novi kadrovi
srpski english
It is currently Sat Aug 19, 2017 2:07 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 251 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 44
Ja sam se već zapljunuo. Samo molim, ako je moguće, da to ne bude sledeće nedelje - u periodu od četvrtka do nedelje - jer neću biti u zemlji.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
Dimitrije Vojnov je na svom blogu Doba nevinosti postovao link koji će vas odvesti do audio intervjua sa Aleksandrom Radivojevićem (na donjoj slici), scenaristom "Srpskog filma". Samo, čuvajte se - intervju sadrži brojne spojlere!

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2010/ ... -acom.html

Image

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:21 pm
Posts: 991
„Srpski film“ i dalje izaziva kontroverze

Reditelj ostvarenja „Srpski film“ Srđan Spasojević tvrdi da naslov njegovog filma ne predstavlja „blaćenje“ Srbije. Takođe, reditelj objašnjava da njegova horor drama stavlja gledaoce u centar nasilja sa namerom da izazove apsolutnu odbojnost prema takvom postupanju.

Srđan Spasojević, autor horor drame „Srpski film" koja kod nas još uvek nije prikazana, rekao je da naziv „ne treba unapred shvatati kao blaćenje Srbije", i ukazao da je film u Americi pozitivno govorio o zemlji u kojoj je nastao.

„Kod nas je, koliko sam ja uspeo da shvatim, apsolutno podeljeno mišljenje u vezi sa ovim filmom. A sve što Srbija zna o njemu potiče iz trejlera. Komentarisati trejler je jedno, a komentarisati film koji nisi gledao je poprilično čudno", rekao je Spasojević agenciji Beta.

Prema njegovim rečima, „Srpski film" je bio „fantastično primljen" na festivalu SXSW u Ostinu gde do sada nijedan film iz Srbije nije prikazan, i ljudi su se tamo „divili zemlji iz koje takav film dolazi".

„Nema tamo priče o Srbima kao negativcima. Njima ako se dopadne film, dopada im se i zemlja u kojoj je nastao. Njima je naslov 'Srpski film' bio potpuno zanimljiv. Neki su se smeškali i govorili 'kako pametno', a drugi su govorili „al' ste se pomučili - smišljali ste ga minut i po'. Taj naslov bode oči samo ovde, što je donekle razumljivo", ocenio je Spasojević.

Ekstremne scene u nezavisnoj produkciji

„Srpski film", sa Srđanom Todorovićem, Sergejem Trifunovićem, Jelenom Gavrilović i Katarinom Žutić u glavnim ulogama, finansiran je potpuno nezavisno, u produkciji firme „Kontra film".

Od države Srbije nije dobio sredstva za postprodukciju. Nema ni distributera.

Premijeru je imao u Ostinu, izazvavši oprečne reakcije zbog izuzetno ekstremnih scena nasilja.

Međutim, „Srpski film" je bio predmet najmanje dvadeset kritičarskih prikaza; u većini je istaknuta umešnost njegove realizacije, a prema nekim ocenama, debitant Spasojević je snimio vrlo zreo film i „remek delo".

„Srpski film" je pored ostalog komentarisan na blogu „Vol strit džurnala", a u međuvremenu je pozvan na dvadesetak festivala u svetu, od kojih Stokholm i Toronto imaju status prvog ranga.

Sa druge strane, ne zna se kada će film biti prikazan u Srbiji, ni kako će biti distribuiran.

Uz to, naziv „Srpski film" se u domaćoj javnosti, pre svega u komentarima na Internetu, našao pod udarom žestokih kritika, nakon što se pojavio trejler za ovo ostvarenje.

„Nadam se da će uspeh na stranim festivalima pomoći distributerima da se odluče da ga prikažu", rekao je Spasojević.

Raskrinkano nasilje koje izaziva odbojnost

Glavni junak filma, bivša porno zvezda Miloš (Srđan Todorović) živi sa porodicom u Beogradu, jedva sastavljajući kraj sa krajem, a onda dobija ponudu izuzetno moćnog producenta Vukmira (Sergej Trifunović) da snimi za njega porno film, uz honorar s kojim će obezbediti ženu, dete i sebe - ali bez prava da pročita scenario po kojem se snima.


Miloš potom otkriva da „film" u kojem igra povratničku ulogu uključuje učešće u stravičnom nasilju - koje se snima uživo.

Povodom scena nasilja, za koje su mnogi kritičari u SAD rekli da su „šokantne" i da „prelaze granicu", Spasojević je odgovorio da „nije bila ideja da se pravi šok radi šoka, ili da se šokira javnost" i da je nasilje u njegovom filmu „samo oruđe uz pomoć kojeg je ta priča morala biti ispričana".

„To nije nasilje koje je vrsta izveštavanja o nasilju, kao na primer na Dnevniku - pogledamo lošu vest, uđe na jedno uvo, izađe na drugo, zaboravljamo je za par minuta. Ovaj film stavlja ljude direktno u centar nasilja, direktno im ga prikazuje, i to na takav način da ga potpuno raskrinkava, i, nadam se, stvara apsolutnu odbojnost prema nasilju", izjavio je Spasojević.


Reditelj je takođe rekao da, dok je pisao scenario u tandemu sa Aleksandrom Radivojevićem i snimao film, nije želeo da pravi kompromise i sam sebe cenzuriše, jer je smatrao da će to da ugrozi kvalitet ostvarenja i da umanji njegovu snagu.

„Želeo bih da taj film bude namenjen svima, ali ono što je realnost i naša obaveza jeste da stavimo neku vrstu upozorenja, i najmanje što smo mogli da učinimo jeste da stavimo na plakat nalepnicu '18'. Zakon o tome kod nas ne postoji, ali zato postoji nasleđe autocenzure i strah ljudi od onog 'šta će ko da kaže'", ocenio je Spasojević.

http://rts.rs/page/magazine/sr/story/41 ... ontroverze


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 1:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 11
Ja bih da prisustvujem toj iligal top sikret prodzekciji


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
It goes where MARTYRS feared to tread. Undoubtedly one of, if not the most extreme horror movies ever made, A SERBIAN FILM—or, as it’s known in Belgrade, SRPSKI FILM—overshadows that Parisian shocker and kicks it to death for good measure. It throttles AMERICAN PSYCHO and spits in the eye of FACES OF DEATH. HOSTEL doesn’t even come close. It’s a film that leaves no stone unturned or takes prisoners—and we’ve got a bunch of exclusive photos and behind-the-scenes pics after the jump!

Think of A SERBIAN FILM (which we last covered here) as an extreme HEART OF DARKNESS with overtly political overtones, in which an ex-porn star—played with gusto by Srdjan Todorovic—degenerates in the underground sex ’n’ snuff racket. What is real and what is not? On one hand, A SERBIAN FILM is a twisted social comment, its fury directed at a confused motherland, though its allegory plays second fiddle to the horrors that unfold. On the other, it’s a shocker that wages war upon the genre with a scorched-earth policy. And with one unforgettably unpleasant scene—more about that in a moment—whatever your opinion, it will certainly continue to spark discussion and debate as it tears through the festival circuit (including a stop at Montreal’s Fantasia in July).

Directed by newcomer Srdjan Spasojevic and shot with the RED ONE hi-def camera, A SERBIAN FILM was his strike against the censorship and forces of authority that he believes are suffocating unorthodox creativity today. “It also specifically addresses the fascism of political correctness so prevalent these days—the tool that kills free cinema,” Spasojevic tells Fango. “This is the kind of film that couldn’t be made in an out-of-control fashion. Everything was precisely planned and extremely controlled. The only way we could make this film right was to make it without compromising or concern about consequences. Still, it pains me that this film could be banned in many countries.”

It’s certainly a film that fuels controversy, and despite being an accomplished work—in which most of the horror is suggested—it will be likely be the leading festival cause célèbre and whipping boy of 2010. It stomps wildly and confidently through cinema taboos, not knowing where and when to stop. It will definitely engage, thrill and infuriate audiences like never before, each crisp frame complemented by Sky Wikluh’s exhilarating techno score. “I know our story was leading us to the edge of the blade,” Spasojevic says. “We danced and balanced on it as best we could, and I believe we never really fell into the abyss. My main responsibilities were for the governing ideas to be hammered home, and that no one got hurt or experienced any psychological trauma on set in the process.”

In a movie that verges on hardcore pornography (the director is adamant that the deeds actually occurred on camera) and pulls no punches in terms of shock value, A SERBIAN FILM has understandably been a cause for concern. A number of ordinarily brave festival directors have been uncomfortable about showing the movie to female audiences, and some women who have seen the film have become visibly upset and agitated. And one scene involving a newborn baby has become a particular catalyst for fury and bewilderment. “It was never an intention to shock [with that moment], but only to express our deepest and most sincere feelings about how strongly we feel violated,” Spasojevic insists. “This baby represents us and everyone else whose innocence and youth have been stolen by those who are governing our lives for purposes unknown. In this scene, we only painted a literal metaphor of how we feel. This image is so extreme that it actually defames violence and nullifies it at its core.”

Nor did anyone involved in staging it suffer any psychological damage. “In a heavy effects scene such as this,” the director notes, “its sheer technicality kills all the trepidation and impact for the people participating in it. So it was much more exhausting than shocking on the set.” Clearly, they were and we are in good hands. Spasojevic’s inspirations include William Friedkin, Roman Polanski, Brian De Palma, Walter Hill, John Carpenter, Sam Peckinpah and David Cronenberg—A SERBIAN FILM echoes the narrative structure of VIDEODROME to strong effect—and his horror background clearly shows. But for many, his film will be a bitter pill to swallow, as he pushes the genre envelope to the breaking point. Claiming it’s a dream come true that A SERBIAN FILM is being championed by Fango (look for more coverage in the magazine’s pages), Spasojevic suggests that our readers should be prepared for his movie—but we’re still not entirely sure…

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?id=49 ... Itemid=167


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Jedan lep teorijski tekst za UZ diskusiju o SRPSKOM FILMU

Kant and Sade: The Ideal Couple
Slavoj Zizek.
Lacan.com.


Of all the couples in the history of modern thought (Freud and Lacan, Marx and Lenin…), Kant and Sade is perhaps the most problematic: the statement "Kant is Sade" is the "infinite judgement" of modern ethics, positing the sign of equation between the two radical opposites, i.e. asserting that the sublime disinterested ethical attitude is somehow identical to, or overlaps with, the unrestrained indulgence in pleasurable violence. A lot-everything, perhaps-is at stake here: is there a line from Kantian formalist ethics to the cold-blooded Auschwitz killing machine? Are concentration camps and killing as a neutral business the inherent outcome of the enlightened insistence on the autonomy of Reason? Is there at least a legitimate lineage from Sade to Fascist torturing, as is implied by Pasolini's film version of Saló, which transposes it into the dark days of Mussolini's Salo republic? Lacan developed this link first in his Seminar on The Ethics of Psychoanalysis (1958-59)1, and then in the Écrits "Kant with Sade" of 19632.
1.

For Lacan, Sade consequently deployed the inherent potential of the Kantian philosophical revolution, in the precise sense that he honestly externalized the Voice of Conscience. The first association here is, of course: what's all the fuss about? Today, in our postidealist Freudian era, doesn't everybody know what the point of the "with" is-the truth of Kant's ethical rigorism is the sadism of the Law, i.e. the Kantian Law is a superego agency that sadistically enjoys the subject's deadlock, his inability to meet its inexorable demands, like the proverbial teacher who tortures pupils with impossible tasks and secretly savors their failings?

Lacan's point, however, is the exact opposite of this first association: it is not Kant who was a closet sadist, it is Sade who is a closet Kantian. That is to say, what one should bear in mind is that the focus of Lacan is always Kant, not Sade: what he is interested in are the ultimate consequences and disavowed premises of the Kantian ethical revolution. In other words, Lacan does not try to make the usual "reductionist" point that every ethical act, as pure and disinterested as it may appear, is always grounded in some "pathological" motivation (the agent's own long-term interest, the admiration of his peers, up to the "negative" satisfaction provided by the suffering and extortion often demanded by ethical acts); the focus of Lacan's interest rather resides in the paradoxical reversal by means of which desire itself (i.e. acting upon one's desire, not compromising it) can no longer be grounded in any "pathological" interests or motivations and thus meets the criteria of the Kantian ethical act, so that "following one's desire" overlaps with "doing one's duty." Suffice it to recall Kant's own famous example from his Critique of Practical Reason:

"Suppose that someone says his lust is irresistible when the desired object and opportunity are present. Ask him whether he would not control his passions if, in front of the house where he has this opportunity, a gallows were erected on which he would be hanged immediately after gratifying his lust. We do not have to guess very long what his answer may be."3

Lacan's counterargument here is: what if we encounter a subject (as we do regularly in psychoanalysis), who can only fully enjoy a night of passion if some form of "gallows" is threatening him, i.e. if, by doing it, he is violating some prohibition?

There was an Italian film from the 60's, Casanova 70, starring Virna Lisi and Marcello Mastroianni that hinged on this very point: the hero can only retain his sexual potency if doing "it" involves some kind of danger. At the film's end, when he is on the verge of marrying his beloved, he wants at least to violate the prohibition of premarital sex by sleeping with her the night before the wedding-however, his bride unknowingly spoils even this minimal pleasure by arranging with the priest for special permission for the two of them to sleep together the night before, so that the act is deprived of its transgressive sting. What can he do now? In the last shot of the film, we see him crawling on the narrow porch on the outside of the high-rise building, giving himself the difficult task of entering the girl's bedroom in the most dangerous way, in a desperate attempt to link sexual gratification to mortal danger… So, Lacan's point is that if gratifying sexual passion involves the suspension of even the most elementary "egotistic" interests, if this gratification is clearly located "beyond the pleasure principle," then, in spite of all appearances to the contrary, we are dealing with an ethical act, then his "passion" is stricto sensu ethical…4

Lacan's further point is that this covert Sadean dimension of an "ethical (sexual) passion" is not read into Kant by our eccentric interpretation, but is inherent to the Kantian theoretical edifice.5 If we put aside the body of "circumstantial evidence" for it (isn't Kant's infamous definition of marriage-"the contract between two adults of the opposite sex about the mutual use of each other's sexual organs"-thoroughly Sadean, since it reduces the Other, the subject's sexual partner, to a partial object, to his/her bodily organ which provides pleasure, ignoring him/her as the Whole of a human Person?), the crucial clue that allows us to discern the contours of "Sade in Kant" is the way Kant conceptualizes the relationship between sentiments (feelings) and the moral Law.

Although Kant insists on the absolute gap between pathological sentiments and the pure form of moral Law, there is one a priori sentiment that the subject necessarily experiences when confronted with the injunction of the moral Law, the pain of humiliation (because of man's hurt pride, due to the "radical Evil" of human nature); for Lacan, this Kantian privileging of pain as the only a priori sentiment is strictly correlative to Sade's notion of pain (torturing and humiliating the other, being tortured and humiliated by him) as the privileged way of access to sexual jouissance (Sade's argument, of course, is that pain is to be given priority over pleasure on account of its greater longevity-pleasures are passing, while pain can last almost indefinitely). This link can be further substantiated by what Lacan calls the Sadean fundamental fantasy: the fantasy of another, ethereal body of the victim, which can be tortured indefinitely and nonetheless magically retains its beauty (see the standard Sadean figure of a young girl sustaining endless humiliations and mutilations from her deprived torturer and somehow mysteriously surviving it all intact, in the same way Tom and Jerry and other cartoon heroes survive all their ridiculous ordeals intact).

Doesn't this fantasy provide the libidinal foundation of the Kantian postulate of the immortality of the soul endlessly striving to achieve ethical perfection, i.e., is not the phantasmic "truth" of the immortality of the soul its exact opposite, the immortality of the body, its ability to sustain endless pain and humiliation?

Judith Butler pointed out that the Foucaultian "body" as the site of resistance is none other than the Freudian "psyche": paradoxically, "body" is Foucault's name for the psychic apparatus insofar as it resists the soul's domination. That is to say, when, in his well-known definition of the soul as the "prison of the body," Foucault turns around the standard Platonic-Christian definition of the body as the "prison of the soul," what he calls "body" is not simply the biological body, but is effectively already caught into some kind of pre-subjective psychic apparatus.6 Consequently, don't we encounter in Kant a secret homologous inversion, only in the opposite direction, of the relationship between body and soul: what Kant calls "immortality of the soul" is effectively the immortality of the other, ethereal, "undead" body?
2.

It's via this central role of pain in the subject's ethical experience that Lacan introduces the difference between the "subject of the enunciation" (the subject who utters a statement) and the "subject of the enunciated (statement)" (the symbolic identity the subject assumes within and via his statement): Kant does not address the question of who is the "subject of the enunciation" of the moral Law, the agent enunciating the unconditional ethical injunction-from within his horizon, this question itself is meaningless, since the moral Law is an impersonal command "coming from nowhere," i.e. it is ultimately self-posited, autonomously assumed by the subject himself). Via the reference to Sade, Lacan reads absence in Kant as an act of rendering invisible, of "repressing," the moral Law's enunciator, and it is Sade who renders it visible in the figure of the "sadist" executioner-torturer-this executioner is the enunciator of the moral Law, the agent who finds pleasure in our (the moral subject's) pain and humiliation.

A counterargument offers itself here with apparent self-evidence: isn't all this utter nonsense, since, in Sade, the element that occupies the place of the unconditional injunction, the maxim the subject has to follow categorically, is no longer the Kantian universal ethical command Do your duty! but its most radical opposite, the injunction to follow to their utmost limit the thoroughly pathological, contingent caprices that bring you pleasure, ruthlessly reducing all your fellow humans to the instruments of your pleasure? However, it is crucial to perceive the solidarity between this feature and the emergence of the figure of the "sadist" torturer-executioner as the effective "subject of the enunciation" of the universal ethical statement-command. The Sadean move from Kantian Respect-to-Blasphemy, i.e. from respecting the Other (fellow being), his freedom and autonomy, and always treating him also as an end-in-itself, to reducing all Others precisely to mere dispensable instruments to be ruthlessly exploited, is strictly correlative to the fact that the "subject of the enunciation" of the Moral Injunction, invisible in Kant, assumes the concrete features of the Sadean executioner.

What Sade accomplishes is thus a very precise operation of breaking up the link between two elements which, in Kant's eyes, are synonymous and overlapping:7 the assertion of an unconditional ethical injunction; the moral universality of this injunction. Sade keeps the structure of an unconditional injunction, positing as its content the utmost pathological singularity.

And, again, the crucial point is that this breaking up is not Sade's eccentricity-it lays dormant as a possibility in the very fundamental tension constitutive of the Cartesian subjectivity. Hegel was already aware of this reversal of the Kantian universal into the utmost idiosyncratic contingency: isn't the main point of his critique of the Kantian ethical imperative that, since the imperative is empty, Kant has to fill it with some empirical content, thus conferring on contingent particular content the form of universal necessity?

The exemplary case of the "pathological," contingent element elevated to the status of an unconditional demand is, of course, an artist absolutely identified with his artistic mission, pursuing it freely without any guilt, as an inner constraint, unable to survive without it. The sad fate of Jacqueline du Pré confronts us with the feminine version of the split between the unconditional injunction and its obverse, the serial universality of indifferent empirical objects that must be sacrificed in the pursuit of one's Mission.8 (It is extremely interesting and productive to read du Pré's life story not as a "real story," but as a mythical narrative: what is so surprising about it is how closely it follows the preordained contours of a family myth, the same as with the story of Kaspar Hauser, in which individual accidents uncannily reproduce familiar features from ancient myths.) Du Pré's unconditional injunction, her drive, her absolute passion was her art (when she was 4 years old, upon seeing someone playing a cello, she already immediately claimed that this is what she wanted to be…). This elevation of her art to the unconditional relegated her love life to a series of encounters with men who were ultimately all substitutable, one as good as the other-she was reported to be a serial "man eater." She thus occupied the place usually reserved for the MALE artist-no wonder her long tragic illness (multiple sclerosis, from which she was painfully dying from 1973 to 1987) was perceived by her mother as an "answer of the real," as divine punishment not only for her promiscuous sexual life, but also for her "excessive" commitment to her art… 3.

This, however, is not the whole story. The decisive question is: is the Kantian moral Law translatable into the Freudian notion of superego or not? If the answer is yes, then "Kant with Sade" effectively means that Sade is the truth of the Kantian ethics. If, however, the Kantian moral Law cannot be identified with superego (since, as Lacan himself puts it in the last pages of Seminar XI, moral Law is equivalent to desire itself, while superego precisely feeds on the subject's compromising his/her desire, i.e. the guilt sustained by the superego bears witness to the fact that the subject has somewhere betrayed or compromised his/her desire),9 then Sade is not the entire truth of Kantian ethics, but a form of its perverted realization. In short, far from being "more radical than Kant," Sade articulates what happens when the subject betrays the true stringency of the Kantian ethics.

This difference is crucial in its political consequences: insofar as the libidinal structure of "totalitarian" regimes is perverse (the totalitarian subject assumes the position of the object-instrument of the Other's jouissance), "Sade as the truth of Kant" would mean that Kantian ethics effectively harbors totalitarian potentials; however, insofar as we conceive of Kantian ethics as precisely prohibiting the subject to assume the position of the object-instrument of Other's jouissance, i.e. to calling on him to assume full responsibility for what he proclaims his Duty, then Kant is the antitotalitarian par excellence…

The dream about Irma's injection that Freud used as the exemplary case to illustrate his procedure of analyzing dreams is a dream about responsibility-(Freud's own responsibility for the failure of his treatment of Irma)-this fact alone indicates that responsibility is a crucial Freudian notion.

But how are we to conceive it? How are we to avoid the usual trap of the mauvaise foi of the Sartrean subject responsible for his existential project, i.e. of the existentialist motif of ontological guilt that pertains to the finite human existence as such, as well as the opposite trap of "putting the blame on the Other" ("since the Unconscious is the discourse of the Other, I am not responsible for its formations, it is the big Other who speaks through me, I am merely its instrument…")?

Lacan himself pointed the way out of this deadlock by referring to Kant's philosophy as the crucial antecedent of the psychoanalytic ethics of the duty "beyond the Good". According to the standard pseudo-Hegelian critique, the Kantian universalist ethic of the categorical imperative fails to take into account the concrete historical situation in which the subject is embedded, and which provides the determinate content of the Good: what eludes Kantian formalism is the historically specified particular Substance of ethical life. However, this reproach can be countered by claiming that the unique strength of Kant's ethics resides in this very formal indeterminacy: moral Law does not tell me what my duty is, it merely tells me that I should accomplish my duty, i.e. it is not possible to derive the concrete norms I have to follow in my specific situation from the moral Law itself-which means that the subject himself has to assume the responsibility of "translating" the abstract injunction of the moral Law into a series of concrete obligations.

In this precise sense, one is tempted to risk a parallel with Kant's Critique of Judgement: the concrete formulation of a determinate ethical obligation has the structure of aesthetic judgement, i.e. of a judgement by which, instead of simply applying a universal category to a particular object or of subsuming this object under an already given universal determination, I as it were invent its universal-necessary-obligatory dimension and thereby elevate this particular-contingent object (act) to the dignity of the ethical Thing.

So there is always something sublime about pronouncing a judgement that defines our duty: in it, I "elevate an object to the dignity of the Thing" (Lacan's definition of sublimation). The full acceptance of this paradox also compels us to reject any reference to "duty" as an excuse: "I know this is heavy and can be painful, but what can I do, this is my duty…" The standard motto of ethical rigor is "There is no excuse for not accomplishing one's duty!"; although Kant's "Du kannst, denn du sollst! (You can, because you must!)" seems to offer a new version of this motto, he implicitly complements it with its much more uncanny inversion: "There is no excuse for accomplishing one's duty!"10 The reference to duty as the excuse to do our duty should be rejected as hypocritical; suffice it to recall the proverbial example of a severe sadistic teacher who subjects his pupils to merciless discipline and torture. Of course, his excuse to himself (and to others) is: "I myself find it hard to exert such pressure on the poor kids, but what can I do-it's my duty!" The more pertinent example is that of a Stalinist politician who loves mankind, but nonetheless performs horrible purges and executions; his heart is breaking while he is doing it, but he cannot help it, it's his Duty towards the Progress of Humanity…

What we encounter here is the properly perverse attitude of adopting the position of the pure instrument of the big Other's Will: it's not my responsibility, it's not me who is effectively doing it, I am merely an instrument of the higher Historical Necessity… The obscene jouissance of this situation is generated by the fact that I conceive of myself as exculpated for what I am doing: isn't it nice to be able to inflict pain on others with the full awareness that I'm not responsible for it, that I merely fulfill the Other's Will…this is what Kantian ethics prohibits. This position of the sadist pervert provides the answer to the question: How can the subject be guilty when he merely realizes an "objective", externally imposed necessity? By subjectively assuming this "objective necessity," i.e. by finding enjoyment in what is imposed on him. So, at its most radical, Kantian ethics is NOT "sadist," but precisely what prohibits assuming the position of a Sadean executioner.

In a final twist, Lacan thus nonetheless undermines the thesis of "Sade as the truth of Kant." It is no accident that the same seminar in which Lacan first deployed the inherent link between Kant and Sade also contains the detailed reading of Antigone in which Lacan delineates the contours of an ethical act that DOES successfully avoid the trap of the Sadean perversion as its hidden truth-in insisting on her unconditional demand for her brother's proper burial, Antigone does NOT obey a command that humiliates her, a command effectively uttered by a sadistic executioner… So the main effort of Lacan's seminar on the Ethics of Psychoanalysis is precisely to break up the vicious cycle of Kant avec Sade. How is this possible? Only if-in contrast with Kant-one asserts that the faculty of desiring is not in itself "pathological." In short, Lacan asserts the necessity of a "critique of pure desire": in contrast to Kant, for whom our capacity to desire is thoroughly "pathological" (since, as he repeatedly stresses, there is no a priori link between an empirical object and the pleasure this object generates in the subject), Lacan claims that there is a "pure faculty of desire," since desire does have a non-pathological, a priori object-cause-this object, of course, is what Lacan calls objet petit a.

1.Lacan, Jacques, Le seminaire, Livre VII: L'éthique de la psychanalyse, Paris: Seuil, 1986, chap. VI.

2.Lacan, J., "Kant avec Sade," in Écrits, Paris: Seuil, 1966, p. 765-790.

3.Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Practical Reason, New York: Macmillan, 1993, p. 30.

4./…/ if, as Kant claims, no other thing but the moral law can induce us to put aside all our pathological interests and accept our death, then the case of someone who spends a night with a lady even though he knows that he will pay for it with his life, is the case of the moral law." Alenka Zupancic, "The Subject of the Law," in Cogito and the Unconscious, ed. by Slavoj Zizek, Durham: Duke UP 1998, p. 89.

5.The most obvious proof of the inherent character of this link of Kant with Sade, of course, is the (disavowed) Kantian notion of "diabolical Evil," i.e. of Evil accomplished for no "pathological" reasons, but out of principle, just for the sake of it." Kant evokes this notion of Evil elevated into a universal maxim (and thus turned into an ethical principle) only in order to disclaim it immediately, claiming that human beings are incapable of such utter corruption; however, shouldn't we counter this Kantian disclaimer by pointing out that de Sade's entire edifice relies precisely on such an elevation of Evil into an unconditional ("categorical") imperative? For a closer elaboration of this point, see Chapter Chapter II of Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder, London: Verso 1996.

6.Butler, Judith, The Psychic Life of Power, Stanford: Stanford University Press 1997, p. 28-29.

7.David-Menard, Monique, Les constructions de l'universel, Paris: PUF 1997.

8.du Pré, Hilary and Piers, A Genius in the Family. An Intimate Memoir of Jacqueline du Pré, London: Chatto and Windus 1997.

9.Alenka Zupancic, op.cit., as well as Bernard Baas, Le désir pur, Louvain: Peeters 1992.

10.For a more detailed account of this key feature of Kant's ethics, see Chapter II of Slavoj Zizek, The Indivisible Remainder, London: Verso 1996.
From: Lacan.com
Available: http://lacan.com/frameXIII2.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 4:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
A Serbian Film****

Regie: Srdjan Spasojevic

Met: Sergej Trifunovic, Srdjan Todorovic, Katarina Zutic, Ana Sakic

Speelduur: 104′

Dit is extreme cinema waar nog jaren over zal gesproken worden. Met stip de zwaarste, goorste, donkerste en meest grensoverschrijdende horrorfilm aller tijden!

Het verhaal: Milos (Srdjan Todorovic) is een ex-pornoster die gelukkig is samen met zijn knappe vrouw en een schat van een zoontje. Toch denkt hij soms nog wel eens terug aan zijn gloriedagen als dé pornoster bij uitstek. Niet voor de vele knappe vrouwen die voor zijn voeten neervielen, maar vooral omdat hij zijn vrouw en zoon veel meer kon geven! Het gezin van Milos heeft het namelijk niet breed en het is soms behoorlijk schrapen om rond te komen. Het is dan ook even twijfelen wanneer Milos plots een aanbod krijgt om tegen een erg hoog bedrag nog één keer mee te doen in een volgens de regisseur erg bijzonder en kunstzinnige pornofilm. Hiermee zouden al hun zorgen in één klap van de baan zijn! Er is echter één voorwaarde: Milos mag niet weten waarover de bewuste film gaat…

Ons verdict: We dachten dat we alles gezien hadden op het gebied van horror en geweld, maar toch kon niets ons voorbereiden op A Serbian Film. Dit stukje extreem gebalde cinema verlegt de grenzen van het toelaatbare zo ver (vergeet zaken als À l’intérieur en Martyrs), dat deze letterlijk niet meer op een legale manier kunnen overschreden worden. En bizar genoeg is de film nergens gratuit of extreem geweld zonder een reden. Integendeel! Regisseur Srdjan Spasojevic houdt ‘ons’ mensen weer maar eens een spiegel voor hoe ‘naar de kloten’ we wel niet zijn. De seksueel expliciete scènes en het extreem harde geweld komen in een sneltempo aan en hier en daar dreigt Sapsojevic zelfs even echt te ver te gaan. Vreemd genoeg is dat net wat deze film zo sterk of relevant maakt. Want hoe beestachtig, pervers en barbaars (kinderen zijn niet veilig overigens!) het geweld en de seks ook is, je kijkt niet weg! En er stond ook niemand in de zaal recht. Het was zelfs vaak bijzonder stil! Het contrast met de manier waarop alles is gebracht maakt het vaak allemaal nog net iets moeilijker te slikken. Want hoe je het ook draait of keert A Serbian Film ziet er geweldig uit. De film heeft feilloze montage, uitstekend camerawerk en daarbovenop is het acteerwerk ijzersterk.

Vooral Srdjan Todorovic is prijswaardig in de hoofdrol en het zou ons niet verwonderen als we deze even later in internationale of zelfs Amerikaanse films zien opduiken. Ook opmerkelijk is het effect van de verschrikkelijke oorlogen in Joegoslavië dat letterlijk in elke scène voelbaar is. De onvermijdelijke tegenstanders horen we al aankomen dat dit het tonen van dit extreme geweld, het over-the-top cynisme en de expliciete seks toch niet kan goedpraten en we stelden ons deze vraag soms ook wel af. Misschien is het net wat de regisseur en de producenten met A Serbian Film willen zeggen? Het is in elk geval een feit dat deze nihilistische mix van (bijna letterlijk!) maagomkerende seks, wraak en geweld ons van begin tot einde letterlijk tot het puntje van onze stoel heeft gehouden en dat is tegenwoordig bijzonder weinig films gegeven. Ook verdient regisseur Srdjan Spasojevic respect om zijn donkere visie zonder enige compromis tot het einde door te trekken. Niet iedereen zal even wild zijn van A Serbian Film en à la Irréversible of Salo zal de productie evenveel voor- als tegenstanders hebben. Hoe dan ook zal de prent niemand koud laten en is wat ons betreft met stip één van de strafste films op deze 28ste editie van het Brusselse International Festival of the Fantastic Film geweest tot nu toe. Een absolute must voor de diehard horrorliefhebbers met een erg sterke maag (dit is dit keer geen loze waarschuwing!).

Bekijk hier de al behoorlijk expliciete originele bioscooptrailer… als u durft tenminste!

A evo i Google Translatora

A Serbian Film ****

Director: Srdjan Spasojevic

By: Sergei Trifunović, Srdjan Todorovic, Katarina Zutic, Ana Sakic

Length: 104 '

This is extreme cinema for years about what will be discussed. Dot with the heaviest, coolest thing, darkest and most cross horror movie of all time!

The story: Milos (Srdjan Todorovic) is a former porn star who is happy with his beautiful wife and a darling son. Still thinks he still may go back to his glory days as the porn star par excellence. Not for the many beautiful women fell at his feet, but because his wife and son could give many more! The family of Milos has not quite wide and it is sometimes scrape to make ends meet. It is also doubt if Milos suddenly gets an offer from a very large sum to again participate in a very special, according to the director and artistic porn. This would all their worries at a stroke of his job! There is one condition: Milos may not know what the film is conscious ...

Our verdict: We thought we had seen in horror and violence, but nothing could prepare us for A Serbian film. This piece is extremely clenched cinema pushes the boundaries of permissible so far (remember things like À l'intérieur and Martyrs), that literally no longer legally be exceeded. And bizarrely, the film is never gratuitous or excessive violence without a reason. On the contrary! Director Srdjan Spasojevic is 'our' people but once again a mirror of how 'the balls' we do not. The sexually explicit scenes and violence are extremely hard in a fast pace and in some cases even threatening Sapsojevic here really go too far. Oddly enough this is exactly what this film is as strong or relevant. For how brutal, barbaric and perverse (children are not safe otherwise!) Violence and sex is, you do not look away! And there was nobody in the room right. Indeed, it was often very quiet! The contrast with the way things have been often makes it all just a little harder to swallow. Because no matter how you look at it A Serbian film looks great. The film is flawless assembly, excellent camera work and on top is the acting solid.

Srdjan Todorovic price is decent especially in the lead and it would not surprise us if we here later in international or even American films appear. Also noteworthy is the effect of the terrible wars in Yugoslavia in literally every scene is palpable. The inevitable opponents we hear all this coming showing this extreme violence, over-the-top cynicism and explicit sex still unable to talk and we imagined that question sometimes off. Maybe it's just what the director and producers with A Serbian film say? In any case, a fact that this nihilistic mix of (almost literally!) Maagomkerende sex, revenge and violence from start to finish us literally to the edge of our seats and took into movies nowadays that is very little data. Srdjan Spasojevic director also deserves respect for his dark vision without any compromise to the end by pulling. Not everyone here is wild A Serbian Film à la Irreversible Salo, or will produce as many supporters and opponents. Anyway, the picture no one indifferent, and what we are concerned with a dot of the nicest films in this 28th edition of the Brussels International Festival of the Fantastic Film've been so far. An absolute must for the diehard horror fans with a very strong stomach (this is not just a warning this time!).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu May 06, 2010 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Aca sa obraća naciji između ostalog i u povodu SRPSKOG FILMA.

mp3 možete downloadovati odavde

A slušanje može ovde


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 9:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 11
Mene vec pocinje da smara da citam/slusam jedno te isto o ovom filmu, ja bih da ga napokon vidim.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 10:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
Svi bismo. Ali mrka kapa.

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 1:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 337
Location: Filmske radosti
pa kada bi taj neko ko ga ima podelio, ne bi bila mrka kapa ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2010 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Ja se nadam da bi na CINEMA CITYju mogao da zaigra SRPSKI FILM. Onda je već dosta lako organizovati se do Srpske Atine. Mislim da čak i festival nudi besplatan prevoz.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Wed May 12, 2010 1:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Sales and production outfit Jinga Films is taking the Balkan route. The UK genre specialist is partnering with Serbian production company Contra Film and will be giving a market premiere to Contra’s A Serbian Film during Cannes.

Directed by Srdjan Spasojevic and executive produced by Nikola Pantelic, A Serbian Film stars Srdjan Todorovic (Underground) as a retired porn star lured back into the industry by a diabolical director (Sergej Trifunovic – War Inc) who has unthinkable terrors in store for him.

“Fans of extreme, intelligent films such as Irreversible, Martyrs and Antichrist are in for a real treat,” said Jinga’s Julian Richards of A Serbian Film. ”It’s an angry political allegory wrapped up in some of the most disturbing scenes ever caught on camera and since its world premiere at SXSW, internet buzz has been so enthusiastic that several distributors have already made offers, sight unseen.”

Other films in Jinga’s Cannes line-up include Federico Zampaglione’s psychological horror Shadow, Jac Schaeffer’s sci-fi romantic comedy Timer, John Michael Elfer’s giallo homage Finale and Darren Ward’s gangster thriller A Day Of Violence.

http://www.screendaily.com/5013677.article


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sat May 15, 2010 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Malo o poslovanju sales agenta SRPSKOG FILMA

The sales and production company has closed a number of deals as the Cannes Market gets underway.

UK sales and production outfit Jinga Films has sold John Michael Elfers occult horror Finale and Johnny Kevorkian’s supernatural thriller The Disappeared to Accent for Australia and New Zealand. Both films are scheduled for release in August.

Closer to home, Jinga has also closed a UK deal for Tom Tyrwhitt’s urban thriller Hush Your Mouth with Brighton based distributor Brightspark.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sat May 15, 2010 11:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Film News
Cannes 2010: A SERBIAN FILM Claims A Victim.

by Todd Brown, May 15, 2010 9:14 AM
Share10
ShareThis

Cannes 2010, Continental Europe & Russia, Cult, Exploitation, Horror
POSTER Serbian film11.jpg
Cult sensation A Serbian Film has broken a distributor here in Cannes. While I'm still looking for specific details, I'm told that at this morning's screening in the Cannes market, one distributor was so disturbed by what they saw on screen that they tried to leave, becoming faint and disoriented on the way out before collapsing at the exit and falling face first into the door, breaking their nose and leaving a puddle of blood on the floor. We've joked before that this film can break people's brains. Now it has broken someone's face, too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sun May 16, 2010 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
So I've made a couple posts about this one here at 24Lps, mostly concerning how off-the-wall and completely gruesome this flick looks. But the new cult hit from first time director Srdjan Spasojevic officially premiered at the Cannes marketplace this morning and found itself a distributor. Twitch hasn't given any info as far as what company picked it up, but I'll keep you all informed as news comes.

Furthermore, the film's effect on its audience has officially begun to take hold, claiming its first victim at the screening this morning. One of the distributors at the marketplace was so distraught by what was going on onscreen he tried to get up and exit the theater, but grew dizzy and faint, fell face first into the door, and broke their nose. Serbian Film indirectly broke someone's nose!... now I really wanna see it.

All kidding aside, for those of you not in-the-know, Serbian Film undoubtedly looks to be one of the most grisly and violent films ever made, and all the first reactions are confirming this. I've posted the trailer below, but even these two minutes are tough to handle. Watch at your own risk, and I warn you, this is NOT safe for work by any means.

http://twentyfourlies.blogspot.com/2010 ... finds.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Mon May 17, 2010 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
A Contrafilm production. (International sales: Jinga Films, London.) Produced by Srdjan Spasojevic. Executive producer, Nikola Pantelic. Directed by Srdjan Spasojevic. Screenplay, Spasojevic, Aleksandar Radivojevic.

With: Srdjan Todorovic, Sergej Trifunovic, Jelena Gavrilovic, Katrina Zutic, Slobodan Bestic.

Taking the torture-porn concept absolutely literally, the bluntly titled "A Serbian Film" is a well-crafted, immensely indecent smut slasher that falls short of the original "Hostel" and "Saw," but still reps a daresay "respectable" go at the genre. Debuting helmer Srdjan Spasojevic's twisted tale of an out-of-work adult film star who (in every way) attaches himself to a deadly new project is also a warning call to budding thesps: Read the whole contract, and don't trust a director who claims that "life, art and blood" are their inspirations. Fanboys will be lapping up the ketchup in fright fests and ancillary.

Though word-of-mouth following its SXSW premiere promised a film that would make "Antichrist" and "Kinatay" look like "Leave it to Beaver," pic is actually heavier on the X-rated side than the gore, and only its final reel of carnage will give hardcore horror fans their due.

Story kicks off as a darkish, fairly entertaining deadpan comedy where Milos (Srdjan Todorovic), described as the "Nikola Tesla of world pornography," is short on cash and pouring himself a tad too many whiskeys. Stuck at home watching his own studded oeuvre, he's urged by his wife (Jelena Gavrilovic) and an S&M-garbed colleague (Katrina Zutic) to get back in the sack and make some dough.

What he's offered is to star in the next opus from ominous director Vukmir (Sergej Trifunovic), who claims to have held a "lifelong fascination with the world of film" and bemoans the fact that Serbia is "no country for real art." But once shooting begins, it's clear that Vukmir is no Kusturica, and his specialty is real-life versions of the work of Eli Roth and Mark Burg, with an auteur's taste for pre-adolescent girls, untold bodily violence and a special genre he dubs "newborn porn" (don't ask).

Despite such shock content, which reaches an almost criminal threshold at the very close, the film is not as off-putting as it sounds, and its sleaze-factor is distilled through clever construction, good acting and sleek widescreen lensing.

As for the title, dialogue makes reference to war orphans and the Hague tribunal, but otherwise it seems to be a stab at irony, and clearly one that won't please its homeland.

Camera (color, widescreen), Nemanja Jovanov; editor, Darko Simic; music; Sky Wikluh; production designer, Nemanja Petrovic; costume designer, Jasmina Sanader; sound (Dolby Digital), Drobhjakovic Milos; sound designer, Aleksandar Protic; re-recording mixer, Ameksander Perisic; special effects supervisor, Miroslav Lakobrija; assistant director, Miroslav Stamatov. Reviewed at Cannes Film Festival (market), May 15, 2010. (Also in SXSW Film Festival.) Running time: 99 MIN.


(Serbian dialogue)

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117942 ... Id=31&cs=1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Konačno, posle velikog uzbuđenja i uspeha na stranim festivalima i marketima, SRPSKI FILM Srđana Spasojevića biće prikazan i pred našom publikom.
Film o kome se kod nas toliko nagađalo, naslućivalo i diskutovalo napamet najzad će moći da se vidi. SRPSKI FILM se vraća kući.
Srpsku premijeru će doživeti na Cinema Cityju u Novom Sadu.
Ona će se dogoditi u Srpskom narodnom pozorištu u pet do dvanest, odnosno 23:55 za one koji u tako uzbudljivom trenutku gledaju na sat u petak 11. juna.
Potrudite se da nabavite karte na vreme, a u predstojećim danima ćemo vas obaveštavati o preostalim detaljima vezanim za prevoz do Novog Sada i sl.

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2010/ ... -2010.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 7:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
Šta napisati? Konačno da vidimo i to čudo koje jede malu decu za doručak.
:)
Jedva čekam.

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 337
Location: Filmske radosti
Konacno.
samo naci kartu na vreme :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
O, da...

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 337
Location: Filmske radosti
Ako se izborim za kartu, mogu da se slikam. Izgleda da su bash minimalne shanse da se pojavi bioskopska distribucija, a teshko cu i do diska doci, zbog ljudi koji pishu vala svashta, a da film naravno nisu ni odgledali


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 6407
Pa kupi kartu odmah, čim krene prodaja za Cinema City. Ne znam šta su oni rekli, kada kreće prodaja...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
Karata za prvu projekciju koja (11. 06.) više nema - rasprodate su.

Danas su još uvek mogle da se kupe karte za reprizu koja će se dogoditi dan kasnije, 12. 06. 2010.

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Srpski film (A. Radivojević i S. Spasojević, 2010)
PostPosted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:02 am
Posts: 1727
Sinoć je u Novom Sadu bila prava havarija. U pozitivnom smislu. Srpska premijera Srpskog filma je počela sa nekih pola sata zakašnjenja, oko pola jedan, pred krcatom salom u NSP-u.

Ljudi su odlično reagovali na film, nije bilo ekstremnih reakcija, padanja u nesvest, povraćanja i sličnog. (Bar ne da sam ja video.)

O samom filmu se može pisati i pisati. To je odlično. Film koji ostavlja ravnodušnim nije dobar film. Čekam da mi se još malo slegnu tisci pa da se raspišem... A i da se drugi probude kako bismo mogli da se upustimo u diskusiju. Biće materijala!!!!

(Gledaću da tokom dana okačim nekoliko fotki s premijere, izlazak ekipe pred publiku i sličo. Čisto da osetite malo atmosfere vi koji niste bili.)

_________________
on the QT and very hush-hush


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 251 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 11  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

2007 Novi kadrovi, projekat podržali Open Society Institute New York i Swiss Cultural Programme Pro Helvetia Beograd, sajt Luka Činč

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group