Posted 31 мая 2021,, 10:01

Published 31 мая 2021,, 10:01

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Yevgeny Ponasenkov: "Today the Oscar is the snot of a sick America"

Yevgeny Ponasenkov: "Today the Oscar is the snot of a sick America"

31 мая 2021, 10:01
Фото: Соцсети
Mitya Smirnov, author of popular film communities and a former member of the editorial board of the Kinoafish portal, took a frank interview with a popular Russian historian, publicist, director, actor and TV presenter, whom many call "Maestro".

This conversation with Yevgeny Ponasenkov was recorded in early May. Most of the leading film publications refused to publish this material without censoring.

Disclaimer: The interviewer's opinion may not be the same as the respondent's.

- Good evening, Yevgeny! First of all, I would like to know about your attitude towards the Oscars? Generally.

- Mitya, hello.

And you cannot say "in general". Because the Oscar was created in a completely different country, because the United States of the late 1920s and 1930s and today's United States are absolutely two different countries. As, for example, the Russian Empire before 1914 and the bandit lair after 1917.

Today, the United States has been captured by communists, socialists, neo-Bolsheviks.

Accordingly, it is a disease. You have to understand that this is not a political phenomenon, but a physical illness, like a virus. It affects the entire body, including the spheres of culture, art and cinema.

The Oscar appeared in a society where aesthetics were valued, where quality was valued - and quality and aesthetics were absolutely in everything. This was the era of art deco, capitalism, class society, this was the era when talent and, above all, talent were valued! And not mediocrity. Mediocrity had no leverage to belittle talent and demand attention to itself.

So [back then] the Oscars really were a symbol of enthusiasm for cinema, and they really did receive outstanding films for sheer awards. It was an action of great society in itself, where beautiful, beautiful people came, splendidly dressed and attracted the eyes - it was really a dream factory and the appearance of a dream factory. Grace Kelly and Marlon Brando after the 27th Academy Awards, 1955.

But today we can only remember this and watch the footage of the recording, as if we come to the museum and look at the canvases of the 16th-17th centuries. We look at footage with Bette Davis or when Sophia Loren gets an honorary Oscar. In general, all these faces [belong] to a bygone era, when a Hollywood actor really looked like a Hollywood actor. It was the concept of "Hollywood looks." A tall, handsome gentleman, a wonderful actress, and not a sick ugly creature.

Today you must be not only a freak or a black, you need to be an ugly black. At the same time, it is desirable that in the past or in the present he was a drug addict, terrorist, cripple and in general a creature who does not even remember his name. And, of course, it must necessarily teach the white life how to live correctly.

It is necessary to pose the question: "In what era?"

- From 2024, the American Film Academy is introducing new criteria for selection for the Best Film nomination. What do you think about this?

- I've heard about it. But these are not so much the Oscar criteria as the criteria of Bolshevism.

All the time you try to look at some trifle, but you do not see the main thing. For example, when a person is sick with the flu, you look at, sorry, snot. Today "Oscar" is the snot of sick America. Here it is - dripping from the nose of the sick USA.

Forgive me, but I'm just telling you as a scientist, but in this case we turn to medicine - once it was a palace truly sparkling with genuine diamonds, today ... I told you what it is.

And, as far as these criteria are concerned, it completely contradicts the possibility of art emerging, because art is a free expression of the artist's personality. And if they are tied up like in prison, these are the broken lives of real artists, who are tied hand and foot.

You have to take ugliness - not just take something, but it says “you have to take ugliness” and “you have to work with ugly creatures”. You must be constantly depressed, you must have shingles. You should be sick. You need to make a movie in constant nausea.

The disease is illogical.

- Do you think any of the modern Russian filmmakers is worthy of the Oscar?

- Not. Today in Russia there is no cinema at all. Accordingly, there are no filmmakers either.

We have Nikita Mikhalkov. A remarkable Soviet actor, whom Ryazanov very correctly put to play a speculator in the brilliant film "Station for Two". This film can be given 10 Oscars.

I think that Nikita Mikhalkov should receive an Oscar every year for Best Actress in terms of serving him. And this is no joke, because he is really a very talented actor by nature, but he has such an unusual role.

- Have you watched any tapes that were nominated for an Oscar this time?

Mitya, "tape" is an outdated word in every sense, because now, unfortunately, it is mostly filmed not on tape, and it all looks like plastic. And in fact, it is also plastic.

There are creatures that devour carrion. There are animals in the world, but there are people who eat everything rotten. Only a person without taste and self-respect can watch all this.

Now I went online with you and opened the list with the nominees. Look here:

Most of all awards and "Best Film" - "The Land of Nomads" .

An ugly aunt loses her job after the closure of a drywall plant where she worked for years with her recently deceased husband. That is, the husband died before the start of the events of the film and we will not see this freak.

But, unfortunately, the whole film we see absolutely nothing of itself is a piece of meat, and all because this actress has neither appearance, nor talent, nor charisma, and she did not even come up with any interesting text, no interesting movements. For the entire film, there is not a single gesture, glance, hairstyle that is worth at least some attention.

Mitya, do you want me to look at a piece of meat that used to work in a drywall factory, and the whole film is sitting next to a van? Who do you take me for? If someone does not respect themselves ...

"Munk" is an attempt to capitalize on the former greatness.

There is nothing more despicable and vulgar than a biopic.

If a great person has already died - for example, Thatcher or Mankiewicz - those who do not even deserve to offer slippers begin to make money on it. But here, since the era of the 40s, they are forced to somehow dress and move in a similar way to how people used to move. Now [people] move differently - now they move like in Negro ghettos, as if they are climbing.

"Father" - the talented Anthony Hopkins plays a very sick man. So, about the disease, for the sick.

"Judas and the black messiah" - well, it is clear that the messiah today can only be black. Some of the poster [depicts] two freaks. Okay, negros, but I repeat, it was found freaks. It's already scary to watch the poster, of course I'm not going to watch shit.

"The sound of metal" - great! "The sound of metal"! Not that the sound of a waltz or Strauss, but the Sound of Metal. Ahmed played the main role of a metal drummer who is losing his hearing. Who do you take me for? So that I could watch the deaf drummer Ahmed portray something there? Again about the disease. "Father" about the patient, "Sound of metal" about the patient...

"Ma Rainey: Mother of the Blues" - some very fat bellied black woman is standing [on the poster] in front of me. It seems that ONLY blacks live.

Soul is an animated [film] and is clearly a drug addict on the poster.

"The Promising Girl" is the bloody mouth on the poster. I will not watch this.

- “A promising girl” is a saying about #MeToo and feminism.

- Feminism! I would have declared them a terrorist organization long ago. Here one in Georgia cut a ten-year-old child because she said that "all men are aggressors." Some animal is sick.

"One more" - about alcoholics.

- I just wanted to ask you, as a cinematographer and as a scientist, how do you like the plot of this film?

- Absolute stupidity. Winterberg lost his talent and now he has to lick Biden, become a local Mikhalkov.

"Hillbilly's Elegy" - the film tells a story about the life of three generations of one poor American family. Who do you take me for? THREE GENERATIONS OF ONE POOR FAMILY. THEM CANNOT BE GIVEN AT ALL! Why give birth to beggars? You need to either start working or use contraceptives. Putting rubber bands on them all to hell, so as not to make such films.

Understand that art should show beauty.

Moreover, an insanely talented and imagined beauty. And all that I have listed is not just a garbage dump, but also a garbage dump where only the sick and the ugly swarm.

A well-dressed gentleman walks by. You cannot take it off near the trash heap or even against the background of the trash heap. And now they want to allow ONLY minorities, freaks and psychiatric patients before filming. They let a white one - Anthony Hopkins - but made him hopelessly ill so that he would soon die, and with shame.

Finished the list of this shit. Anything that won an Oscar this year is scientifically, aesthetically, and artistically insane crap.

- Okay. We have dealt with the Oscar. I would like to ask you about other major world awards - maybe the future belongs to the Cannes and Venice Film Festivals?

- And it's all the same.

[For example] this year's César Awards are just a criminal event where psycho-sick aunts ran out covered in blood. This has nothing to do with cinema.

Actors generally have little brains and intelligence - their task is to walk correctly and beautifully in a good script with a good director, that's it.

Since the actor, as a rule, is a moron, he clings to the most primitive and erroneous political things. Including, if somewhere left-wing criminals introduce him through the left-wing press nonsense about global warming and so on, then, accordingly, he begins to smear himself with blood. This is an incredible connection: smearing yourself with blood to draw attention to global warming, for example.

Everything goes through its stages. You may not have noticed, but now, unfortunately, cinematography is a living corpse.

Once upon a time, a sculpture was called stunning marble, divinely beautiful, insanely complex sculptures. Today it is dirt. Also with painting.

The same thing happens with cinema: it reached a peak under Visconti, under Antonioni, under Fellini, and in Hollywood under Bette Davis and Fred Astaire. It was Everest, and today it is complete decay.

- In a recent interview, you said that you are more or less positive about classical musicals. Have you watched Damien Chazelle's La La Land?

- Everyone was talking about him then, especially small managers, poor managers. Not big ones, who can add drugs on their own yachts and accumulate quickly, but small office plankton, who live senselessly and somehow need the proletarian time of their life, maybe at the end of Friday, spend somewhere. Such people go to a film where [there is] pseudo-romance and pseudo-hope, everything is pseudo.

Ryan Gosling is a wonderful, charming, strange actor who played some amazing roles 20 years ago. His inner uncommon charm by nature.

And in this film Gosling, because he also needs to make money. This film - rubber, foam rubber and plastic, but at least without black drug addicts, which, of course, is something incredible - I am amazed why the authors of the film are not yet in prison for this.

In general, when Ryan Gosling approaches this girl, then at that moment a crippled drunken black man should appear and begin to teach them how to live in general, how to sing, how to dance, and so on. Therefore, I believe that this film should be banned, as deeply racist.

Of course, there is no need to waste time on this. The musical genre, when there was Mario Lanza, Fred Astaire, Ginger Rogers, Gene Kelly, was space and Everest. After that [it is impossible] to look at poor walking guys and listen to people who speak in a not very well-trained voice, not to mention singing.

- And that year, by the way, the "Moonlight" by Baria Jenkins received the Oscar in the main category.

- Obviously, this shitty award is now given solely for political reasons. [Right now] the film has to be absolutely completely shitty through and through to qualify for this award.

That is, if he was simply untalented, like La-La Land, it is still not enough. Enough is when the viewer is already vomiting. So that he had nightmares at night. Then there is a really serious chance.

- Around the end of 2019, a big resonant discussion began. Martin Scorsese vs Marvel Movie Lovers. What is your attitude to comic book adaptations?

- The adaptation of comics is the same as the adaptation of inscriptions and drawings on the walls of a mental hospital. That is, come to the mental hospital, took a picture of someone, and then got so infected that they thought: "Let me take pictures of this nonsense."

This, of course, has nothing to do with cinema. And comics lovers who are immersed and completely lose touch with reality, I think they need to somehow help. Perhaps they need to be transferred to some kind of housing, preferably behind a fence, preferably with barbed wire. They can draw comics there, imagine themselves as comic book heroes, vote for Biden.

Well, by the way, if Biden was there too.

- I know that you have a good relationship with Italian classic directors. I would like to hear from you one of the best films from each such director.

- I want to say right away that Bernardo Bertolucci is not included here.

I really appreciate him, but he is a completely different story. He is permeated with such vulgar phraseological unit ... He is a talented person, but if he masturbated more often, then maybe he took off less.

I think he didn't have to shoot that much. He is drawn to the not very washed, stale - for some reason those who do not wash in the shower are having sex. I always want his characters to be cut, washed and not removed without makeup, because all this is somehow with a smell.

It can be seen that the person is talented, but apparently he somehow suffered.

- But it's like a 4D effect - you watch and feel what is happening on the screen.

- But no, I would not want to feel these smells.

As for the Visconti, this is such a unique world.

Luchino Visconti is above everything. It's somewhere in space.

His filmography needs to be examined in a whole, all films together, although they are very different. Before "Leopard" - this is neorealism, and after - this is what we call "pure" Visconti, aristocratic style.

Luchino Visconti is one of the most important directors of Italian cinema.

Fellini too. You can't name one favorite piece. These are stories that flow into one another, this is Fellini's world inhabited by different characters. The same movie that I really like.

- And for you personally, which is closer - "Eight and a half" or "Sweet life"?

- You can remove the credits at the end of one of them and merge them together - you will not notice the difference in the plot. Let's assume that they are both my favorites with him.

- It would be an ideal dilogy.

- Yes, that's right.

Michelangelo Antonioni is exactly the same. Alienation, loneliness ...

If we take from the point of view of aesthetics, then, of course, "Eclipse". The walks of Alain Delon and Monica Vitti - you can watch it endlessly, forgetting that this is a film in general, you can live in it.

- Pasolini?

- Pasolini ... I really appreciate him as a gifted person.

But he is absolutely not mine: aesthetically, politically, externally, whatever. I would say that the film "Theorem" is of interest to those around him and to great intellectuals - "Medea" with Maria Kallos.

- How do you feel about dubbing and voice acting? Is it possible to watch great works in this way? Or is it necessary to get acquainted with the great in the form in which it was created?

- Of course, it is better in the original language. But it is possible, if it is voiced very professionally, as, by the way, in the impoverished country of the USSR, where there was an outstanding school of translators (because impoverished aristocrats did it there). And dubbing ... The bar for quality and control was just as high. This was done by people with great acting ability.

I myself acted in films, in small roles, because I have requirements for our modern mediocre cinema, then these [roles in Russian works] are like jokes, so I usually ask for 1-2 days of shooting and with one take. If the actor could not play it or the operator did not record it, I just leave.

I also voiced. The moment of dubbing is very important. For example, I played a Wehrmacht officer and there was German. You know, rhythm - it dictates a lot. And it is different. If we are talking about Russian, then Italian films are easier to duplicate, and German ones are more difficult, because the rhythm is different.

- Your cycle of the author's program "Poetry of Fate". Would you like to revive this format or have you already said everything you wanted?

- Naturally, I still have something to say. Perhaps in new conditions on a channel with more technical resources.

But I partly continue this, because in interviews with various - on federal channels, my streams, or you personally - I very often mention cinematographers and filmmakers. One way or another, I continue the story about this, but in a different format.

It can be revived, but it should be of a very high quality on some federal channel. For this, however, federal channels must become decent.

- Once you mentioned that François Ozon and Pedro Almodovar hold the same level among modern directors. What can you distinguish from their work first of all?

- First of all, it is worth recalling that I said this 12 years ago. Then I said it in the format “fish for fish and cancer”.

Now, if a journalist bothers me, does not give me a pass and drives me into a corner with a knife to my throat and asks: "Is there anything decent among modern people?" , leave me alone. "

These two directors are original, they know how to feel, and they found the most important thing - their own dissimilar stylistics. I may or may not like her. Let's say I'm not close to the style of transvestites at Almodovar, but it's ridiculous to watch for half an hour. It's bright, it's in Spanish, it's such a vulgar baroque in cinema.

Ozone is somewhere more subtle, such neoclassicism, and it is also very “uneven”. But his search for sensuality and aesthetic form is obvious. Others do not have this today. Therefore, "8 Women" and "Raindrops on Hot Rocks" are two films that are of interest.

Watching "8 Women". What are we looking at? We look at great actresses. That is, Ozone used the resource of the greatness of past eras. It was up to par.

Imagine, "8 Women" - the amazing Catherine Deneuve, the beautiful Daniel Darrieu - and put in there a fat African addict according to the quota. What will you have? Shit, not a movie.

And in modern realities, he will be forced to insert this black woman there, by all means. This will spoil everything, because you cannot mix the refined Frenchwoman Catherine Deneuve with a completely different anthropology, task and destiny. These are two different things. This is not good, this is not bad, we are just different.

Almodovar takes off the cheerful, nosed prostitute, and he will be told: "No, you know, one brutal boring pseudo-straight is needed here." No quota. It can only be the inner world of the artist, where he will be carried.

- How do you feel about hypocrisy in Hollywood? Let's say that Woody Allen's actors are playing, knowing his past, #metoo begins and they immediately discard it publicly, stipulating it.

- In the midst of the #MeToo movement, the actors disowned the director, refused to promote the project and donated their royalties to charity

It is timeless human. If a person is a scumbag, scum and a traitor, then there is nothing worse than this.

There is nothing worse in the world if a person betrays. This is an abomination.

Such a person should not have the right either to creativity, or to simply communicate with him.

And #metoo is a criminal movement. Losers, without proof, accuse famous successful people of anything. Including my friend Placido Domingo, who is a great tenor and actor who also starred with Franco Zeffirelli. This was also a conspiracy 2 years ago, when the aunts said that 20 years ago he looked at them and they now realized that this was harassment. It's just over the edge.

You are trying to discuss some grain of sand, just understand - the whole beach is dirty. We are in a junkyard. Today Western Europe and the United States have fallen ill with Bolshevism. They are physically captured and occupied by alien savages, and they are also helped by traitorous immigrants.

Anyone who respects themselves at least a little, I advise you not to participate in this in any way. Do not watch a movie on a quota. Now you shouldn't give money to this leftist gang, but you should watch thousands - not hundreds, but thousands! - great successful beautiful films shot from the 1920s to the 2000s. 80 years of great cinema. Your life won't be long enough to watch this.

- And, finally, recommend 3 films for our readers.

- "Great maneuvers" with Gerard Philip

"White Nights", dir. Luchino Visconti

“Everything Remains for People” with Nikolay Cherkasov.