About Pankrat Pope, Aunt Domna and the Revealed Icon in Kolomna

Pop Pankrat, rector of the poor parish, decides to trick: having bought an old icon at the bazaar, he buries it in the ground and spreads a rumor about the dream of the praying aunt Aunt Domna, in which the icon supposedly appeared to her. In the presence of the parishioners they “find” the icon, and how the icon, miraculously acquired, attracts believers. With the increase in parishioners, the income of the priest Pankrat also grows, which does not go unnoticed by the diocesan authorities: under the guise of solemn walking the icons in neighboring villages, they take her to Moscow.

Documentary footage in the film

The film ended with a chronicle - documentary footage of a religious procession on Red Square . ^[4] Also in the film there are documentary footage of bargaining at a flea market in Kolomna . ^[5]

• Nikolai Preobrazhensky - pop Pankrat
• Lydia Sycheva - Aunt Domna

The first Soviet films: "Uprising", "On the Pankrat Pope", "Underground", "Signal" and " Consolidation " - were preparing for the first anniversary of the Great October Revolution . ^{[6] [7]}

The film was shot by the Moscow Cinematic Committee, created in 1918 under the People’s Commissariat for Education on the basis of the nationalized cinematography department of the cinema department of the Skobelev Committee, located on Verkhnyaya Maslovka (now Dynamo Stadium in that place). N.F. Preobrazhensky , an active revolutionary, deputy of the Moscow Soviet, a member of the RSDLP (b) since 1904, unfamiliar with cinema, was appointed chairman of the committee. Filmmakers reacted to him wary:

I remember the first impression that Preobrazhensky made on me. He was short in stature, with a large bald spot on his head, and long-cropped hair. Dressed in a Russian braid, worn reddish boots on his feet. On the belt hung a large Mauser in a holster. If it were not for the formidable look of the Mauser, he could have been mistaken for a village teacher from a parish school. Nikolai Fedorovich did not sit in his office, possessing a seething temperament. At first, we were simply afraid of Preobrazhensky.

- Alexander Levitsky , film operator

The fable of Demyan Poor “ On the priest Pankrat, on Aunt Domna and the revealed icon in Kolomna was taken as the basis .” That is - about the priest’s pocket and the priest’s conscience. Saving tale . " The fable was first published in several issues of the Bednota newspaper in May-June 1918 ^[8] , and in the VTsIK publishing house it was published a 32-page book with 28 illustrations by A. Zelinsky . ^[9]

On the surviving copy of the film’s script there is an inscription: “The whole play must be put in the form of a popular print, with the most primitive scenery and cartoonized make-up and costumes ... Or the whole play can be removed in a cartoon way, that is, with the help of drawings, without the participation of the artists ”, by whom the inscription was made and why the instruction was not implemented is unknown. ^[four]

The director himself decided to play a role in the movie, since the actor, who agreed to play the role of Pankrat's priest, refused to shoot at the last minute, motivating his refusal with religious convictions. ^[10] According to some information, the poet wanted to play the role of the poet Vladimir Mayakovsky , but was forced to urgently leave for Petrograd for the premiere of Mystery Buff . ^[eleven]

In addition to filming in the pavilion, filming was made in the real market, in a village near Moscow. ^[12] The cameraman A. Levitsky noted the work of assistant director Vorozhevsky and artist Kozlov, who in difficult conditions of 1918 managed to give the scenery a complete impression of the inside of the church.

Filming was carried out in mid-March - despite the cold in the filming pavilion, the constant interruption of the light, difficult conditions for the manifestation of the film, a delay in salaries and a small budget - the director of the movie studio B.A. Mikhin was able to allocate only six times less than the amount requested by Preobrazhensky to the crowd.

All this is now recalled as a dream, as the being of that terrible devastation that reigned in cinematography and which Soviet power had to overcome. But, despite all the shortcomings of the film, it is joyful to realize that he still came out. He came out in spite of the persecution that the religions raised, in spite of the sabotage of filmmakers, in spite of the devastation prevailing in the country's film industry, in spite of all the obstacles that stood in the way of his formulation. And here we must pay tribute to its author "in three persons" - Nikolai Fedorovich Preobrazhensky, a communist, a Bolshevik, whose decision to deliver an anti-religious film was unshakable.

- Alexander Levitsky , film operator

Although the assessment of Preobrazhensky’s activity in making the film is different, it’s worth noting that officials’s participation in the cinema was not uncommon at that time: for example, in the film “ Consolidation ” he acted as the script writer and played the role of the People's Commissar of Education of the RSFSR A. V. Lunacharsky , and this practice was explained by "the conditions of the acute shortage of communist workers." ^[13]

The chairman of the Preobrazhensky film committee not only put on the campaign “About Pankrat Pope”, but also played Pankrat himself. If you judge, officials who become actors and directors are much prettier than directors and actors who mutated into officials in the late USSR.

- film critic Mikhail Trofimenkov , 2016 ^[14]

In the catalog “Soviet Feature Films: Silent Films 1918-1935”, the film is listed under No. 2, and No. 1 is the film “ Uprising ” ^[15] , however, A. Levitsky , who shot both films, is the first to name the film “On the Pankrat Pope” an art-propaganda film ^[16] and the first film of state production ^[1] indicating that it was released earlier on November 1, 1918.

A great connoisseur of the history of Russian and Soviet films, Jay Leyda, associates the very appearance of the term “ propaganda film” with the film “On the Pankrat Pope”. ^[17]

In the years 1918-1920, about 80 propaganda films were released. ^[4] But among them the film was not lost, so the film expert L. A. Zaitseva put him on a par with the film “ Mother ” by A. E. Razumny :

Most propaganda films have not been preserved. But among the remaining there are also worthy. Such, for example, as the film adaptation of the fable of D. Poor “About the Pope Pankrat, Aunt Domna and the Revealed Icon in Kolomna” dir. N. Preobrazhensky. These include the first film adaptation of Gorky's novel "Mother".

- film critic Lidia Zaitseva , 2013 ^[18]

As a film adaptation of Demyan Poor's fable, the film is considered unsuccessful by critics:

The rough, but angry-satirical manner of “Tales of the Pankrat Pope” by Demian Poor in the eponymous propaganda film is even more coarsened. A fairy tale turned into a traumatic domestic narrative. It diligently and indifferently illustrated the thesis of the immorality of the clergy.

- movie theorist A.V. Macheret ^[19]

The agitation was delivered in a domestic manner, unnecessarily “seriously”. Only a few shots — for example, a scene in a church where a priest, confessing an old woman, crafty “negotiated” with God, types of priests: skinny and fat, and stylized inscriptions - brought together to some extent the agitation with the writing style of Demyan Poor.

- The history of Soviet cinema, 1969 ^[20]

At the same time, the film critic I.V.Sepman noted that the film is the first attempt to directly adapt the poetry, since previous films can only be conditionally classified as adaptations: no attempts were made to translate the poetic text into the language of the movie in them. ^[four]

The first, direct screen adaptation attempts were made as part of the propaganda film: the plots of Demyan Poor's fables “About the Runner Mitka” and “About the Pankrat Pope” were transferred to the screen. And immediately there were losses that await poetry on the way to on-screen embodiment. Particularly clearly demonstrates them the second film - released on the first anniversary of the October film "On the Pankrat Pope". The sharp, satirical, cartoon-like “about the priest’s pocket and the priest’s conscience soul-saving story” on the screen turned into a moralizing everyday story about a sly and greedy priest. The irony of the author, the agitational pathos of the fable did not reach the screen. This is understandable: after all, only the event was filmed, and the poetic event is not equal not only to everyday, but also to the event in prose genres.

- film critic I.V. Sepman , Ph.D. in Art History, Scientific Secretary of the Russian Institute of Art History (RAS) ^[4]

The film expert R.N. Yurenev noted that the film was the first Soviet comedy, but contained almost nothing funny, and noted its extreme weakness:

I must say bluntly that, judging by the surviving fragments, he was very, very bad. Filmed in long chunks on general plans, overflowing with extras that do not know how to behave, devoid of wit, pace, lightness, very poorly played by amateurs dressed in black robes and long-maned wigs, he was a very primitive sight. From the rude, salty humor, from folk intonations, from the rhythmic diversity and cleverly turned plot of the poem by Demyan Poor little is left. Perhaps, only the experienced actress L. Sycheva (who, by the way, played the role of Nilovna in the first film adaptation of Gorky's “Mother” by director A. Razumny) showed the hypocrite and the sinner Aunt Domna, confidently relying on the images of Ostrovsky’s piles and gummies of “common people” pre-revolutionary movie dramas.

- R.N. Yurenev Film Critic, Doctor of Arts, 1960 ^{[21] [12]}

But even with all the obvious flaws, he noted the value of the film:

Despite the failure of “Tales of the Pankrat Priest,” one should not underestimate this first experience of creating a film on new, modern material. It is especially important to note that the first timid steps of the Soviet comedy film were taken along the path of ideology and realism. Trend, thought, campaigning and educational purpose - all this was almost unfamiliar to Russian pre-revolutionary comedy. Until October, Russian comedy was entertaining, now it has become agitation.

- R.N. Yurenev Film Critic, Doctor of Arts

• Pop Pankrat // A. A. Levitsky - Tales of Cinema - M.: Art, 1964–246 p. - pp. 150—161

• Images from the propaganda film “The Tale of the Pankrat Priest”. 1918 RGALI // “Electronic library of historical documents”
• Images from the propaganda film “The Tale of the Pankrat Priest”. 1918 RGALI // “Electronic library of historical documents”