Film language of the literary script : The wild field by Pyotr Lutsik and Aleksey Samoryadov
Abstract
Film scripts, as the first stage of the development of the visual identity of a film, possess their own film language, which consists of a combination of expressive means that form the concept of the author’s world. Repetitive mise[1]en-scène and camera work figures in script language (synthomes) form a side storyline in the structure of the script and the film, which support the main dramatic conflict. The milestone of the 1990s-2000s, which introduced Russian practitioners to the American form of screenplay, reactualizes the problem of the film script form. However, screenwriters who were brought up in accordance with the traditions of the Soviet film school continue to incorporate elements of the author’s film language into their works.The research material for this paper consists of the screenplay by Pyotr Lutsik and Aleksey Samoryadov («Wild Field», 2003) and a number of episodes from the film of the same name by Mikhail Kalatozishvili (2008). The artistic means of the screenplay by Pyotr Lutsik and Aleksey Samoryadov are analyzed using elements of the psychoanalytic concepts of S. Žižek and Vi. Mazin, as well as the poststructural approaches of M. Yampolsky. Changes in the set of film language means introduced by the director of the film affect the construction of the screenplay and its structure in terms of turning points.
About the Author
E. V. Prokhorova
St. Petersburg State University of Film and Television
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Prokhorova E. V. — Ass. Prof. of the Chair
Pravdy st., Saint Petersburg, 191119
AuthorID: 1111553
SCOPUS Author ID: 57216504299
References
1. Chervinskij A. Kak horosho prodat’ horoshij scenarij. M.: AST, 2019. 299 s.
2. Prokhorova E. The script form in Soviet and Russian film studies // Studies in Russian and Soviet Cinema. 2023. №17 (2). 80-93 pp.
3. Lucyk P., Samoryadov A. Sobranie sochinenij. Orenburg: Orenburgskaya kniga, 2019. 648 s.
4. Zanin A. Petr Lucyk i Aleksej Samoryadov: vremya uhodit’ v «Dikoe pole» // Nedelya nauki i tvorchestva: mat-ly Mezhvuz. nauch.-prakt. foruma. 18–22 apr. 2016 g.: v 5 ch. SPb.: SPbGIKiT, 2016. Ch. 1. S. 109.
5. My prishli v kino s privetom: pentalog kritikov E. Stishovoj i V. Matizena, rezhissera Aleksandra Hvana, scenaristov Petra Lucika i Alekseya Samoryadova v ramkah pervogo rossijskogo otkrytogo kinofestivalya «Kinotavr» // Iskusstvo kino. 1993. № 9. S. 21–27.
6. Shklovskij V. Kak pisat’ scenarii. M.; L.: GIHL, 1931. 83 s.
7. Ejzenshtejn S. O forme scenariya // Izbrannye proizvedeniya: v 6 t. M.: Iskusstvo, 1964. T. 2. S. 297–299.
8. Turkin V. Dramaturgiya kino: ocherki po teorii i praktike kinoscenariya. M.: Goskinoizdat, 1938. 264 s.
9. Gabrilovich E. Ob opisatel’nyh elementah v scenarii // Voprosy kinodramaturgii: sb. st. / red. I. V. Vajsfel’d. M.: Iskusstvo, 1960. Vyp. 2. S. 107–123.
10. Manevich I. O literaturnom scenarii i remeslennom fil’me // Voprosy kinodramaturgii: sb. st. / red. I. V. Vajsfel’d. M.: Iskusstvo, 1962. Vyp. 4. S. 260–280.
11. Nekhoroshev L. Problemy syuzheta v sovetskom kinoiskusstve: Avtoreferat dis. Na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata iskusstvovedeniya // Akad. obshchestv. nauk pri CK KPSS. Kafedra literaturovedeniya, iskusstvoznaniya i zhurnalistiki. M.: Mysl’, 1966. 16 s.
12. Mitta A. Kino mezhdu adom i raem: kino po Ejzenshtejnu, Chekhovu, Shekspiru, Kurosave, Fellini, Hichkoku, Tarkovskomu… M.: AST, 2021. 496 s
13. Yampol’skij M. Yazyk – telo – sluchaj: Kinematograf i poiski smysla. M.: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2004. 376 s.
14. Zizek S. From Joyce-the-Symptom to the Symptom of Power // Lacanian ink. 1997. 11, Fall. R. 12–25.
15. Zhizhek S. Vozvyshennyj ob“ekt ideologii. M.: Hudozhestvennyj zhurnal, 1999. 234 s.
16. Zhizhek S. Hichkokovskie sintomy // To, chto vy vsegda hoteli znat’ o Lakane (no boyalis’ sprosit’ u Hichkoka). M.: Logos, 2004. S. 119–123.
17. Zhizhek S. Mozhno li sdelat‘ prilichnyj remejk Hichkoka? // To, chto vy vsegda hoteli znat‘ o Lakane (no boyalis‘ sprosit‘ u Hichkoka). M.: Logos, 2004. S. 292–319.
18. Zhizhek S. Iskusstvo smeshnogo vozvyshennogo. O fil’me Devida Lincha «Shosse v nikuda». M.: Evropa, 2011. 168 s.
19. Zhizhek S. Kinogid izvrashchenca: Kino, filosofiya, ideologiya. Ekaterinburg: Gonzo, 2014. 472 s.
20. Mazin V. Vvedenie v Lakana. M.: Pragmatika kul‘tury, 2004. 201 s.
21. Mazin V. Lakan v kino. SPb.: Seans, 2015. 336 s.
22. Baudry J-L., Williams, A. Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus // Film Quarterly. 1974–1975. № 2. P. 39–47.
23. Lucyk P., Samoryadov A. Dikoe pole: scenarij // Kinoscenarii: literaturno-hudozhestvennyj illyustrirovannyj zhurnal. M.: 2001. № 1. S. 111–129.
Review
For citations:
Prokhorova E.V. Film language of the literary script : The wild field by Pyotr Lutsik and Aleksey Samoryadov. Bulletin of Vaganova Ballet Academy. 2023;(5):160-173. (In Russ.)
Views:
128
Email this article 