Cinema Trust, Saeed Rajabi Forutan, a former director of cinema, wrote in the newspaper Etemad: “A meeting was recently held at the Tehran University School of World Studies. According to reports, the speakers of the ceremony, while discussing the competitive advantages of Iranian cinema with other cinema world countries, considered the cinema the best ambassador to represent Iranian culture and identity, and after Iranian poetry and literature, they represent Iranian cultural identity.
Speakers at the meeting, who were Mr. Raed Faridzadeh (head of the Cinema Organization) and Alireza Shoja Nouri (cinema activist and actor), each in the past been responsible for the Farabi Cinema Foundation for nearly a decade, and made clear examples of European filmmakers.
What has been heard in the words of the first meeting is that in the last decade due to the challenges in our country’s foreign relations and the widespread sanctions imposed, cultural communication, including cinema, has been minimized and low, and if it is a name for Iranian film and filmmakers, it is also a filmmaker. The films of the recent two groups have generally pursued the life of ordinary people in Iran or an approach contrary to Iranian culture and policies. This node becomes more blind when we know that some films produced in Iran also produced with permits are produced in such a way that they are far from the official and customary norms of society.
Such films have been present at world festivals without receiving licenses and have received awards. If we ignore the political choices of some festivals, Iranian cinema has not released films in the world for years, as if Abbas Kiarostami’s death has been closed forever. Asghar Farhadi’s migration has won two Oscars and one Golden Globe Award and his preference for filming overseas has made Iranian cinema empty. However, referring to the achievements of Iranian cinema in the past and pride for global honors, there is no justification for the status quo, and repeating it does not solve the problems in the path of globalization of Iranian cinema. Remember, the success of the achievement has been in the scope of festivals and elite cinema festivals, rather than communicating with the massive audience and its foreign exchange earnings, and films that have been widespread for the Oscars have not become a single flow and have been a single star.
Moving Iranian cinema into the world market requires the expansion of political and economic relations with countries around the world, including Europe, which our political governance must think about and make it possible to normalize wise relations and within the framework of national interests at least in the seventies and eighties. Both speakers have emphasized the need to learn (English) by filmmakers. The mastery of filmmakers, including producers, directors, and activists in English to expand their cultural and professional interactions with foreign countries in foreign countries, as long as politicians and diplomats have not provided the basis for joint activities, will remain as much as possible.
Removing linguistic barriers is definitely essential in the conversation for joint production and broadcasting, cinematic cooperation, the opening of the office in the two countries and the like, but at present cultural diplomacy is not sufficiently influential due to the specific conditions in the country’s foreign policy.
The day when, in the completely natural and normal conditions of cultural and media communication, supported by political and economic cooperation, Iranian culture and art, including cinema, can open its way to the view of the global audience. On that day, Iranian ambassadors and cultural advisers are not as annoying today, and Iranian art can be profitable without their help. Cinema executives have usually talked about Iranian films and cinematic activists- and what is absent is the feedback of film in the mirror of people’s thoughts and opinions in foreign countries. The author in Kazan, Russia, has closely witnessed the pure emotions of ordinary audiences against the film “Mam Like Mother” (Product 2) by Rasul Mollagolipour and have seen the audience standing with tears in the long minutes after the film was completed. The film that I am unlikely to have won awards from any foreign festival.
The current situation has actually faced a challenge of Iranian cinema to various markets (cinema, television, and other movie screening platforms), and everything is summed up in the eyes of some critics and filmmakers attending film festivals. Of course, during the years, some of the ambassadors and cultural advisers of Iranian film weeks have been established in a few countries in the world, but this has not led to financial and economic actions for film owners, and there have been no agreements for cinema cooperation between the two countries, and everything has been made on paper. Let us be, because of the non -commitment of the then directors of the Islamic Culture and Communications Organization to pay the contribution of Iranian film producers and owners, the least producer is satisfied with the film for free. Fortunately, there are more cinematic directors in the cinema organization who are both fluent in foreign language and have a living and educational experience abroad. Certainly, if the situation improves in foreign policy, the organization’s managers can facilitate the presence and participation of Iran’s private sector in the global markets and continue to liberate the Iranian cinema economy from a small circle that is limited to the geographical boundaries of the country.