Cinema Contemporary, Hassan Lotfi, wrote in the newspaper Etemad: “Do not think the Simorghs they gave are the forty -third festival. No festival ends with its closing. The judges of the referees of each festival specifically alongside the judgments of the Judges of Critics and Specialist Cinematographers who stars the films and write about them, and in general, the referees are widely used to watch all the films and theaters at the festival. They have seen the festival completely.
That is why after the Simorghs home by the winners of the Forty -third Fajr Film Festival or not before, after announcing the names of the candidates, the jury and their opponents began to write and say. Saying and writing that is natural. The most optimistic judgment is attached to taste.
It is enough to change the composition of the jury to change the outcome of the festival’s winners. It is natural, because every festival has its own policies. A policy that can be placed in the program, landscape and mission. The mission that gives the right type, according to the jury, (even if it is against politics, mission, vision, etc.) and guides the referees’ misconceptions. The vote is changed, indirectly, and so on.
In such a form (even if it is expedient), one can no longer talk about the natural votes. I am not trying to insult the festival’s festival referees. I do not want to say that this has happened at the Fajr Film Festival. My word is more general. With what I saw in the comments, the festival’s festival referees are apparently more than a large number of previous festivals in the case. It is better to make more transparency. To defend the vote (though not customary!) I do not say that their defense is effective to eliminate doubts, but at least those who are in a bowl by default are not close and referees who will be out of history. Come, (the future we are going to blink) will say that their votes have entered the basket of each movie from their minds and tastes. According to the man of God, they have not invaded their hereafter with the world of others.
I say these for the sake of the jury itself, otherwise the fate of the films will always be determined over time. No prize alone can last a film in the history of cinema. Unless Hassan Pourshirazi’s brilliant play in Pierre President can be ignored. Unless we can go through, you have to chat more about the films that have the opportunity to win. Maybe when you said such a chat.