FTV 111 Film Journal

Salaam Cinema



Country: Iran
Year: 1995
Director: Mohsen Makhmalbaf
Length: 75 min
Language: Persian












Critical Comments:
What is cinema ? The language of cinema is not really overt in Salaam cinema. It strips out the projected image that suspends our disbelief when watching this film. We can see everything that makes this film. The equipment, the director, the lights, the stage (even though it's just a small box), realism in this film exposes it in its making. There are really not much hidden or derivable meaning in Salaam cinema as the intentions of Makhmalbaf are made very clear in his conversation with those in his 'audition'. Without the spectacle and glamourous illusion, Makhmalbaf is able to capture the raw essence of aspiring actors and lovers of cinema in his home country in a candid way.

Actors are real because they are not acting, in fact in realism, there are really no actors. Everyone is an actor in a realist film especially when filming a documentary. The language of film speaks through the reality and the audiences are not addressed by Makhmalbaf. He is equally as part of this film as his 'auditioners'. It was also interesting to see that while many had the impression of film as some kind of entertainment, there were actors with roles to play and directors made the decisions of what is happening in the film. Many of those who were in that audition were shocked (like the 'blind' man) that they already part of a film but one that was entirely within their expectations.

Salaam cinema challenges that to present film as realism. There is more to film that watching it in the cinema. In Salaam cinema I can see that Makmalbaf who made this film on the occasion for the centenary celebration of film, trace some of its history. Like the rather talented singers that reminds us of the classical Hollywood musical and some of the famous names in cinema which we can see in a 'who do you look like' game.

But what I personally find the most interesting thing about Salaam Cinema in the end is the question of the actor. What is the actor in cinema and what role does the actor play in cinema. This is very relevant in realism film but just one aspect I believe of realism.

Salaam Cinema 'reveals' the evolution of actors behind cinema and how 'cruel' cinema has really been when interviewing the teenage girls that took up almost 30 minutes in the film. The question of actors expected to be artist or humane brings out questions whether actors who can easily manipulate and 'sell' their emotions are still considered humane. Have they given up so much in the name of acting and cinema that they have ascended to a state of artistry that they have forgotten what makes them human? This may be true with actors in the fictional film but in Salaam cinema, Makhmalbaf believes that cinema is for everyone. No one has to choose whether they have to be an artist or human. Realism allows anyone to be an actor without going through this rather morbid dilemma in filmmaking. However the questions remain whether cinema would remain to be for everyone. With the closing shot of the girls holding a blackboard with 'to be continued' in Persian written on it, this can be a never-ending question as to whether film really is for everyone. Actors had to sell their 'humanity' to order to be an artisit in cinema while there are no need for actors in realist cinema.

Readings:

1.Branston and Stafford (1996) 'Realism', The Media Student's Book 3rd ed, London & New York: Routledge, 446-472. This reading tells how different types of realism has been potrayed on film that has different ideas of realism. It was interesting to read about how realism came about as a movement since the 18th century and has been an undying tradition ever since. Realism is a form of aesthetics rather than simply just about capturing 'real life'. To apply what I have read from this reading into Salaam Cinema, the film follows the precepts of the documentary of Direct Cinema. Salaam Cinema does not attempt to bring out any political discourses that wants to change the behaviour of the audience that watches the film. It is simply a documentary about people (Iranians) and what are the ideas they had about cinema which I find it very fitting for a centinary tribute to cinema. As a documentary about cinema after 100 years in Iran, it lets ordinary people tell the audience what they felt and what were the impressions (many which probably were not aware that Salaam Cinema was meant to be a documentary). This is realism right there. The absence, in fact, this is shown through the presence, of the director's mediation in Salaam Cinema preserve Salaam Cinema in its realism state.

2.Traverso, Antonio & Martin Mhando (2005). 'Salaam Cinema: Unlikely Journeys in Documentary' in Asian Cinema, special issue on Asian Documentary (Spring 2005). Traverso suggest that Salaam Cinema puts the questions and theories of the documentary genre back into the drawing board. He tells western film theorist, critics and audience to rethink their initial ideas they had about documentary and realism. For the most part, I find the points made by Traverso agreeable if not more detailed than my critical comments that I had about Salaam Cinema.

However, there some points that I find although unique from its standpoint, I find it not entirely significant or possibly a different reading of the same context. First of all is how Traverso related the theme of religion and spirituality of Salaam Cinema as a context to be read in the film. I cannot really agree that religion should be read as a seperate context in the film but rather it contributes to the discourses of documentary. As Traverso mentioned that Salaam Cinema is documentary about film and explores about the relationship of film during its inception as a device of capturing actuality, religion in an Asian country should be one, if not major part of that actuality. Makhmalbaf as an Iranian that comes from an Islamic country is using film to present realism. Realism as has been discussed of carrying different meanings and natures in different locations in Iran, is religion. This supports the argument that Western theorist, critics and audience need to reconsider what should be a documentary. The realism in Salaam Cinema shows that documentary film should and can be done regardless of religion and in another case, as suggested by Traverso, gender.

What I find most interesting in this reading is how Traverso could come up with the discourse of cinema as power which his points have made it convincing and also interesting to note.

3.Review of Salaam Cinema, http://www.wsws.org/arts/1995/sep1995/makh-s95.html. This review tells how Salaam Cinema transforms from a fictional film to a documentary and hints on the possibility the Makhmalbaf had more than he bargained for. This review although sufficient in describing the viewing experience of Salaam Cinema, does not in my opinion do enough justice of acknowledging Salaam Cinema as a provocative film. It provides the background of Makhmalbaf and Salaam Cinema but not the critical analysis and the reading that we can expect to find in Salaam Cinema

# posted by KC @ 12:03 AM