原子事件总是朦胧的元素。回想一下，RBMK-1000的过程在反应堆的最小功率时失去控制。当我开始评论这部现在已经超级出名的HBO制作时，我受到了一些限制，这让写作变得更加有趣。首先，考虑到编辑steri .ru的虔诚态度，除了政治声明之外，对1986年事故的历史背景的评估仍然不在评估范围之内。其次，电视剧《切尔诺贝利》的人气超越了《权力的游戏》，成为互联网电影资料库(IMDb)的领头羊，这一现象已经在对话、播客、Facebook和电视屏幕上被每个人谈论。在对主创的采访中，他们还在网络上发布了剧本。观众洗净了所有的骨头，认出了爸爸的烟灰缸，指出了不一致的地方，发出了叹气和感叹，他们说，为什么有些人能拍得那么精彩，而有些人却忘记了怎么拍。但还有一些话没有说出来。奇怪的是，没有人关注导演约翰•伦克的音乐历史。难道没有人记得在MTV排行榜上，斯塔卡·波一对一地演唱了Groovy的热门歌曲《我们走吧》(Here We Go)，甚至连胡子都有，类似于我们这个时代的潮人吗?欣赏Little Big的“Skibidi”和1993年的原始视频之间的区别。即便如此，尽管内容很轻，但很明显，斯塔卡·博不是一天的傻瓜，显然会走得更远。在电影中，由于某种原因，某一集里一个不熟悉的演员被记住了，然后你发现实际上这不是一个容易的胡椒，而是一个导演或编剧。Renk也是如此——为麦当娜、碧昂丝和时尚界制作音乐视频，然后与hbo帝国合作(《行尸走肉》、《绝命毒师》)。这是“切尔诺贝利”，拍摄和持续的精确，在观众的语调后戛然而止，这似乎失去了许多国内的电影制作人。The sound atmosphere of the series was provided by the now popular Hildur Gudnadottir, whose disturbing cello is certainly remembered for the films “Sicario” and “Arrival”. Composer Alfred Schnittke pointed to the atomic bomb as one of the strongest impressions of the twentieth century. A weapon of such crushing power that it devalued everything else. Many figures in the 40-50s, shocked by the spectacle of a nuclear mushroom, wondered: is it possible now to seriously engage in art after such a powerful art installation? As it turned out-can be.The supersaturated solution of the media space has long divided facts and events into separate fractions, which are written and move at different speeds. Like it or not, we live in a world of events. In the world of facts there were marks of flight logs, tombstones and indexes of a dangerous zone around the fourth power unit. What to do with them?One waved it away. The other was horrified. The third sniffed at the cold-nosed texture. And the fourth came to her with a creative impulse, split, so to speak, the core. Thus, in the world of events, Chernobyl inspired a lot of people to hang out in S. T. A. L. K. E. R and reflect on the theme of industrial disasters. The further appearance of the eponymous hbo mini-series here does not look like something out of the ordinary.The backbone of the cast, part of which could be seen in the films of Lars von Trier, picked up very well except for the prototype Gorbachev. In my personal opinion, the cranberry-to-authenticity ratio in the HBO project was about 50/50. In parity, if to speak diplomatically.The Soviet Minister of industry with a couple of machine gunners comes to Strelka to a free tribe of redneck miners who wipe their hands on his jacket. Do you think such artistic techniques will confuse the viewer? And if this series is watched in Brazil or New Zealand? And in theater say exaggeratedly loud voices, and that now? Actually, the creators themselves do not hide that the best review for them was the popularity of the series in the former Soviet Union. Why did our viewers forgive the new “Chernobyl” a number of absurdities like the party grandfather with a cane and a speech in the style of “the Sopranos”?Reconstruction. To a large extent, the credit for this success belongs to local production studios in Lithuania and Ukraine, which provided the TV picture with authentic props up to the costume fabric of the 1985 release. Ironically, one of the studios is called Radioaktive Film. A thorough recreation of the little things of life of the USSR allowed to carry out the hacking of local consciousness. Especially since many of them in the 80’s were only born or even later. And in actual fact have an idea about the Soviet past is mainly for the parent stuff in the pantry. That’s where my mother’s thermos came in handy! But not only that. It was personal. The ancestors of screenwriter Craig Mazin were also from these places, and, I must say, Soviet citizens are shown in the series with great warmth and sympathy.
即使在梦里也应该保持警惕的官方媒体的批评人士指责HBO诋毁苏联。缔造者们对苏联领导人的行为持怀疑态度，不太可能被认为是对国家基础的恶意破坏。那么，在《秃鹫的三天》或《外星人》中，哪些基础被破坏了呢?最热情的粉丝将其精神与《切尔诺贝利》相提并论?当局总是喜欢掩盖他们的踪迹——对某些人来说，这是新闻吗?此外，例如在《切尔诺贝利》中，疏散城市中的劫掠浪潮根本没有反映出来。房屋被洗劫和放射性物品在全国的扩散确实发生了。这可能是一个时髦的故事情节的来源，但HBO出于某种原因决定回避这个故事。也许是他们羞于诋毁苏联的历史和居民?如果同样往前走，稍微改变一个角落的视角，那么“切尔诺贝利”的个别元素根本可以被看作是苏联生产戏剧——活跃的女性专家暴露的布拉科德洛夫。总的来说，很明显你不可能让每个人都满意。但《切尔诺贝利》绝对值得一看，即使你不喜欢创作者的口音。 When you implement the correction always happens, even in documentaries, not to mention the artistic project. Direct witnesses of the Chernobyl disaster continued to polemize with each other after his own death. The official accused Anatoly Dyatlov in his book ” Chernobyl. As it was “pointed out the inaccuracies of the” Chernobyl notebook ” by Grigory Medvedev, which served among others as material for Craig Mazin’s script.That is why from receives more superficial treatment” Chernobyl ” will painlessly bounce any, canvassed even the most meticulous criticism. The most vulnerable place of lukomore — confidence exclusive rights to the Chernobyl disaster. The whistleblowers do not realize that they are dealing with a world of events, not facts. The event can not be fenced with a Museum cord, it is like the Holy spirit-lives where he wants. Now their rage is only a plus to the project, increasing interest in him. And if Google notes a record increase in requests on the Chernobyl theme, it is likely that some viewers will definitely get to more in-depth documentary materials.