An ordinary treason

Competing with the Russian agitation and propaganda cinematography is like spitting against the wind. Especially, if the films are about soldiers, special forces, police, or criminals. And war is the most favorite topic. According to the old Russian tradition, as soon as the Russian Federation initiates or becomes involved in an armed conflict, or even worse, in a war, cinematography immediately comes to the country’s rescue to explain the state’s position to the audience. Honor Code – Chechnia, August Eighth – Georgia, The 9th Company – Afghanistan, the list can go on and on. And finally, they reached Ukraine. Recently, Russian channel NTV showed their audience a new film War Correspondent.

The description of the “product” says: “American reporter Matt McCue is used to believing facts only. He has been to Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and earned high television journalism awards. After another change of government in the faraway and obscure to most Americans country, Ukraine, took place, Matt set out there with a task from an information channel, and soon ended up in the east of the country. He was only trying to learn and tell the truth about this war, but Washington accused him of treason, Kyiv declared him a spy, and Ukrainian military sentenced him to death.” What a strange choice of the main character for Russian cinematography, readers might think. The trick is that this reporter repeats slogans of the Russian propaganda word for word, and in the very movie, “a militia volunteer,” who looks more like a Caucasian gunman, will tell that they are at war not with Kyiv, but with America, which “bent the whole world over.” If the script writer had created an image of a “Russian reporter,” he would not be believed as much as an “objective and unbiased” one. And “another change of government” sounds like the election, but voters in the country that has been ruled by the former FSB director for almost 15 years, probably find it impossible to understand.

The story starts in Odesa with an absurd dialog between the journalist in the editorial office, whose main argument is that “my friends in Kyiv said so,” and the main character, the war correspondent, who is supposedly providing facts. It is telling that the action takes place in Odesa after May 2. Russian propaganda dubbed this tragedy the “Ukrainian Khatyn” and constantly uses it for its own benefits. This cliche leaked into the blogosphere and social networks from there. From there, it moved into quite real discussions in the streets and echoed in Russian military registration and enlistment offices, where soldiers are urged to stand up and avenge “Khatyn.” This is the real responsibility for real murders, which is so fervently denied by representatives of the state propaganda. By the way, arguments are absent only on the Ukrainian side in the film, and the dashing American repeats several times that he trusts only fact. These are a few examples of the provided facts: “Kyiv changed the government illegally, while Donbas simply wanted freedom,” “Ukraine is shelling Russia’s territories,” “we cross the border with Ukraine illegally, since Ukraine prohibited entrance for all men under 60,” “I saw how Russian TV journalists were killed, because they filmed how Kyiv rains phosphorus bombs over other cities.” Perhaps, the crew did not worry too much about the degree of absurdity in the movie, because since it is a television product, its audience will swallow this story just like it did the stories of “crucified little boys” and “trains full of punitive squad members.” And that might turn out to be not enough.

Who is this crew, which follows the steps of Mikhalkov? Who are these actors? It turns out that all the faces are familiar. Director of War Correspondent Pavel Ignatov is widely known as the director of the Kadetstvo (Cadets) TV series. Script writer Nikolay Andreev tried this line of activity for the first time, but he used to be starred in various series before as an actor including Glukhar (Unsolved) and Interny (Interns). And there is more to follow. Two main characters are played by Olha Vynnychenko and Anton Yeriomin. The first was born in Ukraine and graduated from the Karpenko-Kary National University of Theater, Cinema, and Television last year. The other one is a Ukrainian as well, a student at the same university (2009-14, Rieznykovych’s class), and an actor of the Lesia Ukrainka National Academic Theater of Russian Drama. There is another cameo jewel. A Ukrainian commander, who surrendered, is played by Vitalii Tahanov, an Honored Artist of Ukraine. It is so tempting to ask how such “honored” earn their titles. It is not the first time we see such treason in cinematography. As for other Russian actors, they can be found in films Streets of the Smashed Streetlights, Criminal Petersburg, Crushing Force, District Officer, My Fair Nanny. All the films and series mentioned in this article, except for the very War Correspondent, were broadcast by Ukrainian TV channels, which proves the harmfulness of Russian TV products and the matrix they create. But it has been said a million times, and all in vain.

Where are our films about war, shot with the state’s support? There was news that in November (8 months after the annexation of Crimea) a 12-series film National Guard will be shot by the 2+2 channel. And when do you think our counter-propaganda should be expected? “It is planned to dedicate the premiere of the first four series of the film to the first anniversary of the National Guard and show in spring of 2015.” And later on, the then minister of culture Yevhen Nyshchuk announced that series and films about the ATO will be financed by the interior and defense ministries, and script contest will be held by the ministry of culture. But nothing more has been heard about it so far.

In the meantime, “Americans” tell us our history. The part of the main “hero” was played by Wolfgang Cerny, and interesting case for psychologists and maybe even psychiatrists (no kidding). He was born in Austria, but has already appeared in two Russian films. Before War Correspondent, he played a Nazi sniper who sabotaged his work because of his love for a Komsomol woman. It reminds some masochist desire to atone for the sins of his countrymen, real ones, not the Nazis and Fascists made up by the Russian propaganda. But first we need to deal with our history, treating others is a secondary matter.

By the way, speaking of history: there is a very telling moment in the film. A soldier with a “Sevastopol Hundred” chevron gives an interview to this American. And he says: “My grandfather and great-grandfather served the tsar, you get it.” You get it, readers, the great-grandfathers of the actor and director served the tsar, and so did yours, perhaps, if you managed to watch it until that moment. And this is how so many generations get stuck in that paradigm, since there is nothing more but “we served the tsar.” There is no understanding how to live without a tsar, who will feed them and provide them with work, even though it looks like slavery. Who will tell whom to blame for all their misfortunes. So, their descendants live and shoot films like that. Without a tsar in their heads. Or with one?