Frost: “Hero” is a prize begging from the beginning to the end / The film can not stand on its own two feet

According to Fars News Agency’s cinema correspondent, Massoud Frost, who was present in the “Seven” program on the subject of reviewing and criticizing Asghar Farhadi’s film Ghahraman, stated in his critique of this film: One plot is completely Persian film.

He added: Persian film The Story of Kiev And gold It has nothing to do with it today, and it could very well have happened 2,000 years ago and it can happen today. And it is not at all clear where it is for. If you take the role of Rustam I in the film, the film does not show the environment in the script at all, and why Shiraz at all? Why not Bandar Abbas, why not Gilan? That is, there is no such thing as space in the script.

The film critic said: “I said this film is a Persian film, because the main character of the story, who needs money and has temporary freedom, and then sorts out the money, already says seventy And eatenA million is ready and then very casually the goldsmith says I will not buy (because the calculator does not work) and then the same person becomes an honest hero because he can not melt the money. This is completely Persian film, while in Persian film I see this process in a better script.

He said that the film has a second plot that is political and that Farhadi is working on it, adding: “The film begins with the Sharia prison and ends with the prison.” We have a picture of the prison. The camera stays in the prison for about a minute and shows the outside. With silence. We have no songs and then nothing to nothing. This could be 5 minutes or 3 seconds. This is the main plot of the film, but it does not take the original time of the film and it takes about half an hour or 25 minutes of the film to move this line forward.

* The movie is against the hero

Frost continued: This is where the filmmaker plays. Gives political slogans, takes back. Hero again anti hero It becomes, it becomes our hero. Officially takes back the hero. This is no longer a hero. The film is against the hero and this is political. Against the hero means that we live in a place where we do not have a hero and the hero is made by the system. The film system, which means prison, and this prison makes a hero, which is a fake hero.

By asking the question, where is the real hero of the film? said: The hero is there who fights twice and takes it back. In prison, he closes the door tightly and 10 seconds later says sorry. This is our filmmaker. That is, he is working on the latter and says that this is the crowd and this is its hero, and it is the hero made and paid for by the government, which is now in the film, the government, the prison. Rahim is a hero somewhere who comes out of this chain and one or two places from this external action show that he does not like it. Similar to the actions that had given Shahab Hosseini (Hojjat) a rare separation from Simin in the film, which does not suit his character in that film either.

* Characters The film has no identity card No / The movie camera is still lagging behind

“In the end, the film ends with imprisonment,” Frost said. Where the so-called hero is exposed, he must be harmed and must return to prison, and the only action he finds in this journey is a box of sweets for the prisoners. It pushes it forward in parallel. I wish he was smart and pushed the two together. We had to know people in the script. Almost none of Tanabandeh And her daughter, up to Rahim’s sister and her sister-in-law, these people have absolutely no identity card and no living space. With an apartment camera in a situation where the camera could be a social value, ie Lang And then see around. The camera is still the backward camera of the separation film, which of course is further backwards because it takes up little space in that film, but not here at all.

* The filmmaker does not like Rahim and makes him miserable and pitiful

The cinema critic added: “From the foreground, when a person comes out of prison, it is a masterpiece in my opinion.” He comes out of the prison from the left frame and then follows the bus and does not reach it. That is, from the very beginning, our pity must be drawn to him. Then we have to see who comes next to Naghsh-e Rostam, who can be fundamental with it A symbolism کرد. I mean it turns out here with a purpose A symbolism has constructed. (Rahim) From the left of the box in Extreme View Lang The shot moves. He comes and I miss him and even in this super extreme Lang I don’t see the shot anymore and I only see the role of Rustam; The camera seems to be blowing, which is a joke.

He continued: “This sequence for filmmaking, which has 10 films behind it and has a world award, this beginning and this camera, this characterization with a hero who is the size of an ant in the role of Rostam, shows that his problem is not a hero, but That role is Rostam. Which, of course, has nothing to do with Rostam because he leaves it.

This cinema critic said: in the restoration sequence of Naghsh-e Rostam, we have a step that Rahim raises from the stairs with slippers and then descends again. لخ Leh Leh (the sound of slippers being pulled to the ground). He is making this person. It is clear from the beginning that he has no sympathy (interest) for this person and the hero فکستنی And it makes me miserable and miserable. The filmmaker wants to eat this pitiful person in the second plot, and for this reason, he makes the film miserable and pitiful.

* The script is extremely weak and fragmented

Frost added: “The film has a very weak and fragmented script that we can move the scenes and increase or decrease the time and nothing happens.” With people who Unable Are identifiable. From the owner of the bag to the sister and the rest of the people. It has so many script holes that it is better to skip it. In other words, it can be said that if someone other than this filmmaker, whose name is made, made this film, these discussions would not have taken place at all, because this film was just a first film.

* The filmmaker no longer knows his own class and to Characters The film is insulting

Reacting to the statement that the filmmaker is not a politician, he said: “Certainly not a politician, because we must be a middle-class person who (in the past) knew his class to some extent and now shows that he no longer knows.” The film basically has no sympathy for any of the people in the film, who are all down to the middle class. When he has no sympathy, it means he has no obligation. He even insults and picks up the camera from above.

* MainMost Frost hero movie sequence

Frost states that cinema is transparentMost medium To expose the subconscious and expose the filmmaker’s lies, he said: “No matter how much you claim, a cut, a camera place, an extra pause or a little will expose you.” An example is a dialogue in the film that says, “It’s a pity this country is in your hands.” Stay tuned for who says that. Mr. Hero, who has become a prisoner, tells him that he is a very man, if a man talks about his recent suicide. He also says very harshly. It seems that the hero was not in prison and did not know what was going on. ImportantMost I think the plot of the film is here.

He continued: The boy who says this is not bad at all and he says this sentence and leaves. Then Rahim goes to the corner and sits down. The camera is a cowardly camera that does not want to continue this discussion. The camera from a distance shows the hero sitting in amazement. (Filmmaker) puts music on this scene because he knows it will move without movement and sympathy. In order not to be exposed. This is the only place where there is music. Actually this principleMost View of this movie hero.

The film critic stated: But this person does not like these things. A person who has lived a lie wants to sell gold with a lie, but he does not. A person who is an instrument and not an activist. What a picture this poor man ‌العملی Can he commit suicide? It turns out that he does not, and that is why the camera takes him away from him in that position.

“This is one of those important moments in the film, and if the filmmaker was in the good sense of the word, social or political, he would stop here,” he said. When he opens the door on the head of the prisonبندد And then he apologizes, obviously a political reaction. Or in his treatment of the relief committee, he makes jokes that have no place in the work. Make irony, but irony must be within the work.

Reacting to the fact that Rahim falls into this abyss due to his own mistakes and the mistakes of those around him, and the system has no role, he said: Rahim is a person, but first, where he is (in prison), he committed suicide. Secondly, they tell him (prison officials) to come and interview him, and they (prison officials) sew pockets for themselves before Rahim’s interview to say that this person is good and with principles. پرورده We are in prison and we treat him well. This is another system and has nothing to do with people’s mistakes.

“What’s going on outside of prison?” Frost said. We do not see anything outside of society. The lady who came took the bag and left and we do not understand until the end why this lady should not return? In a short film made by one of the filmmaker’s students, it seems that this lady returns, but in this film برنمید گردد. I heard that. I mean, it ‘s a shame to say that word مگ‌Gaffinفیلم’s movies that have nothing to do with this filmmaker and put us to work. Why? Because she can not speak correctly and make a person and we understand why she hid this money (gold coin) from her husband. It is not clear why the owner of the bag should not be found?

* Rahim (hero) agrees to torture his son

Saying that we should see life in cinema, but we do not face life in this film, he said: Where is Rahim’s ex-wife? Why don’t we have a plan from him? Rahim Son Worst Of All. His son is tortured and Rahim agrees to that torture and the boy sits in front of the camera in charge of the prison with that stutter and speaks in favor of his father. Rahim first allows this and then takes it back and then comes out and takes the face of Shahab Hosseini (Hojjat) in a rare separation from Simin. These are not due to the logic of Rahim’s character. Torture and taking it back is not derived from the logic of Rahim’s character. All this is the logic of the filmmaker.

“It means we are not dealing with one person and one living space,” Frost said. So what is a movie? The film basically wants an award. All this is because we have to see the American teaser now, and our senseless group of people who are the gods for one thing, get closer to the film with this teaser, but the sales of the film, which is a disaster and shows that these things do not take much anymore.

* Farhadi is not a realist / The film is an award begging from the first scene to the end

He is about the style of the eventAttractive Farhadi’s films, he said: “Realism in the sense of realism, in my opinion, Farhadi is not a realist at all, and a social realist whose problem is the problem of the people and society, is not at all, but he eats this slogan.” It is clear that the film wants a prize, otherwise the film itself is not a living single body that interacts with us. This film, from the first scene to the last, is an award begging in my opinion, and that torture of a child is a new thing in the filmmaker’s works. It is a torture and a trial that is very inhumane and taking it back does not reduce its burden.

* Criticism of the position of the spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Referring to the filmmaker’s statement in recent days, he said: “Some people like to cover up this statement and I am sorry to have to mention the position of the spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was very out of place.” One or two days before the release of the filmmaker’s statement, this position was announced as a throwaway position and a continuation of yesterday. To say this is our product and we send it to the Oscars. This is not the position of the State Department, which has other claims. Worse, the State Department spokesman should then make a political statementپرنسیب (Unprincipled, irregular, without a moral framework) He had to take back the position he did not take.

* The filmmaker’s statement is basically for the Oscars

“The filmmaker’s statement is basically for the Oscars,” Frost said. I mean, now is the Oscar ceremony, and this teaser we saw shows that the film can not stand on its own two feet. But our government friends must answer what they sent, and those who defended sending the film to the Oscars and then saw that statement must answer.

* The new government should not pay a ransom to a filmmaker

He stated: It is not in my intellectual system to pay a ransom. I hope that our new governments, which have revolutionary claims, will not extort money. If you do not ransom in Barjam, you should not ransom a filmmaker here. If you are not a tax collector at all in terms of thinking, why did you pay a ransom here? this is so bad.

end of Message/