The filmmaker dubbed the journalists "provocateurs" who "throw matches around during a fire."

The famous Russian director Alexander Sokurov shared his attitude to television political observers and the military conflicts of the Russian Federation with other countries.

As the filmmaker said in an interview with Znak.com, he hopes that Russian political commentators, television and radio workers will one day appear before the Hague Tribunal. He dubbed the journalists "provocateurs" who "scatter matches during a fire" and suggested that the authorities turn to them Special attention.

"They must intkbbee be punished. These are just criminals who work on both state and private channels, "he said, calling the opinion that Russians and Ukrainians are one people as a deepest delusion.

Sokurov believes that "Soviet practice" has brought the countries closer together, although Russians and Ukrainians are "just neighbors." At the same time, the director considered the historical path of the Ukrainians humiliating, since it involves constant interference from the outside.

“And then there is clearly not enough intelligence in Ukrainian politics. In a difficult historical moment, the people did not nominate large-scale politicians who could delicately get out of difficult confrontational circumstances,” the director said.

As a solution to the problem of Russia's conflicts with neighboring countries, Sokurov proposed to introduce into the Constitution the principle of peaceful coexistence with states that have a common border with our country. He believes that even in the event of an attack on Russia, one should find the strength not to use one's own army and not to invade someone else's territory.

Yes, I'm in the hospital now, but I had very good surgeons. I think everything will be fine. It was a difficult period, rather difficult, but step by step, I am sure, I will get through. This must be done because there are many things to do, many ideas, many tasks, many dangers ...

Come back - 100%! You are a strong person in body and spirit. One of the cases, or dangers, as you put it, that you have to face after being discharged is the situation around the check of your studio. What do you think is going on? Why did the police undertake this check?

There was no reason for any such scrutiny of our activity. All the films that we made were delivered absolutely minute by minute, day by day: both large full-length and short films. All reports were submitted on time.

We rent them every, in my opinion, three weeks of the shooting or preparatory period with photographs, with all documentary evidence. The reporting system is very tough, at least as far as public money is concerned.

There were no complaints about the director of the fund either. He is a young guy, very well educated, knows five languages, which is very important for me from the point of view of international activity. Because we need to show our young films outside the country. And this is very important so that the producer and director of the foundation can communicate ...

But some time ago, one of our employees quit, who thought his salary was low, and then he had some other complaints. Before that, he borrowed money from both me and the director of the fund.

Yes, and this activity has begun. He came to the police, told some fantasies about some operations that were carried out here. And here - short and student films, full-length films ... Apparently, in the evenings he went to photograph some documents that remained on the table in the fund: none of this made any secret. In general, such an absolutely provocative activity. It was just that the man made it his goal to put me and the director of the fund in jail.

This is Mikhail Georgievsky - a man known for his abilities. This is a big shock for me - he is from a wonderful Jewish family in St. Petersburg, a family of blockade. I have visited his parents at home several times on the Day of the Blockade, and I have been at his birthday parties. It seemed to me that such people, absolutely sophisticated, are simply incapable of such actions. In my life, there has never been such a thing that people behaved so absolutely mean. Anything happened, but it was not. I, of course, amazed at this very unpleasant discovery for me.

Honestly, no. Maybe I don't remember. I am not a vindictive person, I forget very quickly, but at least there were always a lot of wonderful friends around me. Reliable, in the most difficult cases, standing by, never afraid of anything. I was so relaxed when this person showed up at our work. Maybe that's the point.

This is actually a very important aspect of sensation. This man had the keys to my apartment: when I left, he helped with something there. Therefore, now it also has a personal pain reaction. Well, and a big lesson for me is who to work with. A very, very big lesson.

Cyril is an outstanding great man, an outstanding, great director with great will. He did all this, as far as I can judge, of course, with the participation of the leadership of this whole great theatrical business. From the very beginning, when we organized this fund in 2013, I set conditions that I would not touch money at all. I will not look into any of the sheets, it is enough for me and there will be a lot of artistic tasks. Therefore, the comparisons are completely inappropriate, if only I correctly understand the functions that Kirill performed.

Well, there is, of course, another part in which the situations are close. Because he, probably, and I - we very often were critical of the current socio-political situation.

Yes, exactly in public. Cyril only did everything much more serious and deeper than me. Kirill is still a mathematician, if I'm not mistaken, by his first education. He has a very tenacious, clearly and correctly formulated mind. He is a very deep person. He is one of our most amazing contemporaries, in my opinion. I judge both as a director and as a citizen, because I took part in the debates with him: at Kolya Solodnikov's, we had a conversation with him in the Open Library.

These positions, of course, often coincided with us. Although they could be expressed with varying degrees of temperament and acuteness. I understand that in a certain political situation the number of difficult people, in a sense independent, has become not very desirable for some part of the ruling class.

Incidentally, I do not mean the president at all now. One-on-one we have had conversations a million times sharper, harder than arguments in a public field. My public incontinence did not make him want to put me in my place, "push me in", give me what is called in my brains.

Oh sure. Because in personal communication, he allows this sincerity, and if you are ready to take this cup and drink it, you can do it. It provides such an opportunity if you are able to concentrately object, motivate. If, with this motivation, he does not see your personal interest in some problem, he participates in the dialogue and brings the dialogue to the end.

As soon as he sees that his interlocutor shows some kind of persistence or formulates something, demonstrating his personal interest, then, according to my observations, this person loses in the president's face the opportunity to talk further.

I needed a meeting with him long before the beginning of this whole unpleasant story. I am now making a film about the events of the Second World War, trying to answer from an emotional and psychological point of view, why this war took place. There are the main historical characters, well-known European participants in this war.

And so, I needed a meeting with Putin in order to ask questions that could clarify the psychology of making personal decisions in difficult historical circumstances. When historical decisions are made not with the understanding that these are historical decisions, but under the influence of the strength of some masculine character.

My communication with Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, so sincere and completely open, taught me a lot. Subsequently, I asked a number of questions to Vladimir Vladimirovich, which concerned, among other things, territorial situations: expansions or contractions, relations to previously adopted international treaties, questions about neutralities ...

The Crimean situation is absolutely illustrative and understandable for me. But in relation to my film, I am more interested in psychological motivations, his internal psychological state, because this is a complex film. In fact, it is a four-language game - very complex in terms of staff organization, technology, technique. I have not done this yet. Therefore, it is very important for me not to be mistaken in my ideas about how and what matures in a person inside.

Yes. I passed on these questions of mine and the need for me (as a director) to meet, but I did not receive any answer. Ultimately, I do not have a direct communication channel, so I don’t know. Perhaps this meeting will never take place.

I understand. If my physical condition allows it, because the doctors categorically say - it is impossible. You still need to get from one city to another. I can’t walk except on crutches, the stitches will just be removed. I'm not afraid of all this. The question is, for whom I will be a burden there: I need someone to help me. If I am at this meeting, then, as sometimes happened, I simply give him a note or go up to him, as everyone can do there if he does not leave. This also does not give guarantees, because, perhaps, he will not want to talk on the scale of such issues. May be.

You know, I can’t rule out anything, I’ll tell you frankly. Because honesty and honor, I now see a little around. I see very little honesty and honor in the behavior of the bureaucratic apparatus and the higher apparatus. To say that this comes from the president - of course not. Who am I that suddenly a sophisticated operation will be developed to elevate me to some kind of there ... No, no, no.

On the other hand, of course, people from the special services have a desire to create all the time some kind of lagoons of dangers, to develop them, apparently. I know that some officers of the special services did not like it very much when, at a meeting with the president, I spoke about Sentsov. I said, it seems, that he was misled - the specialists who were in charge of this case created a specially legal conflict, invented something, designed something, and these terrible 20 years turned out. Everyone understood that these 20 years were not there.

But the president is so convinced of this, they are provided with such documents that he believes in it. Although here, of course, there is already a political collision. With Sentsov, this is one hundred percent policy. This is neither Christianity nor any law there. This is just one hundred percent policy.

Alexander Nikolaevich, when clouds began to gather over Kirill Serebrennikov, many friends and acquaintances advised him to leave the country out of harm's way. Surely now there are people who will advise you the same thing.

You know, since February I have been advised to leave and not return. For me professionally it is possible: I have worked with actors and with my colleagues from Japan to Iceland, and this is very interesting to me. But, you know, I am not ready to part with Russia, because this is my homeland.

No kidding - my homeland. Although I am a child of European and Russian culture, I cannot separate any of them in any way. All this infrastructure, structure and fabric of Russian culture is associated with a really living people. When I visit some of our student audiences, in high school or in colonies, I like my people, you know. I really like him. I understand him. At times I hate because of the fact that some kind of generic or some other shortcomings, vices occur. But I like my people. Even after all these horrible Stalinist purges.

Go to the audience of some good university, stay in class, look at the faces of young people. Just on the faces. I'm probably such a socio-romantic because I look at a human face and I like it. I immediately see some warm shades in a person's soul, the story of his this morning or yesterday evening. I like this people, I do not like what is happening with this people. And sometimes I do not like the way the people behave, and even more do not like the way they behave with the people.

When I was presented with the Nika Prize, I said that today the demonstration was being dispersed, young people were being dispersed. This was probably the first such public appeal. Take care of at least the girls, do not touch at least the girls on these accelerations. Then, we have been waiting for this youth for so long - and they came. And we meet her in this way.

Earlier, in conversations with Matvienko and our former governor, I kept telling them: “Gather young people at stadiums, anywhere. Sit on the field and talk to the stupor, even around the clock. Bring tea there, bring some buns there and talk-talk. If you stop talking to young people, they will start running along Nevsky Prospekt and throwing grenades at restaurants and shops. " Thank God they don't work that way yet. This is how Western youth act when they take to the streets. Thank God, they do not act like that yet, but no one from the political leadership is going to create institutions of inter-party dialogue or something, no one wants to talk to the young anarchists.

https: //www.site/2017-02-09/rezhisser_aleksandr_sokurov_idet_k_tomu_chto_v_rossii_razrazitsya_religioznaya_voyna

"... The flywheel of the destruction of the country will start"

Director Alexander Sokurov: is heading for a religious war to break out in Russia

World renowned filmmaker Alexander Sokurov never hides his civil and political views, even if they ask for it. Because of this, I lost a lot of useful contacts and made enemies .. We talked about Putin and Ramzan Kadyrov, Orthodoxy and Islam, art and censorship.

"Putin has his own cinematic biographer - Nikita"

- At the festival "Days of Sokurov" in the Yeltsin Center, your film about Boris Yeltsin "An example of intonation" was shown. Can you express Yeltsin's intonation in a few words? You talked, you were connected by friendly relations.

- If I could express it in a few words, I probably would not shoot a film. I have many intonations associated with Boris Nikolaevich. And what I have shown is clearly not enough. I just touched on this topic a little. Besides, I wasn't the only one who filmed about him. In Moscow, he actively made contact with other directors and journalists, who seemed to him and Naina Iosifovna more simple and accessible. I was too abstruse for him. However, with me he always had an intonation of understanding, patience, nobility, respect and even some kind of gentleness. But this is my personal, private feeling, because he was not quite like that, since he was engaged in hard work.

- You have repeatedly and quite frankly, as you admit, talked face to face with the current president. After these meetings, did you understand what kind of "intonation" Putin has? Would you be interested in making a film about him?

Vladimir Putin has his own cinematic biographer - Nikita. He has already made films about him. In general, thank God, this place is taken. Although I know many directors who would like to join this row, the president himself simply does not need it.

- You said that in personal conversations he appears different than in public space ...

- I assure you that even Zhirinovsky in public space appears in one hypostasis, but in personal communication he is completely different. And Boris Nikolaevich was different. I was sometimes surprised to see him on TV. I didn’t recognize him, he was so different. In general, any large-scale personality in chamber communication looks different: arrogance leaves, the desire to win a special place for himself in the historical or cultural space. In one-on-one communication, these are always other people. Much to our regret.

- Don't you think that modern world leaders are becoming shallow right before our eyes? It is enough to compare the leaders of the leading European states and the United States with those who stood at the helm half a century ago, the comparison will clearly not be beneficial to the current ones. What do you think is the reason for the crisis of political elites?

How director Alexander Sokurov talked to people about Boris Yeltsin

- Indeed, degradation is evident. And this is due to the fact that they are not witnesses of major historical processes. Our life, of course, remains difficult, but today's leaders are unable to see it or anticipate it. That war with Ukraine is inevitable, I said ten years ago. Many then twirled their fingers at their temples, but for me it was quite obvious. And I wonder why this was not obvious to the Russian and Ukrainian leaders. This suggests that the current political elite is made up of short-sighted people. That the level of culture, intelligence, and indeed the scale of the individual is leveled today. Look at the current chancellor of Germany. What is it? Just a deplorable sight. And the Italian prime minister or the last presidents of France ...

- Since you foresaw the Ukrainian events, let me ask you: do you think a peaceful way out is still possible? Otherwise, if you listen to our political observers, the point of no return has already been passed ...

- I hope someday these political observers will appear before the Hague Tribunal as provocateurs who have caused enormous damage to the humanitarian space of Russia and everything the Russian people... These radio and television heralds are engaged in throwing matches during a fire. In the place of power, I would pay special attention to these people, who create the preconditions for international conflicts. They must be punished. They are just criminals who work on both state and private channels. And there, and there there is no responsibility for such behavior. If the political vector changes, all these commentators will instantly reorganize. We saw this well in the example of the conflict with Turkey. They shouted the loudest about the murderers of Russian pilots, but as soon as they were told that Turkey was no longer enemy number 1, they immediately changed their rhetoric to the opposite. It's so vulgar and vulgar. They are worse than women who sell themselves.

- Women with reduced social responsibility, as they say now.

Yes, I mean prostitutes. But when a woman gives herself to a man, there is at least some naturalness in this, and there is nothing natural and organic in the behavior of these commentators.

- Russia had an open military conflict with Georgia. However, Russian tourists visit Georgia with pleasure and do not face aggression against them. How long does it take to plan a vacation in Kiev?

Indeed, I have recently been to Georgia and have not met anything but cordiality and hospitality there. And in the case of Ukraine, this will not happen soon. Mutual contradictions and resentments are too strong. The fact is that for some reason the Russians are sure that they are one people with the Ukrainians, and this is the deepest delusion. Ukrainians have long dreamed of breaking away from Russian influence and living apart from us, ceasing to be a shadow of Russia. Soviet practice has brought our peoples closer together, but still we are just neighbors. We do not live in the same apartment.

Imagine that you have neighbors and you suddenly start declaring them to be your brother and sister. “Why on earth? They say. "We're just neighbors!" - "No! We live on the same staircase, we are already relatives! " But the neighborhood does not imply that we should change husbands, wives or children.

The Ukrainian people have their own historical path - extremely difficult, sometimes even humiliating. Their history is always a subject of outside interference, when someone is constantly dividing your country, forcibly introducing it to their culture. Life is hard for the Ukrainian people, hard. And then there is clearly not enough intelligence in Ukrainian politics. In a difficult historical moment, the people did not nominate large-scale politicians who could delicately get out of difficult confrontational circumstances. Carefully separate the "Siamese twins", which have become Russia and Ukraine, which have grown together by economies and national characteristics. But there were no politicians who, even taking into account the accumulated irritation towards the Russians and the pressure of the nationalists, would steadily and delicately carry out all the processes. This means that these institutions of power have not matured. Indeed, in order to build relationships with such a large and difficult neighbor as Russia, a wise political elite is needed. Unfortunately, it does not exist in Ukraine yet. Because, unlike Georgia, Ukrainians have no experience of statehood and government.

And besides, we are still very different from the Georgians - we have a different alphabet, a completely different culture, traditions, language, temperament, but everything is different with us. And with Ukraine, of course, there is a dangerous semblance of community. But this is only an appearance, and I, often visiting Ukraine, saw the powerful energy of rejection and desire for independence from Russia. The closer the peoples are, the more difficult their relationship is. You yourself know: the most painful conflicts occur precisely between relatives.

- That is why you proposed to fix the impossibility of military operations with neighboring countries at the constitutional level?

- We must have a categorical condition: not to fight with our neighbors. This applies to the Baltics, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. I would add to the Constitution the principle of compulsory peaceful coexistence with all countries with which we have common borders. Even if we were attacked, we must find the strength not to use the army, not to invade someone else's territory. You can quarrel with neighbors, but you cannot fight.

- But all over the world countries, if they fought with someone, it was more often with their neighbors. Germany has repeatedly fought with France, and in the history of relations between France and England, there was even a hundred-year war. And nothing, somehow they find a common language.

- Let's not forget that Germany was never a part of France, and France was never a part of England, although they fought all the time on a territorial basis. Of course, territorial claims always exist. Italy, too, dreamed of getting a part of the French lands from Hitler. But no one has ever been part of each other, as in the Soviet Union. In Europe, there is only one exception in this regard - the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

"We are dealing with a bomb that can explode at any moment."

- Alexander Nikolaevich, you have always been aloof from political life. They said that not a single party has ever approached you with a proposal to enter its electoral list. And suddenly, in the parliamentary elections in September last year, you headed the St. Petersburg list of the Yabloko party, while remaining non-partisan. Why did this happen right now?

- I have run out of patience. Of all the parties or groups that are professionally involved in politics, only Yabloko are engaged in urban protection activities in St. Petersburg. It is thanks to Yabloko that I myself have understood a lot in the city protection work (The Sokurov Group is engaged in the defense of historical St. Petersburg. - Ed.). They've always used professional tools. For example, they organized large trials against Gazprom, which the St. Petersburg city protection movement did not dare to do. They helped us, and in the end they won almost all the courts. And then, there are people to whom I respect. Although, of course, I had no illusions. I understood that this was an impassable option. But my position was: stop sitting in the kitchen - you need to show your position and support those who think the same way. Of course, I made life difficult for myself, but I have no regrets. You have to pay for everything. Including for such political behavior.

“Chechnya is a region of Russia that is not subject to Russia. They have their own army, and all you need is a signal to move these armed people in one direction. And I'm sure a collision is inevitable. "

- You are the head of a public group of city rights activists, conducting a dialogue with the authorities on protection from the destruction of old St. Petersburg. Last year, you wrote a letter to the Governor of St. Petersburg, Poltavchenko, asking him not to name the bridge over the Duderhof Canal after Akhmat Kadyrov, but they didn’t listen to you.

- Unfortunately, the point has been raised on this issue. AND decision I see nothing other than terrorist activity on the territory of Russia. This threat comes from the Chechen sector. We are dealing with a bomb that can explode at any moment. In my opinion, this is a real military threat. Chechnya is a region of Russia that is not subject to Russia. It has its own army, and it only needs a signal to move these armed people in one direction. It is obvious to me that this is outside the Constitution of my country. And I'm sure a collision is inevitable for a variety of reasons.

Of course, I hope that the president understands who Ramzan Kadyrov is, and the boundaries of his capabilities have probably been defined. But at the same time, I have no doubt that if an instruction to the armed people follows from him, then in a number of Russian cities there will be large casualties.

- At one time, you wrote a letter to Alexander Khloponin, who was the presidential representative in the North Caucasian district, where you offered to convene a serious conference of Orthodox and Muslim clergy under the auspices of the state, raising political issues ...

And, of course, did not receive any answer. Nobody paid any attention to this. Meanwhile, we see what is happening. Young people who have escaped from the Caucasian cities behave outside all norms, not only of the life of Russians, but in general outside all moral norms. And law enforcement officers in Moscow are paralyzed by fear of Grozny, because it is there that death sentences are passed. And if a person is sentenced to death in Grozny, no one will be able to protect him.

“For some reason, as soon as our beautiful women break into the political elite, they behave there more aggressively than men. The most cruel parliamentarians in Europe are our women MPs. "

- Few people dare to speak about it out loud. And it's clear why. Did you feel this danger yourself?

- Of course. But let me not be specific. I understand what I am doing and saying and that I will have to answer for this. And the federal government needs to answer the question: is the Constitution Russian Federation the law in force on the territory of the entire Russian state? If so, appropriate action should be taken. However, we see that this document no longer works. Maybe a new Constitution is being prepared? There is even an assumption who is ready to head the Constitutional Commission - this is one of the most odious and aggressive women in Russian politics.

- Irina Yarovaya?

- Yes. Women are generally unlucky in Russian politics. I think maybe they can not be allowed there? For some reason, as soon as our beautiful women break into the political elite, they behave there more aggressively than men. The most cruel parliamentarians in Europe are our women MPs.

- How do you explain this?

- One word cannot be explained here. The fact is that the role of men in Russia has long been leveled out. This can be seen both in the role of fathers in families, and because of how our boys develop in schools. I think it's time to return to separate education - separately for boys and girls.

- And the entire XX century was spent in the struggle for the emancipation of women.

“But if women want equal rights, then let them be taken with equal responsibility. And after all, we still have a child with his mother in court proceedings, fathers do not have a single chance in this struggle. Then the husband must also leave his home, and let him live as he knows. If we are equal on paper, then let it be so in everyday practice.

However, all these are details, and most importantly - the psychophysical surrender of the positions of the entire male part of the population. And it starts from school. And if you ask which part of the male population in Russia is the weakest, without a doubt, I will answer - our military. This is the most pampered category of men. Even the officers of the special services with great difficulty psychologically adapt to the new living conditions - the military is so used to comfort.

- Quite an unexpected statement from the son of a career soldier, who spent his entire childhood in military camps. Did they begin to notice something like that already then?

- My father was still a front-line soldier, and that generation had a different problem - everyone drank. It was the scourge of military camps. And they drank at home, and drunk people often appeared at the service. Of course, there were garrisons that did not cross certain boundaries, but to a large extent this concerned everyone ... Drunkenness is generally a huge problem for our country. I was struck by the scope of this phenomenon as a student in Gorky, and when I was already studying in Moscow, whole faculties there were in a semi-alcoholic state. At VGIK they drank incredibly, the forms sometimes took on some wild proportions.

It is with alcoholism that I associate the degradation of the Russian male population. Indeed, there is no such problem in Muslim regions. Religion there helps to preserve the national order. And since the Russians have long been a non-religious people, and our national way of life, closely associated with the rural way of life, was destroyed by the Bolsheviks, now we seem to have no support that would stop this fall into the abyss.

"It is a gigantic mistake to hand over some of the power to the Orthodox Church"

Alexander Nikolaevich, at Echo of Moscow you once said: “Our huge country has been torn apart. There is no general energy. The idea of ​​federalism has largely outlived its usefulness. The federal principle must be changed. " Which one?

- What do you yourself think about this?

- In the Urals, there has already been an attempt to change the federal principle, creating the Ural Republic in the first half of the 1990s ...

- I remember Yeltsin's reaction very well, he only talked to Rossel on the phone several times in my presence on this matter. AND?..

- Nevertheless, this idea had enough supporters.

- Both in Ufa and in Irkutsk, I also met supporters of such federalism. This idea is still alive today. For example, Kazan is about to make a decision to change the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin alphabet, which will finally tear us apart. This is happening all over the country. I see it.

“The state absolutely criminally disposes of relations with religious cults. The Orthodox Church is people, to put it mildly, strange and politically imprudent "

- It is important that the government is seen. And they thought, looked for ways to hold the country together before it was too late. Citizens Russian Empire and then Soviet Union felt like a single whole, although there was no Internet or television ...

How do you answer this question yourself?

- Well, I can only be responsible for what I remember personally. I think people were held together by the idea of ​​universal equality, some social guarantees, the idea of ​​internationalism, a common cultural space, affordable free education ...

- I would even say an equally accessible high-quality education that a person could receive in the capital, and in a small town, and in a remote aul, and in a Ryazan village. Basically, it was close to being realized. And today's education is class-based. So we will never have any Shukshin: in modern conditions he could not get an education. All my attempts to resist being paid for higher education led to the fact that I ruined relations with a large number of officials and rectors ... In general, you yourself answered your question, having formulated everything accurately enough.

- But if these "braces" do not work today, will Russia be able to withstand the current "braces"?

- Where I agree with the communists is that the church should be separated from the state. The current state, however, absolutely criminally disposes of relations with religious cults. We are making a gigantic mistake by giving up some of the power to the Orthodox Church. They are people, to put it mildly, strange and politically imprudent.

As soon as a decision is made to create an Orthodox party, which will become one of the official state parties, the flywheel of the destruction of the country will start. Everything goes to that, and Russian Orthodox Church collects property to keep this party rich. But after all, large Muslim parties will appear next, and then the question of the existence of the Russian Federation will be removed from the agenda.

This is not difficult to foresee: if in a certain territory an Orthodox religious force receives a part of political power as a gift from the state, then, accordingly, in other places the Muslim population will quite rightly demand a part of political power for their religious organizations. Believe me, Muslims in this matter will not concede in anything. And when the interests of Orthodoxy and Islam enter into a political conflict between themselves, an interreligious war will begin - the worst thing that can ever happen. In a civil war, you can still agree, but in a religious war they fight to the death. Nobody will give in. And everyone will be right in their own way.

- In one interview you said: “We are strangers in the European space. Aliens, because they are big - by the size of the country, by the scale and unpredictability of ideas. " And in another you exclaim: “Aren't the Russians Europeans? Hasn't Europe raised us? "

- There is no contradiction here. In one case, I talked about culture, in the other - about ways of behavior. But, of course, Russia is more civilizationally connected with Europe.

- And how, then, to perceive the current turn to the East?

“It's just stupidity, that's all. How many stupid things were committed by the Russian state, which cannot really be created yet? We are changing the social system, then we are at war with our neighbors, then we are kindled with some crazy ideas ... And the state is, first of all, a tradition, experience, time-tested and confirmed by national consent. We cannot find agreement even in the smallest details.

Here in Yekaterinburg, on the city pond, they are going to build a church, although part of the society is against it. But it would be nice to see how such issues are resolved in Germany. There, if even a small part of the population is against, the decision is postponed. Thus, they protect themselves from hasty steps. The Russian state has always lacked rationality and prudence, and it is still lacking today.

"Our Muslims are silent and are waiting for where it will break out and which side to take."

- Alexander Nikolaevich, you say that it is necessary to establish strict boundaries in the relations between power and religion, but, on the other hand, you liked Iran, although this state can hardly be called secular ...

- Iranians are Shiites, and this is a very special branch of Islam. In my impression, it is much softer. And everything that we are told about the Iranian regime is not entirely true. I talked there with different people and will go there again soon. I think it is necessary to study the Iranian experience. They found themselves in complete isolation, but did not degrade, but, on the contrary, proved that everything is possible to develop within the framework of one self-sufficient nation - the economy, military and chemical industries, Agriculture, hydrocarbon production and scientific research ... They even shoot films several times more than Russia. And very good ones.

All in all, this trip gave me a lot of reflections on the development and strength of the Muslim world. Serious attention must be paid to it. He is energetic and no longer ready to stay within the confines of his space. We must understand that it will cross borders and expand.

- This is already happening. And you sound the alarm, saying that in no case should the mixing of cultures be allowed. But this thesis contradicts the current official European values ​​aimed at multiculturalism, open borders, and political correctness.

- Europe today is ruined by the fear of admitting that the national is higher than the international. I call it infection. An infection just got into the body, and he got sick. In order for the Christian and Muslim world to exist in harmony and harmony, it is necessary to draw a clear border, through which neither side can cross. We must not allow the mixing of cultures. This cannot happen without conflict, because culture is a code, a worldview. And the second rule is not to violate the norms of the root people. There should be modesty of the guest, but this, as a rule, is not. This is not to say that Europe will disappear if mosques appear everywhere. But culture will undoubtedly die.

Europeans forget that civilization must be protected, this combination of national and Christian norms must be preserved. The European world has accumulated vast experience of socialization, various political compromises and political practices. And the ability of people to work well. After all, the main thing that attracts Arabs and Africans in Europe is that you can come for something ready-made. For some reason, they do not want to fight for the creation of their high-quality states. They will not do this, but want to go where something has already been done. But since they do not have the skills of assimilation, they do not have the habit of respecting other cultural and religious principles, then, naturally, the current situation in Europe will lead to major conflicts and wars on the territory of European countries.

In general, we need a distance, a noble distance between peoples. Or, under European culture, one can draw a line and prepare for a decisive change in the entire European way of life. Either we have to resist, or agree that we will lose.

- And how to resist if you yourself say that you are increasingly faced with censorship in the West?

- Unfortunately it's true. Today in the West people are much more dependent on the authorities than they were 5-7 years ago. More than once, European journalists have confessed to me that editors do not always allow publishing what they have written. My interviews there are now subject to censorship, and TV channels have often refused those on which I would like to discuss. Degradation of democratic traditions is taking place in Europe.

“It's time for Europe to understand that there are much more dangerous adversary than Russia is a Muslim revolution. As once Bolshevism "

- In one interview you said: “Napoleon was considered a murderer, not shaking hands, and now he is almost a French national hero. Even the brand - cognac, cologne ... And with Hitler it will be the same - rationality will triumph over morality. " Will humanity really forget everything that Hitler did?

- Within 15-20 years, everything will start to change dramatically in assessments. But if you ask what my conviction is based on, I will not answer. I just feel it intuitively. This is my perception of the pace with which there are changes in modern evaluative categories. Well, who among the representatives of my generation could have imagined 30 years ago that Nazi youth organizations would exist in St. Petersburg? It seemed to us unrealistic under any circumstances. Moreover, in Leningrad, where witnesses of the Blockade are still alive, participants of the Great Patriotic War... Nevertheless, they are. And not the heirs of Russian nationalism, but the followers of precisely German fascism, who accept its entire system and ideology.

- But our society still considers them to be marginal ...

- So far, this is so, but, unfortunately, the boundaries between concepts are very quickly erased, and the ground has been prepared for this.

- In the same Europe, the topic of the Russian threat is popular today. Does it hurt you as a Russian citizen? Or do you think that the fears of the West are justified?

- I recently staged a play in Italy and, of course, talked a lot with the local intelligentsia. There is a certain fear of invasion in their midst. Russian army to the territory of Europe. I encounter these concerns even more often in the Baltics. I say to the Balts all the time: do not be afraid, this will not happen. It's just that the Baltic states and Poland need to form an association of neutral states - this is an ideal way out for them. After all, when you do not have NATO bases on your territory, then Russia will not need to send missiles in your direction. Be smarter: don't plant raspberries by the bear's den.

Historian Boris Sokolov: there are no reasons for the revolution, but they can appear unexpectedly and quickly

In general, it is time for Europe to understand that there is a much more dangerous enemy than Russia - this is the Muslim revolution. After all, why is it so difficult to deal with ISIS - because it is not just a terrorist organization, but a revolutionary ideological movement of the Muslim world. It can arise anywhere, like Bolshevism. After all, no matter how Europe pressed, it could not suppress the Bolshevik rebellion in Russia. And after all, there was also an ideology - to spread Bolshevism throughout the world: Lenin and his followers dreamed of organizing revolutions in Europe. ISIS is guided by similar principles: Christianity has outlived its usefulness, decayed, let's send Christian civilization to the dustbin of history and replace it with a new order - Muslim-political. And since the idea cannot be defeated with missiles, to fight ISIS without entering into negotiations with them as a system means dooming oneself to defeat.

- This is how the principle sounds: "do not enter into negotiations with terrorists."

- So it is outdated. Now you need to learn to negotiate with them. And this requires wisdom. You see why our Muslims are watching all this so reservedly? They are silent and wait, where it will break out and which side to stand on.

"Don't think that cinema is harmless, it's a delusion."

- Back in 2002, you told the Izvestia newspaper: “American film aggression is killing a feeling and thinking viewer. Russia is defeated in this sense. " Has anything changed in 15 years? How do you assess the completed Year of Russian Cinema?

- Nothing changed. If the Year of Culture ended with the closure of libraries, then in the Year of Cinema we will lose all documentary film studios in Siberia, the Urals, Of the Far East, northern regions and North Caucasus... The state, of course, allocated a little more money for openings, but this is not serious. Our cinema needs 80-100 debuts a year to fully develop, and now we have allocated funds for 16.

Nothing has been done for the mechanism of the existence of cinematography. I'm not talking about banning the distribution of Western films or selling more expensive tickets for foreign films, as they do in France. I'm talking about legal and economic measures that can contribute to the development of national cinema as an industrial direction, when there is a technical base, reasonable budgets, cinemas, access to television ... This is exactly the kind of systematic work that the Ministry of Culture should do, but it does not do it at all.

Unfortunately, this is a feature of the controls in our time. When everything seems to be in place, but in fact no one is doing anything. We regularly see how the president asks them: why hasn't it been done, and why hasn't it been completed? They answer something to him, sometimes, he even catches someone in a lie, but nothing changes. If this is the case everywhere, then why should it be different in our cinema?

- Now there is an active fight against Internet piracy, but many of your films can be watched only thanks to torrents. And in general, for people living outside of large cities, torrents, in fact, are a window to the big world.

- So it seems to me unnatural when an artist is against his work being seen by as many people as possible. I, of course, do not make a production movie, which rigidly requires a return on invested funds, and I myself have never received money for the rental of my films, but I still don’t understand why we are thus depriving a whole layer of our compatriots of the opportunity to choose. I don't think there should be any restrictions in the artistic space. The audience today is very poor, so it seems to me wrong to ban the reprint of books, to restrict access to musical works and films.

We are creating a state to fulfill its functions. And one of its main functions is to support society in a civilized state with the help of culture. The state must have the resources to compensate for possible losses to copyright holders when opening free access to films or books. In general, I believe that an international agreement is needed within the framework of UNESCO or the United Nations on the universal accessibility of works of world culture. But again they will say that I, like a city madman, offer something unrealizable.

- Is this how you perceived your call to the organizers of class A festivals to abandon films with scenes of violence? But then a whole layer of genres will disappear. How to film, say, "War and Peace"?

- I do not urge you not to shoot about the war at all. I proposed to abandon violence on the screen as a professional, dramatic instrument, to abandon plots and images associated with the glorification or aestheticization of violence. For many years I have been talking about this and calling for it, but they do not hear me - neither here, nor in Europe. Unfortunately, I am sure that this may be one of the few cases where I am absolutely right. The heroization and aestheticization of violence inflict much more damage than, for example, any environmental problem.

The propaganda of evil is when on the screen you are shown a method of murder, torture of a person. Such a movie is irreparable harm to the human psyche, because for a modern young man, death is not sacred. It seems to him that it costs nothing to kill. Cinema convinces him that a person can be killed different ways: rip out the guts, rip off the head, gouge out the eyes ... Don't think that cinema is harmless. It's a delusion.

- But this is why the age categories "12 plus", "18 plus" have been introduced.

- However, they do not solve the problem - today any child can see anything thanks to the Internet. Although this can be dealt with, I assure you, there would be a desire. The electronic world is such a manageable and vulnerable segment that 3-4 buttons will be enough to remove all this from public access, but, apparently, no one needs it.

- And what about your appeal to your peers, directors, to stop cinematographic activity for at least a year and give all the funds allocated by the state to young directors? Did anyone react?

- Of course not. I am already accustomed to the fact that any of my initiatives do not cause any reaction in my homeland. Journalists still ask about this, and my colleagues, obviously, are completely uninterested in my point of view on topical issues.

- In the West, many famous directors have gone to television. A fresh example: Paolo Sorrentino, who directed the best film of 2015 - Youth, according to the European Film Academy, recently released the TV series Young Pope about the Pope. Would you be interested in filming a series?

- Well, I did great documentaries for television. For example, "Spiritual Voices" or "Obligation", which lasts five hours. These are great works dramatically arranged for a teleformat. But I don't want to work in the conditions in which Russian serial cinema exists today. I am not interested in these topics, they have nothing to do with me.

- And abroad?

- I was offered, but a number of circumstances did not allow me to do this.

- Alexander Nikolaevich, you are one of the most titled Russian directors, while among your colleagues you are considered a “black sheep”, and the domestic audience has not seen many of your works. Do you consider your professional career a success?

- In general, it seems to me that I have chosen the wrong profession.

- This is a confession!

“It's just that at the moment of the choice I was too young to realize the full responsibility of this step. And for several years now, I clearly understand that the choice was wrong. There are other areas in which I would be more in demand, could do more. Because in the cinema, I have not fully realized. What can I say now ...

Biography

Alexander Sokurov was born in 1951 in the Irkutsk region. He graduated from the history department of the Gorky State University, then from the directing department of VGIK, where he became friends with the main co-author - screenwriter Yuri Arabov. From his student years he was subjected to censorship persecution, was supported by Andrei Tarkovsky, who saw in the "Lonely Voice of Man" "the hand of a genius." Several times he refused to emigrate.

He received all-Union and world recognition during Perestroika, in the late 1980s. To date, Alexander Sokurov is the author of more than fifty feature and documentary films, is the owner of dozens of film awards, including the Moscow, Berlin, Cannes, Venice festivals, the Andrei Tarkovsky Prize, the Nika Prize, the Vatican Prize (presented personally by Pope John Paul II ). Repeated laureate of the State Prize of Russia, National artist RF, Commander of the Japanese Order of the Rising Sun with Golden Rays (for the film "The Sun").

Russian news

Russia

Prisoners were released in New York due to COVID-19, in Russia POC members are not allowed to jail

Recommended to read

Windows instructions

Definition, basic properties and graphs of hyperbolic functions

Windows instructions

Basic concepts of Lobachevsky geometry

Android instructions

Hetman Partition Recovery - a program for recovering data from a memory card or hard drive

Smartphones

What is the magnetic moment of a permanent magnet

Office programs

Implementation and development of electronic document management systems: we get rid of delusions and form true goals

Office programs

Set operations and their properties