An overview of the damages of holding the most important Iranian cinema festival in the past years / Who will be the secretary of the Fajr 45 festival?

Now that the appointment of the secretary of the 45th term is discussed, repeating his name is not only unreasonable but repeating a big strategic mistake.

Eastern Culture and Art Service - Fajr Film Festival in the last two periods with the appointment of "Manochehr Shahsaviri" as the secretary, on the surface claims to restore the distance with the body of cinema and revive the lost passion, but what happened on the scene was not a restoration, but a deepening of the gap and turning this national event into one of the least popular and most marginalized periods in its history. The basic question here is why these courses not only did not improve the quality, but also brought the credibility of the festival to the lowest possible level?

The 43rd Fajr Film Festival started on the 12th of Bahman 1403, while before the official start, the first and biggest margin was directly tied to the secretary.

Shahsavari, who has a history of managing a cinema house, took the helm of this event in a situation where he himself called the short preparation time as a major weakness in a press conference before the festival. Addressing the media, he announced: "On the 15th of November, I announced my agreement to the head of the cinema organization... This is not in the interest of Iranian cinema, nor is it correct in terms of management. We live in a different era compared to previous years, and this change in nature cannot be answered with the old methods. Therefore, with minimal editorial changes, I accepted the festival out of respect for cinema. »

These statements, which were nothing more than a complaint before the start, sent a clear message to the cinema community, that the festival is organized by a management that does not consider itself ready for heavy responsibility. In the same meeting, criticizing the management changes after the change of governments, Shaheswari mentioned that the festival needs a clear and stable secretariat and financial resources, and he considered the lack of this stability as the biggest bane of the national event.

One of the main points of discussion during his tenure as secretary was the tense relationship with the media and his special view on the marginal category. In a press conference before the opening, Shaheswari addressed the journalists in a warning tone: "My wish is for you, the media, to be careful not to be the promoters of the development or expansion of the margins that have nothing to do with art and artists." He was worried that some people would seek to win an award by marginalization and asked the media not to fuel this atmosphere. However, his management itself became the biggest margin producer.

Shahsawari tried to keep the atmosphere of the festival away from political and social inflammations. Choosing the image of Ali Hatami's movie "Mother" as a visual symbol was a symbolic move in this direction.

He said about this: "For all of us, the importance of an image from the movie Mother behind us has been a memory, and Mother has been understood for us apart from the fact that it is a movie. I hope that all mothers will have a lasting shadow." In a rare move, he honored three experienced artists, namely Reza Babak, Manouchehr Valizadeh and Siros Alvand, in the opening ceremony to emphasize the inclusive aspect of cinema. But these superficial actions could not reduce the severity of the criticism directed at his administration in the following days.

Although the first days of the festival went relatively smoothly, the main event took place on the last night of the 22nd of Bahman 1403. With the announcement of Simorgh winners, a wide wave of protests by cinematographers and critics was formed. Many believed that the jury was influenced by certain atmospheres and the results were not fair. The movie "Mousy Kalimullah" by Ebrahim Hatamikia and the movie "1968" by Amir Mahdi Pourvaziri were among the works that were neglected. This was despite the fact that if Shahsawari acted in line with the cultural policies of the Islamic Republic, he should have shown special attention to these two works in the conclusion.

Based on the two operations of True Promise, it can be said that the state of the country before the official attack of the enemy was no different from the period of holy defense. In terms of its content, the movie "God of War" was suitable for military and international events, but it was not paid attention to the point where the film crew refused to receive a special Simorgh in an official letter. Saed Sohaili, the actor of this work, reacted to this injustice by publishing a post in the virtual space. At the same time, Mohammadreza Khormedandan, the director of "Natur Dasht", who had widespread public support, stayed away from the judges and wrote in a bitter note that his Simorgh is the people's support.

The closing night was not limited to union protests. After the ceremony, Shahab Hosseini referred to the difficult living conditions of the people on his personal page, called the atmosphere of the festival alien to the society and mentioned the movie "Reha" as a story of empathy and sadness. The harshest criticisms, however, came back to the exclusion of the film "Old Boy", which was removed from the competition section despite its merits and obvious moral content. Shaheswari did not pay attention to the history of the creator of this work, Oktay Brahni; A person who had published his works unofficially since 1400 outside the official rules.

Masoud Farasti, a film critic, described the behavior of the organizers towards the movie "Killer and Savage" by Hamid Nematullah as inhumane and dirty, and went straight to Shahsaviri. One of the most important aspects of his management was this case. Shahsawari and the organizing team made promises about the screening of this film, which they were unable to fulfill in practice, and the design of this empty promise created widespread displeasure among cinemagoers.

When Saeed Khani, the producer of the film, went on stage to receive Simorgh for the best first film for "Reha", he disrupted the atmosphere of the ceremony and protested in a harsh tone about the non-screening of "Killer and Wild" and restrictive policies. Narges Abiyar, a member of Parvaneh Drama Council, also announced his resignation by publishing a letter and protested against restrictive policies in the field of cinema. These events showed that the management of Shahsawari could not balance between the regulatory bodies and filmmakers, and the festival has practically become a scene of clash of tastes.

Another technical topic that was repeated many times during his tenure as secretary was how to preserve and count public votes. Referring to the history of attending the cinema, Shahesvari claimed that the vote protection mechanism will be carefully implemented and said that protecting people's votes is an inherent honor of the festival headquarters. However, after the end of the festival, there were discussions about how to calculate public votes, and some media and users questioned the accuracy of the polls.

At the end of this period, Manouchehr Shahesvari showed a tired and disappointed face. Some sources quoted him and wrote that he was not satisfied with some events and even announced that he is no longer willing to accept a secretary with this structure. A review of the margins shows that his management could not balance the traditional power structures in cinema and the wave of protests by independent filmmakers. He started with the slogan of reducing the margins and focusing on art, and ended up in the middle of a storm of margins that took place under the shadow of his management.

However, contrary to expectations, Shahsaviri took charge of the 44th festival as well. This period started on the 12th of Bahman 1404 while he was at the helm for the second year in a row. With the experience of the previous year, it was expected to present an image of a cautious manager, but the 44th season became the scene of one of the most controversial cinematic events of the last two decades; A period whose margins went beyond cinema halls and reached the political-union confrontation.

To understand the depth of Shahsawari's failure, one should look at Ebrahim Darughezadeh's management at the 38th Fajr Film Festival in February 2018. That period coincided with three major crises: the protests of November 2018, the martyrdom of General Haj Qassem Soleimani and the crash of the Ukrainian plane. Daroghzadeh ended the festival with smart and empathetic decisions: canceling the opening ceremony and photocall due to sympathy for the grieving families, allocating the canceled expenses to the victims, mentioning the martyrdom of Sardar Soleimani in the closing and turning the festival into a symbol of the cinema family being together. Despite the widespread boycott, the popular reception was overwhelming, and the Western media failed in the attempt to boycott. This calm and professional management showed that a good secretary can create harmony in a crisis, not divide.

But Shahswari activated the margin key himself. He eliminated the selection board, announced the names of the films late, and spent most of the secretariat's time renovating the building. This management style is reminiscent of the luxurious repairs of the cinema house during his management; with the difference that the budget of Fajr festival can be reviewed. On the morning of the 8th of Bahman 1404, Shaheswari announced at the Cinema Museum that the festival welcomes every cinematographer with open arms, but maybe an artist is not in a good mood to come, and he himself is not in a good mood to attend if he does not have legal responsibility. This sentence rang the boycott bell. The secretary of the festival, as the highest executive official, announced that he is not present. The paradox here is that, on the one hand, he insists on staying the festival, and on the other hand, he says that if no one comes, nothing important will happen. Thus, the sanction was reduced to a personal choice based on good status.

Shahsawari explained about moving from Milad Tower to Mellat campus that the quality of the show was criticized in Milad and it was not a respectful place for media people. But in practice Milad Tower was still used as a second hall and he preferred to hold the festival in an empty and empty space.

The closing ceremony was held on the evening of the 22nd of Bahman 1404 in the Vahdat Hall with the presence of the President and the Minister of Guidance. In his speech, Shahsawari created an emotional atmosphere by referring to the ballad "Iran Man" by Homayoun Shajarian and said that it is impossible for a person to hear this ballad and not shed tears. Many of the attendees mistook him for the host of the ceremony.

One of the most important managerial errors of Shaheswari was the selection of Mohammad Reza Shafiei as a member of the jury. Shafii, a mediocre TV producer with a modest background in cinema, has emerged so boldly that some have compared him to ubiquitous characters. His choice, which was apparently made to boost the presence of faces, had the opposite effect. In the interviews after the festival, Shafi'i emphasized on not being influenced by outsiders and made the boycott seem natural. The result? The widespread absence of acting simorgh winners in the closing ceremony and simorghs that remained empty on the stage.

By eliminating the selection board and personal selection of more than thirty films, Shaheswari opened the way for the entry of very weak works such as "Monkey Dust" and "The Roof". These films were met with unwanted laughter from the audience and harsh reviews. He repeatedly claimed that there is no film without proper quality in the festival, but the reality was something else. The first movies section was also removed first and then returned under the pretext of high quality; An obvious contradiction that indicated managerial confusion.

The 44th festival under the leadership of Shahsawari became one of the most marginalized and least recognized periods in the history of Fajr. Now that the appointment of the secretary of the 45th term is discussed, repeating his name is not only unreasonable but repeating a big strategic mistake. His two-year performance showed that he is not able to manage the crisis, nor maintain the trust of the artistic community, nor turn the festival into a real public and artistic event.

Eliminating the selection board, taking a defensive stance against boycotters, selecting mediocre judges and allowing weak films, all came under the shadow of his management. Iranian cinema deserves a secretary who restores the trade union selection board, listens to the voices of real cinematographers and restores the festival to its national and resistance status. Repetition of Shaheswari means repetition of crisis of legitimacy, empty halls and ownerless Simorghs.