Director Alexander Rodnyansky to return with his new documentary Notes of a True Criminal
Washington DC [US], May 27 (ANI): Director Alexander Rodnyansky, former founder of Ukraine's first indie TV network 1 1, has returned to his documentary roots. He has nearly wrapped filming a new documentary, 'Notes of a True Criminal', reported Deadline.
The director opened up about the movie's title, calling himself a "criminal" while referring to the eight-and-a-half-year sentencing in absentia he received from a Moscow court last year for spreading anti-war sentiments.
"It's called that because I'm a criminal now," quips Rodnyansky as quoted by Deadline.
Revealing more about his project, the director said that his upcoming documentary will combine elements of doc movies, which he shot at the end of the Cold War, with more recent footage from the war in Ukraine and WWII footage obtained from his family, as per the outlet.
"I used fragments of the movies I did at the end of the Soviet Union times, because I started out as a director, as well as fragments of movies done by my mom and grandfather during World War II," said Rodnyansky as quoted by Deadline.
The footage in the documentary is likely to contain battlefield scenes, prisoner of war footage, and trials.
"It's a very personal statement which tells the story through one family practically. It starts with the beginning of the war and then goes back and forth. I shot the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Eastern Germany in 1990 and, I say it in the movie, but I had a feeling that these people were not coming back from the war but that they were moving to the war. Yesterday they were soldiers of one army and citizens of the same state, and now they're coming to different countries and becoming citizens of different states and soldiers of different armies," said Rodnyansky as quoted by Deadline.
Rodnyansky, who is likely to have the project finished by next month, says that he is currently in talks with the major international film festivals for the movie to get the festival circuit.
As per Deadline, Rodnyansky is looking to shoot his next slate of films all outside of the US, namely in Eastern European countries such as Hungary, Romania, the Czech Republic, Latvia, and other territories. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
16 minutes ago
- Mint
MAGA policies would make America mediocre
'MAGA" was always an insult to the United States. Make America great again? Wasn't this country great when Donald Trump rode down that escalator in 2015? Now, as Trump 2.0 unfolds, the president seems intent on turning this insult into a reality by damaging or destroying much of what has made America great over 2½ centuries—including the rule of law. The survival of our republic is at stake. But since I'm an economist, I'll stick to how MAGA policies are undermining America's economic greatness. Topping the list of what made our economy great is relatively free-market capitalism, supported by the rule of law. The U.S. has no monopoly on capitalism, but our version has traditionally been freer from regulation and taxed more lightly than, say, Europe's. Our sturdy rule of law has been a huge strength, attracting capital and brain power. The word 'relatively" does a lot of work, however. Every economy needs some regulation for health, safety, and other reasons. Every country needs to levy taxes to pay its bills. Democrats and Republicans have argued for decades over how much (and how) to regulate and tax, and those battles will continue long after MAGA is a bad memory. But when the White House begins telling companies like Walmart when it may raise prices, or Apple where it should make phones, that's not normal capitalism. America's economic greatness has also relied, among other things, on what might be called the federal-industrial-university complex in science and engineering. This engine of growth has been central to American economic exceptionalism. No other nation comes close. Yet each piece is now being undermined by MAGA. The U.S. government has been promoting scientific advances at least since Vannevar Bush, the engineer whose scientific leadership helped win World War II. He convinced President Harry S. Truman and Congress that such advances were crucial to national security and economic growth. Some of the research is done directly by the government in national laboratories such as Brookhaven and Los Alamos. Some is done at the National Institutes of Health. Some is done cooperatively between government and private companies, such as the life-saving mRNA vaccines for Covid-19. And a great deal is done at research universities, typically with federal grants. Importantly, the funding hasn't been politically based. Until now. Elon Musk's chainsaw approach has decimated or eliminated entire scientific units within the federal government. Green technology and anything that smacks of DEI are particular targets. But when you cut with a chainsaw rather than scissors, accidents happen. Remember those nuclear-safety employees? The national labs, the National Science Foundation and even the NIH are all looking at serious budget cuts nowadays. Will these make our nation greater? America's universities, the best in the world, merit special discussion because Mr. Trump has declared war on them, starting with Columbia and Harvard. First a small point: University education is an export industry for the U.S. In the president's distorted view of international trade, we are supposed to export more than we import. Well, the higher education industry does exactly that. Vastly more (paying) foreign students come here than American students go abroad. And it's not because our universities are cheaper. It's because they are better. But the main point is about science, and the extensive cooperation among research universities, government and private industry. America's universities employ many thousands of scientists, including some of the best. Will taking their grants away, sometimes in midproject, make our country greater? Our universities also teach many other subjects, some of which Mr. Trump doesn't like. Classroom discussions in these 'other" subjects may sometimes veer in anti-MAGA directions. That seems to upset the president. But should the federal government try to stop that by, for example, threatening to ruin the universities financially? The First Amendment has a clear answer: No. And so does any effort to keep America great. Universities are unusual 'businesses." While most aren't run for profit, they do need to pay their bills, including for research support. A few, like Harvard, are very wealthy. Most aren't. But even the richest universities are poorly positioned to withstand a major withdrawal of federal funds. Research and much else will suffer. Too few Americans, I fear, see the attack on universities as an attack on scientific and therefore economic progress. Maybe it's hard to generate sympathy for Harvard. But do we really want to make America mediocre again? Mr. Blinder is a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton. He served as vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, 1994-96.
Mint
29 minutes ago
- Mint
Ukraine's drone strike is a warning—for the US
By now Americans know about Ukraine's remarkable drone strike on Sunday that damaged as many as 40 aircraft deep inside Russia as strategic bombers sat like ducks in a row on military bases. One urgent lesson beyond that conflict is that the U.S. homeland is far more vulnerable than most Americans realize. The details about Ukraine's daring operation are few, but Kyiv managed to sneak cheap drones across the border and use them to destroy costly Russian military assets. The bang for Ukraine's buck was considerable. You don't have to be a fan of thrillers to imagine a similar scenario in the United States. 'Could those have been B-2s at the hands of Iranian drones flying out of containers, let alone Chinese?" military analyst Fred Kagan asked this week. The U.S. strategic bomber fleet is small (about one-third the size it was in the Cold War) and concentrated at a handful of bases. See the aerial photo flying across social media of B-52 bombers lined up at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana. The story is similar for fighters and capital assets like aircraft carriers. One lesson is that President Trump's planned Golden Dome missile-defense shield isn't the boondoggle it's portrayed to be in the press. The headlines are preoccupied with space-based interceptors. But the U.S. is exposed to many threats besides ballistic missiles—from drones and spy blimps to cruise missiles launched off submarines. The bipartisan Strategic Posture Commission warned in 2023 that the U.S. needs better integrated air and missile defenses against 'coercive attacks" from Russia and China, and such an attack could come from conventional weapons. In a crisis over the Taiwan Strait, Xi Jinping might threaten the Commander in Chief: Stay out of the Western Pacific or you never know what might happen to your pricey F-22s in Alaska. That's one reason the U.S. needs a layered missile shield that exploits new technology and existing systems like the Patriot. Israel's recent success shooting down drones with lasers shows that innovative and affluent societies can meet new threats. President Trump deserves credit for elevating missile defense as a presidential priority. But the U.S. has lost some basic muscle memory since the Cold War on living in a dangerous world. A prescient report this year from Thomas Shugart and Timothy Walton at the Hudson Institute warned about highly vulnerable U.S. airfields, especially in the Western Pacific. For the new B-21 bomber, the Air Force is looking at shelters 'akin to sunshades," Messrs. Shugart and Walton write, that could leave the aircraft 'exposed to threats, including lethal" unmanned aerial vehicles. 'Not building approximately $30 million" hardened aircraft shelters 'for over-$600 million B-21 bombers is an unwise decision that could endanger the US's ability to strike globally," they write. Such shelters always end up being a low budget priority compared with airplanes and missiles, and the message here is that defense spending can't stay at 3% of the economy and provide the security Americans expect. The bill moving through Congress puts up $25 billion for Golden Dome. But a national air defense won't be built by a one-time cash infusion, and the Administration is ducking a sustained defense buildup to mollify its fiscal hawks. Americans are accustomed to wars fought far from home by a force of volunteers, but everyone in the U.S. will be on the front lines of the next conflict. Political leaders could be doing much more to educate the country about this vulnerability, rather than boasting that the U.S. military is the best it has ever been. It isn't. Ukraine did the U.S. a favor by destroying bombers of a U.S. adversary—and sending America a wake up call about its own complacency.
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
Great sympathy and understanding in UK for what India has gone through due to cross-border terrorism: Indian envoy Doraiswami
London [UK], June 4 (ANI): India's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Vikram Doraiswami, has said that there is great sympathy and understanding in the UK for what India has suffered due to cross-border terrorism that has emanated from Pakistan and Pakistan-controlled territory. In an interview with ANI, Doraiswami emphasised that India's ties with the UK have gained traction. The UK's approach to challenges that have persisted in South Asia has been much more understanding of India's concerns and more willing to respect that these problems need to be solved by India and Pakistan. Responding to questions about the all-party Indian delegation's meetings in the UK, Doraiswami said, 'I don't want to put words into either our parliamentarians' mouths or those of our British friends, but I think there was a great deal of receptivity to the message. There is great sympathy and understanding in the UK for what India has gone through in terms of our long and painful journey with cross-border terrorism that has emanated from Pakistan-controlled territory and the state of Pakistan. There is a great sense of understanding of the anger and hurt in India that this scourge just doesn't go away.' 'That said, of course, the UK has its own position. It's a sovereign government. It will take its own decisions, but in the last decade and more, we see a steady evolution as our relationship with the UK has gained weight, traction, and strategic dimensions. The UK's approach to challenges that have long persisted in South Asia has been much more understanding of our concerns, much more willing to respect the fact that these are problems that have to be solved by India and Pakistan and indeed all other problems in the region by the region. And that India's rise is, in broader terms, the greatest benefit of the Indo-Pacific region and the world as a whole. So, that sense comes through to all our parliamentarians,' he added. Doraiswami emphasised that the all-party delegation's visit was aimed at conveying the sentiments of Indian citizens, and India welcomed the international community's understanding of the country's need to ensure national security. When asked about the Indian delegation's expectations from the UK, he said, 'I shouldn't, we should never set out expectations of a friend. We have come here as far as I can understand from our parliamentary leaders, the people of India as representatives, that we are not here to seek favour from anybody. We are here to explain our position. We are here to point out what the people of India feel, and of course. We welcome the fact that our partners understand what we have to do, but we will do what we need to do to secure the people of India, any government of India, the current government in particular, are committed and will always remain committed to do whatever is necessary to secure our people, and that message has landed.' The all-party delegation, led by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Ravi Shankar Prasad, was in the UK to garner widespread support for India's fight against terrorism and to expose Pakistan's role in fostering terrorism. The delegation led by Ravi Shankar Prasad includes BJP MPs Daggubati Purandeswari and Samik Bhattacharya, Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi, Congress MPs Ghulam Ali Khatana and Amar Singh, former Union Minister MJ Akbar, and former Ambassador Pankaj Saran. During the visit, they met with the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG)-India. They addressed the media there, during which the delegation delivered a strong message on the global threat of terrorism, highlighting Pakistan's misuse of international funds to support terrorism and arms proliferation. The delegation also received widespread support from British parliamentarians, think tanks, and the Indian diaspora for India's democratic unity and firm stance against terrorism. They were welcomed by APPG India President Sandy Verma, and the meeting was co-chaired by UK MPs Lord Karan Bilimoria and Jeevun Sandher. Many current and former MPs, including Lord Ed Vaizey, Bob Blackman, Barry Gardiner, Gurinder Singh Josan, Gagan Mohindra, Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, Kanishka Narayan, Shailesh Vara, Baggy Shanker, Mark Pritchard and others also joined the discussion. Ravi Shankar Prasad stated that during their time in the UK, the delegation met with key UK figures, including the Speaker of the House of Commons and Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel, emphasising the need for international accountability on terrorism financing amidst appreciation for India's democratic approach. Prasad highlighted the global concern over terrorism as a 'cancer' and called for scrutiny of Pakistan's use of international funds, noting the novelty of the all-party delegation initiative. 'This has been really good. Our visit to England concludes today. We held a press conference at the India House here; we met the Speaker of the House of Commons this morning. We met the Chairman of the Conservative Party yesterday; we also met Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel. We also met Indian Friends in the Labour Party... We also interacted with Think Tanks. All of them are concerned that terrorism is a cancer... We also said that they (Pakistan) get loans from the IMF and World Bank and they get other funding too. So, is the funding being used for terrorism and weapon purchases or for the poor? This should be asked of them... Everyone said one more thing: that the all-party Parliamentary delegation visit is a new initiative,' Prasad said. The delegation met UK Minister for Citizenship and Migration and Minister for Equalities Seema Malhotra at the UK Parliament. The delegation also held a meeting with the UK's Shadow Foreign Secretary, Priti Patel, and her team on Sunday to share India's firm resolve to counter cross-border terrorism. In a post on X, the Indian High Commission in the UK stated, 'The All-Party Parliamentary Delegation met with Shadow Foreign Secretary @pritipatel and her team to share India's firm resolve in combating cross-border terrorism. They also highlighted how #OperationSindoor exemplifies the new normal set by India in this ongoing effort.' An all-party delegation, led by BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad, visited London as part of India's global outreach program to convey the country's firm stance against terrorism. (ANI)
