Ilya Khrzhanovsky did not give an interview to the press for the last 10 years, but suddenly decided to break the silence. According to his own words, the reason was the festival rules: it was said to go to press conferences and communicate with journalists and critics - done. Maxim Zagovora was one of the first to meet with the director for a big talk about cinema, ethics, and, of course, about the Dau project itself.
- Ilya Andreevich, for ten years you practically did not give interviews, especially to the Russian press.
- No, I didn't give them at all.
- And even more so on television. What changed?
- Nothing has changed, I just started giving interviews. I did not give them to anyone, and now I give interviews to everyone. My position has changed. Well, because I haven't given an interview for these 10 years and thought that there was no point in talking about this project in the press, because it hadn't come out yet. Only in the form of an artistic performance - an installation in Paris. But in all these periods it belonged to the world that was created by us, so I considered myself entitled to determine the rule - speaking or not speaking about it. Inside the rule of not speaking, I thought it was correct, because, firstly, I do not like the system itself, when the director begins to explain something and everything becomes “kind of true”. Although these are, in fact, just words. Nobody knows what he (the director) actually did. And if he knows what he did, he does not know what he did. That is, this is such a very delicate story. And then it's a co-author's project. I was not the only one who did it. It seems to me incorrect when everything depends on one person. It is not right. That's why I gave the interview.
- Now it is a public screening at the Berlinale, which means that we can already talk about the film.
- I moved to the conventional world, which has its own rules. With press conferences and so on. If I come here, I have to play by the rules. If I define the rules, then everything happens according to them, and if I go to play according to strangers, then I must comply with them.
- Was it an easy decision? I’ll explain: a month ago we spoke in St. Petersburg with Vladimir Martynov, the great Russian composer and participant of the Dau project at all stages. He said that the Berlin Film Festival is not yet a victory. Because "Dau" was not planned as a project for a regular film festival. It must be displayed differently. And there could be no competitive element in it. And now you are talking about new rules
- “Dau” is a project designed in such a way that there were always rules in it and we tried not to break them. We could change them, but we could not break them. It seems to me that here it is important to understand at what point the reality that you are doing is exhausted. At some point, you have to start re-realizing something and do it differently. The premiere of the project was to take place in the city of Berlin, first in 2017, then in 2018. In the city center, nine blocks of houses were to be closed off by the Berlin Wall, built overnight, and shows were to be shown inside this area. Unfortunately, despite the fact that the project was supported by the mayor of the city, Mr. (Michael) Müller, and the President of the country Frank-Walter Steinmeier, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Minister of Culture, and all sorts of great various officials,within a certain political configuration, a scandal began and the project was banned. We now know that it was a manipulative movement of the mayor of the Mitte district, but these are details.
© Matthias Nareyek
- At the same time, the official explanation is almost a violation of fire safety …
- Quite right. Then the investigative journalists of the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper conducted an investigation, and - since all the information here is public - they found a correspondence in which the burgomaster of the central district of Berlin instructs the heads of their departments not to do business with us, go on vacation, take sick leave a few weeks before the official ban … Therefore, this is an absolutely manipulative thing, but it happened that way, the premiere did not take place twice in Berlin. It took place in Paris, but it was very difficult. We were going to start in two theaters at once with a bridge between them, and as a result we started in one theater … It all went through great difficulties. Although in Paris, the project was supported by the mayor of the city, Anne Hidalgo, who fought for it more fundamentally, and the leadership of the Pompidou Center, and so on. But here in Berlinthis type of reality ended at some point, it was exhausted. There was a plan for big premieres, like in Paris, and then the release of a digital platform - DAU Digital.
- Those 700 hours?
- This is 700 hours of cinema, filmed at 35 millimeters, four thousand hours of sound, more than half a million photographs. For many years, everything was tagged by several dozen philosophers, culturologists, scientists, and religious figures. That is, all the material is analyzed, and therefore, depending on how you watch - and who you are - you will always watch your own film. And in this respect, these 700 watches are a product. And what is shown here are trailers. Therefore, I have no creative effect, because they are like particles that move in a vacuum.
- So this is not a redistribution of values? Because it seemed to me that the decision to give Dau to the festival was a kind of recognition that films are the central part of the project.
- You see, what a story … I didn't know physics very well before I started doing this. And now I don't know her well, but my physics friends, when they were filming this project, explained to me something about the quantum world, where everything exists depending on the point of view of the observer. Because the world is very diverse. Looking from the world of cinema, the filmmakers congratulate me on the fact that the film is at the Berlin Film Festival. This is absolutely incomprehensible to me. If you look from the world of contemporary art, they do not see this fact at all, the Berlinale does not exist for them - they are not even aware of its existence. Is this project films? Those products that are here (at the festival) are films too. Is this a huge installation or a performance? The proposals we receive from the world's leading museums confirm that yes. They perceive the film material as part of the installation. Is this an innovative project? Yes. In this sense, it depends on the point of view. But it is important for me that this project lives, because it is my duty to those people who have done this project with me, and to those people who should watch this project. Because, as we all know, cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - is not an art that is perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time. And therefore, it is important that the dialogue between the material, between the cinema and the viewer, takes place at that moment in time in which we exist. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project. In this sense, it depends on the point of view. But it is important for me that this project lives, because it is my duty to those people who have done this project with me, and to those people who should watch this project. Because, as we all know, cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - is not an art that is perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time. And therefore, it is important that the dialogue between the material, between the cinema and the viewer, takes place at that moment in time in which we exist. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project. In this sense, it depends on the point of view. But it is important for me that this project lives, because it is my duty to those people who have done this project with me, and to those people who should watch this project. Because, as we all know, cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - is not an art that is perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time. And therefore, it is important that the dialogue between the material, between the cinema and the viewer, takes place at that moment in time in which we exist. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project.who should watch this project. Because, as we all know, cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - is not an art that is perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time. And therefore, it is important that the dialogue between the material, between the cinema and the viewer, takes place at that moment in time in which we exist. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project.who should watch this project. Because, as we all know, cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - is not an art that is perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time. And therefore, it is important that the dialogue between the material, between the cinema and the viewer, takes place at that moment in time in which we exist. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project. The Berlin Festival and other festivals are, first of all, a way to keep discussion, conversation about this project.
Cinema - unlike, for example, painting or music - art is not so perishable, but has a certain relevance at a certain point in time.
- Well, and the fact that for the first time "Dau" will be shown publicly in Berlin for the first time, is there such an element of revenge for that failed premiere? Or are they different stories?
- No, these are completely different stories. And this is not my initiative to be here. Festival director Carlo Shatrian invited me here and persuaded me for a long time.
- Thierry Fremault (director of the Cannes Film Festival) seemed to persuade you too. Or did you not persuade?
- Well, let's leave that. We are already in Berlin, so we will talk about Berlin. There is also such a logic that many of those who worked with me are Berliners. And Ekaterina Ertel, my co-director in the film “Dau. Natasha”and the main makeup artist of the project, and Jurgen Jurges, cameraman and producer Suzanne Marian. Therefore, in a sense, it is a Berlin and German project as well. I have no lyrical attitude towards Berlin, for me it was a difficult experience in terms of costs in all respects. But life moves and has different aspects. But the screenings at the Berlinale are not the first time. For the first time, the project appeared in Paris, the films were in a different form, in the form of material that had to be released and released. But these films ("Dau. Natasha" and "Dau. Degeneration") appear on the territory where the films live, and it is called - the festival. And then - cinemas.
- To end the Parisian story of a year ago. When you talk about all the ingredients of Dow besides the movie, it's incredibly intriguing. But in Paris, at least in part, they have been implemented. I remember that it was said that our answers when applying for a visa (that was the name of tickets for the Dow premiere - RBC Style) would influence what we see. Booths with interlocutors, psychologists, priests, whatever you may call them, were part of the project. In fact, as far as I understand, the answers were not used. The man just came in and went to watch a movie. Downstairs there was a bar and an installation exhibition.
- There are two elements here. Due to the fact that we received the building in a different condition and one and a half months later than planned, some technological elements related to how the system works were not implemented - there was not enough time. However, it is not the fact that you use your answers that matters, but the fact that you generally respond to them. The story about you is that you perform acts on the territory of your life. Everything unfolds only on the territory of our consciousness and at the moment when you make some kind of effort, for example, get a visa … By the way, how does a visa differ from a ticket? In principle, nothing.
- Nothing. Extra effort in getting it.
- Efforts. And the fact that you have a personalized document. With personalization, you understand that you belong to a certain territory. Many people still keep these visas. I meet people who keep them with them as a personal document. The whole system of relations inside this "Dau" -the territory that was in Paris - between showing, talking, eating, drinking, lying and walking - meant that you are in a territory where it seems to you that you decide everything. Therefore, in our country, for example, the main answer of employees to any question from visitors was “I don’t know”. In this sense, a person who is accustomed to the service system - I bought a ticket and now I expect to be shown this, given what else they give for this money, how else they will entertain me here - turned out to be lost in a sense. It is unclear, he is not given any rules for existence.
- Or even irritated.
- Very often irritated. For example, we changed prices in a bar. A glass of vodka could cost 15 euros, or 2 euros. Prices moved all the time during the day. And people were indignant as soon as something became more expensive. I said: "Why are you not indignant when it is getting cheaper?" Thus, irritation and non-irritation - some kind of positive reaction - are still not high emotions. It is something that at some point brings you potentially into a state from which you can feel something else. You need to "get out" from the normal, daily life in which you come to such an event or to another. Now there is already an infinite number of them, an infinite variety of wonderful events. But within them you understand the code through which you are experiencing. It was important for me that a person, being at the premiere in Paris, was knocked out of the standard type of perception,so that he began to somehow find his place inside this world.
- Why exactly the film “Dow. Natasha”have you chosen to participate in the Berlinale competition?
“I didn't choose him. It was a joint choice with the festival's management - and Dow. Natasha ", and" Dow. Degeneration". I think these films are important for Berlin and for the German public. Because everything rests on the territory where you are. The Berlinale is a spectator festival, so spectator-like that tickets for the Dau were sold out in less than half a minute. But the fact is that there are some parts of history in which a connection with a moment in time and place is assumed. These two stories are “Dow. Natasha "and" Dow. Degeneration”- it seems to me that they are quite connected here. “Dow. Degeneration”tells about how the extreme right forces and through what mechanisms come to power. It seems to me that for Germany, as well as for many European countries, this is very important. Some films I have never shown even in the material or have shown completely in parts,and they will be coming out during this year.
© Andreas Rentz
- Where?
- You will see where. Both at festivals and at the box office. That is, the components of the project will fill those niches in which art products are located. In particular, there will be several books - now they are published by leading Western publishers - linked in "Dau", music discs are coming out, there will be exhibitions. That is, all the existing zones, as it were, in which art lives, the project will live in them. And in particular, films will live at festivals and at the box office.
- It is with “Dau. Natasha”were connected both correspondence and face-to-face questions and complaints about the project.
- What are face-to-face claims?
- Absentee - from those who have not seen, full-time - from those who watched. They see that Vladimir Azhippo, a real ex-secret service officer, is really tormenting the woman in the frame, she is really suffering, and this goes completely against the new ethics of the world.
- And what is "suffering"? For example, the scene with a bottle has been mentioned so many times - if you look, there is no fact of the bottle "entering". But emotionally, everything that happens in the project is always true. Truth in a certain conventional world. If this is more scary for the audience and they can feel something, then this is great. This means that both my work and the work of those who took part in the project - actors and Vladimir Azhippa, unfortunately, now deceased, and Natasha, and other people - that everything makes sense. For example, in Paris, Monica Bellucci approached Natasha, kissed her hand, saying that she was an outstanding, her favorite actress, she was absolutely shocked by her performance, there is simply not a single actress in the world who could do it.
- But is it a game?
- How do you distinguish between what is a game and what is not a game?
- It seems to me that it depends on the director's method, which I am asking about.
- And it seems to me that it depends on your look.
- How did you direct these scenes? Have you been on site? It's one thing - you lead, say: "You torture her …" I, of course, oversimplify.
- That's what I used to say (laughs).
- Either you somehow provoke this, or do these situations develop on their own? It seems to me that this depends, among other things, on my personal answer, my personal attitude to what I see.
- You know, after all, everything unfolds within the agreed view. As I was told: "This is not a movie" or "This is a movie." And who determines whether it is a movie or not? This is an actor, and this is not an actor. How do you define? Education? How is this determined? Is the person suffering or not suffering? Can strong emotions be experienced? And is it possible - within the contract? And this is a matter of collusion. There is even such a concept in directing when they talk about working with an actor - to come to an agreement. You agree with him about certain rules, within these rules the actors always go far emotionally. The better and more fearless an actor is, the further he goes in emotion. If we are not talking about the No theater or the Kabuki theater, which have different rules. If we are talking about theater or cinema, psychological, literal, ultimate. Here, it seems to me, it would be better for people, including film critics and film critics,and other cultural figures, worried not about artistic products, but about how they communicate, how they live their lives. We torture people in life much more. That's how people are. We enter into a relationship with them, we take offense at someone, we worry. This is very difficult to follow. It is very difficult to reflect on your own life. But it turns out that it is very easy to reflect on someone else's life, especially life in an artistic product. And here, it seems to me, it is important to separate life and art and not forget that this is an object of art and culture, this project is a fact of this world, and not another. What does it mean? That the laws by which it is created are different. What is the filming process, how does it work? Film reels mean that there is make-up, costumes, there is a camera, it runs out of cassette, it is changed, there is a focus-puller, there is an operator. The camera is close, moving, making noise, rustling. That is, a very complex technological process that is not entirely related to reality, although it captures this constructed sub-reality.
- You are now describing a classic film process, but the whole mythology around "Dau" was based on the fact that the traditional film process was turned upside down. And even if he was filmed on film, but filmed in a completely different way, it's not like "camera, motor, let's go."
- Well, “camera, motor” and “let's go” were not mentioned, but we were shooting the firecracker. This is a technological process, well, like, I've always been on the site. Rooms were built outside the institute, the group moved around the perimeter. In these rooms there was a playback, a group worked, make-up artists, assistants, loaders and so on sat. Through secret doors we could enter the territory and move around.
It is very difficult to reflect on your own life. But it turns out that it is very easy to reflect on someone else's life, especially life in an artistic product.
- But the actors, project participants … By the way, what is the correct name for them?
- As you want, as you like best. But actors are better.
- People in the frame. Did they always know the camera was on? Did you know when they hit the shot?
- Do you do cinema?
- I don't take it off myself, I'm talking about it.
- But have you been on the set before?
- On the set - more than once.
- But have you ever seen how films are shot on film?
- Yes.
- Do you think it is visible when the camera starts working, or not?
- Yes. We talked in Paris with Jurgen Jurges, and he said that in his career there was no such method of shooting before. Therefore, what I saw on set was clearly different from your method.
- Look, there are two aspects here. One is the method of working with the actor, with the light, with the camera. They are, of course, completely different. Not the same as in standard cinema. If we talk about how the cinema is arranged as such, that is, at the level of your question, not about the method, but about the clarification of ethical norms, then the conversation will not be professional, but ethical. He will not be directly related to the film profession. That's why I'm not going to such a conversation. Am I really going to tell you how Jurgen Jurges invented a different system of light arrangement? This does not mean that the conversation we are having should not be, it just has different rules. This is how we say that there are some rules in the world in which the Dau existed in Paris, and other rules here. In Berlin, there is a rule that if a film is in competition, press conferences and interviews must be given,and I am a very law-abiding person, I act according to these rules - I give interviews, for example. When we talk about ethics, there is one thing related to the fact that the understanding of reality and the artistic process is mixed. And ethics in reality and in the artistic process. Further, naturally, the question arises about ethics as such, modern ethics. But here, it seems to me, I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile. I follow these rules - I give interviews, for example. When we talk about ethics, there is one thing related to the fact that the understanding of reality and the artistic process is mixed. And ethics in reality and in the artistic process. Further, naturally, the question arises about ethics as such, modern ethics. But here, it seems to me, I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile. I follow these rules - I give interviews, for example. When we talk about ethics, there is one thing related to the fact that the understanding of reality and the artistic process is mixed. And ethics in reality and in the artistic process. Further, naturally, the question arises about ethics as such, modern ethics. But here, it seems to me, I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile.that the understanding of reality and the artistic process is mixed. And ethics in reality and in the artistic process. Further, naturally, the question arises about ethics as such, modern ethics. But here, it seems to me, I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile.that the understanding of reality and the artistic process is mixed. And ethics in reality and in the artistic process. Further, naturally, the question arises about ethics as such, modern ethics. But here, it seems to me, I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile. I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile. I answered you one part at a time. And if we talk about how emotionally you can talk with people … We always talked about death, about sex, about love, about suffering during the interview, that is, we entered our personal territory based on the new paradigm. But art also deals with personal territories, which are often much more intimate, the territory of the soul than the territory of the body. And, of course, this territory is very fragile.
- When you insist on differentiation, the thought is discouraging. Because all I knew and thought about Dow was that his idea was to mix art with life. So that life flows into art, so that they stop separating from each other.
- You see, everything depends on the "quantum" view of the observer. We speak at different levels, as if on different floors. There is a professional floor where we can talk about those unique cinematic, professional discoveries (and this is a fact) that we have made with this project. There is a floor where we discuss ethics, that is, what can be done, what is not allowed in the territory of art and the territory of life. The third floor - what is life and what is art in a higher, more complex sense, where are these boundaries. Fourth - that a person can generally donate and give, and where is the limit of his involvement, and what is time. These are all different types. Just like with a budget - you have a huge budget, it is huge from one point of view, but completely small from another.
© Darren Gerrish / WireImage
- You yourself said about the new ethics. Ideas about ethics have changed in the ten years that Project Dow has lived.
- He has been living for 15 years.
- When you started it, it was a different world, from some details - Russia and Ukraine together gave money - to a general idea of life. It is clear that this is a subjunctive mood, but if you started it now, would it be possible for "Dow" now for you personally? Do you feel that the world has changed dramatically?
- What is cardinal? Some forms of relations with human life are changing. For example, in the young generation, to which my son belongs - he is 21 years old. In his generation, they have different relationships with sex and with death, they are arranged differently. This defines ethics. And other relationships with nature, other relationships with the world - both visible and invisible. In this sense, I believe that we are living in an exciting time, unique. I'm incredibly excited about what will happen next, I'm very interested. But at every moment of time …
- What exactly excites you?
- The fact that the technological world is changing so much, that you can now see yourself with the help of technology and reflect on yourself. It's incredible. Anyone can record themselves, look at themselves and learn from themselves. He is able to separate his inner body from the physical. We understand, or rather, we begin to understand who we are. We live in a transparent world, it is absolutely incredible, exciting. What will happen the moment the lie disappears, well technologically. Do you understand that your phone knows so much about you that you cannot lie to it?
- Well, there are enough lies.
- Where? In the lyrics? Or what do you spend money on, what do you watch, where and when do you come, how do you recover?
- Ilya Andreevich, the instagram account of any person is the maximum lie that can be imagined.
- And what has the instagram account to do with it? We're talking about data. Instagram is the smallest element that doesn't mean anything. Your phone knows in great detail how you move, and based on this, it calculates the average and understands who you really are. You don't know, but the phone knows. And even a psychologist cannot know this. Where do you go, where do you stay, what do you eat, what do you spend money on, how many seconds do you watch, what type of resource. He calculates the average and total all the time, stays close for years and knows what is happening to you every day, every second. How much do you sleep, how do you sleep, what temperature do you sleep with …
- Are you saying that this information is more accurate than what I think of myself?
- I can guarantee you that, but you yourself probably guess. I do not know what you think of yourself, I have no doubt that you think well of yourself, you cannot see …
- One can doubt it, but oh well …
- Not? Well, I want you to think well of yourself, you are a wonderful, lively person. But it seems to me that what a person thinks to himself is a completely different story. Now there is an opportunity to reflect on oneself. And there is a connection between people. Remember, it seemed that such a connection, or globalization, is monstrous, that it devours cultures. And then it turned out to be something more, a different type of connection of cultures. The singularity, which, most likely, is not only technological. Perhaps there will be some kind of connection of consciousness. The role of culture and art is growing because people will have more and more free time. And what will they spend it on? For creativity, for creativity. This is not my opinion, these are research results. We live in a world in which people have time not only for the process of survival. How people lived for millennia: they fought and fought in order not to die of hunger. Now this is also happening, but on an incomparable scale. In the past, the whole world fought for a piece of bread. And now the time comes for opportunities to reflect, think, develop your own soul, spirit and consciousness. And I think it's absolutely exciting.
Watch the full interview in our video diary from the Berlin Film Festival.>
