George Lucas talks about the Soviet film industry

STALKER is the big one

@@redline841 Tarkovsky is one of the greatest filmmakers ever

@@redline841 Solaris, come and see, when the cranes fly etc.

@@puppet1-170 nop only pass the goverment censor. Ikagine come and see took more than 7 years just to pass the censors to even begin filming. Todays equivelant is pleasing china.

@Jay Blake en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come_and_See#:~:text=Come%20and%20See%20received%20generally,14th%20Moscow%20International%20Film%20Festival.&text=Come%20and%20See%20had%20to,be%20produced%20in%20its%20entirety. I can provide you with an interview with the director too. Come and See received generally positive critical reception upon release, and received the FIPRESCI prize at the 14th Moscow International Film Festival. It has since come to be considered one of the greatest films ever made. Come and See had to fight eight years of censorship from the Soviet authorities, before the film was finally allowed to be produced in its entirety. I AGREE its total bs that the film had to be censored.

More people need to know this. Thanks for sharing!

THEN HE SHOULD'VE DONE IT, IF YOU DON'T SELL STOP IT YOU ARE BAD AT IT, PROB THOSE MOVIES ARE BAD, NOT MASTERPIECES LIKE MARVEL THAT PRAYS LIBERTY AND AMERICA AND GOD!

@@benijager1372 what

@@pashico7082 antisemite

@@pashico7082 He’s baiting.

Both of them are equally propagandistic and unrealistic.

@@Mustanaamio7 I think the first is perhaps a bit simplistic, but it's more realistic than the single savior concept.

The savior - > individualism - >"meritocracy" and exceptionalism - > hierarchy - > racism (some are naturally stupid, inferior). Capitalism cultural egemony in full circle.

To be fair Star Wars is socialist

This also unintentionally describes capitalism and socialism in general. Movies are indeed a reflection of society.

even more so in star trek

They are the first jedi.

I disagree, the one thing frustratingly lacking in Star Wars is good examples of genuine left wing theory and ideology, very likely a result of the very capitalist censorship Lukas is discussing here.

Congratulation, you worship them as Gods!

^Stalin and Mao too

As Lucas grew up around 68, it's very likely that you are right. Since all the student protests at the time were for vietnam and against the draft.

I've heard that too, but to be honest, it doesn't really come off that way in the film. To me, it always seemed more like the French Resistence vs Nazi Germany, considering the Nazi influences the Empire had.

@@shirakou1 Yeah, the Empire seems more visually and aesthetically inspired by Nazi Germany, but the Nazi Empire was never a hegemonic superpower like the Galactic Empire in Star Wars (or the US Empire in real life). When you look beneath the surface at the broader anti-imperialist theme of Star Wars, the Empire could represent any "evil" hegemonic imperial power from history. It just happens that the US was the dominant superpower at the time Star Wars was made, so it was the empire Lucas was thinking about (plus, Lucas was involved in the anti-Vietnam War movement so he would've been thinking more about US imperialism). Lucas said that other "evil empires" from history that the Galactic Empire resembles are the Roman and British Empires.

@@dimetronome I think the Nazi aesthetics are a just part of the empire in Star Wars, with everything else, as Lucas said, representing the US and UK.

Only I’m so far as being technologically inferior to the imperial force. Not in terms of ideology

Not saying I don't believe you (this is an awesome anecdote) but do you have a source for this? For my future reference

I don’t doubt it, but you’re always treated better as an exalted, famous outsider, no matter where you are (they know you’re going to carry the news of your experience right to the western press).

Thanks, another interesting post.

Obviously you're not a communist if you enjoy "The Cold Summer of 1953", that one is an outright anticommunist movie, made during Perestroika.

Well it looks interesting but I'll just watch yuri anime instead

@@Psx806 I watch both lol

Thanks for the recommendations

*Нет*

DA

Those are just conservative

@@bolt7047 I know

Yeah, but their argument was basically that it was SJW due to diversity.

@@darkwolf4434 Because they're racists

@@davidnicholassarmiento5965 I very well know that. Hilarious people think the new films are propaganda when they have a female lead when Lucas basically said death to America

I have always taken approach, and because of such third position economics seems ideal to me for finding a good middle ground, and now both sides hate me and think I am evil lol. I guess I should not be surprised as it does not conform to either's ideals, but w/e.

Or maybe listen to people who lived through the soviet union...

@@VentureHolly Hence why I support economic reforms, such as expanded public housing. But just because the system isnt perfect doesnt mean we have to go all the way to the exact opposite political ideology. The homeless population of la is about 1% and la has one of the highest rates in the country, and even still, the rate of homelessness in just la is around the rate at which people where in a gulag in the ussr as a whole at around 1.5% of the total population in 1950. And I dont think its too far of a stretch to say that id rather be homeless in la than in a gulag.

@@alphawolf4643 Dude, do you know what the gulag is? This is a distorted abbreviation of the State Department of Correctional Camps. They were mostly Nazi collaborators and criminals. And if you lived in such a climate as I have in Russia, you would be the first to run to the gulag. To food, warmth, and medical care. For example, a Vermont science fiction writer named Solzhenitsyn was able to write his fiction for American establishment after being cured of testicular cancer (Seminoma) in the Gulag. By the way, I mean, there are prison farms in the United States and prison-industrial complex very similar to gulag mission.So the "gulag" is closer than you think. The Gulag which works for global corporations.

@@user-oe9vx5rf2u Yes, Im well aware of the prison industrial complex, and its shitty too. It doesnt have death tolls measured in the millions like gulags did, but its by no means a humane system. And yeah, I know gulags were where they sent criminals, the only issue was that the crimes they commited were stuff like supposedly having spoken out against the government. Not to mention, even people who commited crimes that would be illegal in democracies such as larceny dont deserve that kind of inhumane treatment.

Only plebs use the word "pleb". Wait....oh fuck

He said that Shareholders only cared about whether the movie make a profit. After all, they are the ones funding it. Whereas in Soviet Russia, they will give you this budget and you can make whatever you want because profits are not the priority... as long as you don’t criticize the government. That’s the difference between American shareholders funding movies and the soviet Russian government funding movies.

Plebs don't finance it, its the rich shareholders, Did the plebs not buy the movies like 28 days later or a lot of short movies that come out with little to no budget, paid by the director himself?

It's not about being "pleb-friendly". As if everyone in the "pleb" likes the exact same thing? lol It's about having to abide by the lowest common denominator, so you get the most people watching it. It doesn't mean people just like bad things. People often like niche things, it's just that people like DIFFERENT niche things. But those don't make as much money by virtue of being niche, so they try to find something to appeal to a majority of people, even if the majority of people would actually prefer niche movies. Like, many people go watch marvel movies. But how many people would say a marvel movie is they favorite movie, really?

This aged like fine wine

I don’t think you understand the point he’s trying to make. He said that shareholders want to make movies that make a PROFIT. after all, they are the ones funding it. And that makes directors job a lot harder because that means they can’t make the movie they want. Time is money, and if you keep spending more of their budget doing whatever you want to make the movie you want, that’s not going make shareholders happy. Compare to the Soviet Era, Russian filmmakers can make whatever movie they as long as they don’t criticize the government. So, making a movie for the sake of profit is not the director’s priority. So, that’s why George Lucas said that Soviet filmmakers have more freedom than American filmmakers.

I think is is either around when the Soviet union dissolved or was still a thing as it was still a rather hot topic in America but George was ultimately right in the part that Hollywood has corrupted the art of filmmaking

@@rogue9230 This is well in the 2000s tf u on. Communism is always a hot topic in US and always will be because the rich control the US society

hasan?

@@mostazezo Yeah I like Hasan and Hakim 🙂

He was referring to the country not the party

@TIENxSHINHAN CCCP. As in USSR. Not the "Chinese Communist Party," a made up propaganda term that only brainwashed Americans use.

What does USSR stand for?

Bryton Cherrier no what he means is that you have to do films a certain way otherwise they won’t let you do them because it’s all about making money rather than art

Bryton Cherrier one of my favorite films in the older Hollywood is the 1933 King Kong

I really likes officer

It was sadly undone by Cimino's Heaven's Gate

Media has always had an agenda if anything media isn't any less homogeneous than before

State propaganda movies existed, which are usually the ones shown implying all of them are like that. I don't think there is a single state innocent of contracting/ordering a film maker to make a propaganda movie at some point. The thing is the trash out of Hollywood is corporate propaganda, not state propaganda, I think this is more what Lucas was criticizing.

Censorship and pro Capitalist and American government propogandas literally exist in all most all Hollywood movies

@@zurdddtk3025 there are a shit ton of anti-capitalist stuff in hollywood and in capitalist societies, Star Wars criticizing Nixon and Bush is an example. How do u think criticizing Stalin would go?

@@pablosilva6932 ofc not all movies, especially non political ones generally relating to other topic movies out of USA or Hollywood are not pro capitalist But most relating to poltics are is what I meant,since they always have a general narrative of being pro USA as the government restricts any critisism of itself or its system And yeah Star wars is one of the many exception of movies with political stuff itself,as it wasn't allowed to be filmed in USA for it represented the American imperalism back then, especially their actions in Vietnam and Korea, in a bad light

YOU COMMIE BASTARD

Ah, comrade Lucas, red salute! ✊

@@Mario_N64 oh shit Mario dont-a do it!

Honestly it's kinda worse than what he was describing, because you need so badly to make a hit to even break even on a lot of blockbuster type films you need both the mass appeal he's talking about AND to be okayed by the Chinese Communist Party to get access to their market. So it's like the worst of both worlds. Since a lot of them could make half a billion dollars and lose money they have no choice.

He’s a billionaire genius. He isn’t your comrade you’re looking for

Red Tails

He hasn't released any/many movies since retiring. I don't think he's making movies for you or me or anyone other than himself, which is totally fine. Prince made a bunch of albums that will never get released.

wasn't that his whole thing? he was going to make movies and never release them and just watch them by himself.

He has said that the movies he is making now will never be seen by the public and aren't made for the public. He only makes them now for himself and for friends. He kept saying this during the release of Ep7 in 2015.

Joosh82 I heard he is too busy counting all his money

It’s sad that he eventually became so successful because judging by American Graffiti and his first Star Wars he looked like he genuinely had a lot of talent. I haven’t seen THX but I’ve heard it’s really good as well.

He retired lol wtf

@@jimbeam2299 yeah but he's been whining about wanting to make non studio movies for decades now and he hasn't released anything

You can do all that if you go indie too. In the U.S. Goskino had no power to veto your movie.

Yes, but why someone need to go (and to be sometimes the entire life) indie? And, in many occasions, indie means no money for food. (Spoiler) We all know movies today are all about subterranean loud noises, explosions and screams, and so on. I just now read that Rian Johnson decided to put 10 seconds of absolute silence in the movie. The audience start to scream and to boo, thinking it's a technical problem in the theater. The theater decided to explain - written on the ticket - the moment of the silence and the it's artistical meaning. To explain silence as a lost art in cinema. It's just funny.

Remember that NO ONE is forced to watch your movie or finance it. As a creator, it is your responsibility to convince people to watch and appreciate the things you make, and no one else's. The world is full of examples of indie movies that are actually appreciated by the critics and the public, so no, being indie doesn't automatically mean that you will starve to death. Many creators actually prefer being indie because this gives them greater creative control over their work. I also watched The Last Jedi. No one booed the film in this specific scene you mentioned, and no one had to explain anything to the audience. At least not when I watched. However, if the audience booes your movie, then this means that the movie has failed to convey the experience it was meant to, and the creator is the one to blame here, not the audience. There is no artistic freedom when the government can throw you in jail just because some bureucrat didn't like your movie. I fail to understand why people underestimate this thing called freedom of speech.

If you live on a country with a strong economy, good for you. In my country, go indie means, yes, starve to death, go really cheap, and in conditions that are not decent. Yes, we had some exceptions but they were just very rare exceptions. Once in 10 years or less. 30 years ago it was possible to find individually-owned cinema rooms in my country. It was possible to watch festivals with old or cultural movies, according to the taste of the owner and avaiability of copies. Today, all these theaters are gone (evangelic churches, parking lots or whatever). If I want to see movies, I need to go to the mall, with basically 100% of the cinemas contrled by corporations as UCI and Kinoplex. There are hundreds of video-makers here that really show our country, our people, history and our lives in their works. Some of these works really deserved a chance with public and critics but it's impossible to touch the rule of Disney, Warner, Universal, Fox, etc. I go to the cinema and the options are always between marvel, any adam Sandler kind of, and that's all. Always with many copies with perfect quality, subtlitled or dubbed, good propaganda in newspapers, bus, metro, anywhere. It happens today, happened 20 years ago, and will continue to happen in the future. To be practical, it means that we are forced to not have options. It's a cyclical and never-ending process. I don't want to live under the rule of a totalitarian regime nor want to make people watch what I or some bureaucrat think it's good. But maybe something people in poorest countries can see is that, in practice, freedom of speech usually comes only attached to freedom of money. And that we, as a weaker economy, can only have true freedom of speech with some money control. Money control. Not jail. It's tricky but it's not speech control. And this, only the state can do, with quotas, for example. Otherwise, we have freedom of speech only what the money wants us to watch, listen and think. To me, it is totalitarian, under a frankfurtian school way of thinking. Without the jail. Sounds something theoretical to talk about freedom of speech as a isolated entity or value. Maybe it's just my opinion. Anyway, thanks for your comment.

Freedom of speech is about expressing an opinion without the fear of being arrested or killed. In the U.S. there is no lack of people, rich or poor, who actively criticize the president (regardless of who he is) and demand his designation. It's a universal concept that has nothing to do with money. The fact that someone else can finance a movie about a certain point of view definitely does not remove your right to voice your opinion as well. This is about your freedom to express your views, not how you do that. You may not enjoy blockbuster movies, but there are many people who do, and they have the right to express their tastes as well. You're not forced to watch these movies, and let's face it: there are many artistically amazing productions that simply have no mass appeal, and are niche products. It's a fact of life. However, focusing on a niche is not wrong either. If you think the options offered by movie theaters are not of your liking, go watch TV, read a book or play video games. Even better, create your own stories and share them on the internet. You can even make an indie movie and upload it straight to KZhead or Vimeo these days. You can try to negotiate your production with Netflix, Hulu or Amazon Prime instead f going to traditional movie studios. You can even set up a website and sell your movie directly on it. You just need to assume the risks associated with your production. If you want to outsource the risks of your production to someone else (like a big studio) it is your responsibility to give them a good reason to do that.

2015

What it was really about was millions of dead in gulag camps, invasions (I'm Estonian by descent so you may or may not know how I feel about what was done to us), and limited freedom. It eased up as decades went by but you wouldn't be longing to live there in the 1920s, 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s. The stuff you write about being a musician is pretty funny considering you couldn't even own a beatles record back then either.

@@nickcarroll5034I know history of USSR, sir. Even the blackest spots. Because soviet teachers at school made a good job. My great grand mother was the one of the kids who lost her family when people went nuts and started to make terrible things with those who were owning lands and factories after revolution in 1917. But that's what you will get after making more than 10 millions of people to die in pointless war and treat them like dogs and not allowing then to have proper education if they are not a part of so called nobility. Also my anscetors experienced the Great Hunger in 1932-1933 spreaded around whole Soviet Union. It was caused by many reasons like worst harvest in 50 years. This wasn't the fault of only one man. The Gulags you've mentioned also was one of these mistakes, there is a lot of lies in the Web on that matter. There were no millions of people at Gulags that's just physically impossible. Although it was caused by upcoming War and all capitalist countries trying to destroy the Soviet Union. Otherwise, why do you think, USA were giving money and technologies to german nazis. And this is another qiete vast topic for people to discuss to avoid such things in the future. Nevertheless, I also was making some research on planned economy in Soviet Union. And it will suprise you what this thing is capable of, not only on economic terms but also on social matters and cultural background. Soviet people manage to make whole industrialisation of the country in 7 years. That's why we manage to win Second World War by the way and save the world from nazis. There is a lot to discuss, sir. So probably I will stop here for now. P. S. The only thing I must add is that my father who was living in Soviet Union actually had all records of Beatles, Pink Floyd, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin and other great bands.

@@stanleylove2121 thank you for the comedy

@@nickcarroll5034 at your service, sir!

@@nickcarroll5034 Here is another comedy for you my friend, performed by Harry Truman: In 1941, (future president) Truman said, "If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and if that Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and in that way let them kill as many as possible… P.S. Use the Google, young padawan!

lmao i know right it's pretty ironic to see him talk about this now

This interview happened after the release of 7. Towards the end, he refers to the sale as "him selling his child to white slavers" or something along those lines.

George making Episode 1 is exactly the reason we have a commercialized industry today. He has no one to blame, but himself. He convinced the world that Star Wars was bigger than 1 movie thus creating the 'need' to make sequels, then he convinced the world that merchandising pays for the cost of the need. The reason we have a commercialized industry is because of him. And he plays it off like he's being stifled creatively. Then he takes his billions and makes movies no one will ever see. This is AFTER continually altering his Mona Lisa every chance he gets. Yet to him its apparently our fault. If he truly felt this way, he should have never made Empire and beyond.

Nearly every last penny went to charity.

He had planned to make prequels previous to the release of episode 5. If you don´t know, when episode 5 released it was titled "Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back." Everyone was confused because why would it be called "5" if it was the second movie? He confirmed he wanted to make more Star Wars movies but wanted to wait until computers and cgi reached a point where he was happy to make a movie out of it.

+Bobby Shaw Here, let's go over this real quick. If I said, "+Bobby Shaw just made an utterly retarded and nonsensical comment", does that actually explain why your comment was utterly retarded and nonsensical? What if I said your comment is utterly retarded and nonsensical BECAUSE you didn't explain anything?

+Bobby Shaw I don't even care about the argument, I merely pointed out that you didn't explain anything in your first post. But good job explaining yourself. Might work better when you explain yourself fully the first time...

+Bobby Shaw You were responding to the first guy, yet you quote the word "retarded" AND you defend yourself accordingly, which happens to coincide with what I stated? lol You don't really expect me to believe that, do you?

jojojorisjhjosef You can't be this stupid. 1) 40-50% of the food we produce goes into the trash. 2) Animals going exist through overhunting, overfishing, and loss of natural habitats. 3) Destruction of the Environment 4) Cutting government systems and programs to save money. 5) Imperialism 6) Wasted Labor and Resources 7) Destruction of Art and Culture. 8) Government (Macroeconomics) I can honestly keep going.

You missed the point, the "few" was quotations because of the common retarded capitalist argument that it is a good system despite its "few" flaws, although in reality it is as full of holes as a piece of cheese.

Suffered what? How authoritarian was it? More authoritarian than America? Look at a video of American cops.

So communism got crushed in Russia and you still blame Communism for the authoritarianism?

Russia will never be a puppet state. That's what hurts collective west the most.😂

its almost as if he is retired

He's retired

Try and make an anti establishment movie here in the US and see what happens?

@@lenini056 it ruined Mel Gibson’s career

Those movies literally criticized the government 💀. Not good examples at all. George lucas literally said that to.

And do sex gore make movies better??? Hayao miyazaki was heavily inspired by soviet cartoons and movies. And yeah his movies are masterpieces. The soviet movies are mature. Or is come and see not a great anti war movie? Maybe the greatest ever.

@@tomgu2285 yes, he said it. But you'll have to consider a chance that sometimes even if the overall movie was ok for a government there would still be some pieces that the government would like to censor. There is some a thing called "Gaidai vs. Censorship". The reason why I call it a "thing" is simply because I've heard numerous times that Gaidai had some problems with USSR censorship in his movies and almost every time tried to circumvent icensorship with various methods (for example, inserting a nuclear explosion at the end of "The Diamond Arm" so that censors would demand to cut it while forgetting to demand a removal of other things that the director wanted to stay). However, I've never was able to get into this thing fully to understand if such thing really happened or if it's just a hoax. Although if I Google it (in russian language) I would get at least 15 articles about it.

George would rather have creative freedom than the money. Who even needs to be rich? It's absurd.

@@waltonsmith7210 I agree

Yes, but what the mainstream entertainment outlets don't realize is, you can't create talent, you discover talent. You can't manufacture good movies with board meetings. You hire talented writers and directors and you take a risk and invest in their vision. The one thing I have notice in the last 16 years is that somewhere a long the lines, the risk of investing in something new, has been replaced with creating products using formulas based on past success. So the art of film making has gone from an evolving art from, where artist learn from each others mistakes, and perfect what works. To what it is today, creating movies that follow a basic blueprint that has been tested and proven to work.

True, but you also of course still have those few people who have their own production and create fucking great movies. There is probably only 1-2 of those every year now :(

You totally misunderstood his point and even though it is ironic coming from him, it is still valid. The problem with cinema today is exactly what you said, when you try to make a movie you have to totally adhere to what sells, to what people wants to see. This makes cinema have an extremely big limit as an art form and the existence of Hollywood that treats cinema as just entertainment or a way to get money is what makes people not take cinema as a serious art form, and as long as this still happens, which will under the current economic system, cinema will not progress.

not really. Not at all. Lucas is criticizing capitalism, not film making.

Except that it's more of an Admiral Piet telling the public that Palpatine is a Sith Lord.

Yet he made his fortune from selling Star Wars merchandise to children, who are obviously unable to understand the underlying qualities of capitalism.

Homie literally donated the money he got from selling Lucasfilm to Disney, he ain't a greedy pig

Who knows. Had Jesus been alive maybe he would have said that. St. Peter was a shady mizgynistic guy whom Jesus once called Satan. Maybe Jesus never made him head of the church. Maybe it was supposed to be Mary of Magdalia. After all it was she who had seen first him resurrected. If she wasn't the most important person for him why would he have seen with her as first witness of the miracle

But if you agree with the system, not being able to critique it won't change a thing because you wouldn't do it even if you could. Plus the point of critique is to foster change, and people can critique capitalism all they want and they do but it has rarely ever lead to any change, so it's kind of a useless right in that context

And if it's a good system and you're the idiot?

Yeah, but you hear the rest, about the fine line of commercialism? In capitalist nations, that's your government.

Exactly like anywhere else. For example this was one of the reasons the Snowden movie had to be made in Germany instead of the US.

There is a CIA office in Hollywood whose sole job is to make sure the US military is depicted in an 'acceptable' manner

Also they didn't have to be that careful after Stalins death.

Ok, and in the US, you have to be careful about a million different things. And yes, that also includes criticizing the government.

FUCK YOUR DEMOCRACY I'M GETTING MINE!! That's.....thats how Anakin's line went, right?

Actually Star Wars episode 3 was more a clever way of saying. The way democracy falls is when people lose trust in the system, and thats when a tyrant takes over.. Which would explain and make sense to why The Empire grows the way it does in Star Wars 4. If you listen to the commentary in Star Wars 3 by George Lucas. He is a pretty genius guy!

​@@KhayJayArtwords Donald Trump would say.

In South Korea?) Ha! Say it to K-pop musicians. Without opression, very funny. And you know this brutal opression of the soviet film system. Brutal soviet officials made you...work and spend money on a film, not showing characters shit on each other, symbolizing horrors of stalinism like in the end of 80-s or making disgusting comedies on 3 copeikies (soviet and russian currency, like cents) instead of millions rubbles given by the state and spending on personal needs, like now in modern Russia.

south Korea's authoritarianism from the 1950s - 1980s(or 90s?) would make stalinist USSR blush, and, also, you should check out Jonas Čeika - CCK Philosophy's video-essay on south Korea's K-Pop / music industry.

kzhead.info/sun/fZyFqLOKsaaLipE/bejne.html

No, all these countries also have film industries designed after Hollywood. Also, in South Korea it is illegal to say or show something even remotely positive about the North. Here's a little bit of censorship for you

Exactly because directors could improvise, interfere with the technical team, try all those different things because there weren't producers breathing down your neck. It was just like: here, take some money, do whatever, it's not that much anyway, just don't go too far with criticizing the government.

Star Wars i'snt banned in Russia, what r you talking about?

LMAO YOU'RE RIGHT!!!!! 🤣🤣🤣 WHAT A TOOL!!!!

So what? I think he'd know more about movie making than you. Also,that still wouldn't justify capitalism.

Come and see

Ivans Childhood

Andrei Rublev, mirror, solaris, stalker, the accent and man with a movie camera

Carnival Night

Waterloo is fucking amazing

Meanwhile in the “land of the free”…kzhead.info/sun/Z9ezpNillpdmfJs/bejne.html

"Almost immediately after the death of Stalin, the Soviet establishment started to dismantle the Gulag system. A general amnesty was granted in the immediate aftermath of Stalin's death, but it was only offered to non-political prisoners and political prisoners who had been sentenced to a maximum of five years in prison. Shortly thereafter, Nikita Khrushchev was elected First Secretary, initiating the processes of de-Stalinization and the Khrushchev Thaw, triggering a mass release and rehabilitation of political prisoners. Six years later, on 25 January 1960, The Gulag system was officially abolished when the remains of its administration were dissolved by Khrushchev. The legal practice of sentencing convicts to penal labor was not fully abolished even though it was restrained and it continues to exist in the Russian Federation, but its capacity is greatly reduced." Your comment is pure bourgeois fiction detached from the material reality of the post-Stalin Soviet Union.

The United States already have modern gullocks is called the for-profit private prison system on incarcerate 2.5 million people, the reason why the US government made marijuana legal so they can arrest black people and send them to prison.

you didn't even need to make any comment. They also took people from other countries when they invaded and sent them there for slave labor.

Ok, mindless capitalist stooge.

He donated Disney blood money to charity

yeah and? the statement he says is factual regardless of how much money is in his bank account

lol his wealth has not been created by means of ownership of private property u don’t even understand what a capitalist is lmao

@@nikolamilicevic1040 if someone is willing to hurt themselves over it it shows that they really believe in it and think it's the right way

@@nikolamilicevic1040 he donated most of his money

Also don't be a part of the 99 percent that don't eat.

@@gloccry2184 huh? The fuck does that mean?

@@gloccry2184 this has been disproven by the CIA themselves

Meanwhile in America, there’s a million different limitations on artistic freedom. And yes, criticizing the government is one of them.

@@gloccry2184 you know that this is a name and after the singular family food was practically secured for all families for the rest of the ussrs existence

You capitalists keep using that word voluntary, I'm not sure you understand what it means.

i highly doubt you lived near the ussr

Напомни, сколько раз государство выдавало Тарковскому деньги на съёмки Сталкера? Ужасная советская бюрократия! И кстати, что дальше? Новодворская, Латынина, Млечин, Невзоров, все жили в СССР. Это делает их слова правдивее?

Нет. Многие советские фильмы были прекрасны.

Someone clearly never watched tarkovsky

But still the Soviet the films were very good, with a brilliant wagering the films were very good, with brilliant acting, and the so-called "propaganda" was not there, and if it was, it would be so Invisible that it must be sought For hours

@@vlad4kaofficial the acting was ok,we that lives in the ussr knew about these movies but thery were regulated and boring,most of use were gettin bootleg copies of usa movies which were much more popular that ussr movies

Well, not anymore. Censorship is part of Hollywood propaganda for at least 30 years. This censorship is now more aggressive in the last decade.

The USA had all this same censorship until the 70s or so

I think your brain is too small to comprehend Objective truth.

It's simple as this, why should I give you money to make film if you criticize me? In the Soviet, me is the government. In the US, me is the corporations. But I'd like to see a US movie about the atrocities it's causing in Palestine being out this summer

"Filmmakers shouldn't be able to make certain films if they can't make huge box office" My God, can he hear himself?

he is literally right. the reason movies are sjw trash now is because of this

SD Ravana Lucas's point is that you didn't have to worry about your work being too abrasive, experimental, or whatever. You could attempt to tell any story that didn't directly criticise the government (however many filmmakers got around this by just being subtle). Everything else was fair game. In the Western world, commercialism and the demands of the market puts limits on your work as the studio's would specifically look for movies that fit their model for "a successful commercial film". This means adhering to specific structures, archetypes, concepts, techniques, etc., which has led to Hollywood as we know it today.

So adhering to a rigid way of making films that limits your art VS. Not talking about one subject... Yeah. Totally worst.

Didn't he criticize Reagan? The Nute Gunray (Nute Raygan) It was Reagan who promoted the brand "Evil Empire" in relation to the USSR and used the name "Star Wars", if I remember the course of history correctly. In general, if Soviet and modern Russian directors shot something like this, even with veiled criticism (not open), they would be carried in their arms. But they invariably use public money to filmed shit to attract primarily Western viewers (which they fail to do). And Lucas, as far as I know, was criticized for absolutely amazing prequels, Jar Jar (it's a pity that he didn't reveal himself as a Sith), and so on. And in the end, we got the "logical" legions of the Sith, the horcruxes of Sidious, Mary Rae Sue Palpatine-Skywalker. If it were staged in Russia, our audience would bury the director, as it is said, under the White Sun of the desert. But it was directed in Hollywood under the "Star Wars" brand, the natives in America like it, so the sequels are good. Although for me, from the Lukas rich world, where there is politics, love and a wealth of images of the galaxy, they left an endless fanservice and saber-toothed cosmohorses. And Porgs.

Alrighty, let's look at it from the capitalist perspective, shall we? The one who provides the money is the one who orders the music. You have to adhere to the wishes of your financial backers if you want them to fund your project. They want this or that scene removed? You do it. Some moneysack wants his talentless niece as the female lead? If you want the dough, you gotta do it. Everyone knows this, it's built into the system. There aren't many Warner Bros movies talking about how Warner Bros is a shitty company, now are there? Fair is fair, it's their money, right? So. In the USSR the government financed your movies. Not only that, it also gave you your free higher education and provided you with a workplace based on your specialty. Which you were free to change if you wanted to pursue a different carreer. They gave you money, equipment, all that jazz and put your movie in theaters or on TV on the condition that you avoid this one topic. So how's this more restrictive or unfair, pray tell?

For "[CENSORED] films" many russians could take your head to your [CENSORED], you [CENSORED] . The soviet film industry produced immortal masterpieces that popular in Russia even now. And why every victims of western propaganda so easely believe in "party decided for all"? Well... I have already answered. Officials looked for quality of film because soviet filmakers used a money of government, so movies should be good. God damn, movies were various. In "Podnyataya Tselina" of 50-s (when Stalin, boogieman of weastern and russian propaganda, was alive) were repressed kulaks, former whites and reds themselves, all with their truth, motivation and tragedy. In many soviet films whites were simple humans (instead of modern russian movies, where bolsheviks, especially Lenin, are stereotypical demons or villians from cartoons and scenes with them were taken from propogandist lists from Mccyrtism or the Third Reich). Even were innocent people repressed by NKVD (but not as propogandistic clishe with demons from NKVD) or believers in God. But of course, why do you need to know this to call all goddamn industry "[CENSORED] "? It is funny, but it is now film industry in capitalist Russia is total, TOTAL, shit. And not only in Russia, all world culture in crisis with [CENSORED] clone-films, made with laws of world market. It is more funny that simple man had no other choise. Corporations makes films that you will watch because of emotions it brings in short time. Like sugar or even [CENSORED] . And authors that should make films like that, don't see the point to CREATE better films.

As a Russian I have a few words to say about the Soviet film industry. Of course it used to have propaganda in the first years of Soviet Union. But from 1950s and so on it wasn't there (In fact, I can clearly see more propaganda in modern Russian films than in Soviet ones). Soviet movies were great and there were lots of kinds of them: comedies, tragedies, films about war, historical films, films for children as well as cartoons, TV series and so on. Some of them were better, some of them were worse, but their overall quality was way better than Russian films have now. In the last few years Russian movies have become better, and I hope that they will be even better in the future, but they are still not as good as Soviet era films. In fact, during different Russian holidays (Such as New Year, V-Day, 23rd of February, 8th of March and so on) Russian TVs show Soviet films more often than modern Russian, because people don't like the majority of modern films (mostly because of bad actors, storylines and jokes). Russian film industry was destroyed in 1990s and although it is recovering, it has to go a long way until it will be as good as the Soviet one.

because hollywood movies are totally not shitty. nice mental gymnastics, pleb

@@WTAWWR08 Shit movie or not is not because of its budget. And yes, the most holywood production is endless "normal" films without any idea, any oeuvre, often just objectively bad. And as with any films if you want to look at the reasons - it is because of money. Because how company wants to sell this movie and when. Russian film industry is worse than even this, because of destruction of social institutes after collapse of the USSR (including education for film directors and writers) and lack of money that holywood has (and many other reasons why modern film producers does not even try. Not in Russia, not in Europe, not in the US).

Russia dont made films😂 dude all the time on russian tv, they repeat old 70 century films and cartoons to kids, not of propaganda but for education, usa cartoons are violent without any knowledge, soviet cartoons got morales

He quite literally says "back when Russia was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics", he couldn't be more explicit about the fact that he's talking about Soviet film industry, not contemporary Russian film industry.

@@Srijit1946 yes exactly, previous soviet countries citizens are super respectful and friendly comparing to otheres state, look how clean eastern roads are, look at how dirty are poeples in west