A former film manager’s strong complaints about how to deal with Ahmadreza Darwish+Film

According to the film reporter of Fars News Agency, the 40th episode of “Cinema Criticism” program aired last night on November 12, while the special “Cinema Criticism” panel discussion on “Cinema; “Strategic Industry” was established with the presence of Alireza Rezadad, one of the former movie directors, and it was accompanied by the harsh complaints of this movie director in dealing with cinematographers, including Ahmadreza Darwish.

The dimensions of Iranian cinema have not grown proportionately

At the beginning of his speech, Rezadad said about the lesser use of cinema’s capacity to convey civilizational concepts: First of all, let us remember the sacrifices of the people of Gaza and salute the pure souls of the oppressed and innocent martyrs of Gaza. In such occasions, we remember more about our negligence and lack of capacity. I mention Saifullah Dad’s “Survivor”, which is one of the most important works about the Gaza issue. We should thank the other dear ones who produced works in this field, now with any quality.

This cultural expert continued: the dimensions of Iranian cinema have not grown in proportion to the capacity and productions it has had. In fact, in terms of the existence of supporting resources, willingness, human resources, etc., there are capacities and it can be activated. In proportion to the capacity of production and screening, the share of priorities has become insignificant and all priorities have not been able to appear in the cinema.

Rezadad stated: Government institutions and organizations had many effects with the change of management. For example, the Holy Defense Cinema Association had been silent for years with the change of management. In some parts of the Soura organization, the advertising organization and the art field, they paid more attention to the cinematographic productions and the private sector. Also, the statistics of productions in the artistic field and the floating of the number and type of films are related to its management strategy.

The former CEO of Farabi Cinema Foundation continued: “Perhaps the most favorable way of the story is that we make the issue of resistance a concern of the private sector for interested people and provide space and opportunity.” For example, the art field was once the flag bearer of religious films, and people like Majid Majidi and Reza Mirkarimi produced works that happened to be their personal concern, and they did not make films at the request of anyone. We have no shortage of concerned people in the field of holy defense and resistance. In the resistance sector, less attention has been paid to filmmaking. In my opinion, the change and instability of the management or the change of policies caused some issues in the cinema to not be addressed seriously.

The conversation with the filmmakers has been neglected

The former secretary of Fajr Film Festival reminded: We have to trust the private sector and find mechanisms in this sector. Also, the relevant institutions will eliminate the investment risk for the private sector. Economic institutions that are profitable and have a desire for cultural work, it is better to spend their taxes on artwork. This is how America has progressed. In fact, the tax should not be handed over to the government because its economic cycle is destroyed. Therefore, government employment should be minimized and the mechanisms should be facilitated. The government should interact with the private sector and support the private sector more in critical situations.

In the end, Rezadad said: In the last decade, there was a fear of the entry of some films, the root of which was the film “Resurrection”. We have not had Mr. Darvish for 12 years. In fact, filmmakers don’t follow some themes because they believe that “a series that doesn’t hurt, why should I tie a handkerchief”. Unfortunately, the conversation with the filmmakers has been neglected and we have the duty to provide the space. Part of the daily problems of cinema is the lack of space for dialogue.

“Orange Forest” and a sick hand for the director

The first part of the cinema review was dedicated to the Iranian cinema review table, which the film journalist Mohammad Saberi and the critic Afshin Aliyar said about the movie “Jangal Portaqal”.

Afshin Aliyar first stated: This work was Arman Khansarian’s first feature film among the important films of Fajr 41 festival. When I saw this successful movie for the second time, I came to the conclusion that it is still a success. In this period of cinema when we are facing a lack of stories, it tells stories in the right way and that is what is important. Maybe this feature alone is not enough, but considering the director’s first work, it is acceptable.

Furthermore, Mohammad Saberi stated: I really like the movie “Orange Forest” and I have to say a big thank you to Arman Khansarian for creating this story. The most serious thing that this filmmaker has done is the creation of the character of “Sohrab Baharian”, which according to the interviews of the filmmaker is taken from his own character. This character is so deep and thought out that it can be talked about outside of the movie. This work is a storyteller and defines the message of his story regardless of transmission and is its winning card.

He continued: We talked before about the first films that went to Hoyt. What was new to me in Arman Khansarian’s film is the talk about fake identity or, in today’s terms, fake identity; which involved the people of the world in virtual life. What refreshes the character of “Sohrab” for me is the arrogance in the first half of the film, which is finally shattered.

Amirreza Mafi continued: I believe that both critics pay attention to the extratext of the film. The film is the story of a weak person who thinks he is an important person, but the right opportunity did not occur to him and he has nothing more. Maybe because the criticism of these people is in our mind, the movie is good for your taste. There are layers in the film that need to be analyzed and just a good story is not enough for the film. The positive points expressed for the movie are not of the cinema and are your hypertext.

Aliyar further emphasized: The character of “Sohrab Baharian” is gradually becoming known in the script, and Arman Khansarian, in my opinion, has written the script in full detail. Also, the discussion of personality psychology is strictly followed in this film.

Saberi said: The character of “Sohrab” was very bright for me, and in my opinion, the correct punctuation has happened on it. This character changes from the stage of “being” to the stage of “becoming”. The message in the film is valuable when it is defined in the context of the story, and Arman Khansarian has done this correctly. Because the story in this work is defined correctly, the filmmaker has not interfered in the development process of the characters.

He pointed out: The film’s approach is very important in terms of criticizing this type of fake identity that afflicts us. The character of “Sohrab” faces himself from one place to the next. It goes without saying that if the story has the right meaning, it allows the audience to have their own opinion.

end of message/