Uzbekistan is implementing the state program "Living History," scheduled for 2024–2027, aimed at creating a cycle of 54 films covering the country's three-thousand-year history. However, experts are questioning the feasibility of this plan: can art be turned into an assembly line and achieve quality when creativity is dictated by a "five-year plan" schedule?
In an interview with Podrobno.uz, Eldar Yuldashev, a Doctor of Philosophy in Art History, academician of the Istanbul Cinema Academy, and distributor of the film "Amir Temur" in the CIS, discussed the shortage of personnel, pitfalls of the state plan, and how private investments can handle the historical genre more effectively than the budget. According to him, from a global film production standard perspective, it is physically impossible to create such a volume of quality cinema in this short timeframe. For instance, the script for "Gladiator" took 30 years to gather material, and the masterpiece "Alisher Navoi" was worked on for 17 years.
Yuldashev noted that the program has already faced an acute shortage of "second-tier" specialists. For large-scale projects like "Bahodir Yalangtush" or "Ulug Amir va Donna Maria," stunt performers had to be invited from neighboring Kazakhstan. He stated, "We are losing personnel," pointing out that figures like Timur Bekmambetov, Janik Fayziev, Ulugbek Khamraev, and Dmitry Korobkin once worked in "Uzbekfilm" pavilions but now operate in other countries. Without bringing back talent and creating conditions for their growth domestically, any program will remain merely a list on paper.
The academic emphasized that in the post-Soviet space, successful historical and ideological films have long been made without rigid state programs. Examples like "9th Company" (Russia), "Song of the Tree" (Kyrgyzstan), or "Haytarma" (Ukraine) show that films can be box-office hits, festival favorites, and serve national interests without relying solely on state subsidies. He argued that an industrial approach in cinematography implies freedom from censorship and artificial constraints, especially under the course toward WTO accession and the adoption of the "Creative Economy" law, where cinema should become an industry, not just a "social order" with low profitability.
Yuldashev highlighted that a precedent for successfully bypassing the state funding system has already been set in Uzbekistan, even in the most complex historical genre. He noted that the film about the region's key historical figure, Amir Temur, was made entirely with private funds, without state budget involvement. This proves that in Uzbekistan, large-scale historical cinema can be created without waiting for decrees or "inspiration from above." A private investor is much more interested in the final result and product quality than a state order executor. It turns out that to film great history, it is not necessary to issue protocols—it is enough to create conditions for creative and financial freedom.
According to the expert, Uzbek cinema needs "shock therapy." Instead of top-down plans, focus should be on increasing the number of cinemas (which is currently declining) and creating a healthy market environment. Only a deep rethinking of the state's role in cinema will allow Uzbekistan to regain its status as a regional cinematographic leader.
Source: podrobno.uz