The purpose of the paper is to unblended analysis of sources and literature on the repressive policy of Soviet power against the representatives of Ukrainian cinema. In general, the main principles of party-state policy in the field of cinematography, including the mechanism of the influence of ideology on the cinematographic process in the Ukrainian SSR, are grounded, and the interaction between public administration and creative organizations is grounded; The main methods and forms of the repressive policy directed against the artists of Ukrainian cinema are described. The existing structure severely restricted the powers and independence of the respective republican units of management.
In Ukraine, the general management of cinematography was carried out by the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR through the State Committee of the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR on cinematography - a union republican body that did not have the necessary independence in determining the main principles of the development of cinema art. Derzhkino's powers included economic, financial functions and control over the ideological content of film production. Derzhkinos powers included economic, financial functions and control over the ideological content of film production. It was in its structure that the Cinema Repertoire Control Inspection functioned, the decision of which depended on the fate of films: from the approval of the script to the release of the film on the screen.
In those years, the practice of «film on the shelf» was extended, when films that were fully licensed for rental by all instances were fully prepared for rental, in the final version they did not satisfy the authorities, they were banned from showing. A more liberal requirement was the processing of unsatisfactory moments. The control over the repertoire of films that fell into the audience was reliant on the Main Directorate of Film and Film. The article uses the following research methods: comparative-historical, typologies, classifications, problem-chronological, objectivity, multifactor, which allow to study complex social phenomena, concrete events and facts in their dynamics.
In the course of the study, it was found that during this period there was a structuring and centralization of the management system of the cinematographic industry, the general leadership of which belonged to the State Committee of the USSR. It is proved that during the years of stagnation the influence of the command-administrative system and the rigorous subordination to the principles of party ideology, which involved interference with creative processes, increase of authorizing powers of administrative structures and increase of censorship, was intensified. It was found out that after the thaw was extinguished, Ukrainian cinema was subject to strict regulation of the canons of «socialist realism».
Ideological policy was secured by relevant party and state regulations, which provided a party assessment of the development of cinematography, criticized areas that were not interested in the party-bureaucratic system, the thematic orientation of cinema was normalized. Against the representatives of this course, the authorities used the usual spectrum of methods of struggle: blatant criticism and discredit in the media, in party and government decisions at the gathering of cinematographers; prosecution and imprisonment. The process of organization of the state campaign against the school of poetry films in the context of implementation of the policy of narrowing the sphere of application of the Ukrainian language and reducing the production of films in the Ukrainian language is analyzed.
The planning of the work of film studios, censorship on the subject of films became the main tools for enhanced control over the development of Ukrainian cinema during the studied period. The interaction of public administration and creative organizations - the Union of Cinematographers of Ukraine, which was a pro-government structure and controlled by the party bureaucracy, was grounded, although one of its statutory tasks was protection of the creative, professional, copyright and public rights of its members.