Zviad Dolidze. Otar Ioseliani in Georgian Film
One of the greatest Georgian filmmakers – Otar Ioseliani is a very interesting and original artist who is placed on a very special level in the history of the Georgian cinema. His creative work may be divided into the Georgian period and French period, because beginning it in the 50s in Georgia, he continued working in France since the 80s. Otar has a particular style in finding the critical sides of everyday life and presenting them to the auditorium for thinking, recycling and receiving the decisions. Of course, many film critics in the Soviet Union (when Georgia was one of the Soviet republics) did not like most of his Georgian period films, acclaiming them as the negative works which were not suitable to the Soviet reality, lifestyle, but if we make a deep analyze of them could discover that they were good examples of critical realism (not socialistic realism) and their director wanted to tell his position through his main characters.
Otar Ioseliani is a representative of a new generation of the Georgian filmmakers. Most of them shot their main fiction (short and feature) films in the 60s that's why their name in the history of the Georgian cinema is not a “New Wave” but “The Generation of the 60s”. Among them are brothers - Eldar Shengelaya and Giorgi Shengelaya, Lana Ghoghoberidze, Merab Kokochashvili, Tamaz Meliava, Mikheil Kobakhidze, etc. They had graduated from the Moscow State Institute of Cinematography (VGIK). Some of them started by making documentaries and turned to fiction films. Their works were different from the films made by their predecessors and frequently were a subject of debates. Influenced by contemporary Italian neorealist and French new wave films the younger generation brought new themes, symbols, documentary manner, emotions, ironic attitude to things and phenomena and the new world with different situations and beliefs. Thus, they fulfilled the mission of transferring Georgian cinema to a new dimension. They expressed their position in their films and proved that the Georgian cinema was developing rapidly. 1
“The Generation of 60s” was in literature and in the other fields of the art too. Those were the representatives of new and new generations. Part of them was named the dissidents because they had their strong different positions from the Soviet official ideology. In addition to them, there were many others in literature and arts, the conformists who could adapt to the political course of the government and the communist party of the USSR.
The censorship in the Soviet Union was always worked. Of course, it was in the film industry too. This means all sorts of control from the script departments of the film studios up to high state censorship. It is noteworthy that Joseph Stalin himself was the number one censor. He read the scripts himself, made the corrections there, came up the movie titles, and in some cases had the meetings with film directors, or with the leaderships of the film studios or state film committee to discuss the problematic issues of Soviet filmmaking and so on. There were the cases when in 30-50s some films were banned and were shelved on uncertain times. Other films had gone through the toughest censorship and if someone could find there any anti-state or non-suitable to the ideology things, the making of that film was stoped and its scriptwriter and (or) director possibly were jailed.
After the death of Stalin, since 1952, the situation was softened. This period which continued approximately 11-12 years was named an “Epoch of Thaw”. The representatives of literature and art had received little freedom and in their works tried new experiments, new sight to the things and events, innovative technics, etc. Indeed the most Soviet films were made by the socialistic realism methods but appeared some films where the critical attitude to contemporary life or the recent past were presented. The same news had the Georgian film too but since the second part of the 60s the censorship became harsher and the practice of banning the films took place again. Several times Otar Ioseliani was a victim of such censorship because he tried to say and screen his position critically and did not want to show the beautified reality.
The period of Georgian film history after World War II is often referred to as an “Epoch of a Low Movie Numbers”. In the years 1946-1952 Tbilisi Film Studio issued only eight fiction films. The country suffered a post-war crisis: destroyed agriculture and industry were being restored and most of the financial resources were allocated for their restoration. The objective of filmmakers was to make realistic contemporary films so that the audience was impressed by the noble behavior of the main characters. Certainly, the method of socialistic realism was dominant in the films (and not only in the films but in whole other art fields and literature) and the government of the USSR demanded from the artists and writers to present the samples of that realism in their works.
In 1953 “Tbilisi Film Studio” was turned into “The Georgian Film Studio” (“Gruzia Film”). Parallel to the organizational changes, ways of improvement of film production were outlined. New, convincing manner of narration, realistic themes, and innovative forms were the main characteristic features of films made in this period. The directors working at the studio started working with great enthusiasm and new energy. They were skilled in scriptwriting, film direction, and photography. Thus, the films of that period were to remain in the memories of the audience and, at the same time, they expressed the civil position of the authors. Naturally, the reforms required corresponding professional and psychological preparation. The lack of the above-mentioned affected the number of films.
In 1953 The Soviet Ministry of Culture was ordered to deal with film-related issues. This state organization urged filmmakers to submit new scripts. The best script would be financed and produced. Besides, it was planned to publish a collection of scripts of the most successful Georgian films. However, for certain reasons, this noble cause was hampered.
The authorities paid great attention to the filmmakers who had brought fame to Georgian cinema. In this period about 300 Georgian filmmakers were awarded prizes and medals. Some of them even received the title of Honorable Worker of Art. The following stage of development of Georgian cinema was fruitful both concerning the quality and quantity of films. Some of the films made in this period are of special cinematographic value and interesting narratives.
In 1958 the Film Chronicles Department of “Georgian Film Studio” was restructured into the Studio of Documentary-Chronicle and Popular Science Films. This enhanced the possibilities of the genre and attracted representatives of the younger generation of documentary filmmakers. This studio worked fruitfully in this period. Alongside with experienced directors, representatives of the younger generation created numerous interesting films on new themes. These films were outstanding for their novelty, manner of direction, individuality, and originality.
The film-related issues were governed by the Georgian State Committee of Cinematography. Its function was to govern the planning, financing, distribution, and improvement of the artistic quality of films. Georgian Union of Filmmakers also worked fruitfully, organizing premieres of Georgian films, screenings of foreign films, anniversaries, creative meetings, forums, conferences, etc. Another organization was the local Bureau of Film Propaganda which arranged interesting lectures and screenings. By the way, Otar Ioseliani was one of the lecturers who collaborated with that bureau and presented the lectures about filmmaking and editing to the various organizations of Georgia. It was his additional work.
In the second half of the 60s, the chief focus of the Georgian filmmakers was a deep analysis of human nature and the search for positive human features. The majority of the best Georgian films were made in this period. Naturally, low-quality cliché films were also made, although they too were dedicated to important themes. Since that decade “an expression appeared in cinematic criticism “a phenomenon of Georgian cinema”. 2
In the 70s Georgian films bore the trace of the tendencies of the 60s but also followed the trends of earlier decades. The mixture of old and new trends was a characteristic feature of films of the 70s and a sign of artistic development.
Otar Ioseliani was born on February 2, 1934, in Tbilisi (capital of Georgia). From his childhood years, he was fallen in love with classical music – in parallel with secondary school he studied at musical special school too, in a class of fortepiano. it is the main reason why such many and various music is heard in his films. It is a peculiar nostalgia for the above-mentioned period of his life. After that, in 1953 he went to Moscow University and became a student of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics. He spent there only three years, leave this university and continued study in the VGIK, in the group of a well-known Soviet film director and professor, Alexandr Dovjenko.
The very first work of Otar Ioseliani is his short fiction film “The Watercolor” (1958), based on the motives of Alexander Grin's short story. It was the student work – the third studying course. He shot it in Russia and presented it to VGIK. It should be noted that the cameraman of this film was another student of the same film school Alexandre Rekhviashvili, a person who subsequently became the talented cameraman and film director. Certainly, this film had not any big serious meaning in the terms of mastery because in that time Ioseliani had mastered the nuances of film directing, he learned, learned, learned. It was like a peculiar exercise for him – how to create a composition, how to shoot by various perspectives and how to deliver his opinions and senses to the filmgoers. His film directing style was not delicate yet and he often told about this – that mostly in the art were such moments which in often cases were different from the reality. The plot of the film is very ironic – it is a picture of a poor family. The husband is an alcoholic, but the wife is a laundress. The husband usually spends the money of the wife for buying alcoholic beverages. Once the husband steals money from his wife and runs. The wife chases after him and both find themselves in the exhibition hall. They discover one picture made by the watercolor on where their house is painted which seems very cozy and attractive than it is actually. As one of the guides (this character is played by Otar Ioseliani) notes that the big warm is coming from this picture and points that the decent and noble people live in this house who work honestly, who have many children and are very happy. Of course, it is only that guide's assumption and he does not know who lives in that house. This film shows the controversy between socialistic realism and acute realism, the desirable imagination, and the sad reality.
The next film which also was a student work dedicated to the interesting person, florist and artist-decorator, more than 80 years old Mikheil (Mikha) Mamulashvili, who was a famous man in Georgia by his beautiful and unique garden. The name of the film is “Sapovnela” (1959). Sapovnela is a Georgian name of a low-growing annual plant with brightly colored flowers. The script of this film had been in the Georgian Studio of Documentary-Chronicle and Popular Science Films for a long time and nobody wanted to shoot it. One day a young man, the student of VGIK Otar Ioseliani took that project and made not a documentary, as the studio leadership wanted, but a fiction-documentary film from it, a kind of parable about the relation between man and nature. The director always declared, that “nature creatively charges a person and allows creating the polyphonic folklore songs, the samples of architecture and fine arts” 3. For that Otar Ioseliani, also as a musical director of this film, used there both Georgian national music and classical music. By the directorial view, this film needed no text but the film studio did not inform the author about it and put the extensive text which was not suitable to the plot. In this work Ioseliani continued his training in frame composition, editing, using the sound rows. At that time he paid serious attention to the noises in a film which will help him in his future creative work. “The film acquired the signs of the fable about nature's eternal rotation, about the bilateralism of results after human being intervenes in its canons” 4.
After that Otar Ioseliani decided to shot his diploma film for VGIK. As a brave man who always told the truth, he made short fiction film “April” (1962) and marched against false values. In this work he approved a name of a master of storyboarding – everything was written and drawn by mathematical accuracy. The plot of this film is a melodramatic story about a couple of very happy lovers but after receiving a flat they bought furniture like other neighbors and it will be a cause for them to move away from each other. Finally, the both understand the reason for the alienation and throw the furniture out the window. Ioseliani was saying: “mostly I am afraid of false in the art. It is not to easy to reach such level of honesty and courage which helps the artist's conception to be more close to the result without false, flattery and loss. . . loud opinion losses a lot. It subconsciously crosses several inertial psychological barriers and its free flow changes. That's why in my films I avoid intonation, which proves the uncertainty of what happened” 5.
This last film also had the problems – it was cut, remade, reduced without telling anything to the author and then banned. Ioseliani could not present the diploma work to the examination commission of VGIK. The film was shelved. After the years the studio authorities allowed Otar to edit this film again but he discovered that only some parts were survived. Nevertheless, he edited these parts but much of the author's ideas have been lost.
Otar Ioseliani had never opposed to the state system but only exposed the disadvantages. As a talented artist, he had many envious people around. He did not pay attention to it and continued to find interesting materials for shooting the next film. He liked to say: “a work of art, among other things, is a piece of paper written by us about our own lives among people. And generations, while studying life, are flipping through an art book, each page of which represents the life of an artist” 6.
At first, he wanted to make a film about fishermen and for this reason, began to work on a fishing ship. Then he went to the Rustavi (near Tbilisi) Metallurgical Plant and worked there as a simple worker. This experience gave him an idea to shot the documentary “The Cast Iron” about his coworkers. He did it in 1964 and took it to Moscow. The famous Soviet Filmmaker Grigory Chukhray who was one of the members of the examination commission of VGIK liked this film, wrote a positive review about this work and after this, other members of that commission agreed with him and gave the film a high rating. Otar Ioseliani received the diploma of a filmmaker.
“The Cast Iron” is a realistic film about the plant workers, their everyday work, shot attractively, in full compliance with the documentary style. There are many noises in the film – different voices with music performed by a violin. Of course, the local censorship did not like such cruel and hard reality and because of it, the film studio made only a few copies of the film which were screened in a few numbers of movie theaters.
Otar Iosseliani’s first full-length fiction film was “Fallen Leaves” (“Giorgobistve”, 1966). This last word - “Giorgobistve” according to the old Georgian calendar means a month of November, a time when it is a period of making wine – local peasants make the wine out of the grape. This film is a very unique work, in which the director expressed one particular citizen's protest against the unjust and corrupt system. This injustice is happening in one of the wine factories of Georgia where they have the “tradition” of sometimes making defalcated wine and to distribute it. all the employees of the winery are practice this tradition of falsification of product and no one has any question about it. meanwhile, Niko who is a lead character, wine technology graduate from the agricultural university gets assigned to the winery and after awhile discovers this violation. He is stunned by such dishonest engagement, the indifference of employees and superiors, and decides to go against it, not let them dilute the natural quality of the wine. Despite everyone telling him his efforts are in vain, that he'll lose his job over this and nothing else will change, Niko stays persistent, strong-willed and stubborn. He never imagined to ever face corrupt reality like this.
Besides the issue, the film author paints Niko's other personal qualities too - his family where he grew up, his circle of friends and time they spend, how he gets infatuated by young worker woman at the winery, which is an airhead and unserious toward him, etc. With this and many other details, Otar Ioseliani presents the deeper portrait of the protagonist, so we can thoroughly determine through his actions, how honest and sincere he is.
This film appeared after the “Epoch of Thaw” was dawn in Soviet film and culture. Therefore this film was an unusual event for the viewers, sort of the sensation of its time. Almost nobody was making movies that didn't praise the soviet way of life, industry, agricultural, scientific or other type of achievement. The story of the film focuses on one particular situation in a specific institution, that's been probably happening elsewhere too. The goal of the film wasn't pointing out the flaws of the Soviet Georgian ideology and political course. It only underlined that unfortunately, some facilities (in Winery or some other place) had similar violations occurring and a necessity for the government to interfere it accordingly.
Initially, the script was written for a mechanical equipment factory, but then Ioseliani changed it to a winery since winemaking is deep-rooted in the Georgian culture. growing vineyard and systems of making grape wine is an ancestral duty and grave responsibility for every farmer in the country. It transcends through the generations, almost every Georgian family has its homemade wine, that's generally served for the special guests visiting. In XX century winemaking increased in Georgia. New and bigger wineries were opened due to large demand, high-quality product bottled and distributed to the stores. It is like this, although homemade wine is still a big part of the family culture, therefore wine is a self-defying aspect for the Georgian man identity, more so, worldwide Georgia is considered as a cradle and homeland of wine and winemaking culture.
By the enormity of this particular facility in the movie, Otar Ioseliani underlines the fragile tenderness of historic traditions of wine culture and how morally grounded the protagonist is trying to protect it. Niko is a modern young man who sticks with his moral principals and doesn't compromise to do the right thing, with his mindset, he salvages bulk of shipment from falsification. his friend and coworker Otar who starts working there at the same time as the main hero, is a handsome young man who differs from Niko's perspective, sort of antagonist to Niko, urges him to drop the pursue of rightfulness and just cope with the way things are. all the other workers also standing by indifferent towards the issue, which leaves Niko as the only righteous person standing in the whole factory as a protestant.
In 1966 the pre-screening process of the film had positive reviews from The Georgian Film Studio Artistic Board. Then it was shown to the high ranking members of the Georgian government. It didn't go very successfully, the film was rejected and was denied release in the movie theaters. The government officials were opposed by the members of the film studio. The audience also had mixed feelings about the film – some deemed unnecessary pointing out imperfections of this sort. The film was considered against Soviet socialistic realism because the director must show there only the good sides but the film showed the flaw things and called to correct them. Neither the authorities nor the audience did not want to hear it. This was a healthy criticism. The different organizations demanded to scourge the director, some also demanded to physically destroy all the copies of the film, one letter stated, that the protagonist is not depicted as a belligerent soviet adolescent, but a passive, irresolute, spineless lad. In reality, this hero is a true nature man and tries to prove his truth. The film was deemed as unpromising, inauspicious work and a shame to the Georgian Soviet Socialistic Republic. The critics were banned to write positive reviews of it and it was put on the dusty shelf for years to come.
After the years “Fallen Leaves” appeared in the movie theaters at least. It aroused debates and arguments. The main theme of the film is traditional: the conflict between the person and society. The director drew a perfect picture of the evil dominating in his contemporary society. A part of the film critics was delighted by the film, while others struggled against it. Otar Ioseliani used the principle of inclusion of documentary elements in a feature film and developed the story on the background of wine-producers’ lives. He boldly described a community full of irresponsibility, selfishness, waste of the State property. The film is an outstanding example of critical realism and one of the masterpieces of the Georgian cinema.
“Fallen Leaves” was awarded at the Cannes International Film Festival in 1968 by the two prizes: the Georges Sadoul Prize for the Best Debut and Prize of the International Federation of Film Critics (FIPRESCI).
The love of music led Otar Ioseliani to make the documentary film “Old Georgian Song” (1969) where the samples of the national folklore by the four different regions' songs are presented. The film also has some interesting pieces of the ethnographical sides of Georgia with showing the ancient and middle ages works of architecture, painting and applied art.
In one interview, Otar Ioseliani said: "a man is responsible for his talent and before he leaves this world he must put at least one brick in a house to be built" 7. With this pathos, he who struggled against false visibility in a film made his new full-length fiction film "There was a Singing Blackbird" (1971). This phrase is taken from Georgian folk tales, since all tales are begun with the words: "There was a singing blackbird, God is our mercy" and after such an introduction it was meant that this tale must have had a happy ending. Ioseliani did not follow such a line and presented a completely different story.
The film was based not on any literary material but dedicated to the memory of a young man who died at an early age but could not create anything significant in his life, he could not develop into a person. The literary script was called "The Musician" and the working title of the film was "Day by Day", in which Ioseliani indicated that the film would be a dramatic comedy or a comical drama. It depended on who saw how this story unfolded and how they perceived it. The protagonist of the film is a talented musician who works in the orchestra of the Opera and Ballet Theater and plays on percussions. However, his duty lasts only a few seconds, because his involvement (music part) is at the end of any spectacle. So he doesn't sit in the orchestra during the whole time but goes to visit different acquaintances or friends, spends time together, and at the last moment runs to the theater to do his duty.
Made in the usual strict documentary manner of narration this film, like the previous one, deals with the relationship between the individual and society. The main character is a talented man, pretends to do something but everything is superficial. He can do anything - he can sing, play the piano, be a craftsman, is ready to help people in any way but he can't find his place (and everyone else around him is busy with his favorite thing) and that's his problem, he doesn't even think about it. Despite his sociability, he is a strange film hero and not purposeful, like many others in other Soviet films. The film reflects the fact that there are such people in society and they need some help.
"There was a Singing Blackbird" ends with the main character being hit by a bus on the street and he dies. This will end the life of one such man who is afraid to be alone. The notable metaphor is used in the film's finale when a watchmaker winds a clock with a single movement of his hand. Exactly an impulse like that is necessary for the main character to arrange his life.
The Soviet cinema of that time was sometimes characterized by the appearance of such film personalities in the front row of films, although by the end of the film they would inevitably be corrected, put to work, and they become exemplary young people. In this case, Otar Ioseliani chose differently - his hero died. In itself, such an approach has led to dissatisfaction with censorship - the film shooting process has been banned. Added to this was the fact that Ioseliani could not shoot the film timely (which was to be completed by the end of 1970) so he was stripped of the filming equipment and banned from editing. The footage was then handed over to one of the editors who very poorly edited the film. Also, the film studio has tightened controls on each day of editing. Despite everything, Otar Ioseliani managed to edit the final version as he wanted and in 1971 the film was released on the screens. The filmgoers who were not accustomed to such works met the film with indifference. Many could not understand what its author wanted to say, why he made a film about such a hero. The attitude of film critics was also ambiguous - some critics liked it, some did not.
Later this film was awarded by a prize of the Italian National Association of Filmmakers. It received other prizes too. in 1974 it was screened at Cannes Film Festival and the oldest master of French film Rene Clair congratulated Otar Ioseliani on his success.
The next and last (for Georgian period) full-length fiction film of Otar Ioseliani is “Pastoral” (1975). Due to its title, this film should describe the idyllic existence of the village however, there is nothing idyllic in it, and this film is a complete irony. Its story is also simple at first glance - the quartet of musicians arrives in the village and settles in the family of a peasant to rehearse and prepare for the concert. Against this background, the monotonous life of the local population is disintegrating, which is full of ordinary people, however, this banality is accompanied by negative news and the director does not shy away from showing them. Indifference and inertia reign in this village which aggravates the monotony. The director used mostly non-professional actors. Among them, the main character was played by his daughter, Nana Ioseliani. With this film, the director showed that he was not only interested in the problems of the city and he was also interested in the modern village. Consequently, he painted a rather realistic and non-ideal picture of the village. Undoubtedly, there are several episodes from which it seems that individuals in this settlement violate both law and order if this person is a specially arrived official from the city who is a poacher, no one pays attention to it, but if it is a local, ordinary person, at least he will be strictly warned, may be punished. “Pastoral” aroused debates and was soon banned for several years for the other Soviet republics' screens (Except Georgia).
The Georgian film critic Irina Kuchukhidze had written: “The film directing style of Otar Ioseliani is ideally suitable to the author's position and flawlessly paints the world which he foresees and feels in the difficult reality of our epoch. The film directing of Otar Ioseliani is another topic, his film laboratory is a fascinating sample of mastery and it is so functional that by the point of view of the contemporary film aesthetic arsenal stands above any changes of the weather. He is one of the few Georgian filmmakers who have not any incompleteness complex and are not at all skeptical of those trends which sometimes like the meteors turn over and blind a part of the film directors” 8.
The all three full-length fiction films of Otar Ioseliani can be considered as a trilogy. The suitable opinions are among the Georgian film critics too but the director himself never discusses it.
In the 70s when in Tbilisi, in The Georgian State Theatrical Institute named after Shota Rustaveli (now – The Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Film Georgian State University) was opened a Film Faculty. Otar Ioseliani was invited there as a lecturer of film editing. They did not give him a post of a group supervisor because for that time he was acclaimed as a dissident. Many students (not only from this institution but from others too) attended his interesting lectures.
The Georgian film critics continue to research his oeuvre, analyzing its details and nuances. It is a good experience because Otar Ioseliani is very popular and the representatives of different generations of scholars differently see and perceive his works. One of the film critics, Tata Tvalchrelidze noted: “Otar Ioseliani's diverse pallette, an art of shot image, a culture of construction of shot, a wonderful feeling of film stylistics, deep and comprehensive functional using of the opportunities of the film art without any external effects, serves for presenting the artistic truth on the screen. In the stories, seen from the outside, as if objectively and diligently, without the intervention of the author in it, gradually irony, light humor, sometimes parody and grotesque are too emerge. Everything this founds peculiar poetic which is the Otar Ioseliani's style and different from everyone else” 9.
In a TV documentary film what was shot last year by the Georgian First Channel group in celebration of Otar Ioseliani's 85 years jubilee, the director underlined that always he is a follower of a black and white film but now when there is a trend of the color film he is forced to shot the color movies only. But every time he asks his cameraman to shot such a color film where the color will be soft and backstage and by this, the film will be close to the traditional black and white movie. Also, he likes to make film editing himself. It is a hard job for three-four months. He thinks that the film is only author work and not anything else. Besides he understands that such a film has no commercial success and could not make his director, or producer or demonstrator rich. He is convinced that the author films have an audience despite all. He has nostalgia for the black and white film.
When he makes a film he believes that he has a like-minded person (or persons), that he is not alone, that someone needs his film. He calls filmmaking a craft and believes that every man must pay serious attention to it. He thinks that the audience should not like the falsity in the shooting techniques. Life for him is a wonderful phenomenon that is filled by both – truth and lie. He says, that the film must be a healer.
He can not imagine a man who is a filmmaker and thinks about what and how to shoot on the location. Every director must know everything before shooting, before reaching the shooting location. That's why he needs to have everything drawn by the storyboard.
Otar Ioseliani tries to restore the old film language which was more speaking than the contemporary one. He does not like to use a close up because it is a way for the director and audience to enter the inner world of an actor and it is not interesting for everyone and in his opinion it does not mean anything. It is only presenting the personal features of an actor on the front side and does not serve as a film character's expression. He pays less attention to the script because for him it is only a document for receiving a positive conclusion from various controlling organizations to make a film.
Otar Ioseliani is an author of only one book – it is a textbook for filmmakers – its name is “Louis” which was published in Georgia, 2009, in the Georgian language.
In the second half of the 70s, Otar Ioseliani was invited to France. He went there and continued his creative work in a new stage.
By his attempt to disrobing the falsification, to showing the disadvantages of life, to calling for the rectification of the deficiencies he is a rebel with a cause, a decent member of society who is worried about all of the above-mentioned things.
Notes:
1 Dolidze, Zviad. Georgian Film. Tbilisi: Raeo, 2004, p. 156 (in Georgian)
2 Sepiashvili, Otar. Memory Symphony. Chronicles and Interludes of the Fate of Georgian
Jews. New York: Xlibris, 2011, p. 211-212 (in English)
3 Amiredjibi, Natia. Filmmaker Otar Ioseliani. Tbilisi: Khelovneba, 2003, p. 34 (in Georgian)
4 Tsereteli, Kora. The Famous Names. Tbilisi: Khelovneba, 1986, p. 179 (in Georgian)
5 Ibid. , p. 182
6 Amiredjibi, Natia. op. cit., p. 56
7 Fomin, Valeri. The Intersection of parallel. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1976, p. 108 (in Russian)
8 Kuchukhidze, Irina. The Georgian Period of Otar Ioseliani's Oeuvre. In collection: “The
Georgian filmmakers”. Tbilisi: The Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Film Georgian State
University, 2005, p. 74 (in Georgian)
9 Tvalchrelidze, Tata. Cinematic Searching. Tbilisi: Khelovneba, 1989, p. 46-47 (in Georgian)