Russian MovieBanned in the U.S.
A movie by Russian director Yuri Grymov, entitled Strangers in English-speaking countries, is not recommended for display in the U.S. The reason for the ban is the anti-American theme of the film, although according to the director, its about "the conflict of cultures." Note that there is no official censorship in the United States.
After learning about the ban, Grymov told Dni.ru, This news is surprising. For now, I will refrain from making pointed statements, because I have not received confirmation from official sources. Though the Russian director acknowledged, In principle, this [ban] could have happened, lately, the U.S. is reacting very painfully to any form of criticism. And in the film, I have stated clearly my position regarding the American policy of superiority.
In Strangers, American doctors arrive to a buffer zone somewhere in the Middle East, and vaccinate children on the territory of the armed rebels. The doctors are unable to establish a relationship with the local people, but they are confident that they are raising the third-world country to their, higher, standard. However, at the end of the movie, it turns out that the charitable mission is a raid by the social workers, who arrived to test a new vaccine on the local residents.
It must be pointed out that the movie has Russian heroes--servicemen, who guard the buffer zone and de-mine the area around the civilian settlements. Additionally, the plot features a captured Russian military doctor, who saves one of the Americans from death, and is later killed by the rebels.
The visitors of the exhibition "Kinorynok" in St. Petersburg, which was held on September 15th, were the first to see some clips from the movie. The movie should have been released in the U.S. for limited rentals early next year.
After learning about the ban, Grymov told Dni.ru, This news is surprising. For now, I will refrain from making pointed statements, because I have not received confirmation from official sources. Though the Russian director acknowledged, In principle, this [ban] could have happened, lately, the U.S. is reacting very painfully to any form of criticism. And in the film, I have stated clearly my position regarding the American policy of superiority.
In Strangers, American doctors arrive to a buffer zone somewhere in the Middle East, and vaccinate children on the territory of the armed rebels. The doctors are unable to establish a relationship with the local people, but they are confident that they are raising the third-world country to their, higher, standard. However, at the end of the movie, it turns out that the charitable mission is a raid by the social workers, who arrived to test a new vaccine on the local residents.
It must be pointed out that the movie has Russian heroes--servicemen, who guard the buffer zone and de-mine the area around the civilian settlements. Additionally, the plot features a captured Russian military doctor, who saves one of the Americans from death, and is later killed by the rebels.
The visitors of the exhibition "Kinorynok" in St. Petersburg, which was held on September 15th, were the first to see some clips from the movie. The movie should have been released in the U.S. for limited rentals early next year.
I am curious about the use of the word “banned”. Not to argue censorship in the US but to better understand what action(s) prompted the writer to use that term.
The writer should note that the film community with the US has a long tradition of subverting the “popular” American sentiment. I could easily see this movie doing very well amongst the independant film circles and possibly beyond.
The movie sounds fascinating! I can’t imagine that there are not millions of other Americans who would love to see the movie because so many of us are very aware and ashamed about our actions in the Middle East and elsewhere.
One of the key reasons Obama won: the majority of Americans are fed up with the US’s arrogance on the world stage.
I would like to know if the term “banned” meant that they haven’t found a distributor within the US? Perhaps there are subtitle costs that still need to be worked out?
Please note that one of the US’s strengths is that we don’t think with a single mind. Also if someone says we can’t say, see or do something, we automatically challenge them and want to know why.
So, I’d like to know WHY we can’t see this movie in the US?
In response to a comment (currently awaiting moderation), I’ve done further research on this story. According to The St. Petersburg Times http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=27406 (the article is in English), news reports of the “ban” might have been a publicity stunt.