Background

The Iranian New Wave was characterised by a self-aware, poetic, documentary-style of storytelling that focused on lower and middle-class subjects. It also took inspiration from other new-wave film movements from other parts of the world, such as Italian Neorealism. “Filmfarsi” was the most common style of film in Iran before the new wave. These were commercial films that replicated the style of Bollywood movies of the time. Filmfarsi is often criticised for its low-quality and over-the-top plotlines and storytelling. The loss of popularity of Filmfarsi coincided with the growth of the Iranian New Wave. The Iranian New Wave is often subdivided into three waves;

First Wave

The first wave came in the sixties as Filmfarsi lost popularity amongst the general public. Filmfarsi did not accurately reflect the reality of Iranian life and locals began to seek out better artistic representation. An early precursor to the first wave was Serpent’s Skin (1964) by the director Hajir Darioush. Films like Shohare Ahoo Khanoom (1968) and The Cow (1969) opened the doors to fresh, new, politically-driven narratives that captioned the attention of movie-goers. These had philosophical yet realistic depictions of Iranian life, unlike the melodramatic musicals of Filmfarsi. This wave lasted until the Iranian revolution in 1979 which introduced Islamic restrictions on the film industry.

Second Wave

The second wave lasted till 1999 and introduced some of the most internationally recognised films to come from Iran. Despite political turmoil, the craftsmanship of Iranian films steadily improved. The critically acclaimed Children of Heaven (1997), directed by Majid Majidi, was one of the most recognised films of this era. Like some other films of the Iranian new wave, it followed the trend of focusing on children as its main subjects, which lent it an air of innocence and relatability. It depicts the struggle of a brother and sister surviving in a typical poor Iranian family. It later became the first Iranian film nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film.

Third Wave

The third wave, from 2000 to 2011, includes the most recent films of the movement. A great example would be A Separation (2011), directed by Asghar Farhadi. The drama explores the multifaceted lives of a couple with a struggling marriage in modern-day Iran. It won a Golden Globe for Best Foreign Film and an Academy Award nomination for Best Original Screenplay. It was also the first Iranian film to win the Golden Bear.

Impact

The distinct socially aware down-to-earth approach of the Iranian New Wave, fiction with the air of a documentary, has had a global impact on cinema as a whole. Filmmakers from Persia to Europe have paid homage to this unique artistry. A noted example is the English director Michael Winterbottom with his film In This World (2002).

Also Read: Global Cinema Spotlight: Dogme 95

Also Read: Global Cinema Spotlight: Cinema Novo

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Global Cinema Spotlight: Iranian New Wave appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

Background

The movement was an attempt to create a niche of film free of Hollywood-esque technological gimmicks like special effects. Vinterberg and von Trier aimed to return to the basic ethos of filmmaking; story, theme, and acting. Essentially, it was a return to the pure foundation of film without the excess flab it often comes with. Hence the creation of a dogme (dogma) of strict rules for filmmakers.

The theory was introduced to the public at Le cinéma vers son deuxième siècle in Paris in March 1995. This was a conference celebrating 20th Century film. Lars von Trier was one of the directors invited to speak at this event. Before his speech, pamphlets that described the new Dogme 95 movement were distributed to the audience of filmmakers. The pamphlets were a manifesto co-written by Vinterberg and von Trier. They included a list of rules called “Vows of Chastity” that directors had to adhere to.

The rules included requirements that shooting must be done on location, no props can be brought in from outside location, no music can be added in post-production, the cameras must be handheld, and directors must not be credited, to name a few. Below is an excerpt from the last paragraph of the vows;

“Furthermore, I swear as a director to refrain from personal taste! I am no longer an artist. I swear to refrain from creating a “work”, as I regard the instant as more important than the whole. My supreme goal is to enforce truth out of my characters and settings. I swear to do so by all the means available and at the cost of any good taste and any aesthetic considerations.“

Application

It’s no surprise that the movement was named a dogma, considering its almost religious fundamentalism. Films had to be formally submitted for consideration to be classed as Dogme 95. A few of the films that made the cut didn’t meet all the criteria. In such cases, the directors had to first “confess” the ways they broke their vows. This amusing ritual reflects the fact that although the audio-visual theatrics of recent cinema may sometimes be unnecessary, they are often necessary for good storytelling.

The formalised process created a very rare occurrence in the global filmscape; this cinema niche had clearly defined lines and every film in its ranks is documented. To be exact, there are 35 Dogme films. Although the directors were not permitted to attach their names to the films, all 35 are listed with details on their official website. Other than its original founders, other notable directors of the movement include Kristian Levring, Søren Kragh-Jacobsen and Juan Pinzás.

Impact

As a whole, the films of Dogme 95 had mixed reviews. However, there were a few critically acclaimed gems. Consider Festen (1998), a tragic farce in which a birthday party reveals a dysfunctional family’s struggles with abuse, death, and incest; and Italiensk for Begyndere (2000), an absurdist romantic comedy in which a group of loners facing various life crises band together in an Italian language class. In the long run, Dogme 95 was a breath of fresh air in an industry that seemed to be straying from the basics of film.

Even after the dissolution of the collective, other directors like directors Jan Dunn and Brilliante Mendoza have used many of the founding Dogme principles. From Scandinavia to South Korea, the influence of the Dogme filmmaking style can be seen globally. Although the strictness of their manifesto is unattainable on a large scale, it can help all of us reflect on the importance of the traditional values of film.

Also Read: Global Cinema Spotlight: Cinema Novo

Also Read: Global Cinema Spotlight: Lollywood

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Global Cinema Spotlight: Dogme 95 appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

A Brief History of Cinema Novo

Although the term ‘Cinema Novo’ has been used since the 60s, it is more of a retrospective term. The filmmakers of the time did not actively create films to fit into the description of Cinema Novo. It was an open practice which evolved naturally alongside the political and cultural changes of the time.

In the 1950s, Brazil mostly produced comedic musicals called chanchadas in the style of Old Hollywood. However, at the end of the decade, Brazilian films began to focus more on topics of social justice. This was as the country faced political upheaval as it entered the eras of Brazilian Presidents Juscelino Kubitschek and João Goulart. Cinema Novo did not have a defined style, but it picked inspiration from European film movements like French New Wave and Italian Neorealism.

The French New Wave saw the popularisation of the ‘auteur’ theory, which views the director as the creative lead of a film and therefore its author. Italian Neorealism was a style of politically-driven filmmaking in Italy following the 1943 Italian Spring. It explored topics like poverty and injustice, and Cinema Novo followed in this regard. The onset of Cinema Novo was also the first time Brazilian film began to receive international critical acclaim.

Cinema Novo is often divided into three phases:

Phase One (1960-1964)

The beginning of the movement focused on political themes like poverty, racism and social inequality. Violence was a common denominator which reflected the frustration of the society of the time. Films were often shot in black and white as a stylistic choice that deviated from the more polished Hollywood-esque style. The economic instability of Brazil was reflected in the lowered technical precision since filmmakers lacked the funds for higher-quality equipment. Glauber Rocha, who released the cinematic classic Black God, White Devil in 1964, was one of the notable directors of this phase.

Phase Two (1964-1968)

This phase was a reaction to the overthrow of the popular President João Goulart. The population faced disillusionment as many of his progressive changes were rolled back after the military coup. The pro-democracy ideals of the first phase began to seem unrealistic, and filmmakers began to move towards commercialization. The ‘aesthetic of hunger’ which was popular in the first phase gave way to a concentration on middle-class protagonists. This was a bid to create films more relatable to a larger audience. There was also a move from black and white to colour. This was first seen in Leon Hirzshman’s Garota de Ipanema (The Girl from Ipanema) (1967), one of the quintessential films of this time.

Phase Three (1968-1972)

The last phase of the movement is sometimes referred to as the cannibal-tropicalist phase. Its tropical nature refers to the return to colourful aesthetics reflecting the Brazilian jungle. These had been popular before Cinema Novo. Cannibalism, in this case, was both literal and metaphorical. The best example of this is Rocha’s black comedy Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês (How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman) (1971). The film involved the literal cannibalism of a Frenchman, to represent how necessary violence is in enacting social change.

Impact

Cinema Novo had a definite end in the 70s with Brazilian film moving towards more commercial projects and government-backed film under the Embrafilme company. In spite of this, it has had a lasting impact. Cinema Novo is considered the beginning of the Third Cinema, a wave of socio-political cinema that popped up all across the globe. From Hong Kong to Australia and everywhere in between, the movement of socially conscious films changed how we view cinema. Eryk Rocha, the son of Glauber Rocha, paid homage to the movement through the documentary Cinema Nova (2014) at the Cannes Film Festival.

Also Read: Global Cinema Spotlight: Lollywood

Also Read: Interview: City of God’s Alexandre Rodrigues Discusses The Film’s Impact 20 Years Later

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Global Cinema Spotlight: Cinema Novo appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.