Frame design in visual culture of contemporary filmmaking. Part 1. Constructing authorʾs cinematic language in directing by Yuriy Illenko’s films
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to define the artistic and aesthetic toolkit of frame design in the visual culture of auteur film directing. Research methodology. In developing the topic, an integrated approach was applied, in particular, the methods of systematisation, comparison, verification, comparative and textual analysis were used. The analytical method and the method of figurative and stylistic analysis in their unity were aimed to consider the art historical aspect of the problem. The scientific novelty of the research is that the director's creativity is studied in the context of the visual culture of frame design and for the first time became the subject of a special study. The appropriateness of using the systematic method in studying the features of the author's plastic film language has been proven. A comprehensive analysis has been conducted and the features of frame design in the author's film work have been revealed. Conclusions. The materials presented in the study expand the arsenal of knowledge about the specifics of the visual culture of the author's film language in various worldview models and enable their application in educational courses, the creation of educational and methodological literature on the theory and history of cinema and television, directing
Keywords
Suggested citation
Copy citationReferences
Show all references[1] Briukhovetska, L. (2006). Cinematography by Yuriy Illenko. Kino-Teatr, 1(63), 50-54.
[2] Illienko, Yu. (1999). Agaspherus or the Chronicle of the Second Coming of Christ. Dnipro.
[3] Illienko, Yu. (1999). The paradigm of cinema. Kyiv: Abrys.
[4] Illienko, Yu. ( 2008). Reporting to the Apostle Peter Yurka Illenka. Ternopil: Bohdan.
[5] Koshelivets, I. (1964). Sixties. Contempopary literature. Miunkhen.
[6] Krylova, V.O. (2014). The hero as the personification of the human "I" in cinematography. In The unity of education and scientific research is the main principle of the university: A collection of scientific works of the report-scientific conference of university teachers (pp. 139-141). Kyiv: Publishing House of M.P. Drahomanov NPU.
[7] Liebiediev, O., & Priadko, O. (2013). Plasticity of the cinematographic image and its components. I.K. Karpenko-Karyi National University of Theatre, Cinema an TV Scientific Bulletin, 13, 160-168.
[8] Manokha, I.P., & Fetisova, K.A. (2010). Perspectives of psychological and discursive research in modern psychology of art. Collection of scientific papers of the H.S. Kostiuk Institute of Psychology NAPNU, 162-169.
[9] Matizen, V. (2013). Cinema and life. 12 dozen interviews of the most skeptical film critic. Vinnytsia: Globus-Press.
[10] Briukhovetska, L. (2015). Serhii Paradzhanov and Ukraine. Kyiv: KMA.
[11] Cherkov, H. (2010). Transformation ofreality in the age of digital technologies. I.K. Karpenko-Karyi National University of Theatre, Cinema an TV Scientific Bulletin, 7, 128-135.
[12] Chmil, H. (2003). Author's cinema of Kira Muratova. Art history of Ukraine. Kyiv: SPD Kravchuk V.K..
[13] Epstein, J. (1921). Hellocinema. Paris: Editions de la Sirene.
[14] Gazda, J. (1970). Ukrainian school of poetic cinema. Poland: Ekran.
[15] Konrad, K., & Korcelli, J. (1973). The cinematographer observed the evolution of cinematography. Kino, 6, 23-36.
[16] Stone, J. (1989). Surrealistic chuckle from the Ukraine. New York Times.