Andrei Tarkovsky's Advice to Young Filmmakers/Directors
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 มี.ค. 2013
- In 1983, while in Italy prepping for "Nostalghia", Andrei Tarkovsky and writer Tonino Guerra shot "Voyage in Time", a 63 minute documentary that screened at Cannes' Un Certain Regard in 1995. Asked by an Italian 'fan' what advise he would give to young filmmakers, Tarkovsky gave two advices.
![ความรักของยักษ์เขียว (ทศกัณฐ์) - เดี่ยว ไออุ่น [OFFICIAL MUSICVIDEO 4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yCCy-QVHqK8/mqdefault.jpg)
In 1983, while in Italy prepping for "Nostalghia", Andrei Tarkovsky and Italian writer Tonino Guerra shot "Voyage in Time", a 63 minute documentary that screened at Cannes' Un Certain Regard in 1995. Asked by an Italian 'fan' what advise he would give to young filmmakers, Tarkovsky gave two unforgettable advices.
Fernando Graça Did he speak fluent Italian, or did he use an interpreter like when he directed to sacrifice?
man this really did hit hard. These things always sounded foolish to me, untill the first time i'd say i grinded something in my life. I've done some realtively hard things, but how i recently started to put all my effort into maths, I started understanding the concept of sacrifice and what he probably meant by his second advice. I think it can apply to almost anything you are passionate about. Giving up yourself, only to live trough that one thing. whatever it is. this doesn't have to last forever. but if you do it only for some period of time, this advice still might just hit you like a truck
@@jondstewart It was not fluent, but he could understand and talk a bit, only the basic. At a "press conference" (?) available here on TH-cam, he has an interpreter who tells him what Italians ask him and translates the answers he gives in Russian. So... But it was his first days in exile. There are some footages of him arguing hard in Italian with the crew of 'Nostalgy' about the whether, if it was good or bad for the slow motion dream scene of the dog, the house and the mist. His conversations with Tonino was apparently without mediation - he stumbles over words during this documentary when tries to speak in Italian, but both are able to communicate with each other, specially because Tonino seems to understand Russian, since Tarkovsky does not speaks long and elaborated lines in Italian (Tarkovsky is like a lost and fallen bird coming from a distant winter, as Tonino himself portrayed him in a beautiful poem that he reads to the filmmaker at a certain point in the documentary). Do not forget also that the protagonist of 'Nostalgia' was Russian (or Soviet), having been an actor of 'Stalker' too, but the character of the woman who accompanies him is Italian, and may be inspired by some real professional next to Tarkovsky... In 'Sacrifice', however, there was an interpreter with him all the time, as we can see in the film's backstage documentaries (who curiously looks like the Italian actress of 'Nostalgy')...
Tarkovsky: "Cinema uses your life."
Well he has said it all right there in one sentence.
This is one of, if not, the best pieces of filmmaking advice I've ever heard. Thank you Andrei. Love live your movies!
"Freedom means learning to demand only of oneself, not of life or of others, and learning how to give: Sacrifice in the name of love" - Tarkovsky
To internalize this virtually means you can't fail at making films. You simply have to do what it takes. Get his book and you'll find that each page is infinitely rich and requires some serious devotion to fully grasp, but it is the best book I own. I don't adore this man, but I adore his ideas and am eternally grateful to have been exposed to them.
Ian Aannevik What's the name of the book?
Sculpting in time ?
marin mavurya Yes, already read it
you dont adore this man but adore his ideas can you explain
Why don't you adore him if I may ask?
I love that he's emphasizing the importance of being morally decent people. That's the most important thing, and whatever we produce in our life will only become better from it. It's especially harder to lie on film about what kind of character you have because people tend to project.
this guy is fucking right, there's nothin except to give your life for filmmaking
I watch this video everyday
yeah i would say give your life for any kind of ART!
Nando Souza
yes indeed
Hard Waker still watching this video?
Its almost as he knew, like if he did it on purpose what happen to him on the Stalker production and what it will ultimately seal his destiny, it’s like he knew he could die by being exposed to those toxic environments but he gladly took the sacrifice in order to master his art. He knew his art would outlive him.
A sacriface in the name of love.
Bruno Torres art
She knew😛
Golden words from a great filmmaker.. Andrei Tarkovsky shall always remain immortal as a true artiste who was born for cinematic art..
The man talks, the sealing time, past became in present. Tarkovsky is the meaning of "Kino"
I love how this is filmed like a Tarkovsky film
even the interview with him is framed and shot like one of his own films, lol
It is his film. It's called Voyage in Time. Tarkovsky directed it. It was made for Italian TV. It's about his time in Italy while preparing Nostalghia. The man in this shot is Tonino Guerra, the co-writer.
Hirsute Lung Productions Incredible! I hadn't heard about this, now i need to find it and check it out
Yeah exactly
“Do not separate your real life from the film you make” lol
@@jacobloving6765 good one
Tarkovsky sacrificed everything for the sake of art. My hero 🙏🏻
That's a lot of denim.
Just jeans and a jacket. You never hear that about other materials. I think it looks good. What's annoying is that it will become fashionable again and then you will think it looks great.
I dress exactly like him in this video on daily basis😅
even his interview is photographically like a collection of paintings
just like all of his movies haha
I have no words to thank you for uploading this video. It means a lot for me.
For me too.
He paved the way for social media i.e. TH-cam, in this interview, right here. Turns out the Internet was not only for intellectuals and fatally lonely vagrants or people who otherwise slip through the cracks of home, family and community. It lessens at least some of that problem for those who do fit this description.
Que hermoso momento un ruso soviético y un italiano dialogando..Los quiero
this man is so right
thanks for posting this video
Legend. Cinema forever.
Nice work!
really makes you think
As pessoas precisam conhecer a arte deste espécime raro de homem... Gênio.
Fico feliz em dizer que muita gente conhece. O feedback do vídeo tem sido bem grande!
If you get to talk to director 🤗 don't talk just listen 🌟
thanks so much for uploading this
We love you...
Andrei Tarkovsky R.I.P.
Tarkovsky advice to young filmmakers: philosophy, poetry, the creation of a world answerable to itself, our place in the universe
Michael Bay's advice to young filmmakers: *explosions inside explosions*
🏃♀️🖤❤🖤Natalia Tarnovsky. Re orgullosa de mi apellido....
Cool segment, a rare Tark moment where I had an idea what he was talking about. Never seen Temp di Viaggo or whatever it's called. Seen all of his films, even student films, but missed this sole documentary. Having trouble finding it but hopefully I soon will. Nostalghia was perhaps his oddest film. Sure Mirror was his most confusing but Nostalghia seemed near meaningless at some points, I'd like to see the making-of to get a better understanding of his penultimate film.
th-cam.com/video/SOPS64NPvkY/w-d-xo.html
? ...That's an understatement mate
Living as we now are in the age of digital film-making, if great 20th century Film Directors such as Tarkovsky, Bergman, Fellini, Bresson, Kurosawa and Ray were still alive, I wonder what advice they'd give young aspiring film-makers? Perhaps they would say just give up whilst you're ahead: Hollywood and its triumph of mediocre spectacle has rendered Art Cinema redundant?
Hollywood the man made machine didn't create film so therefore can never render it redundant nor destroy it. A brilliant piece of art always has the potential to be constructed if the artist has mastered the mechanics of what they are trying to say and how they want to say it effectively. This takes time, dedication and a bit of talent on the piece. Hollywood just recycles stuff and markets it well, they create nothing.
They'd probably give the same advice that they've given before. Hollywood mediocrity isn't a new phenomenon. We remember the masters of the 20th century and see that era as defined by them because their films have been able to outlive the mediocre crap that Hollywood was pumping out back then. In 50 years, I wouldn't be surprised if TH-cam comment sections are filled with similar remarks, yearning for the "Golden Age" of cinema when today's masters were at their prime.
Who's Ray?
@@GerguzalbutzelnikoskechSatyajit Ray, one of the greatest directors who ever lived, among the likes of Kurosawa and Fellini. Suggest watching Pather Panchali.
🏃♀️❤🖤❤Natalia Tarnovsky!!! Que apellido que vengo a heredar .No pego una Andrey del conurbano Bonarense y con el mismo apellido que el tuyo...
You sure this interview wasn't directed by Tarkovsky himself?
God caught on tape.
So did he?
So did he speak italian as well or was it translated on forehand?
translated
Would his main concept be - convert to a mainstream religion?
Tell that to tarantino
Like A Colt Is My Passport, this movie is my favorite. I do not believe I am seeing the Master Sleeve brush his hair sideways the way he does. Jesus Christ, if the genius isn't an ingenous, I am God Almighty.
I feel like tarkovsky is cursed, and can only be seen in long take shots.
Pretty cool speech. But, how is a movie director supposed to make a movie that falls under the genre of fantasy and supernatural? " They live in one way, but make movies about something else." ??????????
+5555144 Tarkovsky's movies are full of dreams, fantasy and supernatural and he always tried to not divide his life from his art.
+5555144 By finding the fantasy and suprnatural in their own lives.
That's not entirely true. Most of his films have dreams and memmories. Dreams and memmories (its harder to understand this when thinking about memmories) are not actual representations of real life. It's a reconstruction, a deformation too. See, that glorious childhood house in which u grew, has a special feeling and sense of time in your memmories... suddenly, one day, an older you visits ur childhood house. What one would feel, will probabbly be dissapointment, where is that special glow? where's that feeling of a dense time?... that's how memmory works, it distorts reallity.
Now, that's how one can explain the "fantasy" in his films and yet speak of them as representations of the real life. But what's lovely and unique in Tarkovsky's films, is that he makes the ground cero, the "reallity" itself of the movie, a poetic one. And it's naive or maybe unfair to say that reallity is not like that. It works that way for Tarkovsky. im not saying that he lived in a permanent state of LCD trip, no, what im saying is that he was a human being capable of seeing more than the automatic perception most people have. He had an eye for reality, his own perception, his focused perception not ruled by automatism, but ruled by a deep perception of things. There's a lot of the vitalist philosophy of Bergson involved here, that i would like to elaborate but i cant, english is not my mother language.
There are, of course, other movie director s who have their own eye, and that's what makes them interesting and, in my opinnion, true cinema artists. Just to name some, Lynch, Fellini, Antonioni, Resnais, Goddard, Truffaut, Rohmer, and many more.
So this kind of movies and understanding of reality faces us with the question: is reallity something given, or we structure our own reallity, individually, through our perception? When you start to notice how your eye, your language and all you perception system really elaborates the image you have of reallity, then you start to understand that there's really no distance beetween the movies Tarkovsky made, and his way of perceiving reallity.
Example: we see a glass of milk. Thats all what we see. We just see that, a glass full of milk. That's an automatized way of seeing the thing, which SURE is helpful in everyday life. But we usually see things and everything around us according to the way we can serve ourselves with it. Now, a focused perception has the capability of liberate LAYERS OF MEMMORIES. When that happens, something beautiful happens. We dont GO to the thing, drown in the autamatism, now the thing COMES TO US. What im saying with this, is that, the glass fo milk in the table (or the jar of milk, in The Mirror) suddenly starts affecting our memmory, and now that glass fo milk is the glass of milk u had every morning with your parents, in your childhood... and then, that glass of milk is, in a more abstract way, ur bound to your mother... anything that glass fo milk moves inside of you, in your memmory. Those are layers of memmory reacting to a focused perception on an object, landscape, conversation, or whatever. Again, here im talking about Bergson's philosophy which goes hand in hand with this kind of films. Look at how the editting in Tarkov's films sometimes work: sometime sit seems weird, senseless... example: our character hears a bird chirping...cut, and now we are in a scene from our characters childhood, we've been catapulted to it just because of a sound, but that's how memmory works! Sometimes we hear things that instantly gives us, in our minds, an image or feeling from our childhood.
So... are Tarkovsky's films not bound to his own life? False, they are, they totally are. In his films, and that's what makes him a genius, he opens up to us, as an artist, to his way of understanding and perceiving life, in such a beautiful way.
I'll give you one last example: you came across a gorgeous girl walking in the street.. it was a breif momment, in which both pair of eyes crossed, and u fell deeply in love. NOW, you try to recreate that momment in a movie. You manage to get the SAME girl, and reenact the whole situation... you record it... then you watch it on the screen and... THERE'S NOTHING... where did that magical momment go? you may say, THIS IS NOT AN ACTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE EVENT... the girl did something wrong! This is not the propper lightning! All of those arguments would be invalid... what your recorded scene lacks, is the MOMMENT of falling in love, the TIME it takes, that momment, or FEELING is not there, in the recreation of the momment, that feeling, that sensation, has a deep sense of time. The key thing in your scene, would be to find the TIME those eyes crossing need to reflect the feeling fo FALLING IN LOVE. Which representation of the momment would you pick? Which one do you think would represent that momment the best? The one with the actual representation, detail by detail, of the event, or the one that manages to express, in time (doesnt matter if there's a slow motion, a distortion of time, lets say) that feeling? which one is more real? I would say, the second one... Because the second one expresses the COMPLEXITY (and this is key) OF LIFE.
So again... what is "reallity", or better, which representation of reallity is more sincere, more precise? That depends of our perception of it (:
All i can see in Tarkovsky's films, is sincerity, is an artist openning his heart to his perception of life. Ad it was a beautiful one, a poetic one, and that's why he makes poetic cinema.
Hope i made my point! English is not my native language so i had kind of a hard time trying to say a lot of things in a simple way haha. But there's a lot more to this!
Interesting The Woods.
Could you please elaborate more, in continuation of what you said above?
I'd like to learn more
:)
What you wrote is fascinating and im agreeing tottaly with you, wow nice :)
Don't try to make yet another idiotic film involving people running around firing guns.