Palestine exists in many other parts of the world today, and although we are often unaware of it, we are witnessing a kind of "Palestinization of the world, due to globalization", says the prominent film director Elia suleiman in an interview for "Vijesti".
The director from Palestine, who has been living in Paris for years, supports this conclusion with a series of examples, from Iraq to Ukraine, through right-wing governments or movements around the world...
Among other things, he talks about this in a unique way in his award-winning films, recording in them images, memories, experiences, unique traits of mentality, relationships and humor that he carries in himself or remembers... Born in 1960 in Nazareth, his memories to the hometown are full of contrasts...
In an interview with "Vijesti", he says that Nazareth was a small town in the hills of Palestine, with numerous churches and mosques and pleasant people who nurture good neighborly relations, practice family outings, maintain yards and gardens, go to festivals and maintain customs, in order to further reached the description of a city whose ruins scream despair and sadness, the remains of a city where children's screams have been replaced by the firm footsteps of armed kids, while violence is felt in the air, and the presence of drugs and the mafia is constant...
However, he also remembers that it was similar when he was a child, when his father, in order to take his family on a trip to the lake, had to get permission from the Israeli soldiers, who generally would not allow it, on a whim... Growing up in such an environment , but in a family and a neighborhood where resistance and humor were ubiquitous, Elia Suleiman over the years, as a director and screenwriter, recorded and presented a large part of his experience through films. His creations exude a special poetics, without redundant information, dramatic plots, empty dialogues, but they perfectly depict the spirit and identity of Palestine. He claims that the humor, irony, burlesque, absurdity, sarcasm seen in the films come from personal experience that is shown in the film becomes universal... Humor stands out as a powerful weapon in difficult situations, a tool that makes life easier and prolongs the moment of enthusiasm, and young he sees people alienated from national generalization and pride, young activists, fighters for freedom and tolerance as the hope of the world...
By showing this through his achievements, he earned a number of the greatest awards, from the Cannes Festival to the Venice Film Festival, and at the end of 2022 he received the Lifetime Achievement Award of the European Film Academy... Thus he became the first filmmaker from Palestine to receive this award. award, which he does not consider special. It moves away from national frameworks that it claims only set borders and widen divisions, as a product of the world according to the West...
Elia Suleiman talks about all this, his films, art, Palestine, Nazareth, the West, for "Vijesti", with a brief review of the award:
"Basically, you are happy when people recognize your work, it makes you satisfied, but then you continue to live normally. It is important to know how to continue with what you normally do, and to accept the award only as a nice moment and a certain recognition for previous work", he said, complimenting the organizers of the ceremony in Iceland.
You are the first author from Palestine to be awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award of the European Film Academy. To that statement and to the questions of the journalists, you answered that it would not be something special, perhaps even strange for some, if the award went to someone from Italy, France and the like... Why is it emphasized, in your opinion?
Belonging to a nation is something that is always in focus, as well as the fact that individuals of a certain nationality are generalized and identified with the entire nation. I am not an advocate of it and I am not a nationalist... The interest in my position on matters concerning Palestine is based mainly on the fact that I am Palestinian and as such I am identified with some established codes of the Palestinian nation, but that does not make me any less sympathetic to some other nations , let alone being in solidarity with all other (similar) cases and situations in the world, which actually need solidarity and support. I get the impression that being Palestinian must necessarily translate into some progressive or positive attitude towards Palestine and as if it is based only on nationality. And what actually makes you/us Palestinian is the fact that you can identify with different people who are under some kind of oppression, regardless of race, color, religion, nation... That's what makes me Palestinian, not some particularity or stereotyping of that nationality.
Why and why then constant national determination and generalization?
I think that the discourse of identifying the individual with the nation continues as a colonial discourse that has existed for a long time. I was once watching a BBC news program and noticed certain terms... I don't know if the people sitting there in the studio using them are even aware of what it means when they say, for example, "that part of the world". Such an attitude that we consider the country and the world we live in as the center, and specifically use "that (some) part of the world" as a pronoun to describe an area or a place where strange people live, where strange things happen and where violence abounds, really represents a type of of the dominant colonial discourse. In my opinion, such discourse makes the people who say it think they are on the "right side" and are unaware of the fact that they are using terminology inherited from colonial countries. But the way we perceive other countries, nations, worlds, is not going to change very quickly, especially when we live in the Western world and approach it with a kind of colonial background.
"That part of the world" in your case, and "that part of Europe", and even the coin "Western Balkans" in the case of the post-Yugoslav states created after the war broke up Yugoslavia, are frequent phrases that often have an extended, hidden meaning. Executive Director of EFA Matthijs Wouter Knol said in an interview for "Vijesti" that the audience from the west and northwest of Europe, including himself, when they think of our area, they usually think of war, war films and stories. Why is that, what do you think?
It's all an irony of history, and (when) you think about it, who has caused so many wars around the world? People from the West openly say that when they think of Eastern Europe, they also think of war. The fact is that the problems are in the Middle East, because this is a world according to the West. And all these people are privileged and benefit from the wealth of war-torn countries. This is exactly what my last film is actually trying to suggest, which is that we are witnessing a kind of Palestinianization of the world, as a result of globalization. But, that tension that the "privileged" create elsewhere, usually returns like a boomerang. I honestly don't know why there is an attitude of denial in this part of the globe where people always think the violence is somewhere else and far away, when in fact they are either part of it or the initiators of it. Of course, there are those who resist it, and one of the ways we do and continue to resist is by creating art.
In the latest film “It must be Heaven” you travel to different countries, visit cities around the world, find many similarities with your homeland and draw parallels with Palestine. As you said, you show a certain "Palestinization of the world", in the context that Palestine exists today in many other parts of the planet, although we may not be aware of it yet. Taking into account that today Palestine is often a metaphor for violence and victimhood, are (ordinary) people aware of this and can it be approached through film?
It is a very complicated question and a very complicated situation to analyze. First of all, when you go to the cinema to watch a movie, I as an author do not think that you learn anything on the first viewing, nor should you. Usually you think of pleasure and you want to enjoy what you watch, the story, the pictures, the acting, so I don't think the effect of that is very tangible and concrete. This means that you watch a movie that you like, and then later you see a friend, maybe a girlfriend or boyfriend, husband or wife, colleague, and in some quite ordinary and spontaneous situation, for example at lunch, you might talk about the movie that you watched, maybe both of you or just one of you, and which one you liked and caused some feeling...
Perhaps, especially in my films, there is not much historical information that can be learned or learned, and I also don't think that attitudes change after watching one film. I also think that there is some effect of sleepiness and passivity... I want to think in the direction that people will understand in the long run that the beauty, aesthetics or poetics in my film are intended to detect and unconsciously or consciously reduce the violence in each of us, in each individual. From the point of view of history or science, I am not sure if it is possible to achieve such an effect on public opinion or to change a certain socio-political consciousness through the medium of film. I'm not sure if film in general has that power to really change the order of things. It can affect a person, because you may realize that you want to beautify your everyday life or that you don't want violence in your life or you will want to be kinder to your environment...
For example, many times when I was watching movies and enjoying them, I would be hungry more often than I would want to change the world, but it was actually a desire to prolong the enjoyment of that moment. So it seems to be more on a micro level than on a socio-political level. For example, many people who watch my film "It must be heaven", will not automatically say "it's not just Palestine", but I think they all have their own personalized interpretation of what they saw. Some people are interested in hearing additional facts, ethnographic or historical data and the like, some face their own, let's call it, preconceived notions about "the other world", which sometimes may not be necessary...
You incorporate yourself into your films, either by talking about yourself, your family, your community, a certain period. These are certainly not intimate and individual stories, but universally personal and emotional for everyone who watches the film. How do you look at your achievements, can they be taken as your diary or even your vision of Palestine through time and space?
The fact is that in my films I use semi-biographical elements, sometimes autobiographical parts, but my films are not documentaries, they are far from it... I wouldn't even say that they represent a diary, although I may have used that word in one of them. It's just the way I make movies. I often write notes about things I experience. Sometimes it's a story I hear from someone, but mostly the film is a semi-biographical story. In some I included my family, for example my real parents are in my first film. The idea from which I start is to transfer or translate a certain moment into a cinematic dimension, in order not to freeze an individual or shared experience, or metamorphose it into an aesthetic image.
Again, this does not mean that it remains personal, mine or just my family, but becomes everyone's experience and everyone's family. I repeat, this is exactly what art and film represent, and I am not the only person who is in a relationship behind and in front of the camera. Let's say that I became a kind of transparent guide through the main character's observations. I'm sure there are plenty of filmmakers who have done this, but why it happens, I don't know. It is more intuitive than aesthetic.
An important segment in your films is made up of comedic, witty elements that, I would say, bring the mentality and culture of the people closer to the viewers. On the other hand, you often give a comedic dimension to tragic and anxious things. Why do you choose laughter in almost all emotional situations and how do drama and suffering correspond with humor?
I wouldn't really use the word comedy, but rather humor, irony, burlesque, absurdity, all of which comes from a very personal experience. I happen to come from a very funny family. I grew up as the youngest child and I was probably influenced by my brothers, parents, friends, because there was always a humorous atmosphere at home. I am sure that it is also a result of the environment and the community I come from, which is Nazareth. Nazareth used to be a small town in the hills of Palestine which, due to political circumstances, slowly became a real ghetto. Israel creates its own country by dislocating the Palestinian land and the Palestinian people, making them third-class citizens.
There is a lot under blockade, many people have become homeless, they have nowhere to go, they have no dreams that they can achieve, because of everything that has stifled their lives in Palestine. Not even a job is available to them and all this leads to the city where people live turning into ruins and despair. However, people who live in despair try to resist the political environment, most often with the help of humor, good and healthy humor that is quite well-known throughout history in difficult situations. Where there is a ghetto, there is also humor. People want to laugh, laughter is like a time-stopping machine, a machine that provides moments of euphoria to life, but which unfortunately stops quickly.
I would also compare laughter to poetry that prolongs the duration of the moment, makes it stronger, but also more elastic than the clock that counts down the time shows, and accordingly irony and humor have the power to prolong the present and give us hope, because when there is laughter, there is also feeling that things could be better. Laughter encourages us and provides pleasant moments. I think the ghettos produced a lot of that kind of humor, not always similar or the same, but in a way, many communities that were oppressed and ghettoized offered some kind of resistance through humor, sarcasm, and irony. Also, when it comes to the movie, with humor you somehow prolong that dramatic aspect of life. When I think about the ghettos in Europe, it is known that the Jews in their ghettos were known for their humor, even though they experienced some of the most tragic moments in recent human history. I think it is a form of resistance that comes from a state of despair, often from hopeless situations.
What are your first memories of Nazareth as it used to be and how much has changed?
I remember when I was little, a boy maybe 5-6 years old... Nazareth was under the direction of the army and under military rules. In order for my father to take us on a family trip and to relax and hang out by the lake together, we had to go to the police station and get a permit, which was almost always denied without reason, only to increase the frustration among the Palestinians. I'm not sure if it's visible enough, but I would say that the ambience and atmosphere of my films, from the first to the last, is such that in some way you gain an insight or trace that violence and regret it. For example, when I shot my first feature film, in it you can feel that with all that I mentioned, Nazareth still exists - a small town with churches and mosques, gardens and people who know each other, visit each other, have their own customs, cherish tradition, they go to parties, visit each other... It is clear that everything is going on quite politically progressive, because some military interventions are seen and the existence of violence is witnessed. In the movie "The time that Remains", as well as in "It must be heaven", you can clearly see that Nazareth has become a place of violence, you see children on the destroyed ground, you see weapons, drugs are everywhere, the mafia is omnipresent, every other day you hear about killings between gangs fighting each other for control of the territory... And Israel stands and watches everything that happens, because they want the Arabs, the Palestinians to have these kinds of problems in order to force them to absolutely destroy each other, exterminate each other. Nazareth became such a place, eerie, desperate, sad. I know this for sure from close friends from Nazareth with whom I often talked.
And a lot has changed... Every city in Israel that is Palestinian can be described as very bad, looted or horrible... So long as the Israeli government continues to do what it started doing back in 1948, which is is that it makes life impossible for Palestinians and makes them disappear. They have created everything necessary to make life miserable for the Palestinians. What happened recently, if you take into account the occupation in 1967, which is different from 1948, because in 1967 under direct military supervision they carried out violence, killed people and children every day, a new, modern fascist state was created in which living stateless. I use the term "stateless" because, politically speaking, that is exactly what characterizes the state that now exists in Israel. People do not recognize that it all started with the military government in 1948 when Palestine was occupied. The first creation and foundation of Israel was actually based on violence, massacres, rapes, and this was hidden for a long time.
As someone who lived there, what were your impressions and emotions when you visited Nazareth, what did you expect?
When I once visited Nazareth, for research and filming on the Palestinian part of the film, I saw how much tension had taken over the city and life, the atmosphere of violence and the atmosphere of horror was evident. Then I would add a few such, unplanned moments to the movies. One of those things is kids with guns in their hands...
The second thing I witnessed, besides the armed children, is that there are no young people there anymore... Many young people in their twenties disappeared from the city... I wondered where the young generations were going and how, and then I discovered that they they actually exist, but they left all the Palestinian cities, including Nazareth, and somehow gathered in another city, Haifa, which became their center. Many artists, students, activists gather in Haifa and have started to build, or have already built, a rather unique cultural environment from the ground up. I discovered this during the production when I asked acquaintances or passers-by where the people were, young people... I was told that they had all emigrated and were concentrated in that one city.
I have to admit that it encouraged me to visit the bars where they go out, where they jam, play, I visited the galleries where they exhibit their artwork and they were really magnificent scenes that blew me away. I have to say that every time after that tour I came back under the influence of alcohol, because I went from one bar to another, to another, and so on, until I got stuck in a bar at three in the morning where the people I was hanging out with took me away. They wanted to show me that gay and lesbian Palestinian bar, and I wanted to see what it was like there...
When we entered we were greeted by an incredible party, so intense! I had (more) a few drinks and said, "Now I know what the last scene of the movie (The Time that Remains) is going to be," and it's actually the exact same scene I saw when I walked into that bar. I told the crew to get ready, because I was going to shoot at that location, and everyone was surprised. I stood my ground, I wanted a strong and wild party like before, I wanted a real, life-like scene at the end, whose actors would be the people I found there and the others who go out there, all in that very place... That's right and anyway, everyone got together, started having fun and doing everything they normally do in that bar... That scene for me was a moment of hope at the end of the movie. My character's time and my time have actually passed, and the new generation is taking it over and they are full of energy, resisting occupation and oppression through culture, fun, art, parties, love, enjoyment...
Realizing that many of them are artists, I get the impression that it distracts me from my own sadness and regret, because I see that there is hope, that there is hope in these young people, they are hope... Israel is very well aware of their existence, aware are that they resist with their weapons - culture and art, and that's exactly what the Israeli government hates, so much so that they don't know what to do with people who paint, take photos, dance, socialize, have a free life, enjoy sexual freedom, and that's exactly what Israel despises... I know that some of those people, some of those who were in my film or appeared in scenes, are sometimes severely beaten by the police, arrested for no reason, just to provoke them, to beat them , in order to close them, "admonish" them from time to time...
But these people are talking about what we talked about at the beginning of this conversation, they are talking about universality, because they don't think about Palestine within national boundaries and are so connected to the rest of the activists in the world, they sympathize and identify with them, whether in the case of the African-American movement in America or any other movement for rights and freedoms around the world, while they understand Palestine as a concept of themselves, their own modern and progressive understandings, and not as a nationalist movement or determinant. Moreover, they are more of an internationalist movement, and that's what I'm talking about when I talk about film, because film is also universal.
Given that you don't live in your country, that it is destroyed, you also said that you are full of despair, that its beauty, history, culture are on the sidelines, do you feel sad that you have somehow been deprived of the opportunity to enjoy it and to Maybe your life is going differently?
I cannot imagine what it would be like if things had been different than they are during my lifetime. I simply accepted from a young age that this is my life and that it is the way it is, just like your life is the way it is... The only thing I can say about it is that I honestly consider myself to be privileged in whatever cases there are... I I chose my own exile and it was not a forced exile, but a choice. I live in Paris and compared to many other people in the world, not only the people in Palestine, I feel like a free man.
If I allowed myself to have some melancholic moments and ask myself where I would be if it weren't for Israel, what my life would be like, I would probably imagine it without problems, without violence, in some country house near the city where I was born... In that case, I am no different from millions and millions of people who were forced to emigrate in order to have pleasure and peace in their lives... Also, it's not as if I didn't enjoy myself when I returned home, that would be untrue... I enjoyed nature and had moments of pleasure, even in circumstances where violence was around. Now I sometimes look back at the people I am in contact with from my homeland, who stayed at home, and I see a big difference in how I live my daily life and how they live theirs. It's a huge contrast. I have many friends in such areas, not only in Palestine but also in Lebanon for example, in Beirut, who are going through very difficult times in their lives...
What I can say is to reiterate that I am privileged compared to the experience they have. For example, you can see for yourself, you can talk to me, I drink coffee, my cat is behind me, I take care of her, I think about art, I enjoy everyday life, I don't live under the constant threat and fear that Israeli soldiers will break into my house and what will happen then... That is basically the answer to your question.
However, in addition to films and art, we also talked about Palestine. What do you think could be the end of that situation, when will it all end?
I ask myself the same question... However, I don't think there is an answer to that question. Forget the specific territory or location, the global environment is such that it is on the verge of total destruction... Take into account what is happening today in Iraq, Syria, or closer, look at what is happening in Ukraine, and then see what is happening in Africa , and in so many other places in the world... Think about how many right-wing governments or movements there are across Europe... Racism is on the rise, there are anti-immigrant movements and I would say that things are not going in a good direction, and then with all that there is also an environmental aspect and major environmental problems. Multinational companies and corporations suck the blood of consumers and give it to powerful states that become stronger than the governments of other, smaller states, thus controlling them and forcing them to do what they want. Money, profit and consumerism have taken over our lives, which can be the reason why our lives could be destroyed, especially because the militarization that is carried out today, which also refers to globalization, has a huge influence. It is a means of maintaining the status quo, in order to drain even more blood from poor nations. I see no end to it. Conversations with young people, whom I see and communicate with in all my travels around the world, give me hope. Young people, in addition to all that, are full of energy and are ready for activism, no matter what country we are talking about. However, whether and how they can achieve something in the face of the monstrosity that is on the other side, I have no answer...
Activities that, instead of bringing closer together, distance and divide
From time to time, events like Palestinian film week are organized in Montenegro... When I told you that I watched your film and that I know people who admire your film expression, you were surprised that you had an audience here. Is that why events like those are good, partly for the sake of getting to know the cinematography of distant countries?
I would say that Palestine is not so far from Montenegro. It is maybe a three-hour flight or less, maybe some two or three thousand kilometers, certainly less than I am currently (in Paris) away from Palestine. Honestly, I don't have a particularly good opinion of such events and I don't think they bring distant cultures together. In a way, I am against this kind of activity because to me they seem like changing events for the sake of order, filling the repertoire... It is not as if it will be some kind of cultural denationalization or as if a Palestinian film that the inhabitants of your country would like to be included in the regular cinema repertoire could watch just like any American movie. I think that these weekly activities are often based more on the nationalization and ethnographic program, and not necessarily on the artistic aspect.
Also, often some of the selected films can be boring or even unattractive to the audience that hears that a Palestinian film week is being organized, because "who cares"... That's how films are grouped just because the authors are from Palestine, which is exactly the opposite. from what I think about my films and what I want them to be. My films do not travel because I am Palestinian, but because there is interest, because maybe they are good films... Another example is the organization of some film festivals where only films written by women will be shown. Why these groupings and divisions into certain types? It's not as if it brings together and destroys borders, but sets them up and automatically distances women and women's films from men's, which supposedly satisfies the visibility of women's achievements, only to immediately return to the everyday segregation that exists... The same is true of Palestinian films and other similar activities related to ethnic or national affiliation... That's why I often refused to have my films shown on such occasions, because I don't particularly enjoy it...
Have you heard of it before or maybe you have visited Montenegro?
I once wanted to come to Montenegro, when I was in Sarajevo at the Sarajevo Film Festival, but it failed. I saw the pictures and it is easy to conclude that Montenegro is a very beautiful country. Having already mentioned SFF, I must take the opportunity to point out that I really love that festival, and the people who organize it are like close friends to me.
A burst of creativity can also come after staring at the ceiling
When it comes to films, it is known that you are not always "in operation" and that you dedicate yourself to preparation and production... What are your plans for the future?
I would like to start writing something new, since I haven't until now. I tried once, twice, then stopped for a few weeks... Do I have anything interesting that could make a script out of, I don't think I have yet, so I'll have to wait for the moment when it comes up. It would be nice if something started in me this year and I could start working on it. It's nice to travel around the world to promote and present the film...
While it was relevant with the previous film, I had an excuse why I wasn't working on something new, but now there is no excuse anymore, so I ask myself the same question as you... Writing can arise as a reaction after staring at the ceiling for hours, yes you don't know beforehand what you want to do, but for some burst of creativity and inspiration to happen... Of course, until the end of March I'm busy with other things, so I can't devote myself to writing as I'd like, but I hope that in April I can let me start thinking about it...
Solidarity makes us human, not blood or nationality
Is it possible to put the film in a national or any other frame? How do you perceive it, given that this particular national designation is added as a prefix, either to the author or to his work, does it play an important role?
What makes me and my opinion is not my blood, nor my nationality, but the knowledge of a place and solidarity with the people who are fighting against the fascist regime that occupies them and that destroys lives, takes land and degrades humanity. Of course, my heart goes out to those who fight it…
When you make a film, I speak from my experience, you will insist on these things, on life, fate, people, you will rarely think about the causes of some events, you will easily think about how to help Palestine and liberate it... You think about aesthetics, about poetics, about the narrative, often also about how to beautify the picture and make it even more interesting... The fact is that it is contradictory to think that a film can tell the story of a place, because a film is universal, wherever it is located and wherever the action takes place, whether it's there or here or somewhere else. It is also a fact that the film is always translated into a personal and intimate experience of the viewer, whether that projection is somewhere in Alaska, Europe or Palestine... That is why the film transcends borders and represents a universal lens, and it is not about the interests of any particular group of people or serving them, one's interests, but about any individual human being. Because, for example, when an Englishman makes a film, it is not necessarily a film about England, but a film for all viewers who will later experience it differently.
The film's cosmic journey from the author to the viewers
While I was watching "The Time that Remains", many things reminded me of the Yugoslav culture, that is, the mentality of the Balkans, from the interior, to interpersonal relations, neighborly closeness, to today's life and entertainment of young people... Do you think there is any similarity, connection or is it something else?
I think there is some kind of metaphysical relationship and connection between the deepest and most sincere thoughts of an individual (the viewer) and the deepest moments of inspiration and creation (the creator). And then in that sort of cosmic way, as an author you believe that whatever you do, you reach other people who can identify with the story you're telling. That's what the movie does. The opposite would be to make a narrowly territorial film that will be like a provincial local film. I think the more inspired and sincere you are in what you do, the less you need to think about other cultures or nations, because you come to them through that inner, cosmic journey. I mean I never think about anyone or anything, I just think about what is artistic in itself in the images I try to portray. Art is communicative by nature, until you start choosing a specific group of people to target, because that's not what art does.
An intimate experience and the spirit of the moment
Is it difficult for you on an emotional level to express yourself through film, asking questions you have about/within yourself?
Creating a picture, that is, a story from a moment of intimate experience is difficult... Nevertheless, there is a certain context of a feature film, because when you are on the street you cannot really choose how to construct the narrative at that moment, since films have their limitations, and so on you have to tell a story over a period of time and you have to have a clear beginning and end, even if you try to deviate from that.
If you want to make it easier, you're still on some deadlines anyway and have to think about whether the movie will make it to theaters on time, among other things. I don't know if I face more creativity or difficulty than other filmmakers, it's hard to know, but it definitely takes me a long time to write a script and I often stumble in the process. This is probably because I have to live through some experience in order not to adopt or take on someone else's experience or scenario.
What is your process for creating a story?
It takes years to feel that moment when you know you have enough material and that there is some sensation in all of it, and then it becomes urgent. It's like it's worth waiting for all those notes that at some point start talking and connect. In that process, there are usually several unsuccessful attempts, sometimes you think there is nothing worthwhile, you block, but that also comes from some trigger inside that tells you that there is still something worth saying and seeing. It usually happens to me at the moment when I feel like I'm really in a hurry for the film to be shown, regardless of what he's going to say. Simply, you need to feel something in the air, the spirit of the moment and time, which will make it clear why the film is being made in the first place. It's not as if I have a fetish for filmmaking, but I feel it's time to convey to others something I want to say, leaving the context of aesthetics.
I don't write, I shoot film
With regard to the specific poetics and aesthetics of your films, is there anything that you particularly practice, but also something that represents a challenge during filming?
Of course, but I'm sure there are plenty of people who struggle with something. When it comes to the film, there are a couple of things that I usually struggle with, namely that I try to minimize the giving of specific information to the viewer, I like to relieve the film of dialogue and I try to use the potential of a lot of images that do not tell only one piece of information, but they actually open up to an infinite number of interpretations, which depend on the participation and interest of the viewers.
In the process of writing the screenplay, it becomes very difficult because, in the absence of dialogue and clear information, I as a director and screenwriter do not write, but paint, imagine moments of silence with a lot of sound, but not necessarily with dialogue that guides the viewer through the story and the film and encourages him to watch. That's why people often use the word "tableau" (a frozen image without movement or action) for the film images I compose. I work on each scene separately, trying to pigment it, to have the animation of the foreground in the background, mostly from a wide angle, the shots are open, so it is noticeable that a lot of time the camera stays on only one unique scene while the story of the film unfolds. It would be some classic narrative film through which you can see the base, while the editing has become much more connected to the poetic approach, because I don't necessarily insist on the continuity of the classical approach to editing.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
