The much-discussed film “The Prophet,” which created a buzz this winter, is now available digitally, making it significantly easier to watch. How well does rap sit side-by-side with the great verses from school textbooks, and was St. Petersburg in the mid-19th century really such a lively party scene? Let`s explore.
The plot generally follows the well-known historical path. A young and inexperienced Alexander Sergeevich (portrayed by Kai Getz) shows his rebellious nature at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, insisting that nothing is more important than freedom and a free spirit. His academic performance is average, and he occasionally engages in forbidden duels, but he possesses an undeniable and recognized talent for poetry. He continues to live and grow, attending endless balls and more modest St. Petersburg gatherings. Eventually, Pushkin — now with sideburns (played by Yura Borisov) — is exiled from St. Petersburg to Mikhailovskoye due to his carousing and provocative poetry, with the assistance of Alexander Benkendorff (Sergey Gilyov). There, he languishes among peasants, eagerly awaiting news from his friends as if it were fresh air.
Meanwhile, the Decembrist revolt takes place in the capital, involving close friends and allies of the poet. Pushkin misses the event, and this “betrayal” deeply torments him. Soon, he travels to St. Petersburg hoping for a change in power that would lift the shackles of censorship. Of course, the throne is not taken by Constantine, whom the Decembrists so eagerly awaited along with a constitution, but by Nicholas I (Evgeny Schwartz). However, the sun of Russian poetry attempts to find common ground with the ruler – even playing tennis with him while debating differences in views on state regulations – and this bears fruit. Pushkin is rehabilitated, allowed to publish, and returns to the familiar routine of high society life.
However, happiness is short-lived – the cursed prophecy whispered to Pushkin by a sorceress years ago gradually begins to fulfill: beware of a white horse, a white head, or a white man. Everything seemed fine: married life with the beautiful Natalia Goncharova (Alena Dolgolenko), children, work, occasional balls. But then Pushkin decides on the fateful duel with Dantes to defend his wife`s honor. He will be calm, as there is no white horse, no white head, no white man. That is, until he falls by the Black River from a gunshot wound and notices that his entire head is covered in snow. The story beautifully circles back with Natalia looking out a window and seeing all of St. Petersburg chanting her beloved`s name, but instead of joyful cheers, funeral marches and bells resound.
The filmmakers seemed to tackle the most challenging task – portraying the entire life of a great man in just a couple of hours of screen time. Yet, they also cautiously shielded themselves with the desire to create a colorful portrait of the era, shake the dust off Pushkin`s shoulders, and present him in a more modern and vital image. It is fair to say that this is far from a strict biopic – key moments from Alexander Sergeevich`s life are certainly used, but they are embellished and poeticized: sometimes with beautiful metaphors, sometimes with expressive musical numbers. And this is a strong point of the film – its work with the tone of the story. It is this tone that sets the key focus on the novelty of interpreting familiar names and events.
There was no need to invent anything about him – just read everything possible. But “The Prophet” isn`t a historical work, not a recreation of a specific figure. It`s about an impression, about why we need Pushkin at all today. Haven`t we had enough about Pushkin? Why do we need him today, what can he give us? That`s what was important for me to understand.
The result is a complex mix of genres, including musical, melodrama, and at times, historical cinema. Yes, there is rap (a controversial but arguably valid choice), yes, there are dances, but they don`t detract from the overall film experience. It`s a light, colorful spectacle where historical figures are brought closer to our reality, with their own torments, awkward recitatives, infidelities, vows, and everything else inherent to ordinary people.
The only thing that doesn`t quite align with this approach is the characters` motivations. Even Pushkin himself is hard to understand without a cheat sheet – why does he steal other people`s women, drink heavily, and somewhere in between recite his poems before an eager audience? Despite this, surprisingly, the character portrait did come together. Though sometimes empty and unjustified, it exists, and it`s very easy to love. There`s a theory that director Felix Umarov`s team was simply very lucky with the key actor – Yura Borisov. He is just too good and understandable in the role of the sun of Russian poetry.
An ideal Pushkin. Sometimes absurd and childishly naive, sometimes wise, serious, ready to fight to the death for his own convictions. Beloved, so much so that you want to take him under your wing, whether he`s drunk or a womanizer – what difference does it make if he is the soul of the people?
The fortunately timed wave of popularity – an Oscar nomination, the resulting widespread support – played into the hands of both the actor and “The Prophet” and its promotional campaign. Before the premiere, Yura Borisov appeared as the poet in the Moscow metro, handing out flowers to passersby, and rode through the city on a white horse. It`s no wonder the film caught the wave of word-of-mouth; it seemed everyone with even a slight interest in cinema knew about it. As a result, the film naturally earned ₽1.6 billion at the box office.
Pushchin (Ilya Vinogorsky), Danzas (Roman Vasiliev), all of Pushkin`s friends. They played cards, drank, led a somewhat wild but good-natured lifestyle. I also happened to be there, and I saw that when they played poker, they would even deal cards to Pushkin, meaning he played with them. The first time I asked, `Whose cards are these?` `These are for Pushkin, these are for Sasha,` they said. In short, there was such a mystical atmosphere there, brotherhood, and incredible energy.
First of all, it has a lot of lightness, impudence, love, courage, and drive, and for a portion of its runtime, this biopic fulfills the main task of biopics. And that, in my view sharpened by `The Disciple` and `Limonov,` is for the character of the film to be congruent with the character of the hero.
Lightness was present not only within the film but also during its production. Director Felix Umarov was an unexpected choice, being a debutant and a young one at that. When work on “The Prophet” first began, Umarov was only 26 years old; by the time the film was released, he had turned 30.
The film fulfills a secondary, but not insignificant, function perfectly – popularizing Pushkin`s work among the population. Yes, the film doesn`t carry profound meaning or great importance for the history of world cinema, but it is simply a pleasant and vibrant family film that once again allows you to forget about the surrounding problems of the modern world, and also presents a pleasant alternative reality of a challenging historical period. There is no grand narrative about the Decembrists and the terrible sacrifices made for freedom (even scenes with dead revolutionaries are softened by a cute white rabbit hopping freely among the frozen, lifeless bodies); the cruelty of the ruling regime is almost entirely ignored; all sharp edges are maximally smoothed. This might bother or alienate some viewers, but there`s little to say in rebuttal – the film doesn`t position itself as something serious.
Finley Holt