At front, most people have already come to terms with fact that there will be no demobilization. But there should be rotations - film producer Volodymyr Yatsenko
When you think about Ukrainian films that Ukraine nominates for Oscars or that pack the houses and win awards at Venice, Cannes and other A-list film festivals, the name of producer Volodymyr Yatsenko will be one of the first to come to mind. The films Home, Atlantis, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Glare, Me and Felix, and Wild Field are his most famous projects.
Therefore, when Volodymyr announced in 2022 that he had volunteered for the army, there were contradictory opinions: from gratitude and pride to a rhetorical question: what will happen to Ukrainian cinema?
Two years later, Censor.NET talks to Yatsenko, who has been forced to put his production on hold, but cannot talk much about his tasks as part of the DIU. So has the army changed him and taught him anything? What does he think about mass mobilisation? Has he given up the idea that Ukraine should abandon the role of a victim long before 24.02.2022? And finally, what path does he predict for Ukrainian cinema?
THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WORRY THAT NO ONE WILL SEE OUR UNIQUE WORK FOR MANY YEARS TO COME
- After 24.02.2022, you and your colleagues in the film department were actually filming the Ukrainian resistance around Kyiv and then almost first got to the streets of liberated Irpin, showing it to the world as part of the Ukrainian Witness project. Now everyone knows that the producer Volodymyr Yatsenko is fighting as part of the DIU, and that's about it. Could you tell us more about this?
- Back then, in the spring of 2022, these were small videos that we made out of desperation - to do something at least. We didn't have a plan. We were just in Kyiv and trying to do something together.
In March 2022, we voluntarily mobilized to the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine. Now I am also mainly involved in things related to video, but unfortunately, I cannot disclose any details. I can only say that these are very specific tasks, which include, among other things, accompanying DIU fighters to the areas where they work.
- So you make videos for the DIU's internal use?
- Almost everything is, unfortunately.
- I suppose it's still luckily if you have a result from your work...
- Absolutely. The thing is, there are people in my group who are a little worried that no one sees our unique work, and probably won't for many years to come. However, we knew what we were doing.
- Despite the fact that you produced films about the war and prepared for possible mobilization, you are not a military man. You seem to be quite settled in life. You have recently had your fourth child, but you do not voice your intention to demobilize. How would you describe your experience at war?
- I didn't really go to war in 2014, although I was preparing - I trained in the White Wolf paramilitary organization. According to my military ID card, I am a "financial service accountant", so no one bothered me then and I didn't make up my mind. Of course, I was on the Maidan, but I was scared to take the next step. Later, I saw the front only through the eyes of a producer who was preparing a film based on Serhii Zhadan's book Boarding School, and we went to the front several times with the team of the Come Back Alive Foundation.
When the full-scale invasion began, I realized that I would simply not forgive myself if I ran away or stayed in the west of Ukraine. I was living in a certain bubble because film people are specific, and therefore I didn't really come into contact with real life, so to speak. And when I joined the army, I got a completely different experience, and I'm happy about that. I see very different strata of people, and these personalities are incredibly interesting. This has made me realize what kind of country I live in - in a good way. The people I meet in my work at the DIU are fantastic people and specialists, and I am happy that we have them. Most of them cannot be talked about. They are just as scared as me and anyone else, but somehow they manage to cope. For me, such people are a great hope for the future of our country.
I understand those who are afraid because we have only one life after all. On the other hand, everyone has to live with this choice later. And it would be difficult for me to accept myself as a lammister or draft dodger.
THE TIME WILL COME WHEN WE WILL BE LEFT ALONE WITH THE ENEMY
- If we look at your interviews from 2022 and 2023, we see a difference. Two years ago, you emphasized the messianic role of Ukrainians, who have finally ceased to be an object of history and are instead defending Europe. In 2023, despite this inspiration, your statements have become more down-to-earth: you are asking questions about the future: whether we will tolerate corruption, whether everyone in society understands their duty and will defend the country...
- One does not negate the other. I wouldn't want to leave Ukraine even if I were invited to the US, for example. I would prefer all my children to live here and develop this country. Because the most interesting things are happening in Ukraine. No one in Europe or the West in general has the experience we are gaining now. It is a very sobering experience to be confronted by a great force that does not have a hint of coexistence.
I believe that the time will come when we will be left face-to-face with the enemy, as in early 2022, and our fate will be in our hands. For example, when the US money runs out at the end of the year or if the balance of power in the European Parliament is unfavorable to us after the elections. However, we have been waiting for US assistance for six months, since autumn 2023. It was very painful, but it did not kill us. Yes, everyone is tired, but we have no choice. We may lose more territories, we will definitely lose more people, but Ukraine as an independent state will exist. This is the most important thing for me now.
So everything is in our hands. Yes, there is an internal political aspect, including corruption and the way the state performs its duties, starting with the fortifications that are being built on the third line, 30-40 kilometers from the contact line, and ending with the efficiency of the state in individual regions. But all of this must be influenced by citizens.
- If we talk about citizens in the army, especially at a time when, as you say, we will be left alone again, it is first and foremost direct participation in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. As you can see, mobilization has failed. Partly due to the work of the state, and partly due to the reluctance of citizens.
- The state has been very inconsistent in its actions to make military service attractive and in its actions regarding mobilization. At first, it says that we will punish all draft dodgers or those who have not put on military records but in fact it turned out that we will not. One step forward, two steps back - this is what our state is all about. And all this is a consequence of the fact that we are gaining real experience in state-building right now. We have realized that the state is us, and everything depends on us. That is, we cannot blame all the troubles on Yermak or Zelenskyy, because the state is really us, and if something bad happens, it is because we allow it.
A good example is the state of architectural monuments, for example, in Kyiv. There are a dozen "urban lunatics" who are making a fuss about it. However, most Kyiv residents are not interested in the city they live in. Moreover, if they were in power themselves, they would do the same thing as the developers and city authorities are doing today. So it's not so much about a bad Klytschko as it is about us who are indifferent. And so it is in everything, including the defense of the state. So now, when we are trying to do something not only for ourselves and our families, this is a painful but crucial stage. And the so-called draft dodgers should understand this.
IT IS WORTH REPEATING CHURCHILL'S WORDS ABOUT BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS
- Your words are encouraging and inspiring. The root of the problem is that back in 2022, the government failed to raise awareness of the need for total mobilization, so there was no shame in fighting on the cultural or economic front. And as a result, there was no demobilization. As a person who works with the visual embodiment of meanings, how would you present a campaign to join the army?
- I would do a few things and cover them accordingly, but I don't think many people would like it. To begin with, I would not allow those who are under the age of military service to cross the border - up to and including criminalization. It would be fair to avoid catching them later in Europe, and society would treat it differently.
Secondly, he would have clearly explained what would happen if everyone left. The whole of Ukraine cannot run to Europe, where no one is waiting for us. No one will accept all 37 million people, so we have to stay and defend the land we have. And most importantly, we have no one but ourselves. There is no happiness in being a refugee in Germany. You will always remain a Ukrainian who came there. Many creative people I know fled to the West at first, but almost none of them found happiness. It's important for creative people to speak the same language with their people, and they certainly won't achieve this abroad.
So we should have been frank and repeated Churchill's words about blood, sweat and tears. It was worth having an adult conversation: if you don't go, then either your women will eventually go to war, or the Russians will kill us all.
Thirdly, the reality is that everyone will be drafted now, and it will be tough. We have no other choice if we want to save our country. But everyone has a compadre who will tell you not to join our brigade because there are bad commanders, no ammunition, and so on. And this is also connected to paternalism because the current communication of the authorities about the importance of mobilization is an appeal to young children. Even the motivational videos of the 3rd Assault Brigade are based on a simple message: "Join us!". However, those who were willing and able to come are already there. On the contrary, we need to work with people who do not want to join the army.
In this regard, we have failed to communicate an important thesis - not everyone will "die in the plantings". Out of a million-strong army, God forbid that 250,000-300,000 fight, and a lot of people serve them. Therefore, you don't have to be a person who will die in a planting, because there is nothing worse than an unmotivated soldier who will lose himself and his comrades. Many people can benefit the army and the state in non-combat positions - mechanics, technicians, IT specialists, cooks, air defence operators, drivers... You can drive a jeep and shoot down chessmen, saving lives and knowing that you are unlikely to be hit. In fact, there are recruitment centres, but they don't really explain why this is necessary.
- Given Ukraine's limited human resources, what kind of rotation scheme do you, as a civilian, consider adequate?
- At the frontline, most people have already come to terms with the fact that there will be no demobilization, and we will drag this story out as long as necessary. But I wish there were at least regular rotations, just like in the ATO. I do not believe that the war will end in a year or two. Therefore, it would be fair for a person to fight for two years and be mobilized again in two, three or four years. This is a certain stability that allows us to make plans.
It's a shame when I put my professional life on hold for a few years, while the vast majority of my respected colleagues are pursuing their careers, it's frustrating. However, if I had known that later we would switch places with them, it would have been perceived differently. Both by me and by them.
- What would you say to those who say: "This state has given me nothing, so why fight for it?"
- It is an infantile position that someone should give them something. Only the lazy do not talk about the Ukrainian opposition between the state and society, and this is normal because for too long we have not had our own state and have been dealing with someone else's. The state is perceived as a virtual creature that needs to be resisted: cheated, not paying taxes, broken laws. But, dear friends, this is our country now, and stealing from ourselves is something very strange. If you do not do something for the community, you will not get anything.
This is indeed the case at the frontline because the soldiers are laying down the most precious thing on the altar of our freedom and existence - their lives.
Also, many people perceive participation in the war because of the benefits. I am convinced that Ukraine will have so many veterans that they will either not receive any benefits or they will be small. However, the most important thing is that veterans can then be fulfilled, including in politics.
I have a good friend, a legendary person in the world of cinema, Katriel Shori, who for many years headed one of the largest Israeli film funds and received an honorary award at the Berlinale for his contribution to the development of cinema. But at the same time, he was a commander of a special forces company all his life and fought in three wars. At the same time, the man lives life to the fullest and does not whine that years of his life have been taken away from him. On the contrary, he is happy to do this for his country.
WE NEED TO MOVE AWAY FROM FULL STATE FUNDING OF CINEMA
- In 2022, you managed to get a rotation to attend the shooting of your film. How is it now? Quite a lot of cultural figures who are at war are allowed to go on tour by their commanders.
- No, it's not really possible to get away for filming. In 2022, we were able to shoot three days of the sci-fi film You Are Space, which was actually shot before the full-scale invasion. The only thing we've managed to do over the years is to release old films that were completely made before the great war. These are Luxembourg, Luxembourg, which was a great success, Me and Felix, which was also a success in cinemas. And recently, Valentyn Vasianovych's film, The Glare, which was released in 2019, was released in cinemas.
It's also a challenge for me to think about what to do with my projects. Because it takes a long time to make a film. Many Ukrainian filmmakers are now doing something just to get money or to capture their feelings here now. That's why we are going to see a fantastic wave of bad films about this war. It will be patriotic, but it will be bad because the people who will make it have not had years to realize what is happening to us. No wonder Spielberg waited 40 years to make his Schindler's List.
- On the one hand, you say that it takes time to realize what happened to us. On the other hand, you produce Vasianovych's films, which are also about this war. Where do you draw the line between speculating on the trauma and real comprehension?
- Let's take Atlantis. The cunning Vasianovych moved the film's action to the future - 2025 (and the film was shot in 2017-2018).
And now he's making his next film without any state funding at all, and it's called like a toast "To Victory!" It's an experiment, because we have funds from several European grants, and we also invest our own money, which we get from the sale of other films. This film is also set in the future, after the victory. Valik is actually making a film about himself. The film is about a director who is over 50 years old, who is afraid to go to war, doesn't want to go abroad, and is stuck in his creative work - and this story is about most people in Ukraine. This is actually a self-documentation by artistic means, no one knows how this film will end and whether we will finish it. And the main thing is what it will be like.
- How do you generally assess the state of Ukrainian cinema during the war? Has the era of "bad films" already begun?
- The industry is a stream of a large number of films. In the history of Soviet cinema, there was a period of "low number of films" (a period in Soviet cinematography (approximately from 1943 to 1953) characterized by a small number of films released on the screen - ed. note). Officials looked at the statistics that the USSR was producing 80 films a year, and only 5 of them were successful at the box office. So they decided to just make these great five films a year, but in the end, they got 0.5 good films. The proportion works like this: you have to shoot a lot to get something out of it.
We don't have a film industry right now. It doesn't exist as an industry. Many people have left, a very small part is at war, others have changed their profession due to lack of money. This year, a miserable 600 million hryvnias were allocated to the film industry (the industry needs at least 1.5-2 billion hryvnias to work at full capacity). That's why hundreds of filmmakers, including me, signed a letter to the Cabinet of Ministers with a proposal to allocate these funds for military needs. Because we won't be able to make any decent films, and we'll be wasting taxpayers' money, while at this time it is definitely needed in other areas.
- Despite your belief, there is a public demand for films about the war.
- I don't believe in the thesis that we should make films about the war and people will go. It doesn't work that way. In addition, I am personally sick of films about our sacrifice and victimhood. We've been playing this note for 30 years, and 300 years before that. It's enough.
- It is believed that during wars there is a surge in comedy.
- For God's sake, do it. But we need to move away from full state funding. Producers should invest their own money and be responsible for what they do. Previously, many films were made with 100% state funding, especially "important" and "patriotic" films.
Yes, we need to invest in young people. Yes, we need to support the industry, but not by teaching it to depend on the state. In the Soviet era, cinema was about what the state wanted to say. Today, we seem to be working in a democracy and pluralism. Therefore, there should be pluralism in financing and, as a result, in self-expression on the screen.
- What is your solution?
- For example, in the UK, part of the lottery revenues are allocated to the cinema, and then it actually goes back to the treasury, because the economic multiplier works. Another way is that we once proposed a law on patronage, which would enable businesses to invest in cinema.
I think that the situation will still change for the better. It has already changed in documentary cinema. Now it is possible to make a documentary about Ukraine exclusively with the help of European funds.
Ukraine is a goldmine for documentary filmmakers because what is happening here with society and people is a great experiment. Back in 2022, Western journalists and filmmakers were coming here as if they were dying. But they got used to the abnormal, and now it's a common thing for them to come to Kyiv, for example. Kharkiv or Kherson is another matter.
THERE IS A LACK OF STORIES IN HOLLYWOOD, THEY ARE LOOKING AT US
- Can a quality documentary overcome the period of bad cinema you mentioned?
- Still, documentaries are more of an "inside-out" product, and they work very effectively because they are almost objective, unlike feature films. Foreigners see real Ukrainians who love, suffer, go through incredible experiences and still maintain their dignity - it's cool and it makes a big impression on them. This kind of cultural diplomacy has a tremendous effect.
In Ukraine, documentaries are generally not watched much. For mass distribution, in order to make an impact, you need to make something like Saving Private Ryan, in collaboration with big Hollywood studios. It takes at least 4-5 years to make such a film of high quality.
- Even in these 2 years, we have accumulated a lot of stories for Hollywood and world cinema. A guy who refused to leave Azovstal, a Special Forces officer who fell out of a boat in the middle of the Black Sea while performing a mission...
- Obviously, it has to be a film in English with Hollywood actors. In fact, the Americans are keeping an eye on it as they have a rather big lack of stories. It is important that it is a universal story. Saving Private Ryan is absolutely universal. People sacrifice their lives to save a person they don't know.
So I am sure that such emotional topics will come up later. And they will unite us to Europe more strongly than thousands of government reforms.
- You have repeatedly warned against the trap of the world expecting Ukraine to make only war films. Do you have a recipe for avoiding this trap?
- First, don't feel sorry for yourself and don't chew on the trauma all the time. For example, Luxembourg, Luxembourg is not about the trauma of war, it's about men looking for their father. Now the director Antonio Lukich is working on another project, which won a Berlinale award at the development stage. The plot is that a young girl from Ukraine flees to Ireland as a refugee. She wants to be an actress, and so she chooses an English-speaking country as the first step on this path. It's an absurdist comedy in the spirit of Lukich, which shows that this 17-year-old girl is more mature and conscious than 99% of the Irish adults around her. So, in fact, Europe is shown through the eyes of this girl. And it's going to be a pretty tough social comedy.
There can also be local comedies - for us and about us. Of course, if we raise their level.
- You see, society as a whole is used to low comedy. We can debate whether it was hooked on it or it got hooked on it itself, but so it is.
- Most of these low rank comedies are about people from the countryside who have no other prospects. But there is a strata of people who have moved from the countryside to the city and have a lot of energy, challenges and potential. On the other hand, we still have almost no cool, smart comedies about city dwellers. And after the full-scale invasion, everyone got mixed up, which is also an interesting experience.
But I think it's still too early to make films about this war. I don't know what the announced film Bucha will be like. I have some doubts that it will be a contribution to our cinematic heritage.
It's worth coming from an unexpected angle. Look at the boom in theatre! Because theatre is a live experience here and now. People react spontaneously: if it's funny, they laugh, if it hurts, they cry. For me, it is theatre that gives me an understanding of what is happening to society - it performs a psycho-emotional function for society. It shows what we are afraid to talk about. That's why the sprouts of new cinema will start from the theatre.
Olha Skorokhod, Censor. NET
