I find myself in an oddly conflicted state about this and see both sides here.
I comprehend the cinema's stance; the abrupt change meant they could no longer screen premium content, and the local film industry doesn't appear remotely prepared to contend. They seem to be stuck without a viable solution, and the only effective remedy would entail swift and substantial policy alterations at the federal level.
Conversely, the government's position strikes a chord with me, oddly enough. I'll set aside the perspective of "we aim to boost local films and this influx of free premier content would overwhelm us in competition," even though I concur with that viewpoint.
Even more-so, when considering the country's situation post-war, rebuffing foreign stakeholders even more vehemently than they currently are seems likely to exacerbate the inevitable and substantial post-war recession. If I were a foreign conglomerate contemplating an eventual re-entry into the country, I'd be closely monitoring this situation and I imagine the government officials considering the post-war era know it.
Ultimately the right choice is probably to just let the cinema industry fail, but the responsibility for this predicament lies with neither the ministry of culture nor the cinema industry so I can't help but sympathize with the challenging circumstances a bit.
For Putin's government the key here is censorship of Western content.
Many Western blockbuster movies, Barbie and Oppenheimer included, disseminate ideas that are antagonistic to Putin's fascist narrative. Barbie is, among other things, a play on feminism and on democratic values - think Ken's voting a new Constitution! It's only logical that Putin does not want "foreign agents" distorting the regime's narrative massively distributed to its 83 federal subjects ("federal states").
China has been doing this for ages now by picking a handful of foreign films / year and demanding the Statue of Liberty be removed from film. However, the Chinese market is so yummy that Western blockbuster productions will often self-censor to make sure they make the cut [1]. Putin is getting the opposite in fact, the West is high on anti-Russian sentiments for the last decade or so, and that has trickled down into content. Remember when under Boris Yeltsin that Western productions got plenty of "good Russians" after the Iron Curtain melted down?
They are antagonistic to any other cultural view point, that's how it works. US culture crushes all before it, this is easily observable.
The problem is that plebs of the west mostly don't seem to understand that, or wilfully don't care. Culture wars are a thing and governments have every right to protect against US led liberal hegemony if they want to maintain any sort of collective will.
It's a misunderstanding of Russian mentality, national ethos and the mechanics of their internal propaganda to think that a "message" disseminated by a Hollywood movie poses some kind of threat to it.
Using the example of Oppenheimer, a Russian citizen might see the movie and take away the following conclusions:
1. American leadership makes decisions based on an irrational fear of communism.
2. We are justified in expanding our nuclear arsenal. This is the only way they won't bomb our people in an event of conflict.
3. The Nazis sure were a threat to everyone. I'm glad we defeated them, but they weren't mentioning that in the movie. So ungrateful, typical Americans.
4. The political system of the US is quite unstable. I'm glad we have Putin. That Yeltsin sure was an embarrassment.
5. Whoah, the h-bomb sure is a powerful thing, we should drop that on Ukraine to win the war.
6. History is written by the winners, and whoever is the strongest wins. Thank goodness we're so strong.
7. I'm glad to live in a country where I could torrent this and I don't have to be worried about a 100 million dollar lawsuit.
8. The respect everyone gives us makes me feel so proud to live in Russia, one of the world leaders. We have a great future ahead of us.
I comprehend the cinema's stance; the abrupt change meant they could no longer screen premium content, and the local film industry doesn't appear remotely prepared to contend. They seem to be stuck without a viable solution, and the only effective remedy would entail swift and substantial policy alterations at the federal level.
Conversely, the government's position strikes a chord with me, oddly enough. I'll set aside the perspective of "we aim to boost local films and this influx of free premier content would overwhelm us in competition," even though I concur with that viewpoint.
Even more-so, when considering the country's situation post-war, rebuffing foreign stakeholders even more vehemently than they currently are seems likely to exacerbate the inevitable and substantial post-war recession. If I were a foreign conglomerate contemplating an eventual re-entry into the country, I'd be closely monitoring this situation and I imagine the government officials considering the post-war era know it.
Ultimately the right choice is probably to just let the cinema industry fail, but the responsibility for this predicament lies with neither the ministry of culture nor the cinema industry so I can't help but sympathize with the challenging circumstances a bit.