Tchaikovsky (1969) (English subtitles). Part 1/2.

Tchaikovsky (1969) (English subtitles). Part 1/2.

The film is dedicated to the great Russian composer Pyotr Tchaikovsky (1840-1893). It tells of the last twenty years of the great master's life, of his friendship with Baroness von Meck, an outstanding woman of her time, who for many years was Tchaikovsky's guardian angel. The film also includes retrospections of the composer's childhood and adolescent years, with Tchaikovsky's life poetically recounted against the background of fragments from his operas and ballets performed by the best Russian musicians.

==================
Crew:
Director: Igor Talankin
Script: Budimir Metalnikov, Yuri Nagibin, Igor Talankin
Camera: Margarita Pilikhina
Music by: Tyomkin DmitryEn Mise, D'Orchestre Direction

Cast:
Innokenti Smoktunovsky as Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
Antonina Shuranova as Natalia von Meck
Kirill Lavrov as Pahulsky
Vladislav Strzhelchik as Nicholas Rubinstein
Evgeni Leonov as Aliosha
Maya Plisetskaya as Desire
Bruno Frejndlikh as Turgenev
Alla Demidova as Yulia von Meck
Evgeni Evstigneev as Laroche

Awards
* Prize for Best Actor (Innokenty Smoktunovsky) and Jury Diploma to the film at the San Sebastian IFF, 1970
* Oscar nominations for Best Foreign Film and for Best Musical Adaptation, 1971

© MOSFILM, 1969.
==================
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
==================
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tchaikovsky_(film)
Internet Movie Database:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065127/
RUSCICO:
http://www.ruscico.com/dvd.php?lang=en&dvd=118
==================
English subtitles from original DVD (RUSCICO).

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Tchaikovsky
• Чайковский
• Смоктуновский
• Smoktunovsky
• Classic
• Music
• Классическая
• Музыка
• Russian
• film
• movie
• cinema
• Русское
• кино
• русский
• фильм
• Россия
• Russia
• galabir
• birubir
• English
• subtitles
• MOSFILM
• Мосфильм
• Советский
• союз
• СССР
• Soviet
• Union
• USSR
• yt:stretch=16:9

[Jalilvideogeek93]

@elikrussel He was a homosexual. It shouldn't be a shame that he was. Why would a myth be made up about his sexuality, what purpose would it serve? It makes no sense. He was a homosexual and people must accept that, there's nothing wrong with that.

[Cray2thousand]

@Jalilvideogeek93, Well said! what does his sexual preference have to do with his music????

[DerrickthePinecone]

@GreenBaldrick Also: If you look at most homosexual relationships, it's all built on lusts and not true love. There have been homosexuals in the past turn to Christ, get saved, and are freed from homosexuality and come to marry the opposite sex and have children! Homosexuality is not "normal" whether people like it or not. The primary PURPOSE of sex is to REPRODUCE and populate the earth. Only a woman can give birth, which speaks for itself...

[DerrickthePinecone]

@GreenBaldrick By the way, the penis was specifically designed by God for the vagina, and for urinating. The penis was not created for the "back door" (anus)! Why else do you hear of so many problems that come with a penis entering an anus? It wasn't made for an anus! Again, it is all pleasure-filled and all about lust.

[DerrickthePinecone]

@GreenBaldrick No, there is no such thing as homosexual animals. They lack the mental capacity to identify those types of feelings that transcend animalistic tendencies. It is indeed against nature because it it is anatomically incorrect. This "stimulation" and "orgasms" are all based solely on LUST and fleshy cravings, which feed only the desires of sex, which is ruinous in every capacity to the psyche'. The very act itself is not out of pure love, but out of lust.

[Darkonomist]

@GreenBaldrick I agree with you that it is not "against" nature, and as far as I know most scientists would confirm. Yes, sex with anyone or anything can be stimulating. However, homosexuality causes more damage to health (human and animal alike) than heterosexuality.

Moreover, I do not see Nature as our authority on what is supposed to be and how we as Humans are supposed to behave. In Nature, many animals kill their stepchildren. Do we have to be like them just because it is natural?

[Darkonomist]

@GreenBaldrick 1. Do you have reliable and internationally consistent evidence/proof that homosexuality (or any kind of sexual 'orientation') is "innate"? Or does any sexologist have? As far as I have researched, the answer is no. 2. Based on my knowledge from 1, I do not view homo- or heterosexuality as "someone's nature" but a behavior, influenced by social or individual choice and culture. Like the choice to find pleasure in ANY other lifestyle or taste that I may happen to criticize.

[GreenBaldrick]

@DerrickthePinecone There are homosexual animals. That proves that it's not against nature. There are prostate and it's stimulation can cause an orgasm during anal intercourse and make both partners come. That proves that sexual act between two men is not against nature. What about science..ask any sexologist about homosexuality and you will hear that it's NOT AGAINST NATURE.

[GreenBaldrick]

@Darkonomist Homosexuality is not a sin nor deviation.It's just an innate kind of sexuality like heterosexuality and bisexuality.Ask any sexologist.Or just read Wiki.If you were born gay you can't change that just because people say it's wrong.The only way to be happy for a gay is to accept his nature and to try to find his love.How can you blaim homosexuals for their desire to be happy?How can you call it "dusgusting"?It's love too. It's not just about shoving you willie in other man's arse.

[Darkonomist]

@ididete You make a quite poetic statement, but I wonder what can be so unhealthy and disorderly about giving value to "cleanliness", more specifically, to a physically healthy life, to fortitude of mind and to non-violent peace? I do not "snob" homosexuals, obese people or soldiers, but I would be ashamed to be either one of them, and I defend my freedom to express condemnation (and disgust) towards their behaviors.

[ididete]

@Darkonomist you may claim they are complex, but I would say your reasons for putting being overweight, homosexual and an army member is quite arbitrary and nonsensical. It's a part of psychological obsessive-compulsive disorder with cleanliness. Morally speaking it's snobbery. Politically speaking, it is fascism. There is nothing healthy about your views.