safely take and write a positive review, without disturbing your conscience, “Lobotomy” does not reach. Khashchevatsky considers such an acute issue only from one side, pointing to the facts where pro-Putin propaganda lied, and keeping silent about the facts where anti-Putin propaganda lied. Unfortunately, both lied. The picture is drawn by the fact that the coverage of the war is only part of the film, and less. It is mainly about the hypocrisy of the ruling elite, about the imperial atrocities of Russia in Chechnya and Abkhazia, which, if you like, you can not deny.
The conflict of 08.08.08 should be considered objectively and impartially. Russian television in August 2008, of course, not as brazenly lied as in 2014, but still quite lied, and certainly did not show the whole picture. And the task was to show the Russian audience that in Georgia the fascists who bomb civilians have power, that the decaying West is lying, and only in Russia everything is fair and objective. While denigrating Saakashvili’s actions, it did not mention all of Kokoity’s destructive actions. And they were, these destructive actions. These were bloody actions that led to the death of many residents of Georgian villages. Objective television coverage of events could not be detailed, because in the detailed coverage of events is always someone other than the victims, interested in ...
Is "Lobotomy" the kind of honest film that shows everything as it is? First, Lobotomia is not so much about the war as it is about the policy of the United Russia party as a whole. And the question of war here is an edge, it cannot be circumvented. Secondly, as for the coverage of the rallies, as for the image of Luzhkov, Sechin, Surkov, there can be no objective claims. Objective claims arise when Khashchevatsky’s voice declares that the city of Senaki is located 300 kilometers from Tskhinvali (the hands themselves want to take the line of the Google Earth program and make sure that not in the 300s, but in the 150s), and immediately becomes offensive. It seems like a powerful movie. Sometimes it just knocks out a tear. I feel completely ashamed of my country. And to say that it shows the truth and only the truth is impossible. There is much more truth in it than in Arkady Mamontov’s films, for example. And Mamontov is not just a liar, but also a man-hater. Khashchevatsky is not a liar at all, but a person who can be wrong.
The Lobotomy is worth seeing. Although this is not an impeccable film, watching it very strongly will make you think.