Chapayev

It may seem bold and raw the way in which Chapaev is portrayed as a hero of the Civil War in the film, but the fact remains that this film is entirely in line with the ideological universe of early Stalinism. It reflects a dying positive type of "spontaneous hero", a savage hero, with a penchant for anarchy. Chapaev was one of the models on which socialist realism was built; however, in the mid-1930s, a conscious hero who was not prone to individualism and natural whims was preferred. This is one of the reasons why the "real author" Furmanov replaces book commissioner Klychkov, completely free of the doubt, mistakes and weaknesses of the book prototype. From the very beginning, the film leads the comedically stormy Chapaev in the very mercury-like performance by Boris Babochkin as a naughty child, but he is drafted too soon, so the motive of rebirth thereby somewhat disappears (even in the book, Chapaev remains rather "unenlightened" until his death). The film version of Chapaev is a wild addle-brain. Instead of fighting there is mostly singing in the film, and for a long time there is only one revolting soldier on the side of the victims, whom Chapaev personally kills for mutiny. In a way, the film feels de-mythologized, although we are talking more about the extent of the myth than about its complete absence. There is a clear picture in it of a folk hero, a rebel who may be confused in the number of internationals, but he does sing beautifully. At the same time, he acknowledges his limited role by predicting a beautiful new world for young lovers, to which he will no longer have access as a "man of war". It is quite an eloquent memento of a historical turning point, in which the infallible Stalinist titans began to take the place of the spontaneous heroes. (04/11/2013)

One of the seminal films of 1930s socialist ideology – which is one of the main reasons I couldn't watch it consistently. In terms of filmmaking, it's not that awful, and the regular switching between the three main storylines keeps it somewhat watchable, but again it's marred by disastrous editing and tedious chatter about Soviet principles and heroism. I watched it only out of obligation, I wouldn’t have wasted my time voluntarily. (01/10/2018)

La même année que "Čapajev", s'est tenu le (non) célèbre 1er congrès national des écrivains de l'URSS, qui est considéré dans les manuels d'histoire comme l'un des principaux représentants du réalisme socialiste, c'est-à-dire la métastase de la ligne politique d'homogénéisation stalinienne dans le domaine de la culture. Mais celui qui s'attendrait à un héros de la guerre civile représenté de manière aussi claire et dans les mêmes couleurs chaleureuses que les ouvriers et les paysans sur les mosaïques historisantes multicolores des gares tchèques (et pas seulement), sera déçu. Čapajev est capturé avec de nombreux défauts (même s'il les surmonte avec l'aide du Parti...), en plus l'histoire est complétée et presque équilibrée (!) par la ligne narrative du général blanc. Bien qu'il se tienne de l'autre côté de la barricade (et donc ne puisse jamais vraiment se rapprocher de son propre peuple, comme cela sera évident dans sa relation avec son compagnon Petrovič...), il y a tout de même une tentative de le représenter AUSSI COMME UN ÊTRE HUMAIN. Et cela montre que, malgré sa date de production, le film ne peut pas être pleinement considéré comme appartenant à l'époque du stalinisme... (13/05/2014)