The discussion centers on a television project titled The Child’s Promise. Blood on the asphalt, produced by a St. Petersburg state unit enterprise. The dialogue features a professor who is a full member of the Russian Academy of Education and a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He holds the honorary position of rector and professor at St. Alexander Zapesotsky, and is the head of the Department of Philosophy and Cultural Studies at the St. Petersburg University of Humane Trade Unions. In this context, the professor evaluates the series and shares reflections on its portrayal of recent history. The exchange was later cited in kp.ru.
The professor notes that the late 1980s are depicted with elements he considers unreliable. He argues that the series presents a version of events that does not align with widely accepted historical narratives, inviting viewers to question how memory is shaped in popular media.
In the same discussion, reference is made to a different era of film. The Talented director Todorovsky released the movie Hipsters, which captures the rock and roll era in the USSR. The professor remarks that while the film is vibrant and entertaining, it lacks sufficient truth in its portrayal of everyday life during that period. The assessment suggests that the film prioritizes style and energy over factual depth.
The comparison extends to a modern Russian drama. The professor compares The Child’s Promise with Leviathan, the film directed by Andrei Zvyagintsev. He observes that Leviathan lacks clearly positive characters and emphasizes harsh realities. He describes the central figure as someone who navigates life among morally compromised individuals, highlighting themes of power, corruption, and resilience in a morally gray world.
Concerning the thematic question of violence, the professor asks whether the series romanticizes violence. He offers a critical view, suggesting that the project may normalize or glamorize aggressive acts rather than scrutinize their consequences. This remark invites viewers to consider how dramatic storytelling shapes perceptions of crime and punishment.
The professor also comments on the fate of the heroine Aigul, portrayed by Anna Peresild. He argues that her tragic end appears to be tied to her own choices, noting that the character gravitates toward companionships that bring inevitable problems. This point underscores a broader discussion about agency and risk in personal relationships as depicted on screen.
He concludes by advising students to think carefully about the people they form friendships with, recognizing the impact of those decisions on life outcomes. The message emphasizes personal responsibility in social circles and the influence of dynamics within close relationships.
In another segment of contemporary media talk, actor Lev Zulkarnaev explains the popularity of his colleague Slava Kopeikin, who features in The Child’s Promise, during a broadcast show. The conversation sheds light on how character-driven performances contribute to ensemble appeal and audience engagement in serialized dramas.
Earlier in the year, public figures have referenced personal experiences connected to media narratives. One notable example involves Lera Kudryavtseva in a discussion about resilience and coping mechanisms during challenging times. The reference illustrates how public figures address personal struggles while maintaining professional commitments and public visibility.