Dostal Nicholas: The concept "repentance" to Russian Federation as if is deleted today
Show original
at the heart of the movie two lives - about Shaposhnikov Yvan Semenovich and Novgorodsky Ioann. Photo:
On the last Moscow international film festival Dostal Nicholas "The monk and a demon" took nkino.ru only minor award, thus, that won poll of federation of film societies against Russian Federation. And on a past in Veliky Novgorod a festival of historical cinema of "Veche" the director received the Grand Prix and a prize in the nomination "the best director" at noisy delight of the auditorium. Right after a festival Dostal Nicholas told "RG" about secret which interests the director today.
Nikolay Nikolaevich, I try to understand your thirst for devilry. That you remove "A small demon" Sologub, about Shalamov during general "devilry", "The monk and a demon".
Dostal Nicholas: Has to tell, did not feel and now I do not feel in any prerequisites to research of this subject. After all as there was "A monk and a demon". I removed "Split" near the Nilo-Sorsky desert to Vologda region where recognized about the devotee of the first half of the XIX century Shaposhnikov Yvan Semenovich, bearing obedience in this monastery. I liked this image: poor, lame, the righteous person, lived in kitchen. In "The monk and a demon" it is spoken about noise as though millstones on a floor ride. I in life about Shaposhnikov Yvan Semenovich read it, at it from kitchen noise was heard all the time, something there at it rattled, rode … Then I was in Veliky Novgorod and there learned about Novgorodsky Ioann, sacred XII century which a prayer caught once a demon in a washstand and promised to release if that takes it to Jerusalem. Here these two lives were cornerstone of the scenario. And who best of all could transfer all this Gogol devilry? Arabov Youri. So all accident.
But you would not pay attention to lives if the internal locator was not adjusted on this wave.
Dostal Nicholas: I do not know b, a certain conscious forming of the filmography is not peculiar to me. I think out nothing specially. Everything develops by itself. Incidentally, in fact, "Split" was born, for example. I removed "Lenin's Will" about Shalamov, at it read the remarkable poem on Habakkuk. The protopriest interested me, I a little that knew about him. My brother offered the Petersburg author Kuraev Mikhail to write history. And so somehow somnulos that after Shalamov there was "Split", and on shootings of "Split" became interested in Novgorodsky Ioann and Shaposhnikov Yvan Semenovich. I do not know, maybe, something and conducts me, certainly. Eventually, I am not an atheist. I am a person kreshchenny, but not churched, I do not observe posts, very seldom I go on a confession, to a participle, but I can assume that something inexplicable is present at our life.
A in general if to formulate something the general about my cinema, I remove, and I want to shoot movies about people with unusual destiny. Me first of all characters of these people, their acts interest.
Now you are going to shoot the movie about Nikolaevich Alexander I?
Dostal Nicholas: there is such idea. Besides, Arabov Youri wrote the scenario "Secret".
the Secret is about that legend, what the emperor, probably, dramatized the death, left a throne and became the aged man Kuzmich Fedor?
Dostal Nicholas: Quite right. The scenario won at competition of Fund of cinema. Won won, but the producers wishing it to remove, are not present - the scenario expensive, after all historical cinema. And I wanted to remove. It is sick at Arabov Youri the scenario unusual - in it as in "The monk and a demon", there is a mixture of genres...
I detective, including?
Dostal Nicholas: Well. From Saint Petersburg Alya Fandorin incognito goes to Siberia with secret mission from Nikolaevich Alexander II, to learn - it it or not it.
With mission from Nikolaevich Alexander II?
Dostal Nicholas: Kuzmich Fedor died in the 1864th year when 9 years as Nikolaevich Alexander reigned. And so Arabov Youri wound round this history "arabesques", as in "Dead souls" at Lungin. So the detective with mystical coloring turns out. The hero is thrown a monkey-wrench into the works all the time by the local: monks, men, women. Preserve Kuzmich Fedor against importunate "Fandorin" who for some reason wants to meet the aged man, to learn something, to communicate... And then it comes back to Saint Petersburg and it has an unenviable choice. To tell that it IT - means to lose the head. After all at live Nikolaevich Alexander I Nikolaevich Alexander rules II - succession to the throne crash. To tell that in Siberia not Nikolaevich Alexander I - means to become the liar in the face of History. The material will suffice on 8 series so, I think, I will offer the project to any TV channel. Than to you this subject is interesting to p by
?
Dostal Nicholas: At once I will make a reservation: we with Arabov Youri consider that Kuzmich Fedor is and there is Nikolaevich Alexander I. And as for a subject, so after all same history about a repentance. After all even if not he, the hands killed the father, was all the same involved in murder. As he lived with this sin, here in it it is interesting to rummage. And therefore that each of us has skeletons in the cupboard, be it the academician or the farmer. Probably, President of the Russian Federation was on Athos not for the sake of curiosity twice. Unfortunately, the concept "repentance" to Russian Federation as though is deleted today. But after all this feeling is the extremely important not only for the person of the believer, it for all is important.
But time so why you address again to history, instead of to a modern material?
Dostal Nicholas: Yes I with pleasure. I read such scenarios even for pragmatical reasons - after all on modern history it is necessary money much less, and easier to find them. But, alas, does not come across to me anything interesting. I even Arabov Youri speak:" Your students in the VGIK much, let's read their works". And it gives nothing. Knows that I do not transfer a conjuncture, false pathos...
A if it was something like "Island" of Sobolev on which shot the sensational movie Lungin?
Dostal Nicholas: Me this history is not close to b, all those miracles which there happen. In "The monk and a demon" a miracle only one - when the monk entered to the Lord's Coffin. There was a demon obeseshchenny, and the monk, on the contrary, got rid of the shortcomings - lamenesses, stutters. And all the rest - not a miracle, it everything the demon gets up, both a postirushka strange, and fish huge, and a raft which everything cannot departure. I would not undertake to do cinema about the sacred. Semenov Yvan son same sinner, as all of us. He tries to be the righteous person, and at it it turns out. The final we leave open - we do not say that the demon became a person. We say that he was given chance to try to come to a repentance.
it is curious that in the scenario a demon by the name of the Legion - a such Bulgakov Bassoon, long-haired type in round points with the interrupted right glass. In the movie at it other image, much more ikonoobrazny.
Dostal Nicholas: I saw Fetisov Georgy at theater Vasilyev Anatoly and understood what exactly such demon similar to Judas on frescos, and is necessary to me.
As Fetisov Georgy agreed on this role, after all it was on Athos.
Dostal Nicholas: Even twice. But the votserkovlennost is one, and a profession - another. And here Tribuntsev Timofey who played the monk, on Athos never was. And I did not have enough, unfortunately. We with Arabov Youri when worked over the scenario "The monk and a demon", wanted to go there, but so still "it is necessary, it is necessary" we speak each other.
... I will tell one small parable. Somehow one monk returned to a cell after day of work, emaciated, tired. Approaches to a bed and sees: on it the devil lies, with horns. The monk looks at him and thinks: "Probably too was tired, the poor fellow". Also laid down very quietly under a bed. And right there the demon a bullet took off from a cell. And love it is possible to struggle with the evil. At us speak: the good has to be with fists. And where fists, there war. And for me there is nothing vazhny this sense - love for the neighbor, love in general to the world. What can be more actual today? We not often speak about it, and it would be necessary.
If to return to a subject of associations and hints - one scene in the movie, on the seashore me reminded a scene from "Small tragedies" Schweitzer at the heart of which - a Pushkin verse "It is boring for me, a demon..." ...
Dostal Nicholas: This scene I at Schweitzer do not remember b, but here that is interesting - Pushkin's shadow at us is present. On a pitching in cinema Fund usually are interested: what your cinema has referensy? In other words, successful predecessors. But if at the movie already is any referensy moreover successful, it is not interesting to me to remove. Therefore we with Arabov Youri wrote: authors do not know any referensa either owing to absence of information or owing to big ambitions. And then we learned that at us is referens, and what - Pushkin! Years at 14-15, absolutely the boy, he wrote the poem "Monk". It is unfinished, it consider unsuccessful, but for us it is important that it in it described history of the monk Pankrati who caught a demon.
Perhaps, to you and unusually conscious forming of the filmography, but that you consistently go in for history Russian Federation is the fact. Eventually and "Shtrafbat" - about one of pages of history and hypothetical future movie about Nikolaevich Alexander I. And I any more do not speak about "Split" or the documentary film" Russian Federation, the XX century, a view of the power".
Dostal Nicholas: If to speak about television movies, there besides an art task was also educational. In the majority we at all do not know our past. Certainly, it is necessary that people knew, who such Old Believers that such split that such penal battalions, who such Shalamov. If about the same split to speak, I after all itself knew about it very little. Began to read about Habakkuk, his works. About the tsar Mikhaylovich Aleksey, about the boyar Morozova whom all perceive on Surikov's picture the terrible old woman, and actually she was the young beautiful woman.
K not one too suffered, and together with the sister about whom in general nobody knows.
Dostal Nicholas: And I read b, learned. More me, of course, Kuraev Mikhail read. the 17th century - a century surprising, rebellious. All know about Stenka Razin, and after all were both Salt, and Copper revolt, and the main thing - split. by
And nevertheless me it is interesting not only history, how many people - the same protopriest Habakkuk, the boyar Morozova. Mikhaylovich Aleksey - the interesting unfairly forgotten tsar. Everything is told "by Pyotr, Pyotr". And after all a lot of things from Petrovsky acts there began Kuzmich Fedor, his elder brother, died the young. At all not Peter I started creating the Russian fleet, and his father constructed to Astrakhan the first ship. At us in general as history know? There was Grozny Yvan, after him can be will remember Godunov Boris. And then at once - Peter I. And here Mikhaylovich Aleksey somewhere got lost, maybe, just because tried to avoid a subject of split? Solzhenitsyn told p to
:" If there was no 17th eyelid, maybe, there would be no 1917 also". He considered what exactly then the crack which consequences we still disentangle went over all country. After all with what ease the people changed a cross worn on the neck for the party membership card. Dostoevsky Fedor Mikhaylovich it is surprisingly exact predoshchutil emergence of devilry in the country, but here speaking about the people-bogonostse, he obviously was mistaken.
you with the brother were brought up by Androsova Natalia , Nikolay's I great-great-granddaughter...
Dostal Nicholas: Sorry, I will interrupt - the sister of the father, and Androsova Natalia brought up us with the brother treated us, as the children.
Knows that Androsova Natalia was present on a reburial of remains of Nikolay II, his family and servants. You read diaries of the last tsar? In which it appears as very ordinary personality?
Dostal Nicholas: Something read, but there is not enough to judge Nikolay's II identity. That he very much loved the family, it is obvious. And what was its reign... I have no historical and political estimates of the right to give because I do not possess information. After all even entering Nikolay I in "The monk and a demon", we used only the obvious facts: that it went across Saint Petersburg practically without protection, it was accompanied by only four kavergarda. That it fell down on a soldier's bed. That could put in Benkendorf's carriage though the chief of gendarmes had the carriage, but I reign pleasantly society Nikolaevich Alexander . And for what named him Palkin, stayed behind scenes.
concerning Nikolay II I was only surprised that it canonized. It after all was lost any more the tsar, and Romanov. But how many Romanov, ordinary citizens then killed! I cannot tell - can be, he it deserved, maybe, is not present. Besides, maybe, Nikolay's II renunciation was a mistake? Perhaps, he should have fought, instead of to renounce. But also on it I have no definite answer.
But you after all shot the documentary film about Russian Federation in the XX century...
Dostal Nicholas: We only selected documents, gave nobody estimates. I remember how Batalov Aleksey who read the offscreen text, said that, here supposedly we so are proud of the fiction films, and them in 50, 100 years can be any more will to look. And another matter - the chronicle, documents. Here it, really, for a long time. I am glad that I happened to touch it.