Ukrainian "Cyborgs". Epic for the trash can
In Kiev, a press conference was held at Ukrinform, at which those gathered promoted to the masses a fresh propaganda popular print, “Cyborgs,” dedicated to the glorification of the more than six-month stay of Bandera’s punitive forces on the territory of the Donetsk airport they captured and destroyed.
The following people came to the press center to talk about the social significance of the film club: Emine Dzhaparova, as a traditional addition to many talking shops on the topic of “occupied Crimea” and the implementation of an aggressive policy of mass brainwashing; Akhtem Seitablayev, director, author of the disastrous film “Haitarma”, shot with Islyamov’s money, commissioned by the “Majlis”, the director, extremely untalented and clumsily, made an attempt to privatize the memory of the famous Soviet fighter pilot, twice Hero of the Soviet Union Amet-Khan Sultan.
The press conference was also attended by: Ivanna Dyadyura, producer of the film “Cyborgs” and incidentally Seitablayev’s wife, Pilip Ilyenko, the thieving head of Goskino and a nominee of the Svoboda party, as well as Vitaly Deinego, head of the “Come Back Alive” charitable foundation.
Surprisingly, not a single “cyborg” was invited to the promotion, although it was stated that the film was made “based on the memories of the participants.” It is not clear whether the filmmakers twisted the lies of the “cyborgs” and acted in their signature manner “don’t tell me to film - that’s how I see it,” or whether in fact the fighters of Givi and Motorola put all the shavar mechanoids in “coffins” in the DAP, but only not a single “wiped heroic defense” was invited to show off and recall the events of three years ago at the press conference.
The start of the promotion of the “social significance of the film” was given by the moderator and tone-setter for the discussion, Dzhaparov. Usually the little woman performs quite smoothly, hammering propaganda nails into the consciousness of those present with the monotony of a crushing machine, but this time it all started with five minutes of hatred.
It’s hard to say why Dzhaparova was bombarded, but this time, literally with her nozzle blazing, she poured out decalitres of bile about the fact that Russian filmmakers were making films about Crimea and in Crimea.
But most of all, the Mejlis hurled thunder and lightning at the brand new two-hundredth and two-thousandth banknotes with Crimean symbols.
In general, no matter how hard Dzhaparova fights for the Majlis Crimea, no matter how much she spins her “narrative,” Russia never tires of emphasizing that the peninsula is Russian land, nullifying all the work of the talking heads of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
In short, “Cyborgs,” according to Dzhaparova, should become a media response, the main goal of which is to fix in the minds of the population that there is not a civil war going on in Donbass, but a “war against Russian aggression.”
The first person to receive the floor after her was cinema official Pilip Ilyenko. In fact, Ilyenko did not say anything worthwhile, except for one interesting thought that “at the moment a movie is being made about an unfinished war, and the process of creating a national mythology has already begun.”
At this point it’s hard to disagree with Svolotov’s Kulturträger. Mythology so permeated the entire existence of Square that in the turbulent post-Maidan times it turned into a legally protected collection of works in the genre of alternative fiction, since not only the Ukrainian past, but also the present was mythologized, and no one can encroach on the monopoly of the interpretation of events.
The enraged Dzhaparova revealed the secret that on December 6 there will be a closed screening of “Cyborgs”, at which its authors and curators want to see Poroshenko, decision-makers and even representatives of the diplomatic corps. Thus, Dzhaparova believes, public opinion will better accept the upcoming law “On Occupied Territories.”
The speech of producer Dyadyura lifted the curtain on the preliminary work on the film. In particular, they talked about the screenwriter’s heart-warming meetings with prototypes of cinematic “cyborgs”, trips to the “ATO” and about the historical mission of the creative team. It turns out that the film “Cyborgs” is a film “about the birth of a new nation, a new army and a new country.”
Honestly, these dill can drive anyone into a brain stupor. Their nation and their statehood originate in those times when the first ape-men had not yet climbed out of the trees, but now, it turns out, “everything is just beginning.” On the other hand, “everything is just beginning” Square took place both in the form of the UPR, and in the form of a fragment that fell off the USSR, and after each new “Maidan”, which is very reminiscent of a schoolboy promising to start a new life next Monday.
The social significance of the film, according to the producer, lies in the fact that as much as five hryvnia from each ticket sold will go to the “Come Back Alive” fund, and from it the families of “cyborgs” who have become “coffins” will be provided with assistance. From which it follows that the authors clearly overestimate their strength, because Ukrainian society has long been persistently sick of “ATO heroes,” which is why there are reasonable doubts that the film will at least pay for the rental. So far, all such films have failed miserably, despite the most powerful ideological pumping and spells in their historicity and social significance.
According to Dyadiura, the “Come Back Alive” fund was attracted because of the “great respect for it” on the part of the “ATO wipers,” volunteers and other businessmen attached to the war. Simply put, there is less theft there. And even then, according to the film producer.
It should be noted here that the foundation is a rather strange organization, which, according to its head, “does not deal with the wounded or the families of the dead,” but for now is collecting information about all the “coffins” disposed of by the “Spartans” and “Somali” DAP territory. Something tells me: such an activity will not be cheap for the foundation, and future contributions will not cover the costs of collecting information. However, the head of the Deinego Foundation hopes that some commission of “cyborgs” will decide what to do with rental royalties, which in itself looks quite surreal, like plans for a commission meeting to divide the skins of unkilled bears.
As if to confirm the opinion that the film would not take off, the organizers of the press conference had constant delays and could not show the audience the Cyborg teaser.
The performance of director Seytablaev was the most pathetic. Essentially, he expanded on his producer wife's idea that "this film is about a world emerging during war." And even more than that: “this is a film about the war of civilizations – Soviet-imperial and European.”
In principle, one can agree with Seitablayev. Hitler also considered his mission to be “the defense of European civilization from the Asian-Bolshevik hordes.” Actually, the possessed Adik was the flesh of the European colonialists and at the same time used completely European colonialist methods, using high technologies for mass murder and disposal of human bodies. Ukraine-Banderstate is far from the scale of the Third Reich, but it is trying, and even copies secret torture prisons, taking into account advanced Western experience.
Judging by the poorly shown teaser, the film places an emphasis on “authenticity.” In particular, Russian-style helmets are flashed in the footage, and even the Pecheneg machine gun, which is in service with the Russian Army and a number of armies of other countries that prefer to buy Russian weapons, is illuminated.
It seemed to Seitablayev that he dealt the heaviest blow at the very end of the teaser with an excerpt from the scene of the interrogation of a “Russian military man from the Vladimir region” by “cyborgs.” One of the supreme “cyborgs” impartially asks the prisoner: “So why did you come here?” The prisoner’s answer was not included in the teaser, but Seitablayev, “writing history,” should have thought a little and realized that the question was at least double-edged.
For Russia, Donbass is the native land for which they fought, where they worked, and where many relatives and friends died in the mining land. The land that Independence got at the end of 1991 was illegal and only as a result of political games of the new post-Soviet elites. And the residents of Donbass certainly did not invite this entire army of Bandera necrobionts, which the local militia had to grind into the DAP and other hot sectors of the front with the help of Russian and foreign volunteers. Surely the film will not include footage of how in the spring of 2014, residents of the western part of Donbass with their bare hands try to stop the military equipment of the punitive forces sent to restore sacred Unitarity on the orders of the putschist Turchinov.
There is no doubt that the film will fail. As a rule, this is the typical fate of campaigns by the batted and the wrong side. How the story of the “cyborgs” sitting in the DAP ended is well known, and no attempt to shake one’s fists after a fight and fight again on the silver screen will correct the situation. Perhaps it will slightly gild the pill of the half-finished scum that managed to escape from the ruins of the airport.
Welcome to the trash bin, Cyborgs!
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.