diziler gangs of london izle index

Ukrainian cinematography was started way back in 1896, more than 125 years ago. The first film was shot by Alfred Fedetsky in Kharkiv in 1896, but it was not like the cinema we are used to. The tape was entitled "Transfer of the Miraculous Icon of the Mother of God from the Kuryaz Monastery to the Kharkiv Pokrovsky Monastery." She (title) immediately describes the plot of this two-minute long work. Thanks to this tape, A. Fedetskyi became the first Ukrainian cameraman of documentary films. A little later in the same year, he organized the first public screening for Ukraine, where he demonstrated three-minute documentary stories. At the same time, screenings of French films started in Lviv.

In some texts, the authors focus not so much on the film process as on its historical and social context. Thus, Z. Alfyorova draws attention to those general civilizational conflicts that were related to Ukraine and Ukrainian culture even in Soviet times. The author examines the artistic culture of Ukraine at the intersection of the influences of economic, political and socio-cultural systems and observes how the "crisis of reality", the "replacement of reality with signs of reality" is provoked both by the influence of "official" Soviet culture and the phenomena of early postmodernism. The author rightly notes that the internal dissidence of a certain circle of Ukrainian artists is reflected in the very style of screen works. However, interesting observations and theoretical generalizations do not always find concrete confirmation in the direct examination of the film process.

The cinema of independent Ukraine becomes the object of research by I. Zubavina. It must be said that the author set himself a difficult task: the material, one might say, is still pulsating, having "not stood up" in numerous studies. But the author decently overcomes these difficulties, singling out the most noticeable and expressive tendencies manifested in film productions created at domestic studios. I. Zubavina observes how the breath of time changes the aesthetics of national cinema, how painfully these changes sometimes occur, but the author does not doubt their regularity and necessity.