Cinema “The forty -third Fajr Film Festival ended this year with a not -so -interesting performance,” Sareh Behrouzi wrote in the newspaper Etemad. Although the Fajr Festival is generally considered, it has been far from its past prosperity in recent years.
These changes are not limited to the festival, but also Iranian cinema is involved in the production of superficial films and comedies with shallow content. This year again, the problems of screenwriting in Iranian cinema became more evident. Many of the films in the festival were not proportionate to this great cultural event.
The question is why should films at this festival show that they are far from the most basic principles of cinema? Such films are not in an important cultural event in the country. However, the Fajr Festival should be a place to display prominent and streaming works, not a place to show work that has no innovation.
Many people waiting for the event feel that their time is wasted at the festival. Why should films that lack the necessary innovation and quality are going to the festival? This situation clearly reflects serious challenges in the country’s cinema and culture. Cinema, as an influential media, must be able to provide a deeper look at social and cultural issues in addition to entertainment, but this is clearly observed in recent festivals.
This year we saw that even popular cinemas no longer had the passion of the past. For many people, the presence of such screenings made it a sense of productivity. It seems that these changes have not only affected the number of spectators, but have also destroyed the festival’s spirit.
The selection of films that have a lower technical and artistic level have created a profound gap in evaluating cinema as an art and cultural tool. This situation has not only damaged the credibility of the Fajr Festival, but also diminished the role of cinema as a social and cultural institution in the country.
In the case of specific films, films like “Fisher” failed to properly portray the war; The film was uniform and uniform for the last five minutes, and in the last few minutes, the unity of the troops showed a slogan. “The Shah, a narrative behind the scene of the trade union competitions and the internal communications of Iranian filmmakers, was very weak, scrutinized and without aimlessly with slogan games without any innovation. “Dad” was confused and confused and had no characterization, nothing was clear from the story.
Taxidermy, who had a story about the half -brother of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his interest in deer hunting, showed his weakness in the first few minutes and was very bored. Most of the works could not appear as expected due to the obvious weaknesses in the narrative and the structure of the script. I will write about the weaknesses of the screenplay “Raha” in the public screening in a separate post.
The key question is who is responsible for choosing these works and how can the situation be achieved? Ultimately, the real artists of Iranian cinema who are trying to improve the country’s cinema are unfortunately marginalized. The expected films, including Hamid Nematollah’s “Wild Millennium” and “Pirport”, are still unavailable in public screening. Isn’t it time to take Iranian cinema out of this crisis by adopting a new approach and restore it again? A new approach that should mean fundamental changes in the film selection system, support for creative works, and innovative cultural promotion.