Historical film "forever"!

(Baonghean) - Summer is the season for movies, so when I go on social media, I see my friends talking about going to the movies. After browsing Facebook, I came to the conclusion that the two most popular movies right now are both Vietnamese: “Scandal 2” and “Living with History”. Unfortunately, the interest is two completely different things.

“Scandal 2” is a film directed by Victor Vu. Victor Vu’s films belong to the commercial film genre, close to European and American films, good entertainment, good special effects, and artistic value…no one cares much, because it is a commercial film! As for the film “Living with History”, needless to say, it belongs to the traditional film genre. More specifically, it talks about the Dien Bien Phu victory, praising General Vo Nguyen Giap. The theme is old, the way of exploitation seems new, through characters who are young people living in the present time, recreating historical memories through film footage, photos and imagination.

The story is probably still the same old story: Scandal 2 premiered with 720 screenings on the first day of release, earning 10 billion VND, breaking the Vietnamese box office record. Meanwhile, “Living with History” could not sell a single ticket. Such a magnificent historical film, invested 21 billion VND, but in the end, no one bothered to go see it. Why?

First of all, the communication stage, clearly advertising has never been the strong point of films produced by state-owned film studios. Perhaps because of the subsidy mechanism, they are not under pressure to make a living from the film like private film studios. Let's ask, between 2 films, 1 about a hot topic - the world of famous people - beautiful actors, attractive and sensational trailer, heavily promoted before the film has even finished filming and 1 film from a state-owned film studio, historical topic with "banners and slogans" that has long been saturated, trailer, poster or production stage are all quite quiet, which one will viewers choose? This question is not too difficult to answer.

Second, films made by national film studios are inferior in terms of investment and production. I am not talking about the cost here, 21 billion VND is a lot, not a little! Investment here means investing in talent, effort and especially the heart of the artist. Why are films about war and history in the past extremely successful? It is because there are no conditions in technology and technique, so they can only focus on acting and content. And those are the things that create authenticity, not what kind of smoke or fireworks to use to make it grand, or what camera to make the film beautiful. Don't say that the private sector is better than the state because they have money, they are better in how they use money. They spend their own money, the requirements they set are of course high, because no one will bear the profit or loss for them. Their main motivation is not necessarily art but revenue, but in the end, it is that very personal motivation that binds and ensures the quality of the product.

The reason why educational films produced by state-owned film studios die young, in my opinion, is because of the slow-moving production and artistic thinking. When a film fails to sell, people shout "The film is ordered by the state". So where is the heart and vision of an artist, when he only knows how to accept money as a contract, abandoning all responsibility for his brainchild? Secondly, war and history become saturated over time. We must determine that the same topic, in a period, the public's perspective and interest are focused on one point, but in another period, the public has a different perspective and other interests. Our country is not at war, so filmmakers keep repeating "volunteering", "determined to win", "long live"... Those things are so old, so boring. The public now likes love, tragedy, even the naked things, which have existed in every era? If we know how to exploit it, it is completely possible to integrate history with those seemingly very ordinary values, making them not trivial but real, beautiful and touching to people's hearts.

In conclusion, the eternal question remains: Who cries for the common father? The public and the press will be in an uproar for a while. Filmmakers will still calmly wait in line for their turn like holding rice books and meat coupons in the old days. The state still spends money, films are still made and viewers still look for films from private studios. As for historical and traditional films? "Long live"!

Hai Trieu