 |
International Festival
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
XX International Festival of Ethnological Film October 17th – 22nd 2011 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jury decisions and awards Statement of the jury of the |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In a film made by Martin Gruber called The Future of Visual
Anthropology there is a small scene with Jean Rouch which seems
rather insignificant. Funny at it’s best, no more. Gruber is trying to
interview Rouch about the future of Visual Anthropology, but Rouch gets
a bit upset. He points at the small video camera and says: “That’s not a
real camera. No, that’s not serious”. People around him laugh a little
bit, and that’s about it. But there is a whole idea about filmmaking
behind Rouch’s words. Because what he meant was, that with the advent of
small video cameras the whole craft of filmmaking and especially cinema
making (faire du cinéma) was becoming an endangered craft. Everybody
could now pick up a camera and start shooting without any formal and
thorough education, theoretical or practical. For Rouch 16 mm. was still
the norm, and he persistently refused films shot on video at his Paris
film festival Bilan du Cinéma Ethnographique – until of course he had to
succumb because hardly anyone was shooting on 16mm. anymore. Resuming the films the jury has seen during this 20th edition of the International Festival of Ethnological Film in Belgrade it seems that Rouch’s worries were not unfounded. The films we saw were mostly films that dealt with important social issues and were for the most part very interesting from a content point of view, but what was lacking was a cinematographic approach towards the subject matter. The real craft and art of cinema making, telling a story based on thorough research using the characteristics of cinema, seem to have been transformed into a more journalistic way of treating the subject, resulting in interesting reportages, reporting, instead of strong films that have a cinematographic approach. There is nothing wrong with reportages, on the contrary, we saw quite a lot of good reportages that dealt with important social issues and in that way they are important to educate a broad audience on what’s happening in society today. If there would have been a prize for best television reportage the jury would have had a difficult task. But the jury was part of an Ethnographic Film Festival, not of a festival that deals with television formats. Most of the films we saw were interview based, sometimes entirely based on interviews, intertwined with cutaways of street scenes or of the main characters doing something. Often accompanied by music, a lot of music, either destined to evoke emotions or fill up the visual and auditory gaps. This is a far cry from the classic films of Robert Flaherty, Robert Gardner, John Marshall, Jean Rouch, Frederic Wiseman, the Maysles Brothers or Raymond Depardon, to name a few. And of course of David MacDougall, to whom the festival dedicated a retrospective. Those of you who had the chance to see his films or attend his masterclasses probably noticed the stress that MacDougall lays on treating the subject matter in a cinematographic way, constantly thinking about how and why to shoot what he’s shooting. The masterclasses were, for the students that were there, a great opportunity to really think and discuss cinema, and hopefully the presence of MacDougall was an inspiration to them to think about a kind of filmmaking that has its roots in cinema, not in journalism or television. Two Special Mentions: SPECIAL MENTION FOR TREATMENT OF THE TOPIC The Moon Inside You (Slovakia, France, Spain) Diana Fabianova This film treats one of the main issues of women in our society in an original way. Based on a creative blend of a variety of scientific approaches and use of a range of visual methods, the film gives us a surprising insight in one of the most problematic questions of womanhood. SPECIAL MENTION FOR ORIGINALITY OF THE TOPIC The Flowers at the Window (Canada) Giovanni Princigalli Based on personal research, this film addresses, in a very original way, the question of social interactions of African women with western society in general and with non – African men in particular. AWARD FOR BEST MUSIC The jury decided not to award this prize because there was just not a satisfactory quantity and quality of films in this category. AWARD FOR BEST EDITING and AWARD FOR BEST CAMERA Kalenic, the Last Days of a City Market (Serbia) Ivan Vukovic and Milan Miletic The jury decided on giving the prize for the best editing and the prize for best camera to the same film, since these two elements of filmmaking constitute the core of this film and make it so attractive to look at. In a stylistically consequent way, the film treats the changing landscape of a market in Belgrade, and shows us the interactions between the different players in this specific urban space. AWARD FOR BEST FILM ON INTANGIBLE HERITAGE I Dream of Mummers (Bulgaria) Adela Peeva The film treats one of the important ceremonies of Bulgaria which, although changed considerably, has survived till today and has been kept alive by the local communities. AWARD FOR THE BEST DOMESTIC FILM The Hunger (Serbia) Gordana Simonovic-Veljkovic and Dragica Pavlov-Krstic The film at first glance tells a simple story about an aging and dissolving community, but at second glance addresses universal issues of memory and the relation to death. It does so by evoking strong emotions using a variety of cinematographic means. AWARD FOR THE BEST FOREIGN FILM Trials, Tribulations and Sustainable Development of a Cock (Montenegro) Vladimir Perovic The originality of this film stems from the reversal of the point of view from man to animal and thereby invites the viewer to reflect on the darker side of folklore. GRAND PRIX „Dragoslav Antonijevic” Itelmen Stories (Estonia, USA) Llivo Niglas Reconstructing the traditional hunting practices of a community which under Soviet reign was pushed to abandon its’ own lifestyle and language, the film provides an insightful view of how elderly people are still keen to uphold their culture and language. It does so by using the characteristics of classic ethnographic cinema, letting the people tell their own story in front of an observational camera. Eddy Appels, PhD Slobodan Naumovic, PhD Pedram Khosronejad, PhD |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
The Decision of the Student Jury of the
The jury has reviewed fifteen student films chosen by the selection
committee for the student competition. The main selection criterion was
a research approach to the subject matter, with special emphasis on the
analytical dimension. Special attention was paid to anthropological
issues raised by films and the extent of their interest and relevance to
modern science. Attention was also paid to the symbolic dimension,
which, according to the jury, can contribute to a better understanding
of anthropological theory in the sphere of film.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
