diziler broadchurch index

Some sections are frankly polemical in nature. The authors reserve the right to the original interpretation of classical works, although sometimes their interpretations seem too paradoxical. This can be said about the essays written by O. Musienko and O. Sydor-Ghibelinda.

V. Skurativskyi, considering the film process of the totalitarian era, resorts to convincing generalizations, searching for certain regularities according to which the cinematography of that era existed and developed. Analyzing the cinematographic works of the 1920s, S. Trimbach traces film processes in the context of national culture, highlighting the personality of O. Dovzhenko in a "close-up", emphasizing how fateful the appearance of this artist was for Ukrainian cinema.

It is not often that film experts turn to such an important field of cinematographic activity as film education. It can be said that the young researchers R. Roslyak and O. Bezruchko entered the territory that until now remained on the margins of film studies. In addition, few researchers were able to master historical facts with the help of archival documentation. R. Roslyak's text reveals to the reader a kind of terra incognita, because during the Soviet era, Ukrainian film education was persistently relegated to the shadows, weakening it also purely organizationally (closure of the film institute, departure of personnel, etc.).