Russian TV series in the era of transition: genres, technologies, identities

Abstract

analyse well-known films from unexpected perspectives. However, this analysis is sometimes incomplete. For example, in her consideration of Klushantsev’s Planet of Storms (1962), she concentrates on the plot related to the film’s female character, while other aspects of the film concerning the problems of alternative history, the interaction between Russian and American cosmonauts, and the construction of special effects are characterised rather sparingly. Klushantsev’s films deserve (as Majsova herself notes) much more attention, not only due to his unique cinematic talent but also because they raise some interesting questions about the development of the sci-fi genre in the context of the formation of the Soviet film industry and its interaction with the development of cosmonautics. Concentrating on the analysis of the social content of space films plots seems to be a legitimate methodological choice of the author, but it would be important to at least outline for the reader other ways of studying sci-fi cinema, such as the analysis of special effects or the sound component of films. It is in Majsova’s book that many segments of Soviet film fiction are presented more or less full for the first time. However, it is clear that the work of directors such as Protazanov and Tarkovsky has repeatedly been the subject of attention by film scholars. And if in the description of Aelita the author refers extensively to Ian Christie and Andrew Horton, the author’s attitude to the vast tradition of studying the fantastic imagination in the films of Tarkovsky remains unсlear. Majsova’s investigation of the constructions of subjectivity in Soviet sci-fi cinema, the spaces and agents depicted in it, deepens our understanding of the canon of the genre, shows the tensions and shifts within it and demonstrates how the utopian impulse is embodied in the aesthetic of each of the analysed works. The typology of utopian imagination, outlined in the conclusion of Majsova’s book, is the logical conclusion of this analysis of the Soviet sci-fi film, showing once again that it is connected to the poststructuralist interpretation of subjectivity, which was shaped in the space of Soviet cinematic astroculture and stitched into the sci-fi films. However, the book’s conclusion, entitled ‘Replay, rewatch, remember’ also brings another perspective, assuming a shift from astroculture to film culture, from the diversity of utopias to multiple viewers, from an analysis of genre structures to an examination of the film practices associated with sci-fi archives and space age memory. It could be said that by drawing a map of the Soviet film fantasy country for us, Majsova has invited us to a more careful and scrupulous acquaintance with its attractions.