Pocket: Black Roses: White House, Black Smoke. We are discussing the NTV movie:
'via Blog this'
Black Roses: White House, Black Smoke. We are discussing the NTV movie
Elena Rykovtseva: We are Yuri Bogomolov, columnist of the Russian newspaper, and Volodymyr Chernyshov, journalist of the NTV channel. We are discussing a movie that came out last night on the NTV channel, called "White House, Black Smoke". He looked very much, the share was ten percent, even higher than in the football match that preceded it. Vladimir, I can certainly congratulate you on the audience's interest. And honestly, I was surprised. Yuriy Alexandrovich, were you surprised that so many people wanted to watch it?
Yuri Bogomolov
Olena Rykovtseva: Vladimir, I'm already in the second announcement of your movie, in the first, which is called "Stalin with us", and in the second, in the announcement of this film I see the same phrase. In the first case, you say that I will show you a movie that is not worth watching stalwart supporters of Stalin; you do not have to look at Stalin's stubborn opponents; you need to look at those who want to know what he really was. Now you too say: I'm trying to reveal the real reasons for the events of October 3-4. You are talking about very complicated things, and you promise from yourself that at last you will say the whole truth.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I promise to try to sort out.
Elena Rykovtseva : You promised this attempt - did you succeed? How do you rate what happened?
Vladimir Chernyshov: Of course, this is an advertising move. I would like to return to the numbers before. I'm a little surprised, for example. I did not think that after the football we will raise the channel rating, to be honest. Despite the fact that this event is pleasing to the ancient, 20 years ago, a particular public is very interested in this event. But I still did not expect the masses to connect to it. Although we strove to do this, we tried to make the plot engrossing and work on the picture. Guys professionally, in my opinion, worked. As far as I was concerned, I did not understand, when I started working on the film, I personally caught myself in the thought that even I, the Muscovite, all this happened to me, in my eyes, and I lost some causal consequences. In memory, memory is selective in humans. I remember the images: the tanks are firing, their poshhistyskoy attitude to all of this, rather than proeltsinskoe. Okay, shoot it, order it, it's finally over. Tired of these rallies, the streets overlap. I did not see the picture as a whole, I did not understand causal relationships. To me, when we took up this film, it was interesting to chronologically decompose for ourselves, how it all happened, from which the conflict grew, to what it all led. That's exactly what we tried to do. When we started work, there was a temptation, there were a lot of human stories, to tell exactly these human stories, there were both tragic and dramatic. Suddenly, I realized that people as well as I am confused in the August 91 and the events of October 93. Removed some kind of face in memory. And people adults, who were then mature people, tanks, GKChP, Yeltsin, in some kind of mixed people. And the younger generation, who is 20 years old, does not really imagine what it was. We had to tell first of all a chronological picture of events. How successful it is to judge the viewers.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I think it sounded in the film, maybe not very clearly, but at least I tried to say my opinion on this. It seems to me that the 93rd is the echo of the 91st. And in the 91st society still had hopes that the future would be much lighter than the modern one.
Elena Rykovtseva: You speak right now - illusions.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Yes, of course, the illusions, as then showed the next decades, and today also shows. Echoes of these hopes were still in the 93rd for many, the younger generation, who always believes that tomorrow will be better than today, than yesterday, the more so. Yesterday, in general, young people are denied, rejected. I think the echo of these hopes remained. Yeltsin remained a halo of the nation-elected president. And they believed that even a little bit and everything would be fine, most importantly, that nobody interrupted, and these guys all the time make noises, interfere. This chaos, people were tired of it at that moment. I can not say that the majority of the society actively supported Yeltsin, it more supported the passivity of her, watching the CNN house with tea, a sandwich after the execution of the parliament. The masses did not go out in the street - it was a fatigue from the policy that you finally get to work and work,
Elena Rykovtseva: We are talking not about support but about approval.
Vladimir Chernyshov : The people were silent, as Pushkin, by and large.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov : But this is within the limits of static error.
Elena Rykovtseva: Of course. "I will be indifferent to these events - 13%." But still interesting.
Yuriy Bogomolov : I have a question to you, Volodymyr, that year, that fall you were a young man, did you work or study somewhere?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I was a student, I was 20 years old then. I was just such a stroke and got by chance under fire when I took the city hall. We went with friends in the cinema in "October", as I now remember, not thinking about the fact that somewhere rallies. When we left the cinema and at that moment the first shots from the city hall were heard. I remember very well how we went to the yards to the subway.
Yuri Bogomolov
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I do not mind anything. I said that this was an attempt both on the one hand of the coup and on the other. Both sides sought to seize power.
Yuri Bogomolov : Do you share ideologically? On the one hand, nevertheless, there was a democratic component of this process for Yeltsin, Gaidar and so on. On the other hand, Rutskaya, Khasbulatov, Makashov, Barkashov and other people, quite clearly created a communist fascist. And then, when I felt the skin, I was sitting in the Moscow News, I felt that if you capture television, and in general they would seize power, then all - the next day, the pogroms, the defeats of the editorial staff, will start.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I felt the same at that moment.
Yuri Bogomolov : I understand that years are passing and the attitude is changing. In the film, Vladimir absolutely clearly took Prokurtsov's position.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I do not agree.
Yuri Bogomolov : This is evident from the one you asked to testify.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We invited the participants of those events. I would gladly hear Gaidar, but Gaidar is not there. Grachev is not with us. Yeltsin does not exist.
Yuri Bogomolov : You only have Filatov present on that side.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Korzhakov.
Yuri Bogomolov : Korzhakov is just a misunderstanding, he can not today speak objectively about what was happening.
Elena Rykovtseva: He hates Yeltsin.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : He was directing a particular storming of the White House.
Yuri Bogomolov : He could manage at that moment, but his testimony, as well as the testimony of Nevzorov, who seems to have called the whole company "shabloya" and spoke rather despicable. I remember him at the time, he was kicking, he was a gambler.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : It is still clear that he felt excitement from the battle.
Yuri Bogomolov : In addition, he was an adherent of Makashov, he was doing his time plots about Makashov, as the hope of Russian civilization.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : But this does not mean that we should not give a voice to that side.
Yuri Bogomolov : You give a voice, but they also dominate their position, their point of view in this film is absolutely overwhelming.
Elena Rykovtseva: Can I read one quote? I will not call a person because I did not warn him that I would read his mind. He is an absolute supporter of Khasbulatov, on that side. I made him watch this movie, and I was wondering how satisfied he was with him. He said: "Yes, this is probably the first film to show that the minority did not win, and the majority lost." I say: try to describe this movie to me. He says: "70% of the time was broadcast to the side of the White House, 30% was given to the Yeltsin party, which gave Yeltsin, told how they persuaded him to do without an assault, handed over it." He has a perfectly clear feeling that you are "our", you are them.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We showed a movie in two audiences, on one show you were.
Elena Rykovtseva: Yes, at the Documentary Film Center.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : And before that there was a show in the Union of Writers of Moscow. The first show was for the audience of the Orthodox-Patriotism. You know, there were different thoughts. People approached me, they said: yes, you finally gave part of our truth. And people came across who said: Yet, you justify Yeltsin. You understand that it's terrible that someone constantly wants to get on some side and someone is looking for what you side. I tell you the truth to you, maybe you noticed some kind of distortion, I honestly tried to get away from this, I did not look at them as the supporters of Khasbulatov and the supporters of Yeltsin. The same Rutskoy and Khasbulatov do not communicate for 20 years, already in the White House there was no unity between them.Makashov is a separate conversation at all, it is a third party. Barkashov is the fourth party. There was such a tangle of contradictions inside. Therefore, when we say that at the emotional level we then realized that it all poured out into the street, pogroms, and so on, and on the other hand, Gaidar and the Democrats, when we began to get to the topic, there were so many underwater currents, so much different forces were involved. There were secret services that worked there and there, there were guys there who were negotiating with the White House and the Kremlin, hoping that someone would come to power, all the same - who, most importantly, to agree.
Yuri Bogomolov
Vladimir Chernyshov : But these are the films we had.
Yuri Bogomolov : Well, but witnesses were. Witnesses were full about this. By the way, the most casual witness is Sergey Parkhomenko. Why did not you ask him to tell me how it was, was he at the top of the story?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We initially chose the characters, by the way, there was a huge list, and many refused, on the one hand - with Yeltsin, people refuse to speak. Erin refused categorically. Erin said that these events are not interesting to me, I do not want to talk about them. Bragin, who turned off the broadcast, also refused. I agreed with Venediktov, I had already arrived to shoot, at the last moment he said: "I do not remember so badly, let's Bountman, he's better remembered." Bontman said that I'm riding, I can not now.
Yuri Bogomolov
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We are all afraid of this. Even I'm afraid when I give an interview.
Elena Rykovtseva: Even her television company.
Yuriy Bogomolov : This is a haircut method.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Do you think Rutskaya and Khasbulatov were not afraid? And Barkashov was not afraid? We had bypassed him for half a year, we had to come, show ourselves, drink vodka with him.
Yuriy Bogomolov : I can tell you, the Russian newspaper "published" the letter of 42 ". ..
Volodymyr Chernyshov : By the way, a terrible document of the era.
Yuriy Bogomolov : I subscribed to it. I would subscribe to then and would consider it an honor to sign up today.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : And what about democracy, freedom of speech?
Yuriy Bogomolov : The same Parkhomenko said that freedom of speech was well said, saying that they were advocates and supporters of not prohibiting the newspaper Pravda.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This letter should not be, on the contrary - to ban the newspaper "Tomorrow".
Yuriy Bogomolov : There are many such things that ...
Elena Rykovtseva: Do not subscribe to everyone.
Yuri Bogomolov
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Agree, there are different people there, Makashov was there, and Oleg Rumyantsev was a quite intelligent man.
Yuri Bogomolov : The first violins and the person of this side were Barkashov, Makashov, Khasbulatov. These people are Khasbulatov, Rutskaya, I look at them - they are nothing. What are they intellectual nobody, human nobody. Hasbulatov is such a complacency, and such insult today, for example. And then, you do not remember, he was such a mockery.
Elena Rykovtseva: Let's say objectively, that he and the movie finishes: what you struggled for and got. He is upset.
Yuriy Bogomolov : This person has lived after this absolutely well-off.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Would you like to graduate in Kolyma on construction?
Yuri Bogomolov
Elena Rykovtseva: Has Yuri Zhukov been chosen as a historian for the film?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : No, Yuri Zhukov was not elected, there is another person.
Yuri Bogomolov : It was very small here, but he said well how he saw how they shot these people.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : He was a deputy of the district council of Krasnopresnensky.
Yuri Bogomolov : Why should this be given as an indisputable truth?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : But I do not give anything. Do you think that we give Korzhakov an interview as an indisputable truth that contradicts Filatov?
Yuri Bogomolov : This man, as they say, once lied to someone who believes in you, he has so many lies, lied about both Stalin and, in general, the history that it discredits the whole documentary.
Elena Rykovtseva: We are about the movie "Stalin with Us"?
Yuri Bogomolov : And here he is. Comes with a stick and tells how he saw.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Oleg Rumyantsev says that I did not see a shot, Yury Zhukov says he saw shooting. It's the same as with snipers, some say snipers, others are not. We give different points of view, in the film they sound. One man says: I have seen. He was then a deputy of the district council, there are no grounds for not trusting him, he is a doctor of historical sciences.
Yuriy Bogomolov : This is not a documentary. If there are no proofs from different points of view of the documents, then this can not be taken.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : There is no written order even for the shooting of parliament.
Yuriy Bogomolov : If there are no documents - no need.
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Yuriy Bogomolov : You do not have to remix and say so. Understand what kind of thing, what's the mistake of so many, yesterday we saw on TV two films and one discussion almost simultaneously. What, as a rule, is an error, a feature. The point is not that someone takes a party, I understand that a documentary can not always get out without a concept. But the concept is the greatest enemy of a documentary film. There is a need to overcome the concept of objectivity. And then you're cutting off the cream of those events that exist. You never want to, do not try. One more day earlier, on the "Rain", a discussion between Revzin and Narinsky about this fact, and both, although they tried to get deeper into the situation, did not have a thorough deepening in those or other conflicts, preconditions.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This is a mosaic of different opinions. and we do not know which of them is telling the truth.
Elena Rykovtseva: But when you take a historian in a certain direction and when he speaks of it ...
Volodymyr Chernyshov : He does not act as a historian, in this case Alexander Olerovsky, our historian.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov : So I invited him, this is not a man coming from the street. You know how many crazy rushes up to us and say that we saw barges, full of corpses, we saw how they shot at the stadium. We did not give people just out of the street, we gave a person adequate, a person known and authoritative person.
Yuri Bogomolov : Not authoritative, absolutely.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : It may be for you.
Yuri Bogomolov : No, not just for me. You say that Medinsky's authoritative historian.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Medynsky Minister of Culture. Why is not he an authoritative person?
Yuri Bogomolov : He is a historian, do you know?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I know. I read his books, I like his books.
Elena Rykovtseva: And I see the problem precisely in the fact that Zhukov is authoritative for the mass audience. When he says such things - people believe.
Yuriy Bogomolov : When Zhukov told you in his previous film about what Stalin was a democrat, he was forced into hostage-taking, he was forced ...
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This is his version, she has the right to exist.
Yuriy Bogomolov : There are few lively versions.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : It is based on documents. You wanted documents, here are your documents.
Yuriy Bogomolov : What documents are there? This is a pure fake.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : They showed these documents there.
Yuriy Bogomolov : Well, they showed some old paper.
Vladimir Chernyshov : This is a piece of paper for us, this is a document for us.
Olena Rykovtseva: There is an important interpretation of it.
Vladimir Chernyshov : The whole story is a comparison of facts and the interpretation of these facts.
Yuri Bogomolov : This was a pure falsification.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : These are archival documents.
Elena Rykovtseva: Our listener is sure that the film is made to order mode. Why do the regime have such a view today?
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Yuri Bogomolov
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We have half of the government composed of liberals.
Yuriy Bogomolov : What is the half of it?
Elena Rykovtseva: Did you expect that you will be told - an order?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : "Orders" always say whatever you do. You will do about the cages of the homeless, they will also say that the order.
Elena Ryktseva: This is not a cat - this is a very serious ideological film.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Actually, honestly, this topic is much simpler than Stalin's. Because Stalin shares our society. Any appearance of Stalin in one form or another is already provocative for the audience. The ratings that Stalin was even not comparable. How one of my colleagues joked: you can just show a photo of your hero, the average rating will be on the channel. Therefore, such an interest on the one hand, and on this. And here, it would seem, the story is more or less understood by society, 20 years have passed, consensus has to be that on the other hand people are not right, and from this, one can not bring the political situation to an open collision. And it seems to me, in this case, that I would not say about Yeltsin, I have a different attitude to him, there is no unambiguous look at him, a figure is complex, as well as Stalin.
Yuriy Bogomolov : How complicated a cat can be.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Stalin is a historical figure, there it was different, there was a torment, it was another. Yeltsin, too, is often called the executioner, after the shooting of the White House in particular. In this political moment, he acted as a short-sighted, ineffective politician.
Yuri Bogomolov : Yeltsin joined in this case as a person who suppressed the civil war in the embryo.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : A politician should not tolerate a civil war.
Yuri Bogomolov : He is not alone in this field. How were the clashes ...
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I say that there were various interested parties in this collision.
Yuri Bogomolov : Yeltsin, Filatov rightly noticed, was a compromise man and tried to find him in this case, and Khasbulatov did not agree.
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Elena Rykovtseva: The way they relate to each other, it happened in the eyes - it is an absolute dead end. I had the feeling that this side is creating it, why I did not sympathize with her absolutely. It seemed to me that it was she.
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Yuri Bogomolov : It's not true. How Yeltsin had to deal with the Duma.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I then worked as a parliamentary correspondent in the Duma, I remember all this struggle. This struggle was limited by the arrangements with Zyuganov, transferring suitcases with the money of another faction.
Yuriy Bogomolov : This was the routine of political life.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This was not an ideological and conceptual opposition, as with the Verkhovna Rada.
Yuriy Bogomolov : But under him there was an ideological confrontation, in the subcarpathion of this process there was an ideological confrontation, since these people, and Rutskaya, and Khasbulatov, and so on, stood on a certain fetishization of the state, which later divided. As a result, we came today to fetishize the state.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : It started from when the state showed its might, demonstrating that it could be the power of tanks, the army to solve all issues.
Yuriy Bogomolov : Not everyone.
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Elena Rykovtseva: I do not agree, it was not an easy solution to the question.
Yuriy Bogomolov : After he won and we won, there were a lot of complaints. This is already in our conscience.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This was a really difficult moment in our history. I propose to treat him as a difficult moment in history. It is all the same that we will now disassemble the Constituent Assembly - it is also a difficult moment. On what side to get up - sailor Zheleznyak, red, white? I do not know who I am.
Yuriy Bogomolov : You do not know, and I, for example, know. Really, white.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : And what kind of program was white - to restore republican Russia's king-father?
Yuriy Bogomolov : There were many programs there, and the Constituent Assembly could ...
Volodymyr Chernyshov : It could turn into a bazaar worse than the Verkhovna Rada. It could too. Can not be unequivocally treated.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Yuriy Bogomolov : I think that such films work in a way: from them people get what they are close to. Therefore, it does not change the percentage, for many it is a film of self-satisfaction and irritation. Not just a documentary, but you tried to document a film to make a film.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This is the law of the genre. We have to fight for the spectator, the viewer will not just watch the chronicle.
Yuri Bogomolov : You have created some kind of frame in which it starts with the meeting of two people conditional, as I understand. By the way, for the average spectator inexperienced, he will not notice that this is a pure convention.
Elena Rykovtseva: You seriously imagine: it was fighting there, it was a sniper.
Yuri Bogomolov
Elena Rykovtseva: This is a lure simply.
Yuri Bogomolov : This is not a lure - this is the design of the myth that you create. The myth of noble, romantic, loyal constitution of people. The confrontation of good and evil, plus and minus here is obvious. You will say that someone there said something like that, Filatov's presentation, and so on, but the whole point, the whole mood of the film is directed at the fact that these people were fighting and crushed.
Elena Rykovtseva: I do not agree ...
Yuri Bogomolov : When Yeltsin spoke the last word and lists those moments, you give your comment, remember?
Vladimir Chernyshov : I remember, of course.
Yuri Bogomolov : None of the provisions of Yeltsin is not true. You see, your tenderness.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : This comment comes at the end when we showed that everything is much more complicated than Yeltsin's appeal. When we showed that, in addition to the Communists and the Nazis, there were simple deputies, there were ordinary people, there were priests, which, you agree, were difficult to call communists.
Yuriy Bogomolov : Very funny priest who is washing dishes. You come up with an aesthetic point of view, but you need to be factual.
Elena Rykovtseva: It seems to be artificial, stretched all these things.
Yuriy Bogomolov : If they were told simply, they may have believed, and when they start washing dishes all together ...
Volodymyr Chernyshov : We wanted to make it funny to have the spectator rested from shooting.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Yuriy Bogomolov : This is a screen art, on which you can sell everything, submit it.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Why?
Yuri Bogomolov : That's why.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Therefore, this is not the answer.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov : But still something can flare up between them at any moment.
Elena Rykovtseva: I agree with you, Yuriy Alexandrovich, theatrical and funny. But on the idea of nothing in this terrible, unprofitable one.
Yuriy Bogomolov : In general, the idea is nothing terrible. But this is because it works absolutely against the ethics of documentary.
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Elena Rykovtseva: You do not perceive this genre.
Yuriy Bogomolov : I accept this genre. This genre is very well implemented by Parfenov. Here's what is common today in television documentary, historical documentary reconstruction works, there was an American film bombed Hiroshima when there was a reconstruction, pilots flying, planes from this bomb and realize that this is a reconstruction. And then it blurred.
Elena Rykovtseva: Yes, true, you call them real names, surnames, this person has a surname.
Vladimir Chernyshov : You are talking about the concept of the film, the concept of the film is very simple, that the split in society was then, and as the reaction to the film shows, unfortunately, I completely crashed in this case, I thought everyone calmed down. 20 years have passed, but it turns out, no.
Elena Rykovtseva: Do you work on a commercial company, filming a movie on a subject that can not touch anyone?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Frankly speaking, I thought it was a really interesting story with shooting, with a confrontation, with some pitfalls, if we will show it, this action film, which will make it clear how we were then split, how much society was atomized.
Elena Rykovtseva: That is, do not put up with the present, would you like to be there?
Volodymyr Chernyshov : I wanted to fix it there, then in the process I began to realize that the split is coming to this day, in what we are convinced today. The split in society. And we wanted to say loudly, but I wanted to reconcile the inner between people. When I saw before me in the hall of people who really were on different sides of the barricades at the pre-mural show, it seemed to me that when I saw a Chekist Sevastyanov sitting next to a man who fought in the White House against which Sevastyanov sent his people , it seemed to me that this wound somehow heals.
Any events in turmoil times always raise foam. Of course, Makashov is just a foam that melts in times of trouble. On the other hand, there was also a lot of foam that sprang up, and then even did not settle for a while.
Any events in turmoil times always raise foam. Of course, Makashov is just a foam that melts in times of trouble. On the other hand, there was also a lot of foam that sprang up, and then even did not settle for a while.
Elena Rykovtseva: By the way, answering our listener, Sergey Parkhomenko very much denies and very indignant when the entire history of events begins with the decree of 1400. This is what was the long history of this war, this confrontation of the stupid, which led to this decree.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : What impressed me too is that many people are trying to scold the film because there is no apologetics of any of the parties.
Elena Rykovtseva: You somewhere said that you have reviewed your attitude to these events, you have changed. And how exactly have you changed? What do you think now, how do you formulate your attitude?
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Elena Rykovtseva: Then you could not get a movie because you do not have any position.
Yuriy Bogomolov : This is a habitual mantra: plague on both your houses. Or grace.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : Do not plague both your homes and not grace. How can we stand on the side, I again give an example with the overthrow of the Constituent Assembly, I have no answer, the October Revolution was correct or wrong. At that moment the circumstances were objectively. I now do not know who was right in those events, I know only one thing that we can not allow shooting in Moscow and it is impossible to deal with parliamentarism with tanks.
Yuri Bogomolov : There was no parliamentarism, there was, as was correctly said Nevzorov, a shoble, in which there were decent people who became hostages of this shabble.
Elena Rykovtseva:
Volodymyr Chernyshov
Yuriy Bogomolov : What have they lost? They lost the Soviet regime in the 91st year.
Volodymyr Chernyshov : They lost their habits of life and confidence in the future.
Elena Rykovtseva: You both started the following topic, which is still three hours, and we have 10 seconds to close the program.
Full video version is available here
'via Blog this'
