Close
Faqja 9 prej 10 FillimFillim ... 78910 FunditFundit
Duke shfaqur rezultatin 81 deri 90 prej 91
  1. #81
    i/e regjistruar
    Anėtarėsuar
    27-06-2002
    Postime
    1,611
    Citim Postuar mė parė nga fuorisync
    Behet fjale per "Zabriskie point" dhe "Professione: reporter" dy momente keto qe respektivisht inagurojne dhe mbyllin, le ta quajme, periudhen amerikane ne krijimtarine e Michelangelo Antonioni-t...
    Cher ami !
    Ke bere nje gabim te vockel: ato nuk jane dy momente, por dy monumete te Antonionit !




    Citim Postuar mė parė nga fuorisync
    "Professione: reporter".... Nuk di se pse, por ky film me risolli mbresat e nje kryevepre tjeter te epokes se tij barzh e zi..ate te "L'aventur-es"..
    Bera shaką pak me lart ! ok, shkelqyeshem, me ne fund ke pare nje film kaq te mrekullushem siē eshte "Professione : reporter". Ndofta fakti qe nuk ka marre pjese ne ndonje festival filmi, e pat bere mė pak te njohur kete film, se sa filmat e tjere te Antonionit.

    C'regjizor i madh Antonioni ! Ka fort mundesi te jete regjizori qe ka influencuar mė shume se gjithe te tjerėt kinemtografine moderne (pas 1950-1960-s)

    Dhe me sa kuptoj une nga keto pune, dy jane trashegimtarėt mė tė denjė te tij : regjizori turk Nuri Bilge Ceylan http://www.forumishqiptar.com/showpo...94&postcount=2 (ne foton e mepshtme)




    si dhe ai tailandez Apichatpong Weerasethakul ( http://www.forumishqiptar.com/showpo...&postcount=138 )





    p.s.: si tu duk "La Notte" ??

  2. #82
    i/e regjistruar
    Anėtarėsuar
    27-06-2002
    Postime
    1,611
    Gazeta "SHQIP"






    I lanė lamtumirėn botės nė njė ditė, por i dhanė pėrgjatė viteve tė krijimtarisė kundėrshtitė e risitė e artit tė shtatė


    Bergman & Antonioni, ikja e divave tė kinemasė


    E shndėrruan filmin nė vepėr arti dhe kineastėt nė "artistė supremė"


    Nga njė koincidencė fatkeqe - e cila padyshim mund tė shėrbente shumė mirė pėr skenarin e njė filmi - mėsuam pėr vdekjen nė tė njėjtėn ditė tė regjisorėve Mikelanxhelo Antonioni dhe Ingmar Bergman. Duke qenė se Bergman ishte 89 vjeē, ndėrsa Antonioni 94, asnjė prej vdekjeve normalisht nuk do tė pėrbėnte ndonjė surprizė: surpriza vjen pėr shkak tė rastėsisė qė deshi qė kėta dy gjigantė tė kinemasė botėrore tė vdisnin nė tė njėjtėn ditė. Jo vetėm pėr faktin se qė tė dy ishin prodhues tė mėdhenj filmash, por mė shumė, nė radhė tė parė, Antonioni dhe Bergman konsideroheshin si mishėrimi binjak i idesė qė njė filmmaker mund tė jetė fare mirė njė artist i madh.

    Duke thėnė kėtė, nuk duhet tė mendojmė se tė gjithė i shihnin qė tė dy nėn tė njėjtėn dritė madhėshtie. Janė tė shumtė ata qė rrudhin hundėt pėrpara pėrcaktimit tė kinemasė si njė formė arti. Ndėrkaq, tė tjerėt qė e kanė pėrqafuar kėtė nocion kanė qenė subjekt qortimesh e kritikash nga mė tė larmishmet. Nė njė nga esetė e tij ("Duke i paraprirė filmi ‘Nata‘"), tė shkruar mbi kujtimet e hershme kinofilike, Filip Lopate tregon se i pėrkiste njė shtrese tė nėndheshme artistėsh, e cila idhullizonte Antonionin dhe linte nė harresė kolegun e tij suedez. Nė pritje tė ardhjes sė ditės pėr shfaqjen e premierės sė kėtij filmi, autori shkruan: "Pėr net tė tėra ėndėrroja versione tė ndryshme tė ‘Nata‘". Ai bėn tė qartė se nuk ka pėrjetuar tė njėjtėn ekstazė, kur ka ardhur radha e filmit "Virgin Spring" tė Bergmanit (jo se ekstaza do tė ishte reagimi i natyrshėm, pėrpara atij filmi brutal mbi dhunėn dhe hakmarrjen nė Suedinė mesjetare). Pėr autorin Lopate dhe shokėt e tij, Bergman ishte "i dashuri i periferive". "Njė herė kam debatuar me njė shok student pėr gjashtė orė", kujton, "pasi ai e quajti filmin ‘Emblema e shtatė‘ njė film tė madh". Debati mori fund kohė mė parė. Lopate dhe ethshmėria e tij rinore nisėn tė ftoheshin, ndėrkaq aftėsia e tij kritike erdhi duke u pjekur, nisi tė bėhej i aftė qė tė vėrente aftėsitė e pazakonta tė Bergmanit dhe kufizimet e Antonionit.

    Me kalimin e kohės edhe unė vetė hyra nė fazėn e kinefilisė, rreth njė ēerekshekulli mė vonė; madhėshtia e Bergmanit as qė mund tė vihej mė nė diskutim, ndrysa fama e Atonionit ishte lehtėsisht mė e diskutueshme. Qė tė dy - bashkė me mjeshtrit e tjerė tė mėdhenj, puna e tė cilėve gjatė viteve ‘50-‘60 i dha trajtat njė epoke tė ndritur tė kinemasė - ishin ndėr mė tė rėndėsishmit nė panteon, figura gjigante, qėndrimi i vetėm ndaj tė cilėve ishte adhurimi i thellė. Diskutoheshin nė salla seminaresh, trajtoheshin si tema pėr doktoratura dhe projektoheshin rregullisht nė sallat e errėsuara tė shoqatave mė serioze artistike. Diēka e tillė ishte mė e vėrtetė te Bergman se tek Antonioni, disa prej punėve tė mėvonshme tė tė cilit mbartnin njė lloj guximi antikulturor: orgjia e dezertės nė fundin e "Pikės Zabriski"; rok end rolli te "Shpėrthimi"; Xhek Nikolson te "Pasagjeri".

    Por, tek tė dy regjisorėt impulsi qė i bėnte tė pėlqyer nga publiku ishte mė shumė se ethshmėria estetike, sensi i detyrės kulturore apo kurioziteti historik. Kjo ishte krejtėsisht e vėrtetė, edhe pse qė tė dy vazhduan tė prodhonin filma. Tėrheqja e publikut ndaj "Fani dhe Aleksandri" apo "Identifikimi i njė gruaje" rrjedh nga perceptimi se kėto dy punė tė vonshme u pėrkasin dy autorėve, qė pa asnjė dyshim i pėrkisnin njė epoke mė tė hershme. Gjė qė nuk do tė thotė aspak se reagimi pasional ndaj punėve tė tyre tė mėparshme - ajo ndjesi trazimi e brendshme, e tė qenit tė zotėruar tėrėsisht e tė mbeturit pa fjalė pėrpara asaj qė mund tė cilėsohet si art i mirėfilltė - nuk kishte qenė real. E, megjithatė, kjo nuk ishte arritur gjithnjė me lehtėsi. Institucionet qė e mbajnė artin gjallė e bėjnė kėtė me rrezikun qė edhe mund ta balsamosin.

    Pėr brezat qė nuk bėnin pjesė nė avangardėn kinefile tė viteve ‘50-‘60, kryeveprat e kinemasė moderne e kanė humbur freskinė. Energjitė e tyre u mishėruan nė njė version tė paradoksit, tė identifikuara nga Lionel Trilling nė esenė e tij tė njohur "Gjatė mėsimit tė literaturės moderne", e publikuar fillimisht nė vitin 1961, njė vit pasi Lopate ėndėrroi filmin "Nata". "Koha ka efektin e qetėsimit tė punėve tė artit", vėren Trilling, "t‘i zbusė e t‘i kthejė nė klasike, gjė qė ėshtė njė mėnyrė tjetėr pėr tė pėrkufizuar diēka qė respektohet thjesht pėr forcė zakoni. Studimet universitare, tė organizuara nė mėnyrėn e duhur, mund ta kthejnė mbrapsht kėtė proces, duke u dhėnė sėrish veprave freskinė dhe forcėn e dikurshme. Por, lidhur me punėt e artit nė epokėn e sotme, studimet kanė prirjen e pėrhershme tė pėrshpejtojnė procesin, qė i kthen punėt radikale dhe subversive nė klasike". Punėt e veēanta qė Trilling kishte nė mendje pėr tė pėrbėnin ende monumente tė freskėta tė modernizmit letrar, punė nga gjigantė si Kafka, Xhois, Eliot, vėshtirėsia e tė cilave nuk ishte vetėm zyrtare, por, pėr tė pėrdorur njė fjalė nė modė nė atė kohė, ishte ekzistenciale. Radikalizmi i tyre dukej se vinte rrėnjė te sfidat qė ata ngritėn lidhur me shoqėrinė, ndėrgjegjen, hapėsirėn dhe kohėn.

    Antonioni dhe Bergmani, nga ana e tyre, ishin modernistėt supremė tė kinemasė. Antonioni ndihmoi pėr ta shpėnė filmin italian pėrtej realizmit, duke gėrshetuar peizazhet mė shumė me domethėnie psikologjike se sociale e duke e kthyer erotizmin nga romantik nė njė rrugėtim metafizik. Bergman, pasardhės i njė rryme nordike e pėrfaqėsuar nga Strinbergu dhe Ibseni, zhvilloi njė gjuhė filmi tė mbrujtur me simbolizma psikologjike dhe emocione qė vlojnė nėn sipėrfaqe.

    Qė tė dy si artistė filmi mund tė pėrshtaten shumė mirė nė vėrejtjen e T.S. Eliot: "Tė jesh poet, nė qytetėrimin tonė, siē ėshtė aktualisht, duhet tė jetė e vėshtirė". Filmat "Aventura" dhe "Emblema e shtatė", megjithėse kanė pak gjėra tė pėrbashkėta (pėrveē tė qenit tė xhiruar nė bardhė e zi), janė qė tė dy tė vėshtirė pėr t‘u ndjekur. Jo sepse pėrmbajtja e asaj qė shfaqin ėshtė nervozuese, por sepse nuk i japin shikuesit pėr asnjė ēast mundėsinė tė shtendoset e tė vihet nė pozicionin e atij qė di ēfarė ndodh mė pas apo qė kupton domethėnien e saj. Mes kineastėve tė viteve ‘60, vėrehej njė oreks i qartė pėr t‘i bėrė gjėrat e vėshtira, njė lloj bindjeje se obskurizmi simbolik dhe tjetėrsimi psikologjik pėrbėnin pėrgjigjen mė tė saktė pėr gjendjen e botės. Mė shumė se kaq, ideja e njė bote tė veēantė ka vlerė mė vete - qė tė qenit tė sfiduar ishte njė formė e dukshme kėnaqėsie - gėzonte prestigj, nė atė kohė, gjė qė as mund tė imagjinohet ditėt e sotme. Tani parapėlqejmė mė shumė tė shqetėsohemi se tė trazohemi, ndėrsa masa e sofistikimit artistik ėshtė mė shumė zgjuarsi se seriozitet.

    Duke pasur parasysh tė gjitha kėto, pėr dikė qė nuk i ka jetuar personalisht ato ditė, do tė ishte e vėshtirė tė kuptonte pse Antonionit dhe Bergmanit 40 vjet mė parė u ishte dhėnė statusi i heroit. Nuk besoj se arti i kinemasė ka pėsuar rėnie krahasuar me ato ditė, por duket qartė se klima kulturore qė i bėn kienastėt tė konsiderohen si artistė supremė ka perėnduar njė herė e mirė. Gjithēka qe ka mbetur janė filmat.

  3. #83
    i/e regjistruar
    Anėtarėsuar
    27-06-2002
    Postime
    1,611
    Citim Postuar mė parė nga peoples
    Tarkovski thoshte qe imazhi kinematografik lind gjate xhirimit dhe qendron vetem brenda nje plani....
    Thelbi i thelbit te kinemase !! Perfect ! Dhe ky imazh kinematografik, qe lind VETEM gjate xhirimit(dhe jo montazhit ne studio etj etj), krijohet pergjate asaj qe ai e quan me te drejte "kohė e kopjimit".




    Citim Postuar mė parė nga peoples
    Edhe per kohen ka folur mjaft Tarkovski...

    Ai e quante kinemane artin e kohes, dhe e ndan ate ne tre nivele te ndryshme: 1.Koha empirike,eksperienca kohore e spektatorit; 2. Koha e kopjimit, natyra e nje plani filmik dhe 3. Koha e skalitur (Le temps sculpté,ku qendron dora e regjizorit).
    Mė sakte, nuk ka ku vete.




    Citim Postuar mė parė nga Baptist
    Sipas mendimit tim, ne nje krijimtari kinematike ekziston vetem nje kohe dhe ajo eshte koha artistike. Koha e kopjimit nuk e ka as me te voglin kuptim ne nje veper filmike dhe ajo nuk regjistrohet fare, -as nga shikuesi e as krijuesi. Ne fakt asnjeres pale nuk do t'i interesoje kjo gje ("koha e kopjimit" ose "koha reale"). I vetmi problem eshte koha empirike, pra eksperienca kohore e spektatorit.
    O Baptist,
    Si mor mik nuk paska rendesi "koha e kopjimit" ??? Pra nuk paska rendesi natyra e nje plani filmik ??? Po ky eshte thelbi i thelbit te kinematografine se Vertete, te asaj qe e kam quajtur ne menyre te thjeshtezuar "kinema moderne", te asaj kinematografie qe beri Antonioni apo Berman-i, Ozu, Pazolini, Bunuel-i, Fellin-i, etj etj, e qė ne 20-30 vitet e fundit perpiqen por dhe arrijne ta ēojne ne nje stad ende me te avancuar Hou Hsiao-Hsien-i, Abas Kiarostami, David Lynch, Gus Van Saint-i, Jia Jang-ke, Pedro Kosta, Wang KarWai etj etj.

    "Koha e kopjimit" (natyra e nje plani filmik) eshte ajo qe mundeson lindjen e imazhit te vertete (te kulluar, te paster) ! Dhe ti na e nxorre jashte loje kete kohė ?? wow...



    Citim Postuar mė parė nga Baptist
    Andaj, ne rast se flasim per kohen ne film, ato jane vetem dy:

    1 Koha empirike, (e cila duhet t'i pershtatet metrikisht asaj artistike) dhe
    2 Koha artistike, (e cila eshte plotesisht e pavarur nga "koha reale" dhe "koha e xhirimit" ).
    Krejt e kunderta !! Pikerisht, do te ishte ideale dhe perfekte nese koha artistike do ishte identike me "kohen reale" pra me "kohen e xhirimit" ! Pikerisht, kete kishte parasysh Bergman-i kur thoshte qe enderronte te bente nje film me nje plan-sekuencė te vetme, nga fillimi ne fund, pra nje film ku koha te rrjedhe ekzakt sa koha e xhirimit, pa asnje montazh, pra pa asnje manipulim. Ndaj dhe regjizorėt qe permenda me lart dhe qe perpiqen te bejne art dhe jo mtarpazllėk pseudo-artistik, perpiqen me sa munden qe kohen artistike ("kohen e skalitur"), t'ja afrojne sa mė shume "kohes reale", pra kohes se xhirimit. Edhe pse e dine se persosmeria eshte e pamundur ! Por tentojne amą !




    Citim Postuar mė parė nga peoples
    Prandaj them, se koha artistike eshte dhe duhet te jete plotesisht ekuivalente me kohen e perjetimit te shikuesit, perndryshe dicka aty nuk shkon. Rrjedhja sasiore e kohes filmike per shikuesin duhet te jete e barabarte me kohen e imagjinuar kreative te regjisorit /autorit, perndryshe vepra mund te quhet edhe prej atij vetė - e parealizuar!
    Varet se per ē'shikues behet fjalė ! Sigurisht qe, ne filmat me bum-bum apo me Rambo, koha rrjedh shkelqyeshėm per disa spektatorė, sidomos per kalamajtė apo spektatorėt me te meta mendore - lol.

    Por edhe ne filmat gjoja inteligjentė si ("American beauty", "Dances With Wolves", "Forrest Gump", "La vita č bella", "A beautiful mind","No Man's Land", "Amélie", "The English Patient", "Requiem for a Dream", "The Sea Inside" (Mar dentro), "Shakespeare in Love", "Cinema Paradiso", "Good bye, Lenin!", "The Silence of the Lambs" etj etj, e qe per mua jane edhe me te keqinj se filmat puro-komercialė, koha rrjedh shkelqyeshem per nje tjeter lloj publiku, qe per mua eshte thjesht publik mediokėr ose i pa-ditur. Nderkohe qe per mua personalisht, eshte nje perpjekje e vertete me rezistu e me i pą deri ne fund te tille filma (po ta vesh ré me kujdes, shumica jane fitues Oscar-esh... . Shkurt, filma te tille jane nje tmerr i vertete ( e perseris: nje tmerr akoma mė i tmerrshem se filmat me Rambo dhe Rocky, qe te pakten nuk e fshehin se cilit publik i adresohen) !!


    Por me duket se ketu qendron problemi ne debatin tone: ti nuk merr pothuaj asnjehere qofte dhe nje shembull te vetem, keshtu qe mė duket se ne nuk flasim per te njejten kinematografi. E them kete, sepse ne nje teme te forumit, ke cituar nje film francez, siē eshte ai "Betty Blue" (37°2 le matin) : http://www.forumishqiptar.com/showthread.php?t=19685

    Une nuk di se me cilin opinion e citove ate film, dhe eshte plotesisht e drejta jote ta pelqesh ose jo, por nese per ty ky eshte nje film cilėsor... eshte e kote te debatojme. "37°2" eshte nje nga shembujt mė tipike te kinematografise franceze te ketyre 20 vieteve te fundit, gjoja inteligjente, por qe ne fakt eshte thellesisht mediokre, super kiē dhe genjeshtare (shto ketu faktin qe regjizori i filmit ne fjale, e ka rikonfirmuar mė se nje here, qe nga dalja e atij filmi, mediokritetin e tij monumental).

  4. #84
    Restaurator Orbis Maska e Baptist
    Anėtarėsuar
    20-11-2004
    Postime
    8,690
    Marre parasysh se ne temen "poetic cinema lovers" keni futur cdo gje tjeter perpos asaj qe do quhej poetike kinematike, s'eshte cudi se isha i pergatitur te lexoja edhe nekrologji regjisoresh. Se cfare lidhje ka me kete teme kush vdiq e kush jo nga regjisoret e nderuar ose me pak te nderuar pak ka rendesi.

    Pershtypja ime eshte se kjo teme eshte trajtuar me paramendimin "futja 'shut', dhe hajt ku ta dali!"

    Te tema Filma "blu", per filmat blu, solla filmin e I-re qe kam pare ne "ekranin e madh" qe me beri te ndihem vertete blu. Ate film e kam pare 1 here ne jete ne moshen 15-16 dhe me ka mbetur ne kujtese pikerisht per arsye se me beri te shijoj ndjenjen e depresionit bashkekohor ne moshen kur kjo ndjenje eshte e pakapshme.
    Pra pergjigja ime ishte plotesisht perbrenda kllapave te temes.
    Nuk ishte qeshtje vlerash kinematografike. Ndoshta ishin vlerat letrare ato qe marrin kete merite nga kujtesa ime. Por kjo ka pak rendesi.

    Me rendesi eshte se kapa nje problem ne lidhje me idete tua per filmin, e ajo eshte se:
    Ende nuk e paske bere zberthimin separativ te vepres teatrore prej asaj filmike.

    cit.:
    "kete kishte parasysh Bergman-i kur thoshte qe enderronte te bente nje film me nje plan-sekuencė te vetme, nga fillimi ne fund"

    Kjo, "eshte" menyre e te menduarit filmik! Por per sa i perket qendrimit tim ndaj gjithe asaj qe perben nje veper kinematografike "Ky eshte budallak"!

    Tek e shumta e fjales, nje kader sekuence mund te zgjatet deri sa te permbledh nje Skene ose Akt si ekuivalent Teatror, ndersa cdo gje perbrenda tij (kadrit) do te jete e "aranzhuar", plotesisht e "matur" deri ne kufi te dhunes permbajtesore te saj i detyruar qe t'i permbahesh "kohes empirike" sepse perndryshe cdo gje do te deshtoje.
    Pozicionimi "nje kader-sekuence" - nje film, nekupton edhe strukturen ekuivalente: Nje Skene - Nje Shfaqje Teatrore! Ose Nje Akt - Nje Shfaqje.
    Kauzalisht del se nje sekuence - nje film prodhon nje film njesekuencor. Nje krijimtari e tille, kohesisht, nuk mund te zgjase me teper se nje 20 minutesh efektiv. Mes tjerash, ky pozicionim artificial ndaj fenomenit Film te dhunon kreativisht, te detyron ultimativisht per t'iu permbajtur kohes empirike.

    Te krijosh nje imazh te tille kinematografik, (i cili do te permbaje ne vete edhe shprehjen artistike te krijuesit), nuk mjafton ta percaktosh planin e regjistrimit dhe te therrasesh "Action!". -Kjo menyre e punes eshte "teater i hapur" (ne kuptimin teknik te fjales) dhe si e tille do te kete kerkesa te jashtezakonshme te sinkronicitetit te trupes aktoreske, teknikes percjellese, ndricimit, mizankadrit te sterushtruar, etj, etj, etj dhe gjate githe kohes te rrezikosh rreshqitjen ne falsitet kreativ.

    Per mua Bergman eshte regjisor i Teatrit ne Film. Ai filmin e perdor ne Film vetem ne rastet kur teatri nuk ia ofron mundesine e shprehjes se plote. Synimi i tij ishte te bente Teater ne "bezin e projektorit".
    Thjeshte e thene, ai per kuptimin tim eshte regjisor teatror qe perdor filimin si medium qe ia siguron perjetesine vepres se tij teatrore. Nga ky aspekt, nje krijim me qasje te tille, del se eshte keqperdorim!
    Eshte fakt se cdo regjisor teatri duhet te mbijetoje me vetedijen se vepra e tij do te vdes derisa ai eshte gjalle! Se ai do te jete i pranishem ne varrimin e vepres se tij, pavaresisht sa kohe te gjate do te jetoje ajo. E gjitha qe do te mbetet prej saj, do te jene disa fotografi dhe kujtesa e atyre qe e njohen... ky eshte perjetim i rende... teper i rende per nje krijues artistik.

    Sa per "kohet", e kam elaboruar mjaft mire me sa e shoh ndonese do te mund ta beja pak me te shkoqur ate qe kam thene. Por nuk ndiej nevoje. Ai qe ta kuptoje do ta kuptoje. S'eshte me rendesi fare.

    cit.:
    Dhe ky imazh kinematografik, qe lind VETEM gjate xhirimit(dhe jo montazhit ne studio etj etj), krijohet pergjate asaj qe ai e quan me te drejte "kohė e kopjimit".
    Ky eshte keqperdorim i termit. Nuk kurrfare lidhje koha teknike e gjirimit me imazhin kinematografik. Sepse me kete ke thene se cdo gje e gjiruar/regjistruar me kamere dhe e shfaqur ne "bez" kinemaje eshte imazh kinematografik. -Megjithese, kur e sheh me me shume vemendje kete thenie, i bie te jete pikerisht ashtu! -Gjithesesi, "imazhi artistik" del se eshte dicka tjeter, ndersa shprehja "imazh kinematografik" nje definicion i "thate" teknik. I cili mund te mos kete asnje permbajtje artistike...

    Por per mua eshte qesharake te merret ne shqyrtim "koha e kopjimit" sepse ajo do te editohet ne montazh. Ne mos asgje, -do t'i hiqet kllapa! Por e verteta eshte se ne shume raste hiqet edhe me shume se kaq, shpesh ndahet ne dy e me shume pjese perberese duke shkurtuar kohen empirike per t'iu pershtatur kohes artistike. Ndhoe qe shume kadro bien plotesisht nga montimi dhe nuk futen kurre, edhe kjo ndodhe. Por kjo eshte je instance tjeter e krijimit te nje vepre kinematografike. Keto gjera teknike, varen kryekeput nga metoda e punes se Regjisorit dhe libri i tij i gjirimit.

    Lucas, ta zeme (ne Star Wars) ka punuar me "Liber te hekurt te gjirimit" dhe kjo eshte nje rrethane ne vete. Me c'rast koha e regjistrimit eshte e barasvlefshme me kohen empirike dhe njeherit edhe me "kohen artistike" ne rast se do te ekzistonte edhe ajo perbrenda asaj kllape. Prandaj keto gjera kane te bejne kryekeput me metoden e zgjedhur nga regjisori.

    Koha e kopjimit eshte kohe fizike qe matet me stopwatch! Eshte kohe mekanike qe mund ta masesh edhe me metra te shiritit filmik pavaresisht permbajtjes. Prandaj kjo kohe mund te kete vlere vetem per shkencat ekzakte qe bejne matje te proceseve te caktuara fizike por kurresesi per kinematografine.

    Koha artistike ose kreative matet me pershtypje dhe kuantuum te shenjave te gjuhes artistike te perdorur nga autori qe rrjedhin ne nderthurje organike me porcionet e kohes empirike qe projektohet ne kinema per te krijuar nje rrejedhshemri te pakeputur ideoartistike te nje vepre arti kinematik.

    Natyra e Planit Filmik! _Cka eshte kjo?!! Clidhje kja ky emertim i pakuptimte me "kohen e regjistrimit/kopjimit".

    Me cka e kushtezon "koha e kopjimit", "natyren e planit filmik"?!! Ose: Cka eshte natyra e planit filmik, para se gjithash???
    Kohe e Kopjimit eshte edhe koha qe kamera ka regjistruar ne film aksidentalisht. Ku qendron me kete rast "natyra e planit filmik" te lutem?


    Miko, montazhi eshte i domosdoshem! Pa te nuk ka film, pa te ka vetem teater te filmuar. Kurse une po desha te shoh nje veper teatrore do te vete ne Teater e jo ne Kinema...

    Shendet.
    Aeneas Dardanus
    Lavdi, pasthirrme fosilesh, germadhash e rrenojash vershelluese. -Eja pas meje!...

  5. #85
    pa he!... Maska e korēar
    Anėtarėsuar
    18-10-2002
    Vendndodhja
    NO god'S LAND
    Postime
    666
    O Baptisti pse se ndryshon firmen tende t'u befsha?...
    Shume bukur mund te ishte :
    The Last Standing Defender
    Koqeaus Kandaris
    "Oj nan moj, thenke, a ma ep thiken ta prej Ameriken?"

  6. #86
    Restaurator Orbis Maska e Baptist
    Anėtarėsuar
    20-11-2004
    Postime
    8,690
    Citim Postuar mė parė nga korēar
    O Baptisti pse se ndryshon firmen tende t'u befsha?...
    Shume bukur mund te ishte :
    The Last Standing Defender
    Koqeaus Kandaris

    Prap nuk na e solle definicionin e filmit poetik!
    Aeneas Dardanus
    Lavdi, pasthirrme fosilesh, germadhash e rrenojash vershelluese. -Eja pas meje!...

  7. #87
    i/e regjistruar
    Anėtarėsuar
    24-04-2002
    Postime
    395
    E vėshtirė tė kuptohen shprehjet e Baptist.I gjori djalė,nuk ka marrė akoma mėsimet e duhura se kush ishte kinemaja dikur dhe ku po shkon ajo duke mos harruar tė kaluarėn.
    Koha artistike?Seicili mund tė fantazojė me fjalėt,por disa mendimtarė e kanė provuar me vepra atė qė kanė thėnė,dhe nė qoftė se i njeh veprat e tyre,atėherė do t'i kuptosh kohėt e Tarkovskit.Shih mė parė disa filma qė autori i ka shpjeguar nė forum,dhe mbase mund tė japi dhe informacione,pastaj mundohu t'i kapėsh mė me gjak tė ftohtė.
    Shėndet or mik.

  8. #88
    Restaurator Orbis Maska e Baptist
    Anėtarėsuar
    20-11-2004
    Postime
    8,690
    Po ti or mik a di te na thuash ndoj gje prej vetes per keto qeshtje, apo vetem ato qe te ka mesuar autori?

    Tarkosvkij me punen e tij eshte vetem nje perqindje e vogel e asaj qe quhet Film. Nuk e shpiku ai filmin, ai i dhuroi filmit aq sa kishte te kontribonte ne pasurimin e te shprehurit ne kete medium, por as me shume as me pak ndonese eshte nje nder dhuruesit me te medhenje ne rrugen e formimit te koncepteve per A7.

    Me sa kuptoj une ti je konzumator i filmit, -vazhdo ta konzumosh. Per sa i perket gjakut te ftohte ke gjetur njeriun e gabuar per t'iu drejtuar me kete fjalor. Une jam i gatshem te te jap sqarime te hollesishme ne lidhje me ato qe kam shkruar ne rast se ke ndonje paqartesi.

    Ti si gjakftohte qe qenke, te lutem mos u bej i merzitshem dhe mos keput pallavra tjera te ketij lloji se po na fute ne humor pas gjithe ketyre nekrologjive qe kemi siper se nuk ka kuptim te qeshemi ketu.
    Ndryshuar pėr herė tė fundit nga Baptist : 08-08-2007 mė 00:47
    Aeneas Dardanus
    Lavdi, pasthirrme fosilesh, germadhash e rrenojash vershelluese. -Eja pas meje!...

  9. #89
    Raul Ruiz, tjeter regjizor per t'u marre ne konsiderate (nese nuk eshte permendur).

    Liber Pdf anglisht: Poetika e kinemasė - R. Ruiz
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=IIHTK0MZ

  10. #90
    Restaurator Orbis Maska e Baptist
    Anėtarėsuar
    20-11-2004
    Postime
    8,690
    Igor Kondrashov
    Tarkovsky, Pasolini, and The Cinema of Poetry
    This article was originally written as an academic work on Tarkovsky and his relevance to Pasolini's concept of the "cinema of poetry".




    Pasolini's Cinema of Poetry________________________

    In 1965, the ubiquitous Italian filmmaker & theorist Pier Paolo Pasolini presented a highly influential essay on film semiotics entitled "The Cinema of Poetry". Among the major concepts the essay outlined was the notion of film being capable of portraying multiple subjectivities in terms of narrative and inherent symbolism, resulting in a highly personal experience for any given viewer. Pasolini expanded on this notion by suggesting that film has the capacity to abandon linear narrative logic and the presence of leading characters whilst retaining an internal focus, much in the same way as evidenced in literary poetic works.

    Pasolini theorised that a new "cinema of poetry" was in the process of blossoming, evidenced in the work of established filmmakers like Jean-Luc Godard, Luis Buńuel and Michelangelo Antonioni, among others. He considered the "poetic" aspect of their work to be encapsulated in their unconventional approach to the structuring of narrative, their use of montage for purposes of symbolism and the utilisation of unorthodox camera technique to convey hitherto inarticulate visual images.

    The filmic output and theorising of Soviet filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky is perhaps the perfect epitome of Pasolini's concept of the "cinema of poetry". His films, inextricably linked to literature, are infused with a plethora of atypical stylistic devices which serve to retain the conceptual and metaphorical focus of the director, yet are oblique enough in their nature to enable the viewer to form a subjective impression.



    Tarkovsky and Pasolini: Parallels in theorising
    (I) Cinema as poetry


    A multitude of parallels exists between the theorising of Pasolini and the practice and theory of Tarkovsky. Like Pasolini, Tarkovsky considered poetry to be the artistic manifestation of a particular awareness about the surrounding world, believing that certain concepts can only be accurately illustrated through poetry or its visual equivalent. Wary of using ham fisted clichés and crass symbolism, he postulated that the filmic image must convey truth, that in truth lies beauty and that films making unmediated, sincere observations on life possess within them an element of poetic expressiveness. He mentioned the existence of "poetic cinema" and, like Pasolini, described it to be a move towards the abstraction of cinematic form, citing Buńuel's ability to convey emotional significance through cinema as an apt example. Like Pasolini, he compared the aesthetics of cinema and literature at great length, recognising the ability of both to convey thematic content: literature using descriptive symbols and signs, film manifesting itself directly. In fact, author Natasha Synessios further expands on this difference, claiming that Tarkovsky's films, "Mirror" (1974) in particular, express an aspect of life which is beyond the descriptive power of language and can only be conveyed through the cinematic image.


    Abstraction of Meaning_________

    Tarkovsky's move towards the abstraction of narrative and meaning was prevalent in the majority of his artistic output. He theorised that genuine cinematic imagery can only be obtained when the filmmaker is beyond adherence to genre as a stylistic guideline, due to it being, much like linear narrative logic, too constrictive in its boundaries. In turn, this brought him to strive for the "ideal" artistic image in which the filmmaker's personal stylistic dispositions had to be withheld to avoid tainting the image with a subjective, forced meaning. Particularly fond of Japanese poetry, he often admired the common haiku's adherence to simple, pure realism, admiring its ability to observe life without imposing unnecessary detail.
    Taking Chekhov's predilection for removing the first page of his stories as inspiration, Tarkovsky did much the same with his films, often presenting the audience with seemingly disassociated fragments, without a clue as to their context and meaning, thus allowing a given viewer to impose his/her own insight. As a result, the actors in "Mirror" play several roles, without the existence of clear distinctions between the characters they represent at a given time throughout the film. Thus Margarita Terekhova is both the narrator's wife and his mother and Ignat Daniltsev is both the narrator himself and the narrator's son.


    Poetic Metaphor_____________
    Beyond the poetic lie the poetic metaphor and the direct reference to poetry itself. Both are heavily present in Tarkovsky's films, serving to contribute to the films" lyrical beauty and emphasise the concepts being conveyed in the narrative. "Mirror" in particular contains several examples - Maria's experience in the shower room and visit to the rich doctor's house are both accounted for by the presence of rain and are symbolic of the emotional catharsis she is experiencing, a poetic metaphor referential of a literary classic like Shakespeare's "King Lear".
    In "Stalker"(1979), Hungarian critics Kovacs and Szilagyi suggest that "The Zone" represents the dark past of any human society, occasionally recalled by dissidents to keep public morality in check. Poetic metaphor is even prevalent in the film's costume design, the key protagonists" outfits emblematic of their personalities and their approach to the (spiritual) journey at hand. Indeed at a stretch of the imagination, "The Zone" could be taken as a metaphor for the journey of human civilisation through its own subconscious, attempting to rationalise its slavish adherence to science and art over God and nature by way of philosophical argument.

    Finally, "Andrei Rublev" (1966) was imbued with poetic symbolism by French theoretician Jacques Demeure, who considered the entire film to be allegorical of an artist's search for divine inspiration, whilst Barthelemy Amengual expanded the allegory to symbolise the striving of artistic freedom under the oppression of Stalinism. Beyond Tarkovsky's appreciation of poetic cinema and the power of poetic metaphor is his appreciation of poetry itself and his desire to convey its importance and aesthetic beauty through his films. The stalker recites a poem by Arseni Tarkovsky, whilst his daughter reads a Fyodor Tyutchev poem in the closing moments of the film. Four of Arseni Tarkovsky's poems are recited over the course of "Mirror". Finally an Arseni Tarkovsky poem serves as the inspiration for the plot of "Nostalgia" (1983). Indeed the protagonist, Gorchakov, is a poet by profession.


    Rhythm_____________
    The crux of Tarkovsky's respect for what he termed "poetic" cinema stemmed from what he considered the main formative element of a single cinematic work: the process of editing, where in a sincere artistic work segments dictate their own order and sequence themselves to an intrinsic pattern of flow and repetition. Changing between trademark long shots and quick montage his films develop a sense of varying rhythm, much like the rhythms present in poetry e.g. iambic pentameter. Exemplifying this, the scene with the peasant who has lost his wife in "Ivan's Childhood" (1962) consists of del
    iberately slow, long shots, much like the imperceptible slow motion tracking in the "Mirror" scene where Maria runs through the publishing house.


    Colour_____________
    Rhythm is not the only poetic "device" employed by Tarkovsky. Another key expressive element is the use of colour, used to mediate one's mood and convey emotion. Tarkovsky purposefully restricted the palette used in each film. Thus, in "Solaris" (1972), "Stalker" and "Mirror" the colours used are natural, the contrast emphasising the difference between nature and technology. In fact, Tarkovsky even resorted to having grass and leaves painted in certain shots in an effort to emphasise his pantheistic view of nature.


    Music_____________
    Music, much like colour, incites a subjective emotion by its presence, making the impression made by the filmic image multi-textured, synaesthetic, adding a further cognitive dimension hitherto absent. Tightly controlled in his films, the score was either created to custom specification by composer Eduard Artemyev, or taken from established classical works by revered greats such as Bach and Pergolesi, stemming from Tarkovsky's belief that cinema itself is a young art form and needs to borrow from more established art forms to boost credibility. In "Mirror" the sound is often non-diegetic, the viewer subjected to field recordings of passing trains and the barking of dogs that have no physical representation on the screen, but exist to imbue the visual image with an atmosphere. In "Stalker", like in "Nostalgia", the eerie throb of electronic rhythms creates an uneasy, ethereal ambience.


    Multiple Subjectivities___
    Much like Pasolini's discourse on cinema's ability to convey multiple subjectivities within a single image, Tarkovsky believed that the viewer's interpretation was most important as far as the process of creating art was concerned. Dismissive of established film critics as lacking the precision to correctly interpret, he theorised that the "strength" of a given image lied in its ability to convey an idiosyncratic fact, rather than be overly imbued with cack-handed symbolism. This desire to express oblique yet universal, truthful images came partly due to the duality of his sentiment toward the great Soviet filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein, respectful of the aesthetic devices he pioneered, but unhappy of Eisenstein's consistent imposing of subjective messages through editing and camera technique. He also shunned the practice of pleasing audiences, stating that such behaviour could only be described as deceitful. Often contradictory of his own theory, he cited Bakhtin's intellection of a single book being read by a thousand people being a thousand different books, thereby suggesting that cognition, whether applied to literature or cinema is subjective due to differences in imagination.

    But Tarkovsky was a practitioner as well as a theorist and his desire to convey multi-faceted yet focused concepts was inevitably reflected in his filmic output. His last film, "Sacrifice" (1986), is by his own admission a parable; whereas "Mirror" came to life as a direct result of individual interpretations of the abstract script by the actors involved, the notion of multiple subjectivities thereby manifested physically rather than mentally. Indeed, all of the actors interviewed after filming agreed that dramatic motivation was not discussed for a single character in the film.

    Tarkovsky understood, however, that even with subjective interpretation a conceptual focus must be kept to give the filmic work direction and purpose. Thus, during the making of "Ivan's Childhood", he stated that through the pages of the book on which the film was based, the influence of the writer Bogomolov can be felt. "The Zone" in "Stalker" meanwhile, was meant to be an oblique, vague territory, and one that can be manifested mentally in a subjective manner by every viewer. Finally there is his trademark stylistic device, the long take, where the camera tracks and zooms almost simultaneously, an imperceptible tracking technique giving the viewer an almost primal cognitive experience, making him/her an unwitting participant in the action unfolding on screen.



    (II) Non-linear Narrative Logic
    Both in practice and theory, Tarkovsky's work runs in clear parallel with a key notion suggested by Pasolini - the move away from linear narrative logic and towards abstraction. In his book "Sculpting In Time: Reflections On The Cinema", Tarkovsky introduces his conceptual interpretation of what he terms "the logic of poetry in cinema", deeming it to be germane to the future capacity of cinema to become a sincere creative art form. Considering linear narrative logic to be akin to the rigidity of a geometry theorem, Tarkovsky theorised that the process of thought possesses the capacity to be abstract and therefore its conceptual expression on celluloid should reflect this fluidity of cognition and perception, rather than submit to an acceptable normative order.
    For Tarkovsky, the notion of poetry in cinema is characterised in the combination of images by process of mental association, rather than by conscious attempt to create lyrical, romantic imagery. "Ivan's Childhood" is considered by many critics to be have been a "quantum leap" in the evolution of soviet cinema due to its deft structuring of narrative by way of associative links and subtle transition between dream sequences and filmic reality. "Mirror", Tarkovsky's most acclaimed film, is perhaps the most appropriate example of his disapproval of linear sequentiality as a narrative device. Structured with all the logic of a dream, temporal continuity is abandoned as events from three distinct time periods are shown in arbitrary order. In fact, at the time of editing the film, Tarkovsky recalls restructuring the film as many as twenty times before finally settling on a continuity that pleased him. New characters are introduced at random, obscuring any semblance of narrative continuity that remained.


    Conclusion_____________
    Although Tarkovsky's films appear to include the prerequisite elements of "cinema of poetry", he was wary of directors moving cinema away from itself. Indeed, Tarkovsky theorised that cinema itself should surpass notions of "poetry" within itself and be poetic in its own right, as an established, widely-practised standard, rather than the result of dramatic lyrical cliché. He strove towards an image pure in its representation of reality, like the haiku and its economical descriptiveness. This idealism earned him the respect of discerning film audiences world-wide as well as giving inspiration to countless emerging filmmakers. Ingmar Bergman summarises this achievement best, crediting Tarkovsky with the invention of a new cinematic language, capable of expressing life and emotion in their truest form.
    (Te interesuarit mund te thellohen ne adresen: http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds...yPasolini.html)
    Aeneas Dardanus
    Lavdi, pasthirrme fosilesh, germadhash e rrenojash vershelluese. -Eja pas meje!...

Faqja 9 prej 10 FillimFillim ... 78910 FunditFundit

Tema tė Ngjashme

  1. Marie de France -- mesjeta ne France
    Nga Leila nė forumin Krijime nė gjuhė tė huaja
    Pėrgjigje: 2
    Postimi i Fundit: 03-04-2006, 21:57

Regullat e Postimit

  • Ju nuk mund tė hapni tema tė reja.
  • Ju nuk mund tė postoni nė tema.
  • Ju nuk mund tė bashkėngjitni skedarė.
  • Ju nuk mund tė ndryshoni postimet tuaja.
  •