By Jake Howell jake.howell@utoronto.ca

Countdown To Cannes: Nuri Bilge Ceylan

The sixth in a series of snapshots outlining the nineteen directors in the 67th Palme d’Or Competition.

Background: Turkish; born in Istanbul, Turkey, 1959.

Known for / style: Kasaba (Small Town, 1997), Üç Maymun (Three Monkeys, 2008), Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da (Once Upon a Time in Anatolia, 2011); extended takes with little-to-no camera movement; sprawling runtimes; scenes of deafening silence; wide or distanced shots of landscapes; domestic dramas cast with non-actors or family members; accomplished photography and screenwriting in addition to directing.

winter_sleep_3

Notable accolades: Throughout his two decades or so on the festival circuit, Ceylan (approximately pronounced “dzjay-lan”) has nearly won it all. At Cannes, he’s taken home the Grand Jury Prize twice (Uzak, 2002; Once Upon a Time in Anatolia, 2011) and the Festival’s prestigious Best Director award in 2008 (Three Monkeys). At Berlin, he won the Caligari Film Award in 2008 for Small Town. He’s also a seven-time FIPRESCI Award winner from multiple festivals, a veritable hero at his local Istanbul International Film Festival, and a two-time winner of the Asia Pacific Screen Awards Achievement in Direction prize (Anatolia and Three Monkeys).

Previous Cannes appearances: Since his Competition debut in 2002 (Uzak), Ceylan has reserved his world premieres for Cannes, with Climates, Three Monkeys and Anatolia following in the same pattern. His 1995 short film Koza played in the short film Competition, and he is a two-time Jury veteran (Competition member, 2009; Cinéfondation member, 2004). In other words, 2014 will mark his fifth shot at a feature-length Palme d’Or.

Film he’s bringing to Cannes: Kış Uykusu or Winter Sleep, which may or may not refer to the film’s intimidating 196-minute run-time. “Winter Sleep is about humans,” Ceylan said in an interview with Sony’s technical side. “It’s a drama set in the middle of Turkey, in Anatolia. We captured many kinds of images on location, shooting in Cappadocia over wintertime. There are many kinds of landscapes, human-scapes and portraits, sometimes in snow, sometimes in cloudy weather and more seldomly sunny images as well.” The newly-released trailer shows Turkish actor Haluk Bilginer struggling with domestic married life.

winter_sleep Could it win the Palme? Ceylan is essentially three for four in his Cannes career. Given that the auteur’s style is tailor-made for the Palme’s proclivities, you could bet that Ceylan may be a candidate for  serious awards consideration. A full-out win at this point seems almost too obvious, so we’ll have to wait (and wait) to see. That said, do not be surprised if 2014 marks Turkey’s second Palme d’Or win, after Yılmaz Güney and Şerif Gören’s golden The Way (1982).

Why you should care:  Ceylan has helped place Turkish cinema on the international radar. It might prove difficult to get excited about a drama that’s longer than a Lord of the Rings entry, but Ceylan’s gorgeous location photography, careful consideration of pacing, and his intriguing human story should more than justify its running time. Ceylan’s masterful style is his own.

Follow Jake Howell on Twitter: @Jake_Howell
Previous Entries:
Tommy Lee Jones
Atom Egoyan
Bennett Miller
Xavier Dolan
David Cronenberg

2 Responses to “Countdown To Cannes: Nuri Bilge Ceylan”

  1. Jeremy Fassler says:

    Ugh. Ceylan is a horrible, pretentious director, whose movies are beyond boring. When will Cannes finally see that the emperor has no clothes? I saw his film, Three Monkeys, knowing nothing about it, and thought it was one of the worst films I’d ever seen – the plot outline was interesting, but all I remember is that nothing that happened in the film was related to that. He’s dreadful.

  2. Ray Pride says:

    Oh, boo.

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“The worst thing that we have in today’s movie culture is Rotten Tomatoes. It’s the destruction of our business. I have such respect and admiration for film criticism. When I was growing up film criticism was a real art. And there was intellect that went into that. And you would read Pauline’s Kael’s reviews, or some others, and that doesn’t exist anymore. Now it’s about a number. A compounded number of how many positives vs. negatives. Now it’s about, ‘What’s your Rotten Tomatoes score?’ And that’s sad, because the Rotten Tomatoes score was so low on Batman v Superman I think it put a cloud over a movie that was incredibly successful. People don’t realize what goes into making a movie like that. It’s mind-blowing. It’s just insane, it’s hurting the business, it’s getting people to not see a movie. In Middle America it’s, ‘Oh, it’s a low Rotten Tomatoes score so I’m not going to go see it because it must suck.’ But that number is an aggregate and one that nobody can figure out exactly what it means, and it’s not always correct. I’ve seen some great movies with really abysmal Rotten Tomatoes scores. What’s sad is film criticism has disappeared. It’s really sad.”
~ Brett Ratner Has A Sad

“The loss of a local newspaper critic is a real loss. People who know the local audience and know the local cultural scene are very important resources. You can’t just substitute the stuff that comes in from nowhere through syndication or the wire. I think at the same time, some of the newer outlets have really beefed up and improved their coverage and made room for criticism. The real problem is in the more specialized art forms — fine arts, classical music, dance and jazz, say. There is a real slowing of critical voices, partly because those art forms have smaller audiences. Newspapers and magazines can say that doesn’t get enough traffic, so we don’t have room for that. To me, that’s especially worrisome. This is the opposite of what newspapers are supposed to do, which is not to try to figure out what people are already interested in and recite that back to them, but to hopefully guide them to something that they should be interested in, connecting potential audiences with more interesting work.

“Then again, not everyone needs a critic. People have been going to movies for more than 100 years now, and probably the vast majority of those people have not read movie reviews or cared what critics thought. But there has always been an important subset that wants to know more, that wants to think about what they’ve seen and what they’re going to see, and wants someone to think along with. I think critics are important, not just as dispensers of consumer advice — though that’s certainly part of it, too — but as trusted voices and companions for people to argue with in your head when you’re going to movies or afterwards.”
~ A. O. Scott