Copy to Leonidze. Copies to Antonovskaya and Cherny.

I have recently received two screenplays on the theme of "Georgi Saakadze": one by Antonovskaya and Cherny, the other by Leonidze.

In my opinion, Leonidze's screenplay is unsuccessful. It is poor in artistic terms. It is somewhat primitive from the standpoint of the selection and use of historical material.

The screenplay by Antonovskaya and Cherny is free of such shortcomings. But it has another deficiency. It ends with the victory, the apotheosis, of Saakadze's policy and of Saakadze himself. But such an ending, as is well known, does not correspond to historical reality and creates a false impression of Georgia's past. In fact, as history tells us, Saakadze's policy, although progressive from the standpoint of Georgia's future prospects, suffered defeat (and Saakadze himself perished), because the Georgia of Saakadze's time had not yet matured enough for such a policy -- that is, for the unification of the country into a single state through the establishment of royal absolutism and the liquidation of the power of the princes. The reason is clear: the princes and feudalism proved stronger, and the king and the gentry weaker, than Saakadze had supposed. Saakadze sensed this internal weakness of Georgia and conceived the idea of compensating for it by enlisting an external (foreign) force. But the force of the external factor could not compensate for the country's internal weakness. And so it turned out, as is well known. In the circumstances of these irreconcilable contradictions, Saakadze's policy was bound to suffer -- and did in fact suffer -- defeat.

I believe that this historical truth must be restored in the screenplay by Antonovskaya and Cherny.

And if it is restored, the screenplay by Antonovskaya and Cherny can be considered one of the finest works of Soviet cinematography.

I. Stalin

October 11, 1940

RGASPI F. 558 Op. 11 D. 1124. L. 147-148.