Don’t put off until tomorrow what you can do today! A great gift was to see at the show in the Theater of the Workshop the director of the picture, Andrei Gryazev. After all, the most pleasant thing about watching a movie is to try to understand the course of the director’s thoughts and the circumstances that developed during the shooting of the film. This is especially true of the documentary, because in it the director tries to scoop up as much life as possible. So in this film everything is absolutely real – a “palace coup”, captured by the director, the son of the Decembrists of the 21st century, Kasper, who, by the way, may not always get as much attention as necessary, an inverted car, a removed poster and the notorious kleptomania in the store. The film describes both the good and bad aspects of the lives of rebels against the system, the art group War, who oppose the police and the regime based on its strength. All aspects of the life of the group are considered. As cons – excessive focus on PR, and for myself I also noted the mat, which in the public consciousness is approaching the boundaries of what is allowed (the presence of mat in the picture Andrei Gryazev considers still flowers and not so significant a reason to discredit the cause of the heroes). A significant share is devoted to the character of the heroes who are focused on the goal and resolute, but sometimes forget such values as raising a child, quarrel over trifles and under the gaze of the public forget about the sense of self-preservation, entering into ridiculous adventures to prolong their life in honor. The mother’s concern for the child and political partisanship were noted, due to which some professors consider the sphere of activity of the group to be art.
As I said, the film is essentially a kind of account of the band’s activities. However, this report is compared to Tito’s report to Stalin, which also considered pros and cons (as applied to party functionaries), but many were shot. Also, this film has a certain effect, attracting a large number of people, and being an important factor in the promotion of the ideas of the group due to well-done work. It is interesting to know how you can investigate a formally minor case of a “coup” so that you can create a feature film after that. For me, in this case, a big plus was the fact that after showing the picture in the hall appeared the director and began to answer the questions of the hall (my mother, as you guessed). What's meaningful about this format is that you learn a lot more than you've seen in the film itself, especially when it comes to something as sensitive as political protest. The director, for example, said that during filming he had to put up with relentless surveillance, about which he told a wonderful story about how he conducted an inexperienced checkist. Andrey Gryazev, contrary to the laws of the genre, decided to follow him with a camera. The young specialist on the direct road to the subway betrayed himself, fussing with the phone and looping, after which the maestro turned the camera and passed the young man - he immediately gave his eagle look, looking directly into the lens.
A sharp polemic at a meeting between a young man and the director was caused by the fact that the young man saw an unpleasant opinion of Andrei about the fact that sometimes the characters of the film refused to give permission to screen the film at the Berlin Film Festival. The heated dispute did not become more meaningful from the heat, and, as the director admitted, when the most interested remained, the fact is that the artists appreciate fame so much that they are ready to stint for it by friendship, suing the director who worked with them for many months, responding to midnight calls. Also, the public was particularly interested in the fate of Casper, the son of the Goat, who from childhood was brought up in an atmosphere of acceptance of marginal norms and decadence, and sometimes did not eat well in the course of the picture, but who is still loved. As the director said, many believe that the boy will go to prison, and someone who will accept rational ideals in his youth in opposition to the parental lifestyle, but this situation definitely raises a question for caring people.
The director also shared many of the technical aspects of filming. For example, he said that he dropped the film for a whole year before he began editing, and the episode with the bridge, which was shot before everyone else, he glued almost from scratch, having scattered fragments, some even made with a closed lens lid by one of the spiritualized specialists involved in filming at the time. As noted by the organizer of the show, part-time admirer of Andrei Gryazev, the outgoing glory of the art group “War” without new ideas on its part, is supported only by the success of this film, a participant of the Berlin festival in 2011 and shown in many countries of the world, including Australia and Poland.
The personality of a director who takes risks in his profession, but nevertheless follows the path in which he studied (that is, as a director), after becoming a skate coach, is respected. From himself, the director of the qualitatively made picture “Tomorrow” advised not to be afraid of risk in life, because otherwise a person will get some amoeba.