Cinema4

پنجشنبه 24 بهمن 1398
18:33
masoumi5631

Summary cinema : 1. The new national schools of the 1960s. 2. The end ofHollywoodand the revival of American cinema. 3. European cinema of the last thirty years. 4. The cinema of non-European countries. 5. New criticism and new audience. □ Bibliography.

1. The new national schools of the sixties

After the great season of Italian neorealism and its influence, direct or indirect, on other cinemas - and after the resumption of world cinema during the fifties according to models and forms quite similar to those of the prewar classic cinema, especially in the United States, inFrance, in the Soviet Union - new ferments were felt at the end of the decade and in the early sixties in many European countries, in particular in France, which gave rise to new national film schools, less tied to tradition and open to a double experimentation, both on the level of contents as much as that of forms. In other words, a group of young filmmakers, trained in film libraries or through critical exercise in trendy newspapers and magazines (such as, for example, the 'Cahiers du cinéma "in France), somehow wanted to use the camera not just to make spectacular films, perhaps of considerable artistic level, but to talk about themselves, their generation and their existential problems, often outside of political and ideological references and influences. A reference to neorealism and to a certain minor American cinema, in the wake of a rediscovery of the role and function of the 'author', intended as the sole creator of the work, rather than as 'director', coordinator of the film show. In this sense considerable influence had, not only in France, the theoretical and critical lesson of André Bazin, as well as the so-calledpolitique des auteurs , aimed precisely at privileging, in the collective and collaborative work of film production, the director's position, considered to be the same as a writer, painter, poet or musician: that is, not only the artistic director of a film , but also and above all its creator, with its own poetics, its aesthetics, its Weltanschauung . Hence the use - sometimes abuse - of the expression ‛film writing 'in place of‛ direction'; hence also a filmic practice and a theoretical and critical reflection, in which the director's personality was highlighted, beyond the limits and conventions of current film production,
In the context of this new formal and hermeneutic perspective, in France, in the late 1950s, a fierce and increasingly numerous group of young directors was formed which radically renewed the French cinema of the time. Think of François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, Claude Chabrol, aJacques Rivette, to Eric Rohmer - all critics of the 'Cahiers du cinéma "-, ad Alain Resnaisand his 'cinema of memory', and many others. Everyone, inmeasuremore or less evident and coherent, interested in breaking the schemes of classic cinema, in referring both to their own personal experience and to the new forms of literature and visual arts: and this happened both by bringing characters, situations and environments to the screen that reflected directly or indirectly one's life, either by destructuring the story, breaking up the representation according to new formal rules, or rather inventing the rules necessary from time to time for the construction of a completely personal film. Hence, for example, the so-called 'cinema-essay', of which Godard was one of the most rigorous and consequent advocates, especially with his films of the late sixties - starting from La chinoise (1967) - and the following years ( Numéro deux, 1975; Passion , 1982; Nouvelle vague , 1990; Allemagne neuf zéro, 1991). It was a cinema that rejected history, in the traditional sense of the term, the story, the characters themselves, in favor of a perspective, multifaceted, controversial representation of facts and problems of contemporary society, inviting - or rather almost forcing - the viewer to take a stand, to react to images and words, involving him more on the level of reason than on that of feeling. A cinema, therefore, animated by a very different inspiration compared to that of a Truffaut, whose work moved on the side of a nuanced autobiographism and a use of the camera as a revelator of passions and feelings (the five films on Antoine Doinel , 1959-1979; La chambre verte, 1978), or of a Chabrol, more interested in the critical description of the petty bourgeois environment or in the analysis of pathological situations ( Le boucher , 1970; Masques , 1987; Une affaire de femmes , 1988), or of a Rohmer, delicate storyteller of young stories ( Ma nuit chez Maud , 1969; Pauline à la plage , 1983), or a Rivette, a brilliant manipulator of situations and behaviors ( L'amour fou , 1969; La belle noiseuse , 1991), or finally of a Resnais, an extraordinary investigator of the connections that bind the past to the present, an avid experimenter of new formal solutions ( L'année dernière à Marienbad , 1961;Providence, 1977; L'amour à mort , 1984).
Following the example of the French nouvelle vague - as the new school was named which, in addition to the directors mentioned, including dozens of other young beginners - many directors moved inGermany, in Great Britain, in Italy and in several socialist countries, from Poland to Hungary, from Czechoslovakiato the Soviet Union. To keep quiet from the turmoil of renewal that occurred, in those years, also in Latin America and in theFar East (see the many new, unconventional films made in Argentina, in Brazil, in Japan), and even in the United States, where, however, the revolutionary movement touched only marginally Hollywood, being confined mostly to the so-called New American cinema or underground cinema , whose circulation, in America and inEurope, did not touch the cinemas, but rather cultural circles, film clubs and universities. These new national schools naturally had different origins and developments from country to country, if only because these young authors were facing different economic, social, political and ideological situations. In Germany, for example, it was a question of rebuilding a cinematography that had given very few signs of vitality after the end of thesecond World War, in a country divided into two, with serious political and social problems. Hence the need to gather around the proponents of a new cinema, headed by the writer-directorAlexander Kluge( Der starke Ferdinand , Ferdinando il dura, 1976), a group of young people willing to use the camera as an instrument of knowledge and investigation of reality without too much regard for the conventions and respectability of German society, generally rather conservative and unwilling to question; and it is to these young people that we owe the so-called Junger deutscher Film . Directors likeWim Wenders( Falsche Bewegung , False movement, 1974; Im Lauf der Zeit , Over time, 1975),Werner Herzog( Jeder für sich und Gott gegen alle , The enigma ofKaspar Hauser, 1974; Fitzcarraldo , 1982),Rainer Werner Fassbinder( Die Ehe der Maria Braun , Maria Braun's wedding, 1978; Querelle , 1982) were for years the most interesting and valid representatives of this school, which also introduced new formal models, original linguistic solutions, giving life to a fashion ‛cinephile 'which had numerous followers.
In Britain the situation was different, being the British cinema of the fifties thriving and full of prestigious films. But, as in France, it was a question of getting out of school, of abandoning the spectacular old clichés , of going down the streets and facing the problems of everyday life. Thus was born the movement that called itselffree cinemaand that precisely on the proprio freedom 'of action and language he built his artistic identity: a cinema free to choose new models, perhaps drawn from literature and theater, provided they are anchored in a critical and unprejudiced vision of reality, as the films showed by Karel Reitz ( Saturday night and sunday morning , 1961; Morgan, a suitable case for treatment , 1966),Lindsay Anderson( The sporting Life, 1963), Tony Richardson (Tom Jones, 1963), often taken from texts by John Osborne, Alan Sillitoe, Harold Pinter, Arnold Wesker. A national school that was exhausted in the space of not many years, but which also contributed to rejuvenating traditional cinema and to setting up that new language that would have been characteristic of cinema in the following decades.
In Italy, the film production was instead dominated by genre films, of great popular success, since the season of neorealism had gradually ended. It was therefore a matter of taking up that lesson of realism that the films of Rossellini, De Sica, Visconti had imparted, but of adapting it to the new historical-political situation, and above all of introducing elements of language that did not follow the traditional models. In this sense, think of the work ofMarco Bellocchio( Fists in the Pocket , 1965),Bernardo Bertolucci( The spider's strategy , 1970; Last tango in Paris , 1972),Marco Ferreri( The monkey woman , 1963; Dillinger died , 1969),Ermanno Olmi( Il posto , 1961; The tree of the clogs , 1977), the brothers Paolo and Vittorio Taviani ( San Michele had a rooster , 1971; Allonsanfàn , 1974), all very active also in the following decades; but think above all of the films ofPier Paolo Pasolini, which marked a fundamental stage in the history of poetry cinema, of a cinema, that is, refractory to traditional narration, open instead to the suggestions that a film language could offer, free to reinterpret reality in the ways and forms of a continuous invention aesthetics ( Accattone , 1961; Birds and birds , 1966; Salò or the 120 days ofSodom, 1975). In this respect - that is, the recovery of a personal style without neglecting the themes of contemporary life, with political and social reflections as well - Italian cinema, developed since the early 1960s, has joined those innovative national schools that already in France, Germany and Great Britain the linguistic problem of the radical overcoming both of traditional cinema and of that born from neorealism and from the ferment of novelties of the immediate post-war period had arisen.
In a partially similar situation, but substantially different due to the profound diversity of the political, economic and social structures of the respective countries, Polish, Hungarian, Soviet and Czechoslovak cinema, thanks also to the political and ideological crisis that went through those societies, at the end of the years fifties and early sixties seemed to place itself on a content and formal renewal plan that did not differ much from that of the national schools mentioned. A renewal that marked a clear break against the so-called socialist realism, which in those years still dominatedthe worldof art and literature from Eastern countries. It was a matter of rediscovering daily life with its problems and its contradictions, both individual and social; but it was also a question of renewing a cinematic language which had become sclerotic, linked as it was to the great models of classical Soviet cinema. In this direction, with results of undoubted value, directors like the Poles movedAndrzej Munk( Pasa ä erka , The Passenger, 1963),Andrzej Wajda( Niewinni czarodzieje , Ingenui perversi, 1960; Cz ù owiek z marmuru , The Marble Man, 1976),Roman Polanski( ä w wodzie , The knife in the water, 1962; Rosemary's baby , 1968, in the United States), Jerzy Skolimowski ( Rysopis , Particular signs: nobody, 1964; Success is the best revenge , 1984, in Great Britain) ; the Hungarians Miklós Jancsó ( Szegénylegények , The Desperate of Sándor, 1964; Csend és kiáltás , Silence and cry, 1968), István Gaál ( Magasiskola , The hawks, 1970), András Kovács ( Hideg napok , Cold days, 1966) ( Tuüzoltó utca 25 , Via dei Pompieri 25, 1973); the Soviets Andrej Tarkovskij (Ivanovodetstvo , Ivan's childhood, 1962; Andrei Rublev , 1966-1969), Andrei Mikhalkov-Koncalovskij ( Istorjia Asjej Klja is Inoj , Asja Kljacina History, 1966), Nikita Mikhalkov ( Neskol ' ko dnej iz ž izni II Oblomova , Oblomov, 1979), Sergej Paradzanov ( Legenda o Suramskoj kreposti , the legend of Suram fortress, 1985), Otar Iosseliani ( Ž the BCE is ij drozd , There once was a singing blackbird, 1973); the Czechoslovaks Věra Chytilová ( Sedmikrásky , Le margheritine, 1966), Miloš Forman ( Lásky jedné plavovlásky, The loves of a blonde, 1965), Jan Němec ( O slavnosti a hostech , The party and the guests, 1966),Evald Schorm( Ka ž d ý den odvahu , Daily courage, 1964), Jiří Menzel ( Ost ř e sledované vlaky , Strictly supervised trains, 1966). A large group of authors who managed, at least in the early days, to give us a genuine, problematic, new representation of their countries; but, in many cases, they were then forced to return to the ranks or to emigrate, imposing themselves however among the most significant and important directors of the following twenty years (think of Polanski, Skolimowski, Tarkovskij, Michalkov).
As has been said, also in Latin America and Japan these ferments of renewal manifested themselves in films of undoubted charm and great significance, not only aesthetic, but more properly political and ideological. Not so much perhaps the so-called Argentine school, whose best-known representative wasLeopoldo Torre Nilsson( Fin de fiesta , 1960), as much as a film like La hora de los hornos (1966-1968) by Octavio Getino and Fernando Solanas (very active also in the following decades); and above all the Brazilian Cinema nôvo with the 'revolutionary' works ofGlauber Rocha( Deus eo diabo na terra do sol , The black god and the blond devil, 1964),Ruy Guerra( Os fuzís , The rifles, 1964) and Carlos Diegues ( Bye bye Brasil , 1980). As for Japanese cinema, dominated by the films ofAkira Kurosawa, Kenji Mizoguchi, Yasujirō Ozu and other great directors, known and appreciated also and perhaps above all in the West, the ferment of novelties coincided with the political crisis of Japanese society fifteen years after the end of the war and the hecatomb of Hiroshima is Nagasaki: an identity crisis that young writers like Yukio Mishima, and filmmakers, like Nagisa Ōshima( Gishiki , The ceremony, 1971), were able to capture and represent in novels and films with a strong content and formal impact. Therefore also in the Far East and Latin America the artistic crisis that had affected the cinema in its linguistic (and partly productive) structures - and that in Europe had given rise to the flourishing of national schools that this crisis were able to overcome with excellent results only formal - it was resolved by drawing on that great repertoire of forms and styles that the cinema had elaborated in its history of over half a century, with a freedom of choice that can be summarized in Godard's statement, according to which all that is projected on the screen is cinema.

2. The end of Hollywood and the rebirth of American cinema

During the sixties, coinciding with the birth and affirmation, also internationally, of the various European national schools, there was a progressive weakening of Hollywood cinema, due to various causes, including the great and widespread diffusion of the television, some wrong commercial operations and the changing tastes of the young audience. Just the success of certain films of the nouvelle vague and of other European cinemas, with their free style, with their characters, environments and stories related to the world of young people, to their personal experience, to their daily myths and rituals, determined some failure of the American films, most of which are made according to somewhat obsolete patterns and models. Only at the end of the decade, with a film likeEasy rider (1969) byDennis HopperShot on the economy, outside the big production houses, the result of a sort of compromise between the traditional show and the revolution of underground cinema , there was a real recovery. That film, which became a sort of manifesto for the new generations and which well captured the restless and rebellious spirit of young people, not only Americans, in a period of reflux and new revolutionary ideals (we are in the years of the youth contest and the French May ), gave rise to a new production that was based, at least in part, on the European one.
Over the course of a decade, Hollywood cinema gradually abandoned its great spectacular tradition - which was still followed, albeit with remarkable and personal innovations, by great directors such asArthur Penn( Alice's restaurant , 1969),Sam Peckinpah( The wild bunch , 1969; Straw dogs , 1971),Robert Altman (Nashville, 1975; The player , 1992; Short cuts , 1993), or by a brilliant independent author likeRoger Corman( The wild angels , 1966) at whose school some of the young people of the 'new' Hollywood of the following decades were trained - to take a less linear path.
Linguistic innovations were combined with a great freedom in the choice of themes and subjects to be treated; unconventional characters were outlined within environments taken from everyday life or distorted by a fantasy that mixed reality and desire, dreams and evencriticismsocial. Cinema became the place of contradictions, the mirror of a society and a world - that of youth - which manifested themselves through individual and collective paths that were always different, certainly not linear. Thus, spectacular new trends arose, together with a progressive transformation of the production organization in Hollywood, no longer concentrated in the big ‛historical 'houses, but divided into a series of smaller, isolated, independent projects, or in a different production structure, which it took into account the changes in the tastes of the public, or rather the differences between the spectators, no longer endorsed in a single undifferentiated generic "public", but bearers of sectoral requests and expectations. Thus,studio system and star system , that is, the supporting structures of the Hollywood production of the previous decades, to venture on roads that would have led to a general reformulation of the film models.
On this road he moved, among the first,John Cassavetes, close to the artists of the New American cinema , but later the author of numerous films that originally combined the needs of the show with the needs of individual artistic expression: films often built on few characters and a lot of improvisation, with a free style that put them in light the most genuine and truthful aspects ( Husbands , 1970; A woman under the influence , 1974). A director like was inspired in many ways by CassavetesMartin Scorsese, who in a few years became the most significant author of the new American cinema, being some of his films become cult movies , with all the consequences of the case in terms of cinephilia and popular success ( Mean streets , 1973; Taxi driver , 1976 ; Goodfellas , 1990). As part of this new production, free from previous influences and open to the most diverse suggestions of the moment, many other young directors have moved, such asFrancis Ford Coppola( Apocalypse now , 1979, the triptych of The godfather , 1971-1990),Brian De Palma( Dressed to kill , 1980; The untouchables , 1989),Michael Cimino( The deer hunter , 1978; Heaven's gate , 1980),Lawrence Kasdan( The big chill , 1984),George Lucas( American graffiti , 1973; Star wars , 1977),Steven Spielberg( Duel , 1971; Close encounters of the third kind , 1977, Raiders of the lost ark , 1981; Jurassic park , 1993), and also - on the side of a genre cinema, especially horror and science fiction - interesting directors such asJohn Carpenter( Escape fromNew York, 1981), Ridley Scott( Blade runner , 1982) oJonathan Demme( The silence of the lambs , 1991). But certainly, together with Scorsese, the author who best represented the novelty and ferment of American cinema of the last twenty years is David Lynch, in whose work, differently accepted by the public and critics, there is an ‛apocalyptic 'vision of society and of man, seen and represented as negative models of a corrupt and corrupting world, in which the individual seems to get lost without finding points of reference or ways out ( Blue velvet , 1986; Wild at heart , 1990).
In this climate of uncertainty, often of fear, sometimes of unease, young directors have become interpreters in more recent years asAbel Ferrara( Bad lieutenant , 1992),Jim Jarmush( Stranger than paradise , 1984),Spike Lee( Do the right thing , 1989), the brothers Joe and Ethan Coen ( Barton Fink , 1991) and above allQuentin Tarantino, who became a cult author with Pulp fiction (1994), a model of a new violent and aggressive cinema, but also permeated with self-irony and sarcasm. And with self-irony, humor, sometimes with declared comedy, the American cinematography of the last thirty years has not been without, on the contrary, it has obtained original results, sometimes even ingenious, as evidenced by the traditional Jewish films made by authors-actors such asMel Brooks( Frankenstein junior , 1975), Gene Wilder, Marty Feldman and above allWoody Allen, one of the most subtle investigators of American customs and mentality, especially New Yorkers ( Annie Hall , 1977;Manhattan, 1979; Crimes and misdemeanours , 1989).
Outside of these tendencies, both comic and dramatic, indeed outside of American film production, as closed in total isolation, in a sort of voluntary exile, is the complex and difficult to catalog work ofStanley Kubrick, author, in the seventies and eighties, of memorable films such as 2001: a space odyssey (1968), A clockwork orange (1971), Barry Lyndon (1975), The shining (1980), Full metal jacket(1987): different chapters of a large fresco on violence in contemporary society and its consequences on the life of individuals. Within the Hollywood system, albeit renewed in content and shapes, in the redefinition of cinematographic genres and in a more flexible and open production structure, there are instead many films that have been made according to spectacular principles that do not differ much from old models, or with the new technologies through which very suggestive and successful success special effects can be obtained. Hence the multiplication of films built with openly commercial intent, with large technical and financial means, with an extraordinary expenditure of productive forces: films that have placed themselves, especially during the nineties, at the top of the world cinema market, contributing not a little, with their massive and widespread presence, to the weakening of other European and non-European cinemas. So much so that, in an all-encompassing perspective that takes account of developments and variations in the path, there is the risk, in this part of the millennium, of seeing Hollywood not only as a symbol and emblem of cinematout court , but also as absolute ruler of world cinema.

3. European cinema in the last thirty years

The transformations that Hollywood cinema has produced in the film market and its international success, especially among young audiences, have not, however, prevented European cinema in the last thirty years from continuing on the path taken at the end in the 1950s and early 1960s, when, as has been said, the new national schools were born and developed. Of course, the financial difficulties, a widespread production disorganization, the competition of Hollywood cinema and television, the economic and social crisis that hit the Eastern European countries in particular, the fall of the wall ofBerlin, with the consequence of a different political structure of that area and the end of ideologies, did not favor that path, on the contrary they hindered it. In some cases there was even a very strong drop in production, almost the disappearance of this or that cinematography; in other cases old arrangements were changed or models and functions were transformed; in still others, finally, they remained at the previous stage, contenting themselves with administering a consolidated artistic heritage, with little or no innovation.
In some respects this was the situation of French cinema after the great season of the nouvelle vague, at least in the sense that the most significant directors of the last thirty years still remain Godard, Chabrol, Rohmer, Rivette, Resnais, Truffaut (died in 1984). There is no doubt, in fact, that some of their films, such as Godard's Hélas pour moi (1993), Chabrol's La cérémonie (1995), Rohmer's various Contes (1990-1996), Jeanne la Pucelle (part I and II , 1992-1993) by Rivette, Smoking / No smoking (1994) by Resnais, are among the most interesting works of recent years. However, alongside these masters, a new trend in French cinema has developed, if not a real school, which has been able to pick up and update some of the motifs and themes of thenouvelle vague , introducing the ferments, expectations, fears, desires, anxieties of the new generations. Think of directors likeLuc Besson( Subway , 1985),Jacques Doillon( Le petit criminel , 1990), Cyril Collard ( Les nuits fauves , 1992), Léos Carax ( Les amants du Pont Neuf , 1991) and many others, more or less interested in the strong and unsweetened representation of contemporary reality, perhaps through an original use of metaphor, a composite style, unusual characters and environments. A cinema to a large extent innovative, even if not always up to its intentions, more or less declared, or closed within a little dated content and formal schemes.
In this respect, which equally affects the language and the topics addressed, English and Irish cinema seemed more lively and dynamic, which on the one hand referred to the lesson of free cinema- with particular attention to social issues, the world of work, the difficulties of everyday life - and on the other hand it has opened up to a series of experiments in the various fields of entertainment, with original film solutions. In this latter area, a prominent place belongs to two artists likePeter Greenaway, author, among other things, of Thecook, the thief, his wife and her lover (1989) and Prospero's books (1991), eDerek Jarman, to whom Edward II (1991) and Wittgenstein (1993) are responsible : brilliant and provocative directors of the image and the environments, outside the usual patterns of the show, careful to rediscover all the fascinating possibilities of the screen, used as a reflective mirror of fantasy. In this sense they seemed far more interesting than a director-actor likeKenneth Branagh, updated but superficial cinematographic interpreter of Shakespeare's theater. Instead in the context of a 'social' cinema, attentive to the concrete problems of contemporary Britain or Ireland, they have distinguished themselves above allStephen Frears( The snapper , 1993), Kenneth Loach ( Raining stones , 1993),Mike Leigh( High hopes , 1988) and, secluded in his private and largely autobiographical world, Terence Davis ( Distant voices, still lives , 1988).
As for Germany, the innovative thrust of the Junger deutscher Film having ended , only Fassbinder (died in 1982), Herzog and Wenders dominated German cinema for a long period, with a success by critics and international audiences. Just think of Berlin Alexanderplatz (1980) of the former, Cobra verde (1988) of the latter, and above all of the overall work of the third - Paris,Texas (1984), Der Himmel über Berlin (The sky above Berlin, 1987), Bis ans Ende der Welt (Until the end of the world, 1991), In weiter Ferne, so nah! (So ​​far, so close, 1993) - which has become, for the young critics and the cinephile audience, a sort of model of contemporary cinema. The presence of these authors has overshadowed a film production which, despite the economic difficulties and disaffection of the spectators, has nevertheless maintained a certain quality level, thanks to the contribution of directors such asEdgar Reitz( Heimat , 1980-1984) and Werner Schroeter ( Malina , 1991), in addition to the aristocratic, experimental and elitist work of Hans Jürgen Syberberg ( Hitler, ein Film aus Deutschland , 1977). Nor has the unification of the two Germanies, after the collapse of the Berlin wall in 1989, marked a productive recovery or a diversification of the film production, which, in fact, has become increasingly flattened on spectacularly traditional models and schemes without real expressive needs .
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, this situation also dominated Italian cinema, limited - with few exceptions - in the field of popular entertainment, black comedy or vulgar drama, however, obtaining great success with the public, at least in certain cases.
But there were precisely the exceptions, represented by the works of directors who had made their debut in the early sixties and who continued their personal journey in the following decades, a little on the margins of the market, with certainly positive results. Ferreri, for example, with his nonconformist, provocative, aggressive cinema ( La grande abbuffata , 1973; I love you , 1986); the Taviani brothers, with their refined and intellectually stimulating films ( Padre padrone , 1977; Fiorile , 1993); Olmi, with his delicate and profound gaze ( Long life to the lady , 1987); Bertolucci, with the grandeur of his ‛international cinema '( Novecento , 1976; The last emperor, 1987; SmallBuddha, 1993); and then Bellocchio ( The eyes, the mouth , 1982),Ettore Scola( The family , 1986),Liliana Cavani( The night porter , 1974) and others. To these it is necessary to add the name of Sergio Leone, considered the master of the western Italian style, brilliant craftsman of the popular show ( For a fistful of dollars , 1965; Once upon a time in America , 1984). These authors were then joined by others no less interesting, such asPupi Avati, Gabriele Salvatores, Giuseppe Tornatore and especially Gianni Amelio( The child thief , 1992),Sergio Citti( I magi stray , 1996), Franco Piavoli ( Voices in time , 1996) and the one who is considered, even outside Italy, the best representative of Italian cinema of the nineties,Nanni Moretti( Palombella rossa , 1989; Dear diary , 1993). Directors who have opposed the fierce competition of American cinema with a bulwark made of intelligent and personal films, but who nevertheless remained on the margins of the market for a series of reasons equally attributable to the distribution and the cinematographic exercise, dominated by the products of 'across the ocean (as indeed happens in most European and non-European countries).
Outside of what we can still consider as the great European cinemas - the French, the English, the German and the Italian - there has been, over the past thirty years, a certain recovery of production in marginal areas, like Spain or Portugal, however, in the face of a significant drop in production in the countries of Northern Europe and the very serious crisis that hit the countries of Eastern Europe after the end of communism and the consequent political and social transformations. The renewal drive that had characterized those films in the early sixties had been running out for several years. But during the nineties, despite considerable difficulties, both economic as well as political and social, the recovery, especially in what was the Soviet Union, it seemed to assume significant proportions, through the development of certain elements of novelty that had already appeared in the previous decade, during the Gorbachev era. Think in particular of Sergei Bodrov (SER-Svoboda eto raj , Freedom is paradise, 1989), to Vitalij Kanevskij ( Samostojatelnaja ž izn' , An independent life, 1991), to Pavel Lounguine ( Taxi blues , 1990), to Aleksandr Sokurov ( Moskovskaja elegija , 1987), to the Lithuanian Šarunas Bartas ( Few of us , Far from God and men, 1996). In what was thereYugoslavia the most prominent name is certainly that of Emir Kusturica( Underground , 1995); while in Poland the author who brought that cinematography back to a very high artistic level, with a series of films of extraordinary content and formal appeal isKrzysztof Kieslowski( Dekalog , The Decalogue, 1987-1989; the triptych Trois couleurs , shot in France: Bleu , 1993; Blanc , 1994; Rouge , 1994). Finally, as regards Spain and Portugal, after the end of Franco and Salazar's dictatorships and the advent of democratic governments, cinema has resumed its path, with results that are captivating or disappointing, original or traditional from time to time , however, demonstrating a ferment of novelties and a certainly interesting industriousness. In Spain the author who made the most talk about himself for the aggressiveness of his films, the nonconformity of the themes, the freedom of style, is Pedro Almodóvar ( La ley del deseo , 1987; Carne trémula, 1997), who has been able to give us a provocative portrait of contemporary Spanish society through strongly metaphorical stories and characters. But also Juan José Bigas Luna, Montxo Armendariz and others have achieved good critical and public success, for their personal way of portraying the vices and virtues of the Spanish people. As for Portugal, where a new national school has developed with the films of Joâo Botelho, Teresa Villaverde or the older Paulo Rocha, the director who has maintained the primacy for decades for the originality of his style, the depth of the themes treated, the subtle and melancholic poetry emanating from his characters and from the environments in which he falls them, is Manuel de Oliveira, author of many ineffable films, including O passado eo presente (1971), Francisca(1981), A divina comèdia (1991), Vale Abraâo (1993).
Finally, for their originality and uniqueness in the panorama of European cinema, the works of the Greek Theo Angelopulos ( O thiasos , La recita, 1975; Topio stin omihli , Landscape in the fog, 1988; To vlemma tou Odysseu , The look of Ulysses, 1995), by Finnish Aki Kaurismäki ( Tulitikkutehtaan tyttö , La Fiammiferaia , 1989; La vie de bohème , 1991; Kaus pilvet karkaavat , Nuvole in viaggio, 1997), by the Danish Lars von Trier ( Europe , 1991; Breaking the waves , 1996).

4.The cinema of non-European countries

While in Europe the various national cinemas were forced to reorganize in the face of the massive competition from American cinema and television, with results that were not always convincing and amid many economic and financial difficulties, outside Europe, in Asia, in Africa, inOceania, productions of various kinds and success were born and developed, including internationally, which, although unable to oppose Hollywood, conquered their own autonomous space. They were films and authors who managed to represent in an original and authentic way certain fundamental characters of their respective societies and cultures, to grasp their mentality, customs and ideology. Films and authors very different from each other, as different were the countries of origin, but united in their position outside the western tradition, both American and European. In the Far East, for example, they established themselves in the so-called ‛three Cine '- of Beijing, byTaipei and of Hong Kong- three different film schools that established themselves, especially in the eighties and nineties, on the world market. In the People's Republic of China, after the death of Mao Tse-tung (Mao Zedong) and the progressive political transformation, the directors of what were called the fourth and fifth generations formed a fairly homogeneous group of authors, interested in retracing the recent history of China with disenchanted and critical eyes. Chen Kaigehe made his debut in 1984 with Huang tudi (yellow earth), which was followed by some films of considerable artistic and political value ( Haizi wang , The king of children, 1988; Bawang bieji , Farewell my concubine, 1993);Zhang Yimouhe made his debut in 1987 with Hong gaoliang (red Sorghum) and established himself all over the world with Dahong denglong gaogao gua (Red Lanterns, 1991) and Huozhe (Vivere !, 1994); other younger directors followed the same path, asTianZhuangzhuang or Liu Miaomiao. TOtaiwan, next to Edward Yang, Tsai Ming-liang o Ang Lee(known for the films shot in the United States, The wedding banquet , 1993; Eat drink man woman , 1994), the most prestigious name is certainly that of Hou Xiaoxian, subtly disturbing and stylistically rigorous author of Niluohe nüer (The daughter of theNile, 1987) and Beiqing chengshi ( Mourning city, 1989). Finally, in Hong Kong, in addition to the personal and intimate films of Ann Hui, Allen Fong, Clara Law, the overall work of Tsui Hark, director of imaginative and overwhelming films (such as Dao ma dan , or Peking opera blues) , 1986; the four episodes of Once upon a time in China , 1991-1994), and the most recent one ofJohn Woo( Hard boiled , 1992; Hard target , 1993), which have influenced American violent cinema or special effects; and more recently that of Wong Kar-Wai (Chongqingsenlin , Hong-Kong Express, 1994; Duoluo tianshi , Lost Angels, 1995; Cheun gwon tsa sit , Happy together, 1997).
In Japan, in addition to the great masters of the past still active, such as Kurosawa ( Kagemusha , 1980; Ran , 1985; Konna yume wo mita , Sogni, 1990; Hachigatsu no rapusodi , Rhapsody in August, 1991) or Shōhei Imamura ( Unagi, L ' anguilla, 1996), some young directors, the best of which is certainlyTakeshi Kitano( Sonatine , 1993; Hana-bi , 1997), have created a real national film school, which is imposing itself above all abroad for its own originality of forms and contents. And new directors have also established themselves in Korea, the Philippines or India, after the great season of the fifties and following, dominated by the figure ofSatyajit Ray( Shatrani ke khilari , Chess players, 1977; Ganashatru , An enemy of the people, 1988).
In Africa, alongside the Egyptian production, known in the West for the work of Yusuf Shahin (Yussef Chahine) ( El massir , Il destino, 1997), or that of Algeria and other Arab countries, sometimes present in international festivals, during the seventies and eighties, a production involving the French-speaking and English-speaking countries born on the rubble of the colonial empires was developing, following the example of some directors who had previously made their films with great courage and independence, like the Senegalese Ousmane Sembène, author, among other things, of La noire de ... (1966) andCamp de Thiaroye (1987). Souleymane Cissé has established himself in Mali ( Finyé , Il vento, 1982; Yeelen , 1987); in Ivory Coast, Désiré Ecaré ( Visages de femmes , 1985); inBurkina Faso, Gaston Kaboré ( Wênd kûuni , 1982; Zan boko , 1988) andIdrissa Ouedraogo( Yaaba , 1989; Tilai , 1990): directors who have been able to grasp social transformations and the contrasts between tradition and modernity in their countries with great psychological subtlety, sometimes with humor.
But the non-European cinema that has most demonstrated its originality in the last decade, that is, in years in which, in Asia as in Africa, the other cinemas have marked the step with the risk of a serious artistic and economic involution, is the Iranian one, despite the internal political and social situation, after the Islamic revolution of 1979, it is not favorable to the free circulation of ideas. Among the new authors, alongside Rakhshan Bani-Etemad eaMohsen Makhmalbaf, has imposed itself internationally Abbas Kiarostami, extraordinary investigator of the spirit of his own people and fascinating descriptor of environments and atmospheres ( Kh ā ne-i dust kogi ā st?, Where is my friend's house ?, 1987; Nem ā -ye nazd ī k , Close up, 1990; Zendeg ī and ā meh d ā rad , E vita continua, 1992; Z ī r i darakht ā n-i zayt ū n , Under the olive trees, 1994).
On a different cultural side, steeped in western culture and more tied to the forms of the usual cinematographic show, with a tradition behind it that, in some cases, dates back to the 1930s and before that, cinema in Latin America, in Canada, in Australia and in New Zelandin recent years it has given quite a few signs of life, placing itself on the one hand in opposition to Hollywood, but, on the other, accepting certain models and formulas. Think of the Australian filmsPeter Weir( The last wave , 1977; Witness , 1985), but above all to those of the New ZealandJane Campion, who quickly became one of the leading directors of the new world cinema ( An angel at my table , 1990; The piano , 1993; Portrait of a lady , 1996). Think also of the CanadiansDavid Cronenberg is Atom Egoyan: the first, disturbing author of films immersed in murky or sick atmospheres ( Dead ringers , 1988; Naked lunch , 1991; Crash , 1996); the second, ingenious author of extravagant or dramatically complex films ( Exotica , 1994; The sweet hereafter, 1997). As for Latin America, after the season of the Argentine and Brazilian national schools in the 1960s, and of some interesting attempts at independent production in other countries, especially in Cuba, there has been a long stagnation, due to multiple factors, both political both economic, persisting the massive competition of Hollywood cinema and going through some of those countries, serious and dramatic political crises. More recently some signs of recovery have been felt, which however have not reached world markets and which do not yet seem so solid as to herald the birth of new national schools. Rather one should speak of individual personalities of directors who, sometimes at home, more often in exile, have continued their artistic and ideological discourse, most often in conflict with their governments or criticizing the widespread mentality or reactionary politics. For example the Bolivian Jorge Sanjinés Aramayo (Yawar mallku , Condor blood, 1969; La noche deSan Juan, 1971); the ChileansMiguel Littinand Raúl Ruiz, the first author of La tierra prometida (1973) and Los náufragos (1994), the second of a large number of films made in different countries ( Palomita blanca , 1973; L'île au trésor , 1986). Especially the MexicanArturoRipstein, whose work seems to refer to Buñuel, of which he was a friend, but also to certain Mexican cinema of the 1940s and 1950s, for his declared taste for melodramatic stories and sordid environments ( El castillo de la pureza , 1972; La reina de la noche , 1994; Profundo carmesí , 1996).
These are different and perhaps contradictory aspects of a way of making cinema that only marginally falls within the classical schemes of European and American production, preferring, in the best of cases, its own autonomous way, through which it is possible to manifest the cultural tradition, the customs social, political transformations of each individual country, and even more its own world view, not always coincident, in fact most of the times divergent from the usual one. In other words, it is what we can call a new film school, which crosses all the cinemas of non-European countries and proposes new models and new contents.

5. New criticism and new audience

The panorama of the last thirty years of world cinema would not be complete if we did not even mention the significant transformations that cinema theory and criticism have undergone, as the individual film schools proposed new spectacular schemes or subverted traditional ones; and also to the sensitive modifications, at times to radical changes, of the cinematographic public, no longer identifiable as a unitary whole, but divided and even dispersed in multiple streams. On the one hand, film criticism, and subsequently theory, found itself faced with new spectacular models, with a cinema that rejected old rules, schemes, models, gradually deconstructing traditional film narrative and dramaturgy classic, that neo-realism had only partially cracked; on the other, the public began to make individual and collective choices that corresponded less and less to the usual canons, favoring each time this or that genre or sub-genre of cinema, which moreover the new cinema was corroding from within, mixing the peculiar characters of each spectacular genre, introducing variants and modifications, creating new models. Furthermore, the widespread diffusion of television in every social stratum and the consequent crisis of neighborhood and suburban cinemas in large cities or those of provincial towns and villages, which year after year lost the usual popular public, not only have greatly reduced the number of spectators, but their characteristics have changed: no longer generic, anonymous, interchangeable spectators, but above all young, motivated, with different tastes, curious and intolerant. Hence a diversified film production, which wanted to address differentiated audiences, with a prevalence of youth; hence also a radical modification of the rooms themselves, which had to take this diversification into account, reducing the size and creating a multiplicity of screens, according to the needs and tastes of the spectators.
On the level of criticism and theory, a myriad of new youth magazines were born and developed during the sixties and following, which gave life to what has been called "cinephilia", or a love for cinema in unique, exclusive sense, including the entire film production as a universe in itself, a meeting point and synthesis of the most varied existential and cultural experiences. Consequently, even the criticism has gradually turned towards a hermeneutic practice that privileged personal discourse, individual taste, perhaps referring to ideological or political assumptions reinterpreted in a subjective or group key. This especially after the youth protest of 1968 and the widespread politicization of culture. As for theory,
Precisely referring to de Saussure's general linguistics and the consequent semiotic theory that has spread in the field of literature, especially in France, but also in Italy, the United States, Great Britain and elsewhere, some scholars have created a real semiotics of cinema, which analyzed the mechanisms of production of meaning characteristic of film language. In this field of research, and in parallel sectors, they have established themselves in the international fieldChristian Metz (who filmed and developed previous formulations by Jean Mitry), Raymond Bellour, Gianfranco Bettetini, David Bordwell, Francesco Casetti, Seymour Chatman, Gilles Deleuze, François Jost, Juri Lotman, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Marie-Claire Ropars and others, whose works have contributed significantly to resume and develop the theoretical discourse on film language, with the aim of grasping its peculiarities from within, through timely analysis of the constituent elements and relations with the spectator. From this point of view, beyond the controversies and discussions that animated the theoretical debate, especially in the sixties and seventies, there is no doubt that the semiotics of cinema and the studies that directly or indirectly refer to it ( or who contest it), have contributed to a clearer and more rigorous definition of the research field, with not negligible influences on film criticism and its practice. Which she criticizes, as well as in magazines, in periodicals, in newspapers, over the last decade, it has also spread through television channels, film festivals, monographic or retrospective reviews, that is, the places of a different consumption of cinema, more suitable for deepening the forms and contents of the show. Within this horizon of new cognitive and popular possibilities, the diffusion of videotapes has also contributed to a general re-examination of cinema as art, and to a sort of rewriting of the history of cinema on the basis of a direct knowledge of the works of the near and remote past. more suitable for deepening the forms and contents of the show. Within this horizon of new cognitive and popular possibilities, the diffusion of videotapes has also contributed to a general re-examination of cinema as art, and to a sort of rewriting of the history of cinema on the basis of a direct knowledge of the works of the near and remote past. more suitable for deepening the forms and contents of the show. Within this horizon of new cognitive and popular possibilities, the diffusion of videotapes has also contributed to a general re-examination of cinema as art, and to a sort of rewriting of the history of cinema on the basis of a direct knowledge of the works of the near and remote past.
This knowledge - and in some ways this flattening of the reception of films in a contemporary consumption that favors synchrony over diachrony, with the consequence of a historically incorrect vision - has called into question the very nature of the film show, less and less occasional or linked the uniqueness of the representation and increasingly conditioned by precise individual or group choices. The result is a fruitful situation that does not differ much from that of traditional arts, with the possibility for the viewer to see or review entire films or parts of them, behaving like the book reader, the listener, the visitor of galleries and museums. In fact, the widespread use of videotapes, even in the university environment, made it possible to consider the film product as a work in itself, collectable and catalogable according to criteria substantially analogous to those relating to the products of music, literature, visual arts. A cataloging which in fact means the creation of a repertoire of works, which can be drawn upon at any time; and, consequently, an individual relationship with cinema which, on closer inspection, differs considerably from the usual relationship established in cinemas, by their nature places of collective reception.
These gradual modifications of cinema as a spectacle and of the public as a spectator, during the 1980s and 1990s, contributed to modify, at least in part, the cinematographic language itself. In the sense that, by addressing sectoral audiences or even individual spectators, it was possible to significantly expand the range of technical and aesthetic possibilities. The subdivisions between genres and subgenres, fictional cinema and documentary cinema, popular entertainment and formal experimentation - which for many decades had been the cornerstone of a theory and history of cinema by categories, schools, periods, etc. - have gradually lost their meaning, in the general tendency to transform the cinematographic language into an all-inclusive language, suitable for the most diverse information and expressive needs, and taking for granted the presence of different audiences, made up of spectators who, even individually, could make their choices. Therefore, despite the crisis that the world cinema market has been going through for a few years, which can be seen in the closure of many cinemas and therefore in the disaffection of traditional viewers, paradoxically we are witnessing a sort of multiplication of the opportunities offered to watch films, often by means of new distribution channels, such as festivals and video tapes. This increase in production and consumption is part of the wider field of the so-called 'free time', in which contemporary life, at least in the West, has been articulated. A time dedicated to fun, culture, travel, other non-working activities, in which cinema is placed with its own specificity. And it is this specificity, within the composite and very vast world of vision, which in recent decades has been enriched with multiple technical means and new technologies, allowing the cinema, at the end of its first century of life, to maintain a position important. Also because, if we refer to the etymology of the word "cinema" (movement writing), there is no doubt that all forms and techniques of shooting, projection or creation of the self-propelled image - through television, the allowing the cinema, at the end of its first century of life, to maintain a prominent position. Also because, if we refer to the etymology of the word "cinema" (movement writing), there is no doubt that all forms and techniques of shooting, projection or creation of the self-propelled image - through television, the allowing the cinema, at the end of its first century of life, to maintain a prominent position. Also because, if we refer to the etymology of the word "cinema" (movement writing), there is no doubt that all forms and techniques of shooting, projection or creation of the self-propelled image - through television, thecomputer and any other possible iconographic machine - they can only refer to the invention of the Lumière brothers, correctly understood as the point of arrival of a scientific and technical research that has developed over the previous centuries. A research that has produced, in the twentieth century, what has been called the civilization of the image, of which cinema is certainly the main structure.
In this respect, it can be said that cinema, at the threshold of the 21st century, continues to be one of the most cultural, aesthetic and social phenomena of the multimedia civilization. The different technical, productive and popular areas in which the self-propelled image finds its application today allow us to consider strictly cinematographic production as an important but not exclusive part of the iconic universe that surrounds us. Therefore, talking about cinema of the last thirty years, noting the most important results or the most significant trends, only means giving some information that must be continuously updated and above all compared with what has been and is being done in the areas that have been mentioned. Only bearing in mind the reference
framework in its entirety,


BIBLIOGRAPHY

AA. VV., Off Hollywood ,Venice1991.
AA. VV., Fury: le cinéma d'action contemporain , Aix-en-Provence 1996.
A prà , A. (edited by), New American cinema. American independent cinema of the sixties ,Milan1986.
A umont , J., B ergala , A., M arie , M., V ernet , M., Esthétique du film , Paris 1994 (tr. It .: Aesthetics of the film ,turin1995).
B akari , I., C ham , MB, African experiences of cinema , London 1996.
B enigni , M., P aracchini , F. (edited by), American movies 90 , Milan 1994.
B uttafava , G. (a care of), Beyond the thaw. Soviet cinema of the sixties , Milan 1987.
C asetti , F., Teorie del cinema 1945-1990 , Milan 1993.
C aughie , J., The companion to British and Irish cinema , London 1996.
C hateau , D., G ardies , A., Jost , F. (edited by), Cinémas de la modernité: films, théories , Paris 1981.
C oursodon , J.-P., T avernier , B., 50 ans de cinéma americain , Paris 1995.
F urdal , M ., T urigliatto , R. (edited by), From the Polish school to the new cinema 1956-1970 , Turin 1988.
G iusti , M., M elani , M. (edited by), Before and after the revolution. Brazil in the 1960s: from Cinema Nôvo to Cinema Marginal , Turin 1995.
K hayati , K., Cinémas arabes: topographie d'une image éclarée , Paris 1996.
La P olla , F., The new American cinema 1967-1975 , Turin 1996.
M artini , E. (edited by), Free cinema and surroundings. New English cinema 1956-1968 , Turin 1991.
M artini , E., History of English cinema 1930-1990 , Venice 1991.
M artini , E. (edited by), Fall in love and lollipops. Independent American 1960s , Turin 1992.
M ereghetti , P. (edited by), Dictionary of films 1998 , Milan 1997.
M icciché , L., Italian cinema: the 1960s and beyond , Venice 1995.
M iccichè , L. (edited by), The cinema of reflux. Italian films and filmmakers of the 70s , Venice 1997.
M orini , A., R ashid , E., D i M artino , A., A prà , A., The cinema of the Arab countries , Venice 1993.
M üller , M., T omasi , D. (edited by), Cruel tales of youth. New Japanese cinema from the 1960s , Turin 1990.
N azzaro , GA, T agliacozzo , A., Hong Kong cinema. Swords, kung fu, guns, ghosts ,Genoa1997.
N owell -S mith , G., The companion to Italian cinema , London 1996.
N owell -S mith , G. (edited by), The Oxford history of world cinema , Oxford 1996.
O rr , J., Cinema and modernity ,Cambridge1993.
P flaum , HG, P rinzler , HH, Film in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Der neue deutsche Film von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart ,Bonn1992.
P rédal , R., 50 ans de cinéma français (1945-1995) , Paris 1996.
R ondolino , G., History of cinema , Turin 1995 3 .
R ondolino , G., Historical dictionary of films , Turin 1996.
S esti , M., New Italian cinema. The authors, the films, the ideas , Milan 1994.
S esti , M. (edited by),The schoolItalian. History, structures and imagery of another cinema (1988-1996) , Venice 1996.
S pagnoletti , G. (edited by), Junger deutscher Film (1960-1970) , Milan 1985.
T urigliatto , R. (edited by ), Nouvelle vague , Turin 1993 2 .
T urigliatto , R. (edited by), Nová vlna. Czechoslovakian cinema of the 1960s , Turin 1994.
U mard , R., Film ohne Grenzen. Das neue Hong-Kong Kino , Lappersdorf 1996.
V ecchi , P. (edited by), Maravillas. Spanish cinema of the eighties , Città di Castello 1991.
V ecchi , P. (edited by), Dissolve and tie. Hungarian cinema of the 1960s , Turin 1996.
V incendeau , G., The companion to French cinema , London 1996.


[ بازدید : 71 ] [ امتیاز : 0 ] [ نظر شما :
]
تمامی حقوق این وب سایت متعلق به biographycinema است. || طراح قالب avazak.ir
ساخت وبلاگ تالار نمای چوبی چوب نما مشاور گروپ لیزر فوتونا بلیط هواپیما تهران بندرعباس اسپیس تجهیزات عقد و عروسی تعمیر کاتالیزور تعمیرات تخصصی آیفون درمان قطعی خروپف اسپیس فریم اجاره اسپیس گلچین کلاه کاسکت تجهیزات نمازخانه مجله مثبت زندگی سبد پلاستیکی خرید وسایل شهربازی تولید کننده دیگ بخار تجهیزات آشپزخانه صنعتی پارچه برزنت مجله زندگی بهتر تعمیر ماشین شارژی نوار خطر خرید نایلون حبابدار نایلون حبابدار خرید استند فلزی خرید نظم دهنده لباس خرید بک لینک خرید آنتی ویروس
بستن تبلیغات [X]