Whether it was about the same people and events to tell a friend? Certainly.But whether you take any living creature to prove that ode or ballad rather epic narrative in which the author does not come to the fore, but as it is hidden behind their heroes?Until relatively recently, it was believed that "to imagine a modern documentary, entirely freed from narration, it is difficult, no doubt it would have been full of the degree of depletion, defective product." The above statement applies to Drobashenko 1962.It just stay in our own day, one of the "defective" products should include such films as "Look at the face" and "Nikolai Amosov," "Perpetual Motion" and "We - blacksmiths," not to mention the well-known works Peleshyana Vinogradova, Rothenberg, Lunkova, Goldovskaya and other directors, had a significant influence on the developmentscreen documentary. Open or hidden copyright presence not only do not contradict, but mutually enrich each other: because the "seal of subjectivity" can fully manifest in those scenes where there is no kakoylibo comment;so we should have a long time to give up too much flatness, opposing each other things that generally can not be download the film Peter the Great. Will
and countered. However, not always rejection epikodramaticheskih documentary forms due to the inertia of aesthetic thinking of past years.Ten years after Belyaev thought about the artists, who "ran, but did not conduct the" director said that today it is, by contrast, involves the ability to create works in which the author openly expressed ideas about the world.This problem of television, according to Belyaev, can not be satisfactorily download the film Peter the Great. Will
and resolved by virtue of that "external parameters" of phenomena and facts here must remain intact, the author is forced to stay in the background."Live" broadcast deliberately loses versus cinematic possibilities of deformation events and a deeper understanding of life.Nemo or TV movie - is, by far look the director, the opposite of personal interpretation of the material, as if the latter is available on television and then only in the accompanying picture comments.Thus, the position of a television documentary can not be called art, but only technical concludes Belyaev, in fact, speaking now on the side of his former critics.If before, claiming aesthetic observation, director insisted apparent objectivity of television artist and his seeming innocence to reflect that, in accordance with its current view of the author's objectivity is no longer a visible and non-involvement of the artist - only apparent.But watching - always opposite of anonymity.
This is not a list, not the act of registration of the world, no inventory being.As the writer says is his style of presentation about the painter - his manner of writing, and about the documentarian we judge already around his characters, for one of their phrases, he found it necessary to bring to the screen, at the choice of expressive means, language editing.And what form of narration or chose a writer, he can not express his ideas about the life of his agreement or disagreement with the reality, which aimed lenses - with reality, "as is." Cit.