The main events that left their mark in the 1980s, which was the year of change and transformation in all aspects of Turkey, were the September 12 revolution and the seizure of power by the Turkish armed forces and the neo-liberal policy of Turgut Ozal, who came to power in 1983. When we look at the trajectory of Turkish cinema in the 1980s, we can get information about the socio-economic environment of that time.
The 1980s were the year when Turkish cinema was significantly different from Yesilsam in terms of style, style and content.
In the 1980s, Turkish cinema was releasing from the stereotypical cardboard typology of Yesilkam and moving towards a multidimensional, deep character where the individual is foremost. We can say that the “producer-director” method was widely used during this period because the directors who were released from the pressure of the producer got more freedom to create the content of the film and create the characters. During this time, however, the audience began to return to the cinema hall.
The number of films shot during this period is as follows: The number of films, which was 195 in 1979, decreased to 62 in 1980. The number of films will gradually increase in the coming years. 72 in 1981 and 82, 78 in 1983, 124 in 1984, 127 in 85 and 185 in 1986. This increase, which lasted until 1987, when a law was enacted to give foreign capital the exclusive right to distribute and manage the market, began to decline after the law was passed.
With the September 12 coup, not only the right and left conflict, but also sex films were cut like a knife.
Such films, which began with erotic comedy and evolved into pornography, have been replaced by Arabic films. The videocassettes are shot with painful Arabic films for the trend and with a lot of low-level Arabic music stars from the 1970s, which have become widespread in a society parallel to immigration and slum events, and they work great. Video market thing.
The move to transition to a free market system with the decision of January 24, 1980 also ignited the fuse of economic transformation. In these years, the reflection of materialism in society and politics is mostly transferred to the silver screen through comedy films.
Grade jumping, banking incidents, black market, massive bribery incidents, corner turns Here are some examples of themed movies:
The state bird of Memduh (1980),
ertem inflexible banker bilo (1980) and honest (1984),
Eagle Tibet Central Pole Sabbath (1984)
Quotes Yılmaz closet horse (1982) and
Clever Money Rush (1982)
With urbanization comes the discussion of the growing weight of women in business life, the transformation of families, and the problems that modern urban women have experienced in their free and content efforts. It would be unthinkable for a movie to be ignorant about this.
Indeed, in parallel with the rise of the feminist movement in Turkish cinema in the 1980s, women-themed films were widely produced.
Attribution Yılmaz: My (1982), A Sip of Love (1984), A Widow (1985), Her Name Wasfiye (1985), Aaah Belinda (1986)
Faizi Tuna: A Woman, a Life (1985)
Yavuz Turgul: Fahriye Bon (1984).
Halit Refig: My Aunty (1986),
Sheriff sees: Frog (1985), Any Woman (1981),
Om’s Roster: A Broken Love Story (1981)
The story of despair that illustrated the inner world of the individual, including the trauma of the urban marginalized leftist intellectuals who met on September 12 from the mid-1980s, was illustrated.
Chatur Voice (1986),
Cunning Laziness “The Thorny Path” (1986)
You Look at the Sheriff, Sing Your Song (1986),
Zulfu Livanelli Sis (1988),
They Can’t Hit the Bronze Dragon (1989)
Om’s Roaster Night Journey (1988)
In the context of the political film, we can combine Erden Kiral’s films: A Season in Hakkari (1983) and Sheriff Sir’s Eol (1982).
In the apolitical environment of the 1980s compared to the 70s, Turkish cinema does not fail to produce high quality social / political critical films in addition to the ones mentioned above. Let me mention these films in general: Lucky Worker, Toilet Horse, Attack of Interest, Wrestler, Broken Landlord, A Handful of Heaven, Naked Citizens, Horse, Poor, Call, A Handful of Sky, Road to Hope, Salute Band, Rhythm World, Rich Food , Wives. Ward, Homeland Hotel, Mr. Muhsin …
When it comes to 1987, Turgut Ozal in a sense prays for the janaza of Turkish cinema.
With the enactment of the Foreign Capital Incentive Act, US giant companies can enter the Turkish market and open tax-free branches without intermediaries. These big companies, which have monopolized the distribution and operations of the market and cinema halls, create unfair competition. , New theaters are opened, new sound and visual systems are introduced, and theaters are attacked by current foreign films. After a certain stage, domestic films become unavailable for theaters. Production is declining and Turkish cinema, which is already struggling with problems, is going into a deep crisis that will continue throughout the 90s. An example would explain the gravity of the situation. The number of Turkish films found in the 1990s is as follows: 5 in 1990, 15 in 1991, 11 in 1993, 15 in 1994, 10 in 1995, 6 in 1996, and 13 foreign films in 1997. The audience was approximately 10 million in 1990, when the movie was able to find a vision, the number of Turkish movie viewers was 500 thousand. The sad part of the issue is that American movie monopolists transfer money earned from Turkish audiences to their country, even without paying taxes. However, Russia, which has entered into a similar agreement, stipulates that the revenue received from Russia will be used in the agreement.
As I have emphasized from the outset, Turkish cinema has evolved in a claim-free manner, far from state support and large capital contributions.
Over the years, the state has seen cinema as a sector that needs to be controlled and restrained and brought it through the nose of filmmakers through its censorship system. By shooting a tired warrior for TRT, for which a lot of hard work and money was spent like a witch, the state did not stop burning serial movies. As in the case of Turgut Ozal, the state did not hesitate to take steps that would drain the film’s financial resources, which it did not support, and leave the entire movie market in the hands of foreign capital.
Similarly, the film industry is persecuted by the state under copyright law. Copyright law complement, “Only films made after the release date will benefit from this law.” And the same condition does not apply to musical work. Filmmakers cannot enjoy the rights of musicians. This situation is still effective as a great shame of the state.
However, when you look at the European film industry, we see that national cinemas carefully protect states through a variety of approaches.
For example, as we learned from an important article by Hakan Erkilik entitled “Providing state aid to films within the framework of cinema policy”, Ingmar Bergman’s home in Sweden, with the decision taken in 1963 by the Swedish Film Institute, paid the money raised. 10 percent tax on movie tickets in the industry. Similarly, in France, the National Cinema Center collects 11.5 percent tax from movie tickets, 5.5 percent from TV channels and 2 percent from video revenue. It collects this tax in a fund and with this money helps the film archives and cinema educational institutions. . In addition, to break American dominance in the distribution system, it supports the movie theater and distribution industry more than producers.
Turkey, Sweden and France began implementing the tax practice in 2001, albeit in part, in support of cinema. They save 75 percent of the 10 percent entertainment tax deducted from movie tickets as revenue from the Ministry of Culture and transfer it to the film fund. This practice was enacted in 2004. With the law number 5224 enacted in 2004, there was a law for the first time in Turkish cinema. Although there are many aspects of the law that need to be discussed, the number of films shot after this date has increased significantly and the movie industry has been revived.