Saturday, June 26, 2010
In the latest date, July 7, the series "A New Film Peruano", held in the UTP are present-in the auditorium "Escobedo Gallegos Angelica" - the only release planned for this frame. It is "3", by Eduardo Quispe, the author of "1" and "2", which we saw last year at the Festival Limeño Film Festival, held at the same university.
connection with this release, we We did an interview talked about the recording process of this film and, above all, substantive issues of the Peruvian cinema.
Any new exploration in "3" with respect to your two previous films?
Eduardo Quispe (EQ): Well this time I worked with over 10 people (usually working less than 5), which tested my communication skills and organizational, as we always work without a script . The draft of the film serves as a starting point for participants to ideas we come together and perform several parallel creative processes. Jim and I we just channel this creative stream in the direction of the thrust of the film. People who work with us does not charge a sun hardly recompense him wiping movies, inviting pizza, a dinner with pisco sour, etc. That means that they believe so much in this project as we are, they put their enthusiasm, effort and ingenuity. It is almost a collective work, where my role as director is more a motivator and facilitator.
"3" is a film about the reality of the young generation Lima; try to recreate a night on a park, always in the vein of the fictional naturalist and documentary / experimental use and in the movies. Our theme continues to revolve around the difficulties in relationships, in a conservative city that has been mediated and that so difficult to adapt to rapidly changing social paradigms.
What was the recording mode for this movie?
EQ: On this occasion we recorded almost the entire film Single shot sequence. As this is not so new, looking for ways to give our original touch, and well, the result left me satisfied. We spend more than the previous two films together, we had to record it all on 3 occasions, and we had many difficulties, to unite all people, to coordinate the talks, the level of participation of each one, because not everyone agreed on the same schedule of meetings and rehearsals, and could not participate for various reasons, I had a serious health problem that took me into surgery, died the mother of one of the participants, there were personal problems between some members of the cast, among other things. I imagine they are inherent difficulties recorded in this way, but despite complications, was a good experience and fortunately it all came to fruition.
if it had a looser budget, "would come out of digital? Or do you think that this support has its own personality that goes with your feelings.
EQ: If I had a considerable sum of money, find an excuse to bring Charlotte Gainsbourg, I know, I love that woman. Never let the digital medium, it's the principle, not only sensitivity or money. If you have more budget would include the distribution, make my films more accessible to people. For example, bulk out DVD editions of good quality, that cost 3 soles, or 2.50, which is the price people pay on the street. I am against record in a format so expensive and scarce in this country, and spend many technical aspects involved with film recording and display. Also, for my film making is part of a series of activities for the true democratization of the media and art, so I only complicate celluloid life.
Peruvian Nuevo Cine "naming a group of young film directors is a way to report the existence of a cinema" old "?
* Once you mentioned that you want to motivate more young people to make films How do I pass it in your movies? (* This question is not publication, but the answer is yes, so I took the liberty of including)
EQ: No one must denounce the existence of an old movie, because that is really quite obvious to anyone who has a fair perception. Might call "old cinema" the kind of films that inspire only do the opposite to what they have done their makers, which will inevitably arise with the urge to create new aesthetic, expressive and formal as call "a new film." I know we can not ignore the existence of films made in the past that transcend and remain in effect, precisely because of its proposal, but unfortunately did not echo, and generated a tradition of innovation, much less the filmmakers gathered in a vanguard movement , which happens now with young people you mention.
What are the characteristics of this film "old"?
EQ: In my opinion this film was not born old but has been aging for giving renewed. It has become a rather boring and tasteless film, covering topics superficially deep, with excessive theatrics, drama straight out of a local newscast, texts so obvious, over-exploitation of stereotypes, gags, implausible situations, predictable, maps and sequences reduced to being an illustration of scripts, a naive realism that if a character hits the wall, is hitting the wall, if you're eating because you're eating, if you walk down the street, as they are going somewhere. There is no reference, no metaphors or signifiers, or at least the director makes you feel well. The spectator just make the effort to follow a series of events that have been lightened, hoping to become a more commercial product, without soul, without passion, without art.
Do you feel the need to establish a group of young filmmakers to be seen?
EQ: do not think there is a need to meet, but what is the need not met. Everyone has their own style, their proposals, their mode of production, elements that characterize it, their tastes and their own vision of cinema. But what unites us is the red need to do something new, think of it Peruvian cinema be blamed for the same Peruvians. I dare say that everyone wants to make art films, without the interest that these adoption increases in the conventional manner, desperately seeking effective media or win any festival. Making art is quite exhilarating, cathartic and inspiring those feelings can not be obtained in some other activity, let alone can satisfy the money. And I think that is transmitted into the soul of the film, which is why the (few) people who see it not just leave the theater.
EQ: The production of my films staff resources, budget, all this is available to everyone. Recorded with the camera you have available, and the minimum technical requirements that we use, only casting a stumbling block, but not both, for example, "2" needed an actress and none of my friends was available. So I started looking for Hi5 (very fashionable some years ago) to girls who have the features I was looking for the character, and also has quite an affinity with art and certain kinds of movies. So I met Linda Soto, we set out to form part of the project, liked it, we were writing to gain confidence, we filmed, we became friends and even we have plans to record later. In "3" as required more people, as did the same, but this time calling through facebook. Some were known to be regulars film club, I made the invitation and accepted it, and even invited their friends. Even some people who volunteered because they had loved my previous films.
Assuming you do movies to make your impression of the world mass and recognizing that the alternative circuit in which you move has little diffusion and bounce. How do you intend to disseminate your work towards reaching a wider audience?
recording Ending "4" (by late October this year) I'll move this package of films for markets alternative, Powder Blue, Round Table, The Gap, etc.. Also try to place them abroad, through some contacts moviegoers. Similarly, with Jim Marcelo, my co-kinesthetic, we have a project for quite some time, bring the films to schools, colleges, community centers and public places that just have a projector, sound equipment and place where you feel the people. Additionally, the films will be on the blog of kinesthesia, where people can download the free. The reason I waited until October is because I am improving the presentation of the DVD as well as trying to clean up the audio, especially of "1" so people have no problems seeing her at home.
Something to say about CONACINE?
You can give money to someone to do a movie, with the main criterion "project feasibility." And So What? Apparently only financing films with the support of people and producers of "experience" that will ensure that the project will perform smoothly. So we no longer speak of the purpose of cinema or art, but only the product. If the movie does not work, does not return the money is there?, Then why such an approach considerations premium over, say, more artistic?. Whereas most films that take risks are more values \u200b\u200bthat promote artistic film and then reward the "feasibility" does not make much sense. We need a film institute that not only rewards projects with a certain profile (quite debatable, of course) and one other course, but who cares about the principal capital of art creativity. If it continues to maintain a conservative position without risking more experimental, while promoting the directors of both formal and aesthetic research and media education, especially in the population because I do not think much progress. I do not consider personal achievements Claudia Llosa, Héctor Gálvez, the Vega brothers, are an indicator that we are on track, but it reaffirms my feeling that can only be accomplished something important if you do the opposite of what has become filmmakers " experienced, mainly supported by CONACINE.
Published cinencuentro.com
* Photos of this post (also part of "3"): Hugo Palomino Gonzales
Published cinencuentro.com
* Photos of this post (also part of "3"): Hugo Palomino Gonzales
0 comments:
Post a Comment