CinemaThe preacher of the preacher;
I have to say honestly I was not curious about watching the “anti -hero”, over the years about some of the political and effective figures of the 1980s that were unilateral and biased, I thought “anti -hero” was one of them, but the film, from the beginning, the audience with it. It accompanies. Aref Afshar’s film remains fascinating to the end, and the director’s efforts to narrate one of the most important characters in the history of the revolution is remarkable.
*I think during this time, you’ve repeatedly talked about the subject of “anti -hero” and its content. “Anti -Hero” is about two views. One is represented by Mr. Khalkhali and the other is Ayatollah Beheshti. But let’s go back a little. Khalkhali is a unique personality, why did you choose him?
Aref Afshar: I think there is the answer to the question. Mr. Khalkhali is a unique personality. Probably not only me, but many other filmmakers, from the next generations, also tend to make films about him.
*Your previous film “The Burzakhs” was about the wrong cultural policies of the 1980s and the imposition of restrictions, the film was marginalized, and you would have predicted that it would happen for “anti -hero”. These margins seem to be fascinating and a factor in your film.
In choosing the subject, I always think that people have a sensual subject matter. If not all people, at least part of the people. The next thing to do is that the issue is not over at one point. The subject is alive, involved generations, and in our lives, the current and the sari. A character like Mr. Khalkhali has not finished in the past and we have for today. The same is true in the “Purgatory”, the view and approach has not ended. The idea that is criticized in the “anti -hero” and “integrity” has changed the shape if it does not exist in that form, but still alive.
*When we talk about the 1980s, we talk about an influential political spectrum, some of which are reformists, a reformist whose path and view of some of them changed in the coming years. Isn’t your criticism of the reformists in the “Purgatory” and “anti -hero”? In the “anti -hero”, it is quite clear what Khalkhali is, close to Imam Khomeini’s bits and supported by Ahmad Khomeini.
I disagree with the narration of history, we must analyze history as it is and without specific prejudice and glasses. In both films, I examined a case, the effective characters in these adventures are clear and clear, my concern is not what the political faction depends on. I strongly deny that my films are against the reformists. There are those in front of the camera who are the prominent figures in the 1980s and, as you say, the reformers are very dignified about their performance and honestly say that we have made a mistake, this represents their matureness, that one is once based on the circumstances, the conditions. Even his view and belief do something, it is natural. We all have this feature, but if we are busy in the wrong way after time, it is valuable.
*Although there was no reference and fundamentalist political lines at that time, Ayatollah Beheshti was close to Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mohammad Khatami. Perhaps if he had not been a martyr, he could have been an effective reformist figure.
Like you, I can’t comment or predict the characters so explicitly, I see Mr. Beheshti with his performance and conversations, so I see others. That he was close to people and that this belonging, friendship or relationship has continued to this day, at least in my opinion it is not easy to prove. All the important and effective people of contemporary history are attractive to me with all their positive and negative qualities. It is attractive to Mr. Beheshti’s filmmaker, Mr. Khatami and Ahmadinejad are also attractive. I was interested in talking about Mr. Beheshti, I would like to have the opportunity to film about Mr. Khatami or Ahmadinejad.
*Why do you say this category is not right?
Some of the critics of Mr. Khalkhali’s performance are now belonging to the reformist faction, with their companions and supporters of stubbornness during their fundamentalism. A number of Mr. Khalkhali’s supporters who came to them and refused to speak are today’s fundamentalists. Therefore, the basis for choosing the subject and even those who come in front of the camera is not their political orientation. It was important for me to have a detailed and accurate account of characters and history. The “anti -hero” in the fundamentalist government was difficult to show, and his problem was resolved in the period of the problem, if Mr. Khalkhali, in your opinion, belongs to the reformist spectrum, that would not happen. The screening of the film in this period shows that my concern, the critique of the thinking of characters and political currents, has been seen.
*I didn’t say he was a reformist. I said it is close to the Imam Khomeini and Ahmad Khomeini. It is closer to the reformists.
The fact is that from the moment of film research, the design of the question, and when I ask the question, perhaps the only thing I don’t think is the factional dependence of the film and the interviewee. I care that everybody has dependence and tendency, but I am not looking to engineer votes and thoughts. For me, at these moments and time of editing, the goal is to make the principle of the event that happened and the subject of the film for the audience. The traces of political interests and the factional tendency of people are seen in my films. I will deal with any intellectual, political, and ideological orientation if it is related to the film’s space and in line with its main purpose. In the “anti -hero” you can see that we say that Mr. Khalkhali was Talabah and was in line with Mr. Mustafa Khomeini. At the end of the film, at the end of the film, we also hear his relationship with another children of Imam Khomeini.
*Was there a lot of documents about Mr. Khalkhali? Was it possible to talk about him? Many people, especially his companions, seem to not like to say something about his common past or their friendship.
The documents about Mr. Khalkhali and all the historical issues are great, but access to them is important. I had a serious problem to access historical documents and sources, this was my most important challenge. Mr Khalkhali’s supporters and opponents are reluctant to talk about him. It is as if they want to erase that character and that period.
*What was the best criticism or reaction you read about “anti -hero”?
I can’t say anything, I have read and heard a lot of comments, but what I like is that the “anti -hero” has a lot of serious and stubborn supporters. I have no negative sense of the opponents of the film, even between the opponents and the supporters of the film, we do not have the intellectual and factional category, there are people who love the film and belong to a thought or faction, in the same faction and thinking, the film has serious opposition.
*Are you satisfied with the screening of the film at the Fajr Festival? The film was welcomed in “The Cinema of Honest” and the film was taken into consideration by the audience.
It is a good thing that the film is screened at the Fajr Festival. I still can’t believe the “anti -hero” has reached the Fajr Festival. I didn’t even know what the fate of the film was before before the start of the “Cinema Film Festival,” I didn’t know what happened to the film, but I didn’t even think of the “anti -hero” to the Fajr festival. In my opinion, it has been a major impact on the change of individuals and managers in the cultural space, for filmmakers, audiences and cultural currents of these changes. This sentence is both humorous and tragedy. The “Anti -Hero” was banned last year, and this year it was also nominated for Best Film, and is also screened at the Fajr Film Festival.
*In the two films “Anti -Hero” and “Purgatory”, is a strong and strong policy, are you a political filmmaker? You see your tendency in these films, see?
I don’t know, I try to make a movie, a film I make, and the general audience loves it, and then the particular audience will like it. It is a good film for me to react to the elite part of society (politicians, scientific and cultural personalities) and the general audience, this is the most ideal way for me. In the future, I will go to issues that are probably more pronounced in terms of being sensitive and controversial than “anti -hero”. These days, I’m working on a screenplay and documentary, I hope they are conditions for their construction.