diziler hilda diziler diziler yakamoz s 245

The US film industry has developed a system of multi-genre independent cinema: both cult films and creative experiments by directors. As a rule, these are low-budget films made by little-known directors. "Independent films" are mainly non-commercial films that bring maximum profit to their creators, such as blockbusters, and therefore in them you can often see some creative experiments. Most often, it is from "independent" cinema that world-class stars emerge: for example, the debut film of the famous K. Tarantino was the film "Mad Dogs", which is now called a classic of independent cinema.

Chaplin began his career in cinema at the Keystone Film studio. It was headed by the patriarch of American comedy M. Sennett, whose school also went through the famous comedians B. Keaton and G. Lloyd. However, the real "godfather" of American cinema of the beginning of the 20th century. certainly was D. W. Griffith (1875–1948). His films, among which the Birth of a Nation and Intolerance should be especially noted, enriched not only US cinema, but also the entire world cinema with new means of expression, improvement of the specifics of montage (parallel montage). Extremely interesting experiments are taking place at the same time and on the other side of the ocean - in the countries of Eastern Europe, in particular in Russia, where directors Ya. Protazanov, V. Gardin, E. Bauer, whose work was connected with the flourishing of the melodrama genre, are actively working.

In some texts, the authors focus not so much on the film process as on its historical and social context. Thus, Z. Alfyorova draws attention to those general civilizational conflicts that were related to Ukraine and Ukrainian culture even in Soviet times. The author examines the artistic culture of Ukraine at the intersection of the influences of economic, political and socio-cultural systems and observes how the "crisis of reality", the "replacement of reality with signs of reality" is provoked both by the influence of "official" Soviet culture and the phenomena of early postmodernism. The author rightly notes that the internal dissidence of a certain circle of Ukrainian artists is reflected in the very style of screen works. However, interesting observations and theoretical generalizations do not always find concrete confirmation in the direct examination of the film process.