Can Iranian Stories Be Told from Afar? / Migrant Cinema from 'Exercises for a Revolution' to 'The Seed of the Sacred Fig'

The selection of Pegah Ahangarani's documentary as the UK's entry for the 2027 Oscars has once again raised the question of how far Iranian filmmakers, after migrating, can portray the society they have left. A review of these filmmakers' works shows the answer cannot be reduced to where the artist lives, nor to the awards their films win.

Rehaneh Eskandari - The selection of the documentary "Exercises for a Revolution" by Pegah Ahangrani as the British representative in the Best International Film section of the 99th Academy Awards has once again raised a question about the relationship between migration and Iranian cinematic narrative: how far can a filmmaker who has been away from the society of origin for years represent its changes and realities in detail?

This question is not only related to the director's place of residence. Lived experience, familiarity with everyday language, family relationships, lifestyle changes and social developments are the sources that play a role in the formation of a believable narrative. Staying away from these sources can limit the filmmaker's understanding of the current state of society; Especially when people's everyday lives are supposed to be the focus of the story, not the past memories or a person's personal experience.

Of course, geographical distance alone does not mean inability to narrate. Documents, archival images, conversations with people in the country, and research can compensate for some of the deficiencies caused by distance. The main issue is how the filmmaker uses these sources and to what extent he distinguishes between his personal experience and the image he presents of a society.

the issue of distance; The loss of details that form in everyday life

Social life is constantly changing. Common language and terms, the form of relations between generations, economic relations, the way of using public spaces and even people's daily behaviors change over time. A filmmaker removed from the narrative setting may still have access to accurate memories of the past, but needs fresh resources to reconstruct the present.

This issue is not necessarily as important in works dealing with the past as it is in films about contemporary life. The memory of a historical period can be reconstructed with recorded documents and images; But the narrative of today's society, without sufficient familiarity with the changes of recent years, may lead to the use of old patterns or characters that represent a preconceived idea rather than real life.

In such a situation, the weakness of the narrative does not necessarily mean that all the information in the film is incorrect. Sometimes the problem appears in small details: a conversation that does not seem natural, a reaction that does not fit the social relations of the environment, or a character whose characteristics are all summed up in one problem. The accumulation of such choices can widen the gap between the story and the experience of an audience familiar with that community.

On the other hand, living in a country alone does not guarantee full knowledge of it. A filmmaker working inside Iran may have access to the experience of certain social groups and may have limited knowledge of the lives of other groups. Thus, physical presence is a source of recognition, not a guarantee of narrative accuracy.

However, long-term distance can make the access issue more serious. Contacting family and friends, reading the news, and talking to people in the country are useful, but they do not fully replace the continuous and direct observation of all aspects of social life. This limitation becomes more important when the filmmaker wants to transform the experience of a limited person or group into a comprehensive image of society.

From Parviz Sayad to Amir Naderi; Two paths after migration

After the revolution of 1357, a number of Iranian cinematographers continued their activities abroad. Parviz Sayad, an actor, writer and director, was one of these figures who dealt with political and social issues in works such as Farstadeh and Sarhad.

In the analysis of these works, a distinction should be made between the political theme of the film and its cinematic quality. Dealing with political issues in itself is not a sign of weakness or strength of a work. To evaluate the success of the narrative, one should pay attention to the structure of the story, characterization and the way the idea is transformed into a drama. Also, it is not possible to give a definite verdict about the filmmaker's knowledge of Iranian society based only on the place of production.

Amir Naderi took a different path. Before emigrating, he was known for films like "Runner" and "Water, Wind, Soil", after moving to America, he made the experience of living in New York a part of his cinematic world. "Manhattan by Number" and "A, B, C... Manhattan" are works of his activity outside Iran.

Los Angeles Times critic Peter Reiner, in his November 1994 review of the film, praised Nader's ability to capture the urban atmosphere and his visual gaze, but believed that the film's story was artificial and lackluster compared to its visual quality. In the conclusion, he wrote that Naderi is a true filmmaker, but his poetic depiction of the city deserved a better film.

The difference between this path and the films that try to reconstruct the contemporary life of Iran is in the subject of narration. In some of his works, instead of reconstructing the original society, Naderi went for the experience of the city, loneliness and the encounter of a person with a new environment. In such a situation, distance from Iran does not necessarily reduce the accuracy of the narrative; Because the filmmaker is not trying to recreate the details of the society he has distanced himself from.

This distinction is important: the main issue is not immigration, but the relationship between the subject of the film and the resources available to the filmmaker to narrate it. The more the work depends on the details of the daily life of the source community, the more the need for access to new information and experiences increases.

Makhmalbaf and Qobadi; Change of geography and change of narrative language

Mohsen Makhmalbaf dealt with the social and political issues of Iran in an important part of his career. After the migration, the geography and subject of some of his works changed. "Crying of Ants" and "President" are among the films that were made outside of Iran.

"The President" produced in 2014 tells the story of a ruler who, after the fall of power, finds himself among the people he used to rule with his grandson. The film was set in Georgia and instead of directly recreating a specific society, it used an allegorical structure to deal with power and responsibility.

In criticizing Mohsen Makhmalbaf's "President", Godfrey Cheshire on Roger Ebert's website does not deny Makhmalbaf's cinematic abilities, but believes that the film, despite showing the director's skill, lacks specific cultural and political details that could have helped to make it more impactful. According to his interpretation, the distance between real characters and symbolic substitutes is one of the problems that the works of immigrant artists may face.

Choosing an allegory can reduce some of the limitations of representing a specific society; Because instead of claiming to show all the details of a country, the filmmaker pursues a general issue in the form of a story. However, the allegory also succeeds when the characters and situations have sufficient complexity. Political idea alone cannot take the place of characterization and dramatic structure.

Regarding Bahman Ghobadi, the difference between his early works and his later films can be examined. "A Time for Drunk Horses" and "Turtles Fly Too" deal with the lives of the people of the border areas and Kurdistan and take advantage of a specific social and geographical context. "Season of the Rhinoceros", which was made in Turkey, deals with the fate of an imprisoned poet and a broken family, and uses poetic imagery to narrate loss and separation.

The difference between these works cannot be attributed solely to immigration; The change in the subject, form and type of story also plays a role in it. However, their comparison raises the question of whether the distance from the social environment in some cases leads the filmmaker to more general and symbolic narratives. The answer should be sought in the works themselves; To what extent social details play a role in the formation of characters and the development of the story.

"Holy Spider"; The difference between case reconstruction and community recognition

Ali Abbasi dealt with the case of Saeed Hanai, a serial killer of women in Mashhad, in the movie "Holy Spider". The film, which was filmed in Jordan, follows the story of a reporter who follows up on murders and faces obstacles and social reactions along the way. Zar Amirabrahimi received the best actress award at the 2022 Cannes Film Festival for her role in this film.

Making a movie based on a true case requires choosing between events and characters. No fiction film can contain all dimensions of a case or society; But the way the details are chosen determines how complex and believable the work is.

In representing a society in which the filmmaker is not continuously present, it is not only a question of access to historical information. Knowledge of language, everyday relationships, social reactions and differences between different groups are also important. If these details are not sufficiently present in the narrative, the characters may become representatives of a concept or point of view rather than independent individuals with diverse motivations.

This issue should be specifically examined in the review of each film. Neither the fact of the case alone guarantees the accuracy of all the details of the drama, nor does filming in another country mean a definitive weakness of the narrative. What is important is the quality of the link between information, characterization and story structure.

Asghar Farhadi; Transferring the storytelling method to a new environment

Comparing the works of Asghar Farhadi in Iran with the films he made in France and Spain is a suitable example to examine the question of whether the change in the geography of production affects the quality of narration by Iranian filmmakers. "A Rare Separation from Simin" and "About Eli" are among the prominent works of Farhadi's career, which were able to attract Iranian and international audiences by relying on social relations, family relations and moral ambiguities. On the other hand, "The Past" and "Everybody Knows" despite having well-known actors and being welcomed by some critics, faced evaluations that placed them lower than the best works of the director.

"The Past" takes place in France and tells the story of an Iranian man who returns to this country to finalize his divorce. "Everybody Knows" also takes place in Spain and begins with a woman returning to her hometown to participate in a family ceremony; An event that changes the relationships of family members.

The consensus of critics in Rotten Tomatoes described the movie "Everyone Knows" as a work less than the sum of the abilities of its actors and a step backwards for Farhadi. In Metacritic, the film received a score of 68 out of 100 based on critics' reviews; That is, overall a positive assessment, but not at the level of exceptional admiration.

In both films, Farhadi maintains part of his familiar pattern of complicated relationships, incomplete information, and gradual revelation of secrets. But transferring this model to a new environment requires knowing the social and cultural relations of that environment. Family relationships, the way of facing the crisis and the reaction of the characters cannot remain believable simply by transferring a story pattern from one society to another.

These two films show that the filmmaker's ability to design suspense and multi-layered narration is one of the important factors of success; But for the narrative of another society, knowing the environment is also important. If the characters and situations are not sufficiently connected to the social context of the story, even a coherent story structure may not be able to display its full potential.

Mohammad Rasulof; When the place of construction is different from the place of registration of reality

"Maabed Fig Seed" by Mohammad Rasulov is a different example. The main parts of the film were shot in Iran under difficult conditions, and the next stages of production continued abroad. The story is about a family in Tehran, where the promotion of the father's job, as a court investigator, coincides with social protests and disputes within the family.

This film received the Special Jury Award at the 2024 Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for the Academy Award for Best International Film. Its importance in the current discussion is the difference between the filmmaker's place of residence, the place where the images are recorded and the place where the production stages are completed.

Recording images in the real location alone does not guarantee artistic quality. Editing, characterization, narrative structure, and how to link individual experience to public developments still play a role in the final outcome.

Pegah Hengharani; Can archives replace today's experience?

The documentary "Exercises for a Revolution" by Pegah Ahangarani approaches the history of Iran from another direction. This film, which premiered at the 2026 Cannes Film Festival and won the Golden Eye Award for Best Documentary, reviews more than four decades of Iran's history using personal archives, family films, images of street protests, newspapers and audio recordings.