“Attraction for the sake of attraction will not work”: Andrey Kravchuk - about filming in Syria, historical cinema and criticism

- Recently, filmmakers often pay attention to stories that happened not so long ago.

An example of this is Once Upon a Time in the Desert.

What do you think, what is it connected with?

Why did you feel it was important to tell this particular story?

- I liked her very much.

She was both touching and incomprehensible.

The hero was very well written.

Plus, I've wanted to make a modern war film for a long time.

And it seems to me that the bright and emotional events that take place in reality, and on which the script is based, reveal people, relationships, feelings more clearly in them.

Very important questions arise, which in everyday life and in everyday life can go to the periphery.

Especially - the question of life, death, the meaning of life.

In our everyday life it seems that everything is endless, we are endless.

And in a situation of war, meetings, and conversations, and relationships, and insults become significant for us.

A person can suddenly leave forever, and you can’t fix anything, say kind words, do what you had to.

Therefore, these themes, it seems to me, are so relevant and important for art.

— Did you strive to convey specific ideas to the audience?

Maybe they wanted to call the audience to something through this story?

The film should evoke emotions and feelings.

If I start commenting on it, it will get poorer.

The artistic image works wider and more emotionally than my retelling.

But we touched on the relationship between children and parents, how much a person devotes himself to his beloved work, gives himself to work and destroys a family, and asked questions: what are we ready for for the sake of loved ones, for the sake of people, and is there a place for such a feat - I'm not afraid of this word - in our daily life.

- The film is based on real events.

What is the proportion of fiction in the picture?

Did the heroes have prototypes?

- There were prototypes, there were also stories of heroic deeds in the war in Syria.

Of course, a lot of things have been brought in by us, thought out - there is no other way to tell the story.

But we tried to be as close to reality as possible, talked a lot with our military, with participants in those events, with sappers, and revised the chronicles a lot.

- And how reliable is the work of sappers?

“We always had two sappers on the site who worked in Syria.

Moreover, our artists were trained at the International Mine Action Center in Nakhabino.

They went to classes there for about a month, they were taught to work with improvised explosive devices.

In this regard, we have everything real, there are almost no assumptions.

- What about locations?

- Some objects were filmed in Syria, something in other places.

Both the military who were in Syria, and the people who flew there even before the war as tourists (Palmyra is the pearl of antiquity), they say, there is a feeling that they got there again.

There was a lot of factual material that we relied on, as well as computer graphics.

We finished drawing the objects on which we worked.

— Tell us more about the material that was filmed in Syria.

Did these shots make it into the final cut?

- Certainly.

We had Syrian production.

We directed the filming from Russia, via messenger.

With the same car in Syria, they filmed general plans and driveways, and filmed inside the car in Russia.

All this was developed in detail, both the Syrian production and ours had storyboards.

In reality, it was possible to shoot only at Khmeimim itself, at the airfield, and leaving was unsafe for the group.

• Shot from the film "Once Upon a Time in the Desert"

• © www.kinopoisk.ru

How were the explosions filmed?

“We filmed almost all the explosions live, we only added smoke, stones, fragments with the help of computer graphics, rubbed the cables.

And so, a group of stuntmen brilliantly worked out most of the explosions.

We only strengthened and refined them.

- Weapons, equipment - is it all real?

Everything is real, working.

We even fired blanks from the tank to make it look convincing.

— When working on action episodes, did you encounter any risky situations?

- No, you are.

Every situation was discussed, everything was safe.

How can you risk people's lives on set for a shot?

It is unacceptable.

- You must have heard the story when the cameraman died on the set of a film with Alec Baldwin.

In the US, this is now being actively discussed, they are reconsidering the attitude to the organization of filming.

In your opinion, how relevant are such problems for Russian cinema?

— There are departments that work with weapons.

And live ammunition cannot hit the site, it's impossible.

I can’t even imagine a situation where there are live ammunition on the site.

As for the work of stuntmen, of course, safety is paramount.

If the stunt coordinator says that he needs some kind of safety equipment in order to shoot a shot ... Not only stuntmen - here, extras run along a narrow wooden bridge, but water with ice on the right and left.

A person may slip and fall, he may have a shock due to cold water, some risks.

Security issues need to be addressed immediately.

This applies to the production team, and the director, and the stunt coordinator.

In any case, in my practice everything is always safe.

In my last pictures there is a war, shots ... Plus, computer graphics.

Cannons are not always fired on set, sometimes shots are superimposed later.

Each frame is discussed, developed, assembled, filmed separately.

It's not like we came: "Let's shoot, we'll shoot."

- The production of "Once Upon a Time in the Desert" was supported, among other things, by the Ministry of Defense.

Tell us, does such cooperation impose any restrictions on production? 

- Not.

They helped us with technology and advice.

From them there was a consultant who monitored the conformity of the form, appearance.

So that we do not distort for the sake of artistic truth some points related to the internal routine, the charter of the life of the military.

- The main role in the film was played by Alexander Robak.

Quite an unexpected choice for this genre.

How did you come to him?

- I thought for a long time what the main character should be, I tried a lot of very good artists.

But for some reason it was hard to believe that at the end of his military career, he remains just a captain.

And in Sasha Roebuck, especially when I watched the movie "Storm", I saw some kind of reliability, humanity.

I could believe that he is like that in life, that his inner values ​​are more important than external circumstances.

He is reluctant to compromise, trying to achieve what he wants.

It seemed to me that such an image would be more truthful and honest.

“After the release of the trailer, social media users have nicknamed Once Upon a Time in the Desert as our answer to The Hurt Locker.

How do you feel about this comparison?

Does it flatter you or, on the contrary, offends you?

We have a different story.

That movie says that war is a drug.

If you're hooked on it, you can't leave.

Our story is completely different.

Similar circumstances - any film about the war will concern the military.

It is important that in terms of quality, emotions, and statements we should be no worse, and maybe even better.

So that we do not look like a pale shadow.

And what is compared is the right of the audience.

• Premiere of "Once Upon a Time in the Desert"

• © the press service of the film "Once Upon a Time in the Desert"

What results do you expect from Once Upon a Time in the Wilderness? 

- I don't think about it yet.

I would like to see as many viewers as possible.

It seems to me that we made an emotional, vivid movie, on the one hand, almost a military action movie, on the other hand, a strong human story.

I saw that many viewers in the hall were crying, which means that the film evokes emotions.

At the same time, I am aware that now is far from the best time for a release.

But as it will be, so it will be.

You know how a child comes to life - and then how his fate will develop ... We did everything we could.

Do you always feel this way about the release of your films?

Or, nevertheless, sometimes you are waiting for something specific?

Here is the "Italian" you thundered in Berlin.

Did you expect such a success?

- Not.

I did not believe that I would get anything, to be honest.

This is practically my debut.

And then - about 40 international festivals, He was even nominated for an Oscar ... It was joyful.

Although there was practically no rental in Russia - generally zero.

Only two times showed, and no one went.

- What do you think, what should be in the project so that it gets to the western review and receives a prize?

Every festival has its own theme.

The Berlinale has a certain focus on social issues, Venice is about the complexities of human relations, and so on.

So it's hard to say.

Similarly, there is no recipe for success or failure.

Sometimes a movie is amazing, but it fails at the box office.

Sometimes, you look - it's so well done, it shocks you, but the viewer does not go.

And there is a film that seems not outstanding, but it is a resounding success.

There is no formula here.

There is a hit, a miss.

A lot of factors influence this.

- What is more important for the success of the film - an interesting idea or a high budget?

- Of course, the idea.

The budget determines history.

And there is always not enough money - either for a film with a small budget, or with a big one.

But the budget sometimes makes it possible to additionally recreate some attraction.

Because for the theatrical screening, the film must contain some additional element that you won't get at home watching TV.

“But even not the most spectacular film can be made in different ways, with a low and with a high budget.

How important is the budget when shooting not films-attractions, but life stories?

“Everything is determined by history and design.

Here, "The Tragedy of Macbeth" by Cohen - everything is filmed there in the pavilion, not a single battle is shown.

Everything is almost theatrical.

The previous film, Macbeth, has both battles and executions.

The entertainment component is much higher.

However, it is difficult to compare them.

Each has its own tasks and artistic goals.

Even within the same film, different fights cannot be done in the same way.

If you remember "Saving Private Ryan" - the first fight there goes about 20 minutes, it is filmed as detailed as possible.

The other is already shown through the eyes of a person who is afraid, hiding.

Everything depends on the task.

Sometimes not showing something can work emotionally more than a full-blooded show.

And sometimes, on the contrary, it is necessary to reveal something as much as possible, to create a visual attraction in which the audience will learn something new about what is happening in the frame.

Any attraction is needed to reveal the characters' characters and circumstances, or some things related to the theme.

Attraction for the sake of attraction will not work.

- You have already shown different historical periods on the screen.

This is the 10th century, and the 19th, and the 20th, and our days.

What was the most comfortable time for you to work?

— It is always easier to work on the present tense.

You know everything about reality, it is easier for you to restore it.

And the historical world - a lot of questions arise.

It takes a lot of emotional immersion to try to imagine how people could live.

And more difficulties and obstacles to overcome during the preparation and filming period.

- And more interesting with what time?

Every time is interesting.

When you dive there, you begin to discover whole worlds for yourself.

And further attempts to reconstruct these worlds are not final, it is still some kind of my view of time.

But it's always very exciting.

When making a film about modernity, you still recreate it.

• Frame from the film "Union of Salvation"

• © www.kinopoisk.ru

- At the end of last year, the film "Peter the Great: The Last Tsar - First Emperor" was announced with your participation as a director.

It is positioned as a documentary-fiction.

Tell us more about what it is?

- This is a documentary about Peter, but there is an artistic reconstruction in it, some fragments of life will be shown.

There are collected several points of view of historians, politicians, futurologists, sociologists, psychologists.

There is also our author's view of Peter.

I would like to have an emotional feeling when watching this documentary, that you have watched a feature film and listened to a historian.

- Will there be a place for artistic fiction in this project?

- There are no chronological descriptions of all the events taking place.

When there is a detailed description, it is possible to recreate authentically.

But all the same, how the hero behaved, how it manifested itself, has to be thought out.

Therefore, we call it reconstruction, but we give the floor to narrow specialists in specific topics.

They will tell their point of view in accordance with the documents.

Therefore, it seems to me that we may have a unique and unexpected image of Peter.

- Game pictures, which are somehow based on real events, inevitably face criticism from the audience.

Always find some inconsistencies with history.

- Naturally, every viewer has the right to judge.

But often, when people say, “it really happened,” they are cunning.

Communicating with historians, you see all the inconsistency of documents.

Relying on one source and believing that he is the very icon of these events is not entirely legitimate, but it is pointless to argue.

It must be understood that a work of art implies some conjecture.

- At one time, your Union of Salvation was also criticized.

How did you feel about it?

To be honest, I stopped reading.

Why poison your life?

You worked, did what you could.

Often some statements are not related to the film itself.

This is a feature of the perception of works - especially Russian ones - by our viewer.

Everything is forgiven to foreign cinema, the viewer is more indulgent towards it.

But our films are approached with a microscope, they look through a magnifying glass.

And reading this... why?

Ruin your life?

What would help you for development, you will not find in such criticism.