The topic just seems very heavy, in fact it was about provocation. In the thaw and perestroika was the rise of the Russian cinema now, according to experts, the low point of his fall. You just have to understand why, then, were masterpieces, and now “nothing to watch”. And understand, I find today among modern battalions for the new Otarov Ioseliani in Russian cinema.
In Vyborg discussed the state of modern cinema in Russia
President of the festival “Window to Europe” Armen Medvedev told the audience that he is haunted by this coincidence: all significant events of our cinema again in 30 years. And if the 1956 and 1986 more or less clear, now our cinema is not the cause of unanimity and understanding. As well as the fact from which point you can count our chinesefriends. Medvedev himself is convinced that Russian cinema began with the film “Brother” – about a hero who tragically difficult to determine its relationship with the world. Today cinema has come to the position when expressed in the film Director, and producer, and there is a desire for the cinema with no personality. For authors, no space left.
Thus, although the producers formally imply the studios, it turns out that independent of big studios like in Hollywood, and has not appeared. Those that could, without state support to build their programme and to formulate their own policies. All studios have state funding, and implement it including the producers, which can have its Guild interests. In the 90 years, Medvedev recalled that the Commission of the Ministry of culture consisted of artists who could afford a two-day discussion of a movie script about Bunin. And today lacks even the usual democratic open vote, which would explain why support find these or other projects. Finally, convinced Medvedev, a new law on cinematography, which will save the Directors from the arbitrariness of producers who do not invest in the production of their money, but I think it is possible to remove Directors from the Assembly. And the same law should govern the distribution of funds from the proceeds of the film – that the money remained in the regions, as in the USSR, and contributed to the development of the industry, and not left to the “center”.
Medvedev’s speech continued Alexander Shpagin. He said that 98% of the producers of “freaks” who are not willing to work with scenarios, where the drive and sense” is an integral part of the mainstream. So mainstream in Russia. However, he believes Shpagin, and are not taught to produce ideas, educating only professional skills.
Yuri Bogomolov in the example of the crisis of the ideological state of our cinema gave examples of thaw films about the war. There, he argues, were attempts at de-collectivization of human consciousness. Top contributors were from “we” to “I”, and now the new films about the war again brought up the feeling that “we” because people wanted to have a “roof”. “And once again, the government begins to break down the creative intelligentsia of the knee, to demand the Patriotic sentiment,” said Bogomolov.
Victor Matizen has called the current situation a period of reaction associated with the political situation. And the best period of Russian cinema, he believes the ‘ 90s, because no one thought of profits and losses, but just did a movie. And those movies are still reviewing.
Kirill Razlogov noted that the trend towards entertaining to us naturally and to avoid it will still fail, no matter who sat in the Ministry of culture: “the new barbarians” or best representatives of the intelligentsia. Because only Hollywood and bollywood can work without government support and because we belong to the part of the countries where cinema is not ready to support free of charge only on the grounds that it is a culture. It should be easy to relate to what is happening and accept the fact that, for example, the camp tradition wins on TV and in the movies, because embedded in the plot structure and the aesthetics of the works.
Speakers expressed their concerns regarding the filling of domestic film festivals, and special attention was requested to pay television, which is today in the world pulled in the cinematography and the shots and ideas and even experiments. Our time has yet to comprehend, but present at the round table it is hardly possible to observe a sufficient number of optimism about the future of Russian cinema.
Related posts:
“It is important to develop culture of consumption of its movie”
Moral killing: how the U.S. government by using “freedom of speech” to destroy other peoples
In Los Angeles to host week of Russian cinema
“The Film Is About” – Reader. “Chapaev,” German immigrants and the French girls on the beautiful barges
