Cinema , Tina Jalali wrote in the Etemad newspaperA: In the last week, the formation of the Cinema Council, with the presence of prominent names and high -ranking people in the country, has caused a lot of noise in the field of cinema, and there have been various discussions between experts and critics. Since the essence of the council was related to the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the presidency of Javad Shamghadri and the filmmakers did not like that, the continuation of such a group in the medical government was not pleasing to them, some of which were opposed to the formation of the council, and some would have made such a gathering more. They considered the advertising and formal state. We had an interview with Mohammad Mehdi Asgarpour, a true member of the council, and discussed the comments with him. The full text of this conversation is in front of you.
Mr. Asgarpour, as you know, the formation of the Supreme Cinema Council relates to Ahmadinejad’s presidency with Javad Shamghadri’s cinema management, from that time, the basis of this council and how it works was accompanied by a lot of criticism and debate, if you agree first the nature of the council. And you have an evaluation and analysis.
The main idea of the council, initially introduced as the “Supreme Council of Cinema”, was formed when the confrontation between the Ministry of Guidance in the Tenth Government and the Cinema House reached its peak, so one of the main issues that the Ministry of Guidance or the Cinema Organization It was time to set up the council, the challenge against the cinema house and the serious confrontation between the Ministry of Guidance with the Cinema House, and they were thinking that they were launching the High Council of Cinema so that cinema issues were attended by the country’s top executive. Of course, part of his personal communication was also a good relationship between Mr. Shamghadri and Ahmadinejad, and even Mr. Shamghadri’s relationship was apparently better than the Minister of Guidance with Mr. Ahmadinejad, so I can say that the Supreme Cinema Council plan was fundamentally more likely to confront the home. Cinema was formed, while the combination that had been introduced to this council was a combination of legal and legal positions.
But since the trade union and the cinema house were not accepted by the Tenth Government, there was no place for this trade union as a legal status in the composition, and approved that only a few people were true to the artists, and of course, those who, with the They were closer and were more in touch with the tenth government. So the first thing was that the trade union was completely eliminated and their position was given to the real people.
Of course, natural and legal individuals are seen in many councils, on what basis are they elected?
Yes, this objection to many of the country’s councils that when you look at them, you see that the councils consist of a number of legal entities, plus individuals, who choose the sovereignty themselves as necessities or tastes. So we are confronted with collections (whether the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution or other councils of this kind) do not see the representatives of these councils among these councils, though in a period like now, it may be invited to invite these meetings to balancing class officials as individuals. They, like this meeting, Mr. Dehkordi and I were present at the Cinema Council meeting, but it is understandable that the invitation was to fill the same vacuum, because the legal status of the cinema house was not seen in the council.
Did you respond to the lack of view of the cinema house in the Cinema Council?
Yes, this was the site of my protest that I announced at the meeting, because tomorrow the officials may be replaced tomorrow, so the representatives of the class must be present and amended in the bylaws.
These talk about the structure of the council, what do you think about the council?
What I find that most of the cinema council meetings were in the tenth government, after which less meetings were held and were not held in courses at all.
It was somewhat closed.
By reviewing previous approvals of this council, I presented today that the Secretariat of the Council or its officials and the Cinema Organization approved by the Supreme Cinema Council’s approvals from the beginning and see how executive form itself. In my opinion, these approvals were either none or very little to the implementation stage. So we seem to have a council that has had many approvals, but many of them have not been executed. Like the hall and many other approvals, they have been approved without their support, so that most of them are not considered a budget line, so the programs remain silent.
Mr. Asgarpour, what seems to be about this council has been more magnified. Agree?
Yes, I think it was more propaganda to show the awe of the cinema, and in the first place they wanted to beat with the council in the mouth of the trade union, but to say, there were some issues in the council that the executive form was. Like a livelihood to our colleagues on Eid and Ramadan, which was sometimes paid and sometimes not paid, these payments were mainly made from the Ministry of Guidance’s credits, so it was not to open another headline, so There was no need for the High Council of Cinema to help livelihoods. Until now it has been the situation.
Now what do you think about forming a council in the new era?
Now friends in the new era believe that this may be possible to push some of the macroeconomic issues and want to pursue seriously. Despite the past that exists in this council and we do not see much hope, we do not have the opposition to the government to tell them that you are wrong before you take a step, they say let’s take the step, to see if it is wrong or not, or not at all. Can’t?
We interact with the government until this area, I personally believe that Dr. Salehi has good intentions, and they are sympathetic to artists and want to happen to the field of culture. During this time, they have been trying to empathize among artists.
So we have a duty to help them along the way, Mr. Faridzadeh is the same, they have good intentions and are trying to happen to the filmmakers and filmmakers in the macro. But in order to have a more accurate evaluation of this council, we need to be time -consuming, and of course, the association and interaction will be to the point where there is a proper and pragmatic approach.
Did you talk about more and more formal presence of the trade union in this council? Did you get the results?
The council’s administration is approved by the Cabinet, which identified the composition. During the previous periods when they formed the Council, it was based on this bylaws and no changes to this Code, as I said, a number of legal members and a number of filmmakers and artists who are real members of the Council, attending the Code. They have to change the bylaws for the presence of the representatives of the trade union, because today I have a guardian responsibility, but tomorrow I may not have that responsibility, so the representative of the trade union must be in the council.
Another point is that we want to be on the agenda of the classes, the tips that were raised in these previous meetings and meetings of the Cinema Council were mainly in the trade union, which I say, the issues we are involved in the class today, and apparently this. The issues have never been in the Cinema Council meetings.
Another point is that the names in the council had a variety of reactions, whether these people attend each session. What do you think?
This is what you say is based on a bylaw that has already existed and has not been fundamentally written unless they change the previous by -laws to approve the cabinet.
Do they change?
In my opinion, at least they should make changes to the presence of the trade union, and we may have suggestions within the legal sector. My point is that some of the legal entities in this council are empty and some may not be suitable for this council.
Mr. Asgarpour, in your talk, you mentioned that the Minister of Guidance is working hard to resolve the problems of the filmmakers and to judge it fairly during this time, this is clearly clear (an example, if we were to point out that Tomaj Salehi was supposed to be executed but It is free now) Hope is very important among the cinema, but do you think the big cinema issues will be resolved. For example, making social films is a top priority, but cinema executives emphasize the production of social films in their words, even the point that Mr. Aref emphasized at the council meeting was to remove the security view of the cinema and more importantly than the talk. Do I want to know your opinion on the cinema?
The government started with a claim that should not move on, it may take time to solve cinema problems, may be part of the problems, may not be part of the problems really, or perhaps the slogans we saw throughout the time. , I have no judgments for now, but what we see and it is clear that the current Ministry of Guidance’s current executives are determined to solve problems and empathize. But our advice as a trade union to friends of the Ministry of Guidance is that in some areas structures should be changed, meaning good action along with good structure. Then the conditions for making good social films that are extremely empty in the cinema may be possible, otherwise with the same structure, the license and license of the show we only see that the managers became more tasteful, but it is unclear how long it will continue because it may It is again to put pressure on the institutions and change the space, and the goodness will be lost and again face inappropriate conditions.
In my opinion, friends think about restructuring and take the role of the trade union more seriously, not as an individual, but the trade union institution to make their own decisions.