The case of "Matilda": how the Teacher's film became the most scandalous in Russia. The Tsar and Matilda

Why did individual believers belonging to the Russian Orthodox Church oppose this film, which has not yet been released?

A trailer for this movie was shown especially for some people. Why are trailers shown to specially invited people? So that they become interested in the film, so that they can judge it not by its title, but by its trailer and, probably, the conversation with producers, authors and actors that took place while watching the trailer.

So we fix - individual people who were shown the trailer may well and are free to express their opinion about the concept of the film.

If what he says about the movie trailer is true, then I agree with him.

Fact based fantasy is one thing. Another thing is just fiction that can really be offensive to a person.

Nikolai Alexandrovich had an affair before the engagement. The novel was broken and this is a fact recorded in the diaries personally by the beloved. ON THE. fair man and ended the romance. The film allegedly shows a man acting dishonestly.

They have the right, of course, to invent. Well, others have the right to be outraged by this.

It's like with Vyrubova. At first, people made up jokes, and then some *** wrote fake diaries with vile vulgarities from jokes. Only now the interim government conducted an investigation and nothing was confirmed, it was not possible to accuse or judge. The Bolsheviks drew these jokes on the wallpaper before they were shot.

The result - well, they played along with the extremists, everyone will be furious, jumping, barking (both sides), hating each other even more.

Regarding what Alexei Badryzlov said.

The Church cannot and does not consider N.A. sinless, since there are no sinless ones, including saints does not mean sinless. Including N.A. and his family are glorified for how they accepted death (this is additionally emphasized by the term - passion-bearers), and not for how N.A. lived.

From the official report of the commission:

Being anointed to the Kingdom, endowed with full power, Emperor Nicholas II was responsible for all the events that took place in his state, both before his people and before God. Therefore, a certain share of personal responsibility for historical mistakes like the events of January 9, 1905 - and this topic was devoted to a special report adopted by the Commission - lies with the Emperor himself, although it cannot be measured by the degree of his participation, or rather non-participation in these events.

Another example of the actions of the Emperor, which had detrimental consequences for the fate of Russia and the Royal Family itself, was his relationship with Rasputin - and this was shown in the study "The Royal Family and G. E. Rasputin." Indeed, how could it be that such a figure as Rasputin could influence Royal Family and the Russian state-political life of his time? The key to the Rasputin phenomenon lies in the illness of Tsarevich Alexy. Although it is known that the Sovereign repeatedly tried to get rid of Rasputin, but every time he retreated under pressure from the Empress because of the need to seek help from Rasputin to heal the Heir. It can be said that the Emperor was unable to resist Alexandra Feodorovna, tormented by grief because of her son's illness and, in connection with this, was under the influence of Rasputin.

Summing up the study of the state and church activities the last Russian Emperor, the Commission did not find sufficient grounds for his canonization.

However, in the Orthodox Church there are known cases of canonization of saints, even those Christians who led a sinful life after baptism. Their canonization was carried out precisely because they atoned for their sins not only by repentance, but also by a special feat - martyrdom or asceticism.

========================

“One evening, when the Heir stayed with me almost until morning, he told me that he was going abroad to meet with Princess Alice of Hesse, with whom they wanted to marry him. Subsequently, we spoke more than once about the inevitability of his marriage and the inevitability of our separation, ”she writes in her memoirs. And when on April 7, 1894, the official engagement of Tsarevich Nicholas with 22-year-old Alice of Hesse-Darmstadt was announced, Matilda admitted: “My grief knew no bounds.”

I must say that after the engagement, Nikolai immediately told the bride about his relationship with Kshesinskaya, and she forgave him in an edifying letter: “What has passed has passed and will never return. All of us in this world are surrounded by temptations, and when we are young, we cannot always fight to resist temptation… I love you even more since you told me this story. Your trust touches me so deeply… Can I be worthy of it…?”

Memoirs of Kshesinskaya can be read here, everything about meetings and about her novels after N.A .:

Words by A.F. were written to her in the diary of N.A. July 8, 1894 in English, translated from the footnote at the end of the text:

There were no throwings after the engagement and fainting during the coronation. Just read these diaries and compare with the movie. The teacher implies that this is all a lie and N.A. monstrous hypocrite.

Yes, I understand, the usual thing for young people is to walk with one and immediately forget her in order to overflow with love for the other. You can see it in the diaries.

Where did the Teacher come up with that N.A. rushed about (and this is so about the trailer, fainted, etc.) and, consequently, disgustingly hypocritically lied in the diary - I don’t know.

And, yes, I'm not against the movie, you never know how much different films happens. I would only be glad if the film was not financed at public expense and money was not laundered on it, as is now suspected.

MOSCOW, July 24 - RIA Novosti. In Russian Orthodox Church do not consider the film by Alexei Uchitel "Matilda" a deliberate distortion of the image of the saint, but they called the negative reaction of a part of society natural. This opinion was expressed by the press secretary of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill, priest Alexander Volkov in an interview.

"The teacher did not make a chamber film for some selected audience, not a movie for his own. He made a movie for wide release ... And he, of course, needs to understand that the perception of his work can be very ambiguous ... The reaction that is, - "it's something natural enough. The film will obviously cause a mixed reaction and will not go unnoticed, including from a negative point of view," Volkov said.

He recalled that Nicholas II not only historical figure, but also an Orthodox saint - "and here, of course, you need to understand that with this film the director can hurt a lot of people." "At the same time, I think that there will be a positive reaction to the film. I'm sure that it has the right, the good side" added the priest.

The patriarch's spokesman also stated that the Teacher's film is not a deliberate distortion of the image of the saint.

“I am sure that whatever this film is, it is not a caricature and a deliberate distortion of the image of a holy man,” Volkov answered the question of whether it is possible to draw an analogy between “Matilda” and caricatures of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

"There is a difference between the conscious shocking of people, the caricature genre, and high cinema, of which Aleksey Uchitel is a part. This is the view of a particular director, a particular artist on one or another historical aspect, and his attempt to convey his idea to spectators, and there - deliberate incitement of hatred," Volkov said.

“We must categorically avoid the priest, standing on the pulpit, in a sermon saying: this is a good work, but this is bad, you can’t go to this film, but go burn cinemas there. Of course, this is impossible,” said the priest.

"The hierarchies of the church cannot simply take it and say:" This is what you should like, but this is not. " Simple free people they can express their point of view, it is their right. If they unite themselves around Orthodoxy and say: we Orthodox believe that this film is not good enough or just bad, then sorry. So, take their position... Of course, in this sense, we always strive for balance and urge people not to go beyond the limits of decency. In this sense, of course, people need to be warned against excessive aggression," the spokesman said.

The film "Matilda" is dedicated to the fate of the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya, with whom the future Nicholas II was in love. main role Michalina Olshanska from Poland played, Nicholas II - German artist Lars Eidinger. The premiere will take place October 6 at the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg, and the film should be released on October 25.

Previously representatives social movement"Royal Cross" called "Matilda" "an anti-Russian and anti-religious provocation," and State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya asked the Prosecutor General's Office to check the picture. According to her, specialists and scientists made a comprehensive examination of the film materials. She showed that the image created in Matilda does not correspond to the image of Emperor Nicholas II, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.

“In connection with my interview with RT, which, in particular, dealt with the film “Matilda”, I must once again emphasize that the opinion expressed was my personal judgment regarding this film and has nothing to do with the official position of the Church and holy patriarch. I apologize to those whom I have confused or misled,” Volkov told RIA Novosti.

Earlier, Alexander Volkov, in an interview with RT, spoke about the film "Matilda" as follows:

“I will not try to formulate any official position, but will express my opinion. Any artist who does something that he considers right and necessary must be aware that any creativity is a responsibility. Before the viewer, before the one to whom he is addressing this work.

Aleksey Uchitel made not a chamber film for some select audience, not a movie for his own. He made films for wide release. This is his artistic remark addressed to the population of our country.

And he, of course, needs to understand that the perception of his work can be very ambiguous. He needs to be ready for this. Why now, before the release of the film on the screens, there are negative moods? I hope that the person understood what and, most importantly, who he is making a film about.

We must be aware that our the last Emperor Nicholas II is not only a historical figure, but also a saint, glorified by the church, is a man whose image and holiness are undeniable for millions of people. This man is dear to people not only as a historical figure, but also as a saint, close, native to the heart specific person. And here, of course, you need to understand that with this film the director can hurt a lot of people.

The reaction that is there is something quite natural. The film will obviously cause a mixed reaction and will not go unnoticed, including from a negative point of view.

No one forced Alexei Uchitel to make this film. He took it off and faced a variety of reactions. At the same time, I think that there will be a positive reaction to the film. I am sure that it has the right, good sides.

You ask: should the church formally rebuke? It is important that the assessment of this film, like any other work of culture, should not come from the church, from the pulpit. It must be categorically avoided that the priest, standing on the pulpit, in a sermon, say: this is a good work, but this is bad, you can’t go to this film, but go burn cinemas there. This, of course, is impossible.

The Church cannot evaluate the phenomena of culture from its sacral, sacred space of the temple. Whatever this film is, it is still a cultural phenomenon that needs to be left inside this cultural space and not try to cultural space drag them into the church, and, conversely, not try to unnaturally try to enter the church inside this cultural space.

But, of course, the church is an organism in which many people with diametrically opposed views live. People who are united only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Everything else does not correlate at all with some people, there is no similarity. In the main they are the same, but everything else, including views on the film, may be different.

Everyone needs to be patient when this film is released so that there is an objective assessment of it. Be determined to accept the assessment that will follow, and be aware that the church is a heterogeneous organism. The hierarchy of the church cannot simply take it and say: “This is what you should like, but this is not.” Ordinary free people can express their point of view, this is their right. If they unite themselves around Orthodoxy and say: we Orthodox believe that this film is not good enough or just bad, then excuse me. So take their stand.

Of course, in this sense, we always strive for balance and urge people not to go beyond the limits of decency. In this sense, of course, people should be warned against excessive aggression. But this is such a sore subject. Moreover, the film was shot in the year of the centenary of the revolution, next year will be the centennial anniversary of the execution royal family, and these dates are very significant for many of our fellow citizens.

There is a difference between the conscious shocking of people, the caricature genre, and high cinematography, of which Aleksey Uchitel is a part. This is the view of a specific director, a specific artist on this or that historical aspect, and his attempt to convey his idea to the audience with his methods, his tools, his film, and there he deliberately incites hatred.

I don't think it can come to that. Undoubtedly, our Russian art much more adequately and consciously, and I am sure that, whatever this film may be, it is not a caricature and a conscious distortion of the image of a holy man.

The film "Matilda" is dedicated to the fate of the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya, with whom the future Nicholas II was in love. The premiere will take place on October 6 at the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg, and the film should be released on October 25.

Earlier, State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya asked the Prosecutor General's Office to check the picture. According to her, specialists and scientists made a comprehensive examination of the film materials. She showed that the image created in Matilda does not correspond to the image of Emperor Nicholas II, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.

“The Church should not evaluate cultural phenomena,” said the press secretary of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill, priest Alexander Volkov, commenting on the situation with the film “Matilda” directed by Alexei Uchitel.

“It is important that the assessment of this film, like any other work of culture, does not come from the church, from the pulpit,

- RT quotes the speaker of the patriarchy. “We must categorically avoid the priest, standing on the pulpit, in a sermon saying: this is a good work, but this is bad, you can’t go to this film, but go burn cinemas there.”

At the same time, speaking about the picture itself, Volkov noted that it could hurt a lot of people. “The reaction that is there is something quite natural. The film will obviously cause a mixed reaction and will not go unnoticed, including from a negative point of view,” he said.

The statement of the representative of the Russian Orthodox Church regarding the film by Alexei Uchitel, which even before its release became the subject of exaggerated attention of the conservative public, looks more liberal than the previous statements of the church about the film. So, earlier hegumen of the Sretensky Monastery, Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) in an interview “ Russian newspaper”said that the task of the church in relation to the film is “not to demand bans, but to warn about truth and untruth.” At the same time, according to Shevkunov,

if the film will artistically rethink the real historical events, then it should declare itself as a historical "fantasy".

Perhaps the new statements are related to the activity of law enforcement (more precisely, supervisory) authorities in relation to the film and the campaign unleashed against it. Thus, the day before it became known that

The Moscow prosecutor's office sent materials and a submission to the investigators of the Moscow Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution based on the result of a prosecutor's check of the actions of members public organization"Christian State - Holy Russia".

As RNS recalls, a few months ago, on behalf of this organization, letters were sent to several hundred cinemas and film distribution companies threatening to set fire to cinemas if they did not refuse to rent the film. Apparently, the check was carried out at the request of director Alexei Uchitel and his lawyers in connection with the threats received by the filmmakers.

The supervisory authority established that in the actions of the leadership of the organization "Christian State - Holy Russia"

there is a sign of a crime under Part 1 of Art. 179 of the Criminal Code of Russia (coercion to refuse to complete a transaction under the threat of violence, destruction or damage to someone else's property).

Closed screening, which was not

Earlier it became known that in June closed Show"Matilda", which, according to some reports, was attended by State Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin and chairman of the Public Council under the Ministry of Culture Pavel Pozhigailo. The latter allegedly persuaded the director to make some amendments both to the trailer of the film and to the picture itself. True, the director himself, in an interview with Gazeta.Ru, denied this information, saying that

considers it “ridiculous” to suggest that the chairman of a public structure under the federal ministry can recommend edits to a film director.

In an interview with TASS, Alexey Uchitel said that Pavel Pozhigailo "was at the screening, spoke laudatory words, did not offer any alterations."

Poklonskaya and boxes

Meanwhile, at the end of last week, State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya, the initiator of the campaign against the film, collected signatures from 37 deputies, as well as more than 100 thousand appeals against the film "Matilda" directed by Alexei Uchitel. According to her, a request for action "within the limits of competence" was sent to the Minister of Culture, the Prosecutor General, as well as the Minister of the Interior. Information from the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation that the state had allocated 280 million rubles for the creation of the picture was attached to the request and signatures of citizens. In the annex to the request, Poklonskaya sent the signatures and appeals of the same hundreds of thousands of citizens "about insulting their feelings."

Actually, it was this application that hardly fit in 13 boxes, Poklonskaya said.

The request contains a request to take the necessary measures and prevent “insults of the religious feelings of believers and desecration of Orthodox shrines storyline movie." She and her like-minded people consider offensive the assumptions about the romance of Nicholas II with Matilda Kshesinskaya after marriage Russian emperor with Alexandra Feodorovna, as well as the fact that in the film Empress Alexandra Feodorovna is shown as a fan of the occult.

In addition, the rejection of Poklonskaya herself caused the performance of the main role by the German artist Lars Eidinger, whom the deputy repeatedly called a porn actor (apparently for his role in Peter Greenway's film Goltzius and the Pelican Company, where he played naked).

MOSCOW, July 24 - RIA Novosti. The Russian Orthodox Church does not consider the film by Alexei Uchitel "Matilda" a deliberate distortion of the image of the saint, but they called the negative reaction of part of society natural. This opinion was expressed by the press secretary of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill, priest Alexander Volkov in an interview.

"The teacher did not make a chamber film for some selected audience, not a movie for his own. He made a movie for wide release ... And he, of course, needs to understand that the perception of his work can be very ambiguous ... The reaction that is, - "it's something natural enough. The film will obviously cause a mixed reaction and will not go unnoticed, including from a negative point of view," Volkov said.

He recalled that Nicholas II is not only a historical figure, but also an Orthodox saint - "and here, of course, you need to understand that with this film the director can touch a lot of people." “At the same time, I think that there will be a positive reaction to the film. I am sure that it also has the right, good sides,” the priest added.

The patriarch's spokesman also stated that the Teacher's film is not a deliberate distortion of the image of the saint.

“I am sure that whatever this film is, it is not a caricature and a deliberate distortion of the image of a holy man,” Volkov answered the question of whether it is possible to draw an analogy between “Matilda” and caricatures of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

"There is a difference between the conscious shocking of people, the caricature genre, and high cinema, of which Aleksey Uchitel is a part. This is the view of a particular director, a particular artist on one or another historical aspect, and his attempt to convey his idea to spectators, and there - deliberate incitement of hatred," Volkov said.

“We must categorically avoid the priest, standing on the pulpit, in a sermon saying: this is a good work, but this is bad, you can’t go to this film, but go burn cinemas there. Of course, this is impossible,” said the priest.

"The clergy of the church cannot simply take it and say: 'This is what you should like, but this is not.'" Ordinary free people can express their point of view, this is their right. that this film is not good enough or just bad, then I'm sorry. So, take their position ... Of course, in this sense, we always strive for balance and urge people not to go beyond the bounds of decency. In this sense, of course, people need to be warned from excessive aggression," the spokesman said.

The film "Matilda" is dedicated to the fate of the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya, with whom the future Nicholas II was in love. The main role was played by Michalina Olshanska from Poland, Nicholas II by the German artist Lars Eidinger. The premiere will take place on October 6 at the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg, and the film should be released on October 25.

Earlier, representatives of the public movement "Royal Cross" called "Matilda" "an anti-Russian and anti-religious provocation," and State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya asked the Prosecutor General's Office to check the picture. According to her, specialists and scientists made a comprehensive examination of the film materials. She showed that the image created in Matilda does not correspond to the image of Emperor Nicholas II, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church.