Strange laws one after the other/ Cinema should not be allowed to enter politics

Charso Press: The story started when Abbas Rafei, because one of his films has not been screened for more than three years, said: “I talked to Mr. Khazaei and they said that there is a law that has not been paid attention to and we want to implement it. to act Therefore, directors whose film has a regulatory problem are not allowed to make a new film until they solve that problem.”

This one story was enough to guess that independent directors are going to be removed from the field of filmmaking over time and cinema will be in the hands of filmmakers whose films are institutional and more than popular with the audience, they are welcomed by government bodies and institutions. The same discussion that has been mentioned for a long time; Discussion of insider and outsider in cinema.

In order to find out if this story is true or not and what are its consequences, we went to Seyed Amir Seyedzadeh, a cinema producer.

Syedzadeh, while confirming this story, says: “They say that if a director has a suspended work, he cannot make a new work, depriving the director of his talent and creativity. I say this because all of us may accidentally and unintentionally make a film that does not comply with the current and cultural laws in the country, and because of this, it will be banned for a while. This incident is not a reason to stop the growth and development of that director. In my opinion, this story is legally unacceptable. Let’s not forget the point that the producer himself did not ban his film and he definitely wants his problem to be solved, to solve that problem and take care of those conditions, it is not the producer’s hand that stops the director’s activity.”

He continues about the negative result of this story: “I am against this story because the artist cannot be someone else’s intellectual pin and the audience wants and another person’s taste to make a customized product. A product that is in harmony with the rules and regulations of a specific body and only that body, organization or body welcomes that film, basically such a problem is not possible. We need a changing, aware, progressive and changing society. Therefore, there is no reason to support the intellectual and linear spectrum of an organization or body and say that we should only implement this issue. This is completely wrong. There are different thoughts and opinions in the society that have their own supporters and opponents.

Strange laws one after another

The assignment of the previous story was not yet determined, but Jamal Sadatian, the cinema producer, announced that he had given Ershad two scripts this year, one comedy and one social, both of which have been stopped. But the main story is that, for example, when you want to criticize the police force, in Irshad they say take the story, give it to the police force to read and get permission to make it. The problem here is why and how should I do such a thing? When, for example, I want to criticize the judiciary, how should I get approval from the judiciary to make a film? I don’t know what approach is taken? The Ministry of Guidance should strengthen its chest, provide a platform and stand behind the people involved in cinema, rather than insisting that we seek permission from the police force, municipality or any other institution and organization for any legitimate, legal and humane criticism. If this is the case, nothing will be left of the movies.

Sidamir Seyedzadeh clearly declares this story as wrong and believes that this will impose self-censorship. He says about this: “When the director wants to make a film, and criticize it from somewhere, if he has to endure a double pressure in addition to the cinema organization, he does not do it, or he does self-censorship as much as he can. It allows the movie to not be blocked and not allowed to work anymore. “This law does not help the growth of creators and makes them more involved in self-censorship.”

Seizure of the film and its losses

Almost every day, we come across a new list of names of banned films, films whose problems are neither solved nor released, and just remained at the back of the screening queue. Seyedzadeh considers this incident unpleasant for the cinema and says about the financial losses and consequences of banning the film for the audience and for the producers: “Part of the aspects of banning a film are material and economic, and the other part is spiritual and credit losses. When an investor spends money to make a work, he naturally looks for its return, but if he doesn’t get his initial capital by banning his film, he will no longer have the funds and desire to invest again. This financial discussion is the story.

“Another part is when a group gets together and they make something and they want to see their hard work pay off, and when that doesn’t happen, all those artists and production team members get frustrated,” he continues. This incident has material and spiritual damage along with each other. Now the negative results for the audience is that they are deprived of seeing different thoughts. A person who goes to the cinema likes to check all the thoughts, when he goes to the cinema constantly and does not see new thoughts and issues, the result is what we are witnessing now, the ever-increasing decrease of cinema audiences. As long as we prevent the audience from going to the cinema, this means harming the cultural layers, which also leads to a decrease in the audience.”

Have these limitations brought our cinema here?

Now that these restrictions have plagued the cinema to such an extent, we can say that the stagnation of the audience and sales in the cinema has a specific origin, and that is the cinema officials themselves and their rules.

While expressing regret for the current state of cinema, this producer says: “Once in the 60s and 70s, we were among the top 10 cinemas in the world; But now, due to the application of personal, group, institutional and organizational tastes, productions have gone in different directions in terms of content, which does not have much of an audience, unless a comedy film is released, and our comedies are more ridiculous than humorous. With these conditions, what do we expect? We expect that in a society where awareness and dynamism of thought and thought are supposed to grow and develop, relevant officials and organizations will have the courage and tolerance to hear and see different opinions and tastes. When this expectation is not met and people want to apply their personal taste, as a rule, the restrictions in the cinema increase day by day. All these problems have caused our cinema to be in the current state of stagnation. We should also know that cinema should not be allowed to enter politics.”

///.