𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯!

"Yet, even the final approval of the director’s script by the chairman of the Cinema Committee did not always mean that the script would remain the same in the final product. After 1938, the film production process itself was subject to further scrutiny and, as a result, further changes. After the preparatory period, GUPKhF kept a close eye on production to ensure that film-makers adhered to approved director’s scripts, budgets, time limits and so on. If it was unsatisfied with any aspect of a film production it could take punitive action or report the matter to the Cinema Committee chairman. For example, the production of the film Gold (Zoloto) which was later renamed 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘛𝘢𝘪𝘨𝘢 (Paren iz taigi, 1941) was dogged by a series of problems, including some that were beyond the film-maker’s control, such as lack of access to basic studio facilitites. The cinema administration and its chairman were unsatisfied with the ideological and artistic depiction of some of the film’s main characters, which meant that scenes had to be shot again. GUPKhF also rejected the words for some of the songs that were to appear in the film. When Bolshakov gave his assessment of the situation, he, of course, did not criticise representatives from the cinema administration. On the contrary, it was usually studio heads and the film crew who bore the blame for failure to implement production plans." » Soviet Cinema: Politics and Persuasion under Stalin {2009, Jamie Miller}