Alexei Voronkov, head of the Cinema Owners Association, promised the audience: “Everything will be very good in the New Year.” He meant that movie theaters had something to show during the New Year holidays, in late December and early January – the sweetest time for filmmakers, when movies traditionally break the biggest box office hits. They fight for these dates all year, until recently they even discussed the possibility of transferring the premieres of foreign films on these dates in 2019, “if a foreign project interferes with the Russian film.” This year, foreign films from France and Australia calmly coexist with Russian projects, but we do not expect high-profile premieres. Yes, the next “Yolki” and “Ivan Tsarevich – 5” are released, there will be new episodes of “Masha and the Bear”, serials in theaters are already very helpful, but there are no blockbuster films, no glamor films, neither Russian nor foreign production , all this is in the past.
And Alexei Voronkov sadly continued: “This is where all good things end because we don’t know what will happen next year. There are no bright prospects for cinemas. Now we have closed 700+ movie theaters. We expect a second wave of shutdowns in February.”
They’ve been talking about what’s going on in cinemas in Russia for a long time. The pandemic has severely undermined this work, because unlike movie theaters, most movie theaters were forcibly closed during the quarantine, purchased movies were not premiered, and the audience never recovered after the lockdown was over. However, there were hopes for continued film distribution. But the absence of Hollywood films literally collapsed this part of the film industry: the level of decline in the box office of Russian cinemas reached 56-70%. Now movie owners (in Russia, with a few exceptions, movie theaters are privately owned) offer a kind of ultimatum: if they don’t get a deferral in paying rent, electricity bills, interest on loans, just shut them down. Even today, major networks leave two or three of the ten halls in operation: there are few spectators, tickets don’t even cover the wear and tear of equipment. Parallel to cinema imports do not work even if some Hollywood hits are shown without the permission of their owners, but this is not the quality that the audience is used to at all.
Against this background, the state offered to start active production of domestic cinema. Not that it was done before: up to 100 films were shot annually in Russia, but not all of them reached rentals, and what appeared on the screens often had an insignificant number of copies and failed. counter. Let’s be honest – most of the domestic films did not bring any income to the cinemas, and a dozen large-scale projects that were hits at the box office cannot compete with big Hollywood, even with administrative support.
But there is still hope in the country’s leadership to create its own content, which, in the absence of current competition, will return the love of the Russian people to domestic cinema. Authorities don’t profit from cinema – that’s what cinemas are about – but the magic is the re-creation of the ideological and thematic context that underpins certain national traditional values.
So, the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation, Olga Lyubimova, at the forum “Film Industry in the New Reality” called for an increase in the pace of film production in response to the increase in state funding.
This year it reached a record amount of 10 billion rubles. True, one of Russia’s leading filmmakers, Sergei Selyanov, noted that, despite the impressive scope of state support, the amount of 10 billion rubles is only a quarter of the budget spent on shooting the second Avatar: the cost of producing large genre films is always growing. Selyanov calculated that around 350-400 new films would have to be released annually to replace 70% of the fees that Hollywood movies bring.
Despite all the efforts of the studios, Russian cinema will not be able to produce such a large production today. By the end of the year, the Film Fund will support 35 new projects and 60 projects currently in various stages of development. The Ministry of Culture supported 150 films this year. That’s a little more than half of what’s required, and after all, a movie’s production cycle is usually two or even three years, so there will actually be fewer screenings.
But this is not all problems. Hollywood movies had a huge advertising budget used to create a wide variety of marketing products, from quality trailers to commercial products, and this flow of information prepared Russian audiences to watch. Russian state support is not intended to promote films. And cinemas don’t know how to work with the promotion of their posters – but they have nothing to do and lack of resources.
It is clear that a mechanical increase in the number of films cannot solve the necessary problems. Films need to not only be made, but also live up to the expectations of the audience. A number of contradictions arise here. First, new films will obviously be low-budget, modest in their staging capabilities, now that the big movie attractions have neither the power nor the time. A feature film receives state funding of up to 70% of the budget in the amount of up to 100 million rubles. Investing in private equity was difficult in the old days as income was always more problematic.
So they will shoot simple comedies, romantic comedies, melodramas and – possibly detective stories. It is not what it used to be when 786 million rubles were spent, despite the fact that the “Keeper of the Galaxy” earned ten times less than Dzhanik Faiziev.
Secondly, priority issues were announced, the list of which was formulated in the bowels of the Ministry of Culture. Films in this direction will be given priority in financing. For example, topics such as “Neo-colonial policy of the countries of the Anglo-Saxon world”. The deterioration of Europe. “The creation of a multipolar world” may require a more serious budget. But to be honest, a movie on such a topic is unlikely to become a box office leader and box office champion. For all its importance, “preservation of family values, patriotic education, achievements of domestic science, resisting attempts to falsify history, and even the heroism and selflessness of Russian soldiers during a special operation, the work of frontline brigades and volunteers” is unlikely to be an incentive for creative breakthroughs, and certainly not will not encourage participation.
It is clear that the idea of bringing back “the movie empire we lost during the collapse of the Soviet Union” is based on ideal ideas, not real ones. The return to the former popularity of Soviet cinema is possible only when the Internet is completely turned off and all other forms of leisure are turned off. Soviet cinema was watched and loved in those days when it had no rivals, it was the most massive and cheapest form of entertainment.
When modern multi-screens appeared in the 2000s, the audience went to the cinema not for spectacle, but for the then new way of life. A fashion has emerged to spend time in cinemas where there is a huge screen and great sound, super comfortable seats, where you can eat and drink during the show, and where comfort is at a very high level. a person in the modern world. It is no coincidence that the main income of cinemas consists not only from paying tickets (although the film, of course, attracts visitors), but also from the purchase of cola and popcorn, which are attractive not in themselves, but also as a sign. the state of belonging to a particular urban culture. Where is the place of the shopping center with the attractive features of the consumption cult, the sparkle of electricity, bright showcases and playgrounds? It is quite difficult to replace this with fashion for the discreet design of an ascetic movie theater, where it is quite difficult for the audience to wash a cheesecake with kvass, watching the work of young engineers on the screen with enthusiasm. I have no doubt that we can handle this task, but this time requires a lot of creative ideas and general enthusiasm. It seems easier to close movie theaters.
The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the editors’ position.