تحول بیانِ تصویری در لحظه‌های‌ گفت و گویی سینمای ایران در دهۀ 1380

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیئت علمی گروه آموزشی سینما، دانشکدۀ سینما تئاتر، دانشگاه هنر، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار گروه هنرهای نمایشی، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

3 استادیار گروه ادبیات نمایشی، دانشکدة هنر و معماری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

چکیده

یکی از بخش‏های مهم در زیبایی‏شناسی تصویر در سینمای ایران لحظه‏های ‏گفت‌وگویی است. یکی از قراردادهای مسلط و غالب در تصویرسازیِ لحظه‏های گفت‌وگویی نما/ نمای معکوس است. در این پژوهش تلاش شده به تحلیلِ مواجهة فیلم‌سازان ایرانی با لحظه‏های گفت‌وگویی پرداخته و نحوة تحولِ بیان تصویری در این لحظه‏ها نمایان شود. از همین روی، ده فیلم از سینمای ایران در دهة 1380 به منزلة جامعة آماری گزینش شده‏اند؛ این آثار عبارت‌اند از: سگ‏کشی(بهرام بیضایی، 1380)؛ من ترانه پانزده سال دارم(رسول صدرعاملی، 1381)؛ شب‏های روشن(فرزاد مؤتمن، 1381)؛ گاوخونی (بهروز افخمی، 1382)؛ آتش سبز (محمدرضا اصلانی، 1386)؛ شبانه‌روز(امید بنکدار و کیوان علی‏محمدی، 1387)؛ دربارة الی(اصغر فرهادی، 1387)؛ جدایی نادر از سیمین(اصغر فرهادی، 1389)؛ پرسهدر مه (بهرام توکلی، 1388)؛ یه حبه قند(رضا میرکریمی، 1390). نخست ماهیت نما/ نمای‏ معکوس و ویژگی‏های آن بررسی می‌شود. سپس، دو مفهومِ «می‏شود و شده در تصویر» تعریف می‌شوند و این دو مفهوم در لحظه‏های ‏گفت‌وگویی واکاوی می‏شوند. سپس، به نمونه‏های تکراری این الگو در جامعة ‏آماری پرداخته می‏شود. سرانجام، به فیلم‏هایی اشاره می‏‌شود که از الگوی نما/ نمای ‏معکوس فراتر رفته و آن را به پرسش گرفته‏اند. این پژوهش آشکار می‏سازد که به‌‏رغم آنکه غالب فیلم‏های ایرانی دهة 1380 در سیطرة نما/ نمای معکوس بوده‏اند، آثاری نیز وجود دارد که از این سیستم خارج شده و آن را به چالش کشیده‏اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Development of Visual Expression in Dialogic Moments of Iranian Cinema over the Period 2001-2011

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sajad Sotoudeh 1
  • Ahmad Alasti 2
  • Mohammad Jafar Yousefian Kenari 3
1 MA in Cinema Studies, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor in Dramatic Arts, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor in Dramatic Literature, Faculty of Arts, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Iranian cinema is well-known in international movie festivals. A lot of internal and external researchers have conducted many researches about Iranian cinema and its filmmakers. Usually these researches are affected by cultural studies and have the same approach to content and meaning. This has become the reason that we have few researches about visual aspects and cinematic structures in Iranian cinema. One of the neglected issues of visual aesthetics analysis in Iranian cinema is the dialogic moments: scene in which two or more characters talk to each other. Since dialogic moments have been used frequently in movies, its use has become conventional, and almost no movie can be found without them. One of the dominant conventions in directing dialogic moments is shot/reverse shot technique. This research tries to analyze Iranian filmmakers’ approach to dialogic moments and aims to reveal how their visual expressions have been transformed. In order to achieve this, 10 movies from 2001 to 2011 have been selected as statistical period of the research. These movies are: Killing Mad Dogs (Bahram Beizai, 2001); I am Taraneh: 15 (Rasul Sadr Ameli, 2002); Light Nights (Farzad Motamen, 2001); Gavkhooni (The River’s End) (Behrooz Afkhami, 2003); Green Fire (Mohammad Reza Aslani, 2007); Day and Night (Omid Bonakdar and Keyvan Alimohammadi, 2008); About Elly (Asghar Farhadi, 2008); A Seperation (Asghar Farhadi, 2010); A Walk in the Fog (Bahram Tavakoli, 2009); A Cube of Sugar (Reza Mir-Karimi, 2011). First, the nature of shot/reverse shot (as the dominant pattern for visual expressions of dialogue scenes), and its characteristics will be discussed. In this part, we review a brief history of forming the shot/reverse shot in order to define where this pattern began and in which years it had been developed and became customary in cinema. Then, all the movies in the statistical domain of the research will be reviewed in order to indicate what percentage of the dialogic moments formed in these works have been using shot/reverse shot. Two concepts, “Becoming” and “Became”, in cinematic image and its effect on dialogic moments will also be examined. The concept of “Becoming” in the picture alludes to moments which are continuous in the present time and develop, while the concept of “Became” alludes to those which are removed of continuity and time. Reviewing the substance of shot/reverse shot shows that this découpage pattern postpones the picture from the spectator, and transforms it into something that has happened in the past. Then recurring samples of this pattern will be analyzed and an attempt will be made to single out films that have chosen the dominant pattern. Finally, films that have gone beyond shot/reverse shot and have questioned its established position will be discussed. In this chapter, few works are resolved which have creative suggestions for picturing the dialogic moments, and do not bind themselves of a repeated pattern. This research will show that although most Iranian films of this period, have been dominated by shot/reverse shot, there are some movies which have deviated from the expected cinematic technique.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • iranian cinema
  • Visual Aesthetics
  • Dialogic Moments
  • Becoming in Picture
  • Became in Picture
  • Shot/Reverse Shot
راستین، شادمهر (1387)، به یاد بیاور، این خود تویی؛ مصاحبه با محمدرضا اصلانی، مجلةفیلم، 388: 77- 80.
Bordwell, David (2008), Poetics of Cinema, Routledge, New York.
Bordwell, David and Kristin Thompson (2008), Film Art an Introduction, Eight Edition, Published by McGraw-Hill, New York.
Chisholm, Brad (1989), On-Screen Screens,Journal of Film and Video, 41(2): 15-24.
Dayan, Daniel (1974), The Tutor-Code of Classical Cinema, Film Quarterly, 28(1): 22-31.
Debord, Guy (2002), The Society of the Spectacle, Trans Ken Knabb, Hobgoblin Press, Canberra.
Foucault, Michel (2002), The Order of Things An Archaeology of the Human Sciences, Routledge, London and New York.
Heath, Stephen (1978), Notes on Suture, Screen, 18(4): 48-76.
Kennedy, Barbara M. (2002), Deleuze and Cinema the Aesthetics of Sensation, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
Mitchell, W.J. Thomas (1994), Picture Theory Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Pearson, Roberta E. and Philip Simpson (2001),Critical Dictionary of Film and Television Theory, Routledge, London and New York.
Pramaggiore, Maria and Tom Wallis (2008), Film A Critical Introduction, Second Edition, Laurence King Publishing Ltd, London.
Rothman, William (1975), Against the System of the Suture, Film Quarterly, 29(1): 45-50.
Salt, Barry (1977),Film Style and Technology in the Forties, Film Quarterly, 31(1): 46-57.
Spadoni, Robert (1999), The Figure Seen from the Rear, Vitagraph, and the Development of Shot/Reverse Shot, Film History, 11(3): 319-341.
Thompson, Kristin (1985), The Formulation of the Classical Style 1902-28, in The Classical Hollywood Cinema Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960, Routledge, London.
Williamson, Catherine (1996), You’ill See it Just as I Saw it: Voyeurism, Fetishism, and The Female Spectator in Lady in the Lake, Journal of Film and Video, 48(3), Film and Television History, pp.17-29.