diziler ingobernable

It is not often that film experts turn to such an important field of cinematographic activity as film education. It can be said that the young researchers R. Roslyak and O. Bezruchko entered the territory that until now remained on the margins of film studies. In addition, few researchers were able to master historical facts with the help of archival documentation. R. Roslyak's text reveals to the reader a kind of terra incognita, because during the Soviet era, Ukrainian film education was persistently relegated to the shadows, weakening it also purely organizationally (closure of the film institute, departure of personnel, etc.).

In some texts, the authors focus not so much on the film process as on its historical and social context. Thus, Z. Alfyorova draws attention to those general civilizational conflicts that were related to Ukraine and Ukrainian culture even in Soviet times. The author examines the artistic culture of Ukraine at the intersection of the influences of economic, political and socio-cultural systems and observes how the "crisis of reality", the "replacement of reality with signs of reality" is provoked both by the influence of "official" Soviet culture and the phenomena of early postmodernism. The author rightly notes that the internal dissidence of a certain circle of Ukrainian artists is reflected in the very style of screen works. However, interesting observations and theoretical generalizations do not always find concrete confirmation in the direct examination of the film process.

In the context of the totalitarian era, the historical film actively developed - "Alexander Nevsky" (director S. Eisenstein), "Bohdan Khmelnitsky" (director I. Savchenko), "Petro I" (director V. Petrov), the trilogy "Zlyva", "Perekop" , "Koliivshchyna" (director I. Kavaleridze).