Not on behalf of the state: what films about Russia are Oscars seeing?
Anna Malgina (film journalist and film researcher)
The Oscar nominations were announced yesterday. Only one project, "Mr. Nobody vs. Putin," made the final list of films with a "Russian slant." Several films featuring Russian authors and themes had previously made the Academy Award shortlists, which in itself is considered a significant achievement. The shortlist is formed after a multi-stage selection process and signifies that a film has been officially considered by members of the Academy. For independent and auteur cinema, especially in the absence of national nominations and limited access to international industry resources, being shortlisted remains a significant professional achievement and a way to preserve Russian stories and voices in the international film industry.
In 2025–2026, discussions of Russian cinema have finally ceased to be confined to the confines of the "Moscow industry" and the official national agenda. Until recently, it seemed that Russian cinema had all but disappeared from global cultural exchange. However, today, its stories are once again being heard in internationally significant contexts: at Sundance, Telluride, and on Oscar shortlists. They just sound different than before.
One of the most notable works of recent years is the documentary film Mr. Nobody Against Putin Mr. Nobody vs. Putin, which was shortlisted for the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature, joins a cadre of films that are currently shaping the conversation about political and human reality without relying on conventional genre or industry models. This film emerged not as part of the artistic mainstream, but rather from everyday life.
Its author, Pavel Talankin, a schoolteacher from the small town of Karabash in the Chelyabinsk region, spent two years after the war began filming school events, documenting how the environment was changing under the influence of propaganda and militarization. The filmmaker began taking his camera to places where it was forbidden or undesirable for a difficult personal reason: "I filmed these lessons... they told me I was simply documenting the work, but I didn't yet understand that it would become a film." It was this material, collected as part of his regular school duties, that formed the basis of the documentary project. Talankin explains that he acquired a camera simply because the school administration asked him to document the events, and at some point, he realized he was filming not just a report, but a history of the changes and repressions taking place within the system. говорил about his choice: “It wasn’t about cinema, it was about the truth.”
In June 2024, Talankin left Russia, taking seven hard drives containing the footage with him, and, together with American documentary filmmaker David Borenstein, edited it into a film. The film's international festival career was swift. A screening at Sundance in 2025 earned the film a special jury prize in the world documentary program. However, the reaction in Russia was negative. The project was labeled anti-Russian, and Talankin himself was criticized on social media and regional media. blamed in betrayal. Ultimately, the film became an example of how an author's voice can emerge outside of industrial structures.
The author of the film here does not “create an image,” but simply remains within the environment about which says.
"As soon as the war started, we were planning something together with a cultural institution. And they were talking about it so enthusiastically. I said, 'Wait, wait, wait,' I said. 'Now they'll bring your husband in a coffin, and then you'll rejoice. Then you'll talk about this, about everything, with such enthusiasm.' She was so offended at me. 'What are you talking about? What are you saying? Everything will be fine!' In the end... In the end, how all this mobilization happened and how these coffins, 'Cargo 200,' started pouring in. And I have a question: why doesn't anyone ask themselves any questions? Why doesn't anyone ask?"
Another illustrative example is the short film Extremist by Alexander Molochnikov (the film can be viewed at youtube In an interview with Deadline, the director said the film was inspired by the story of artist Sasha Skochilenko, who was sentenced to seven years in prison in Russia for anti-war price tags in a supermarket. "I felt enormous admiration for her actions, while I was fleeing. She's my hero," говорил Molochnikov. The film was shot in Latvia, where the Russian environment was recreated, and made its way through the festival circuit, including Telluride, the BAFTA Student Film Awards, and other venues, before being shortlisted for the 2026 Oscars. According to the director, "The Extremist" is not so much a reconstruction of a single event as a film about choice. It's about the moment when a person is forced to decide whether to remain true to their convictions or submit to the pressures of the system. This ethical framework makes the film relatable to viewers beyond its specific political context.
Julia Loktev's documentary project, "My Unwanted Friends. Part I: The Last Air in Moscow," fits into the same category. It had its international premiere in the Berlinale Special section at the Berlin Film Festival. The film, over five hours long, follows several independent journalists who attempted to continue reporting in Moscow in the final months before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, despite increasing repression and pressure from the regime. was born Loktev's desire to understand what it's like to work as an honest journalist under pressure and threats: "I was drawn to their ability to continue telling the truth, even when everyone around them thought it was impossible. They were alive and real, and I wanted to show that."
"My Unwanted Friends" isn't just a chronicle of events, but a deeply personal observation of the lives and work of people caught in a situation where speech becomes a matter of survival. Loktev filmed both the work and everyday lives of the journalists who remained on air until the very last moment, ignoring the threats and restrictions imposed on independent media in Russia, including the closure of their editorial offices and forced emigration. This approach, according to critics, makes the film one of the most important documentaries of recent years, as it shows the human face of freedom of speech. The film was shortlisted for the 2026 Oscars as an example of documentary filmmaking that reflects not only specific events but also the social experience of the era.
Importantly, all of these films originated outside the state film system. Talankin's material was exported from Russia, "The Extremist" was filmed abroad, and Loktev's projects exist from the outset in an international documentary context. Today, cinematic language is defined not by the production location, but by the depth of vision and the honesty of the author's approach. At the same time, almost all films with a "Russian slant" that made it onto the Oscar shortlist exist under a double ban. Within Russia, they are denied distribution, websites and interviews with the directors are blocked, and the directors themselves are often labeled "foreign agents" or "extremists." Outside the country, wariness persists of anything labeled "Russian," even when it involves anti-war or critical statements.
In an interview, Pavel Talankin spoke directly about the paradox: a film about a Russian school turned out to be effectively inaccessible to the Russian audience for which it was conceived. Alexander Molochnikov noted that "The Extremist" exists between languages and jurisdictions, existing primarily in the festival and academic space. As a result, a new type of auteur cinema is emerging, a cinema without a territory or a national screen, but with a clear ethical stance.
The situation was once very different. During the Soviet period and the first years after the collapse of the USSR, films from the country regularly received recognition from the American Film Academy. Sergei Bondarchuk's War and Peace won an Oscar in 1968, Vladimir Menshov's Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears in 1981, and Nikita Mikhalkov's Burnt by the Sun in 1995. There were also wins in other categories, including documentary and animation. However, in 2022, Russia for the first time declined to submit a film for the Oscars, symbolizing the disconnect between the national system and the international context.
Against this backdrop, the 2023 Oscar win for "Navalny" marked a turning point. The film, directed by Canadian Daniel Roher, won the award for Best Documentary, and Yulia Navalnaya's speech at the ceremony about the fight for freedom of speech became one of the emotional moments of the awards night. For the first time, the award went to a film about Russia made not in the name of the state, but in defiance of it. This moment set a new perspective, in which "Russian cinema" increasingly signifies not official selection, but rather individual and civic expression.
The films shortlisted for the 2026 Oscars—from Mr. Nobody Against Putin to Extremist and the works of Julia Loktev—continue this line. They no longer represent the country as a competition participant, but capture it as a space of experience, pain, memory, and choice. This isn't about Russian cinema disappearing from the global stage, but about a radical shift in its status. From a national showcase to a personal testimony, from an institution to a voice increasingly heard outside the system.
