The removal of eight revolutionary figures under the pretext of “McFarlane” / a successful woman is not necessarily educated

Mehdi Motahar, a documentary filmmaker who is participating in the 15th International Reality Film Festival by producing three documentaries, told a Fars News Agency cinema reporter about the documentary “Grandmother Velvet”, which deals with model women in Iran: “This documentary is the product of a series of three or four parts. It was about women all over Iran who are not necessarily defined as educated and employed women in the administrative and conventional sense, and differ from our common definitions of women succeeding in the social sphere.

He continued: “Women have played an important role in our history, but the role of Iranian women is usually portrayed in the margins and in the hidden layers.” In particular, this role has always been neglected in the less urbanized contexts of society.

The director of the documentary house added: “But now the role of women, especially in the economic dimension, is more important in these spaces.” We tried to portray the active role of women in these spaces in “Grandma Velvet”. Here, although Grandma Velvet was not an entrepreneur, she is someone who knows the deal and economic values, and despite being old, she is very hopeful for the future and has financial plans for it. He is strong and he is fighting for his rights. He criticizes his mother for not giving them financial gain.

The producer explained about the audience of “Grandma Velvet”: “I think this film is suitable for broadcast on TV and will not be just welcomed by festivals.” It can also be inspiring for urban women. The director’s view of it is also not productive and he has taken the time to make it. We can say that in recent years, a genre of old women has been created in documentary festivals, with which Grandma Velvet is different.

* In documentary cinema, we have only 20 producers in the specialized sense

In response to the components of production in documentary cinema, Motahar said: We have several models of guidance in the field of production; Captaincy, refereeing and coaching, however, in documentary production, all three must sometimes be experienced and each taken on responsibilities at different times. In documentary cinema, we may have 20 producers in the specialized sense. Because 70% of documentary projects are usually produced by the directors themselves. Because there is a misconception that the producer is just someone who is so-called above the work and is only going to distribute money. The Center for the Development of Documentary and Experimental Cinema also mainly entrusts the production of its works to the directors themselves.

He continued: “Although cinema has become industrialized, the financial return of feature films is still not guaranteed, let alone documentary cinema, whose financial situation is” Azhar Man Al-Shams “. The projects are mainly supported and rented. Documentary production, then, is essentially a cultural category and cannot be measured by the abacus. The output of its production must be sought in society, whether the documented goal has been achieved or not. Today’s documentary space is limited to television broadcasts or, finally, festivals. In festivals, too, the prizes are mainly focused on technical factors. In short and semi-feature films, too, the director is awarded a prize, and only one producer can be awarded a prize for a feature-length documentary, which in turn reduces the incentive for professional documentary producers.

The director of the documentary house continued: “Of course, now the platforms have improved the conditions for this kind of cinema.” Art and experience itself is a possibility that at least makes news flow. The VODs have also been effective in spite of all the criticism leveled at them. For example, a documentary such as “Mahin” has been the most watched work in VOD, and following this success, it has not been broadcast exclusively on one of the platforms. This will give investors and documentary filmmakers an incentive to continue working in this space.

* Removal of 8 revolutionary figures under the pretext of “McFarlane”

Motahar, who is also present in the Shahid Avini section of the Haghighat Film Festival with his semi-feature documentary “From Austerity to Politics”, explained about this work: We have worked with a director who is having several collaborations with the documentary house. In addition, the themes of these works have been various. From a demanding film to an environmental work and a film about political history and about women. This has been an achievement for the documentary production office.
He added: “Currently, a wide range of our colleagues are developing their first experience of working with the Documentary House, and their work will be accepted by festivals.” “From austerity to politics” The first experience Filmmaking is by Amin Abbasi. The plot of this documentary about Ebrahim Israfilian was one of the founders of the Cultural Revolution in Iran, but as we went along, we saw that although this subject is scientifically very attractive and educated, he also has a neglected political background, which is a pity. And now the film has positive margins and can be screened for it and under the pretext of this documentary, several cases can be opened.

Motahar added: “We had eight revolutionary figures in the parliament who asked the officials of the time about the story of McFarlane and the deal with the United States, and the left-wing newspapers also dealt with them shamefully at that time.” They insulted them so much and accused them of being counter-revolutionaries in order to remove them from the sphere of the Islamic Republic. From Israfilian and Fahim Kermani and Mohammad Khamenei to Seyyed Jalaluddin Farsi, etc., who were all good people and did not cover the debates in the media because of Imam Khomeini and the revolution, and can be addressed under the pretext of this documentary.

End of message /