| dbp:text
|
- 0001-03-03 (xsd:gMonthDay)
- 1990.0 (dbd:second)
- "My dear country, which I love very much, is not doing very well. It lacks, in particular, a political figure who would have the courage, I would even say the optimism, despite everything that is happening in the Middle East, to move forward, to reach out, to create a dialogue in this impossible world. This absence of a visionary figure is dramatic. In this context, what can I do? I am not a politician. I trained as an architect and I am a filmmaker. Then I remembered what Jeanne Moreau once said to me: "Every new project is an opportunity for me to learn certain things I don't know yet. "So I decided to make this film. It was an opportunity to ask Israeli society a question" (en)
- "Aharon Appelfeld is an author that I respect infinitely, first of all because he doesn't instrumentalize the Shoah. He doesn't use things outside of his experience, there is a minimalism in his writing that I find essential, profoundly accurate and moving. Adapting this text for me allowed me to create some distance, not to be illustrative. I wanted to make a film of tenderness in the middle of this hell. That's the contrast that interested me. Appelfeld weaves his stories with tiny details. It's a fiction but it's partly based on his autobiographical experience : his character, Tsili, reacts to threatening sounds or birdsong, she smells, she contemplates the landscape... It is all this juxtaposition of delicate details that makes us feel the claustrophobic environment in which she lives. The forest in which she has taken refuge protects her from cruelty and imprisons her at the same time. With Tsili, I close a cycle of four very intimate films: Carmel, based on my mother's correspondence; Lullaby to my father, dedicated to my father, a Bauhaus architect driven out of Europe by the Nazis; Ana Arabia, which evokes a community of Jews and Arabs in Jaffa. After Kadosh and Yom Kippur, I needed to move towards a more radical film language, to avoid the conventions of cinema." (en)
- Gitaï wants this house to be both a symbol and something very concrete; he wants it to become a character in a film. He achieves one of the most beautiful things a camera can register 'live', as it were; people who look at the same thing but see different things – and who are moved by that vision. In this crumbling shell of a house, real hallucinations begin to take shape. The film's central idea is simple and the film has simply the force of that idea, no more, no less." (en)
- " We never go inside the reality of the war but always remain at the edge of the scene, on its tangent. The camera constantly glides over its subject without ever penetrating it, attacking it, like our eye on the surface of the screen, reproducing within the film our real situation as spectators. Field Diary offers a civilian image of war, […] setting it apart from the rest of audio-visual production by its content as much as by its mode of operation, by the solution it offers to a problem that pertains to the ethics of the filmmaker as much as to the aesthetics of cinema" (en)
- It's like a jigsaw puzzle, and even more like a kaleidoscope, voices mingle, and faces, Jeanne Moreau, Hanna Schygulla, damaged photos, memories, vestiges, the quest is all personal, it's precisely in this way that it becomes universal, associating relationship to one's land and its history , rootedness and vagrancy, attraction and repulsion. (en)
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
