kuheylanus
Joined Mar 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews4
kuheylanus's rating
The film "Babak" (1979) which was directed by Eldar Guliyev was a product of cooperation between "Azerbaycanfilm" and "Mosfilm." The prominent Azerbaijani historian Ziya Bunyadov was one of the advisers. The film has used historical material about Babak and Khurramis as skeleton and has added its own flesh to it. Sequence of events and characters are represented according to historical sources. However there are overtly anachronistic elements. Narrative and representation is distorted according to the needs of official Soviet ideology and Azerbaijani nationalism. Representation of Babak and Khurrami movement is completely compatible with Soviet Azerbaijani historiography in this sense. Babak is represented as a national hero who fought for equality in the society, common ownership and moral subjugation. He is also a hero fighting for the freedom of Azerbaijan against Arab invaders. The film depicts how Babak joins Khurramis, how he gets to the top of the movement, his struggle against various Arab commanders send from Baghdad, and lastly his capture and execution.
Babak's place in Azerbaijani history and culture may seem strange considering the fact that Azerbaijanis are Muslims and Babak is known for his resistance against Muslim Arabs and caliphate and his brutal treatment of Muslim population. However this actually represents the strong anti-clericalism and Muslim secularism in Azerbaijan. Following the Russian colonial rule powers of the clerical establishment were severely restricted and not like other places in Muslim world secular intellectuals had chance to publish and proselytize their own works. Secularization process continued during the Soviet period as well, and this can explain why identifying with a figure like Babak does not bear inherent conflict for most Muslim Azerbaijanis. In the movie the rebellion is not motivated by religious factor; the conflict portrayed has its seeds in patterns of property ownership and nationalism. Babak is represented as a hero fighting for equality of men and freedom of Azerbaijan. Although Babak and Khurramis are represented as non-Muslims the conflict between them and Arabs is not between Muslims and non-believers, actually there are Muslim elders who are supporting Babak.
There is obviously abundance of anachronistic elements in the film. In the first place the representation of Babak as the national hero who fought for the freedom of Azerbaijan is highly problematic. Apart from this, in the movie the primary source of motivation for Khurramis in their struggle is equality among men and common ownership; the terms equality and freedom are used as equivalents. In fact there is no sound evidence for community of goods among the Khurramis.
There are many elements of symbolism in the movie. Red flag and color is associated with Khurramis and black flag and black color is associated with Arabs and the Caliphate. When Afshin offers Babak cooperation to overthrow Arab Caliphate to establish Iranian state Babak rejects this offer and replies: "I have committed to ideals which demand freedom or death Either you will be destroyed under the black flag of the caliphate or I will be destroyed under the red flag of the Khurramis." Arab army is associated with destruction, fire and slavery. In one scene on the route of Arab army we see a vulture on a dead body and a crying child next to a dead mother.
Two other striking elements from the film are treatment of woman and relationship between Iran and Azerbaijan. Javidan's wife Zernise is depicted as an active figure who controls the affairs of the castle after her husband's death, and decides who would take his place. She also attends meetings of the decision making council of Babak's commanders and her opinion counts.
Iran and Azerbaijan are treated as two different entities in the film. Although many Azerbaijanis claim that during the period population of the region was Turkic hence different from the rest of Iran, Iranian sources maintain that people were predominantly Persian and the region should be considered as part of greater Iran. In addition, in the film, there is clear reference to Tabriz as Azerbaijani land, and there is delineation of borders between Iran and Azerbaijan in a sense that Hamadan is not considered part of Azerbaijan, whereas Tabriz clearly was.
Babak's place in Azerbaijani history and culture may seem strange considering the fact that Azerbaijanis are Muslims and Babak is known for his resistance against Muslim Arabs and caliphate and his brutal treatment of Muslim population. However this actually represents the strong anti-clericalism and Muslim secularism in Azerbaijan. Following the Russian colonial rule powers of the clerical establishment were severely restricted and not like other places in Muslim world secular intellectuals had chance to publish and proselytize their own works. Secularization process continued during the Soviet period as well, and this can explain why identifying with a figure like Babak does not bear inherent conflict for most Muslim Azerbaijanis. In the movie the rebellion is not motivated by religious factor; the conflict portrayed has its seeds in patterns of property ownership and nationalism. Babak is represented as a hero fighting for equality of men and freedom of Azerbaijan. Although Babak and Khurramis are represented as non-Muslims the conflict between them and Arabs is not between Muslims and non-believers, actually there are Muslim elders who are supporting Babak.
There is obviously abundance of anachronistic elements in the film. In the first place the representation of Babak as the national hero who fought for the freedom of Azerbaijan is highly problematic. Apart from this, in the movie the primary source of motivation for Khurramis in their struggle is equality among men and common ownership; the terms equality and freedom are used as equivalents. In fact there is no sound evidence for community of goods among the Khurramis.
There are many elements of symbolism in the movie. Red flag and color is associated with Khurramis and black flag and black color is associated with Arabs and the Caliphate. When Afshin offers Babak cooperation to overthrow Arab Caliphate to establish Iranian state Babak rejects this offer and replies: "I have committed to ideals which demand freedom or death Either you will be destroyed under the black flag of the caliphate or I will be destroyed under the red flag of the Khurramis." Arab army is associated with destruction, fire and slavery. In one scene on the route of Arab army we see a vulture on a dead body and a crying child next to a dead mother.
Two other striking elements from the film are treatment of woman and relationship between Iran and Azerbaijan. Javidan's wife Zernise is depicted as an active figure who controls the affairs of the castle after her husband's death, and decides who would take his place. She also attends meetings of the decision making council of Babak's commanders and her opinion counts.
Iran and Azerbaijan are treated as two different entities in the film. Although many Azerbaijanis claim that during the period population of the region was Turkic hence different from the rest of Iran, Iranian sources maintain that people were predominantly Persian and the region should be considered as part of greater Iran. In addition, in the film, there is clear reference to Tabriz as Azerbaijani land, and there is delineation of borders between Iran and Azerbaijan in a sense that Hamadan is not considered part of Azerbaijan, whereas Tabriz clearly was.
John Boorman's Excalibur is one of the numerous reflections of King Arthur and Holy Grail Story on silver screen. (No less than 262 works exist on the topic) Film tries to represent King Arthur of legend primarily drawing on Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur.
It is obvious that making a historical film on this topic is very difficult as not much is known on the "true" personality of King Arthur. So Excalibur like many other films made on the subject serves to the legend not to the history. Majority of the central personalities in Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur were given voice in the film.
Although their historical representation is questionable, I found Excalibur's display of historical topics like the relationship between the chivalry and courtly love, transition from paganism to Christianity and Grail story interesting.
Sir Lancelot is captured between his loyalty to his king and his love for Arthur's queen Guinevere. His chivalry is superior he defeats all the knights including Arthur himself before joining royal army but once Arthur defeats him he becomes his loyal best friend. However at the same time he falls in love with Guinevere. His long struggle with this temptation is extensively depicted in the movie. Aberth claims that it was Arthurian romances that were largely responsible for linking together the martial ideal of chivalry with the ideal of courtly love.
It is also interesting that Boorman does not find it problematic representing paganism alongside with Christianity without any conflict between the two. Although it seem like the period of transition from paganism to Christianity the conflict between two is no evident anywhere. Magic and sorcery is everywhere, Merlin is almost more central figure than Arthur himself, but still we also see Arthur's wedding taking place in a church and other symbols of Christianity around. Lack of conflict between paganism and Christianity is a distinguishing feature of the film.
Representation of the Grail Story in the film is unusual. It comes out that secret of the Grail is that Arthur and the land are one and there is no religious symbol attached to the Grail. Arthur rejuvenates after drinking from the cup so in a sense he is savior of himself. No reference is made to Christianity at all.
To conclude, although film is not a historical film and based on a legend, it includes important topics from medieval history like the relationship between chivalry and courtly love, transition from paganism to Christianity and the story of Holy Grail, although their historical representation is problematic. Christianity and paganism displayed side by side without any conflict and Holy Grail story is completely de-Christianized in the film.
It is obvious that making a historical film on this topic is very difficult as not much is known on the "true" personality of King Arthur. So Excalibur like many other films made on the subject serves to the legend not to the history. Majority of the central personalities in Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur were given voice in the film.
Although their historical representation is questionable, I found Excalibur's display of historical topics like the relationship between the chivalry and courtly love, transition from paganism to Christianity and Grail story interesting.
Sir Lancelot is captured between his loyalty to his king and his love for Arthur's queen Guinevere. His chivalry is superior he defeats all the knights including Arthur himself before joining royal army but once Arthur defeats him he becomes his loyal best friend. However at the same time he falls in love with Guinevere. His long struggle with this temptation is extensively depicted in the movie. Aberth claims that it was Arthurian romances that were largely responsible for linking together the martial ideal of chivalry with the ideal of courtly love.
It is also interesting that Boorman does not find it problematic representing paganism alongside with Christianity without any conflict between the two. Although it seem like the period of transition from paganism to Christianity the conflict between two is no evident anywhere. Magic and sorcery is everywhere, Merlin is almost more central figure than Arthur himself, but still we also see Arthur's wedding taking place in a church and other symbols of Christianity around. Lack of conflict between paganism and Christianity is a distinguishing feature of the film.
Representation of the Grail Story in the film is unusual. It comes out that secret of the Grail is that Arthur and the land are one and there is no religious symbol attached to the Grail. Arthur rejuvenates after drinking from the cup so in a sense he is savior of himself. No reference is made to Christianity at all.
To conclude, although film is not a historical film and based on a legend, it includes important topics from medieval history like the relationship between chivalry and courtly love, transition from paganism to Christianity and the story of Holy Grail, although their historical representation is problematic. Christianity and paganism displayed side by side without any conflict and Holy Grail story is completely de-Christianized in the film.