Dilar Diken YÜCEL

Ümit Ünal and “Oda” Films: 9, Ara, Nar

Auteur is a concept which has kept cinema history busy since the World War II and which still maintains its debatable quality today. The concept in question is used as “the director who is the creator of the film”, “the director who uses the receiver as a pen” in cinema literature. So is it possible to make auteur director analogy for director Ümit Ünal who is analyzed his three films in the scope of the study? In this study the answer to this question is investigated through the cinematography of Ümit Ünal, who has director and screenwriter. Ümit Ünal started his film adventure during Yeşilçam period and stepped into his career as a screenwriter. In time, he started to film his own scripts. The fact that Ünal was both a screenwriter and a director is only one of the reasons why he is selected for researching in this study. Because with the low budget films he shot, Ünal put his signature under important successes such as original films which were far away from the understanding of the mainstream cinema and he was deemed of worthy of many prizes. In this study 9 (2002), Ara (2008) and Nar (2011) films which are referred to as “Oda” Films and accepted as a trilogy due to their common qualities by Ünal have been analyzed in the framework of auteur theory. During the evaluation of the films, short fragments were taken from the films to provide visual references for auteur theory. A sociological and historical method of analysis has been adopted in film analysis, and technical features, personal style and internal meaning elements set by Andrew Sarris as the rings of the auteur theory have been identified as the main criteria. In addition to these criteria, evaluations regarding the points where the films meet art, common themes, metaphors used, contradictions, and the reception of the films by the audience have also been done. In consideration of the evaluations, it is concluded that the director can be qualified as an auteur due to the common themes he used, his technical competence, and his personal touch.

PDF

___

Wollen, P. (2014). Sinemada Göstergeler ve Anlam. (Çev. Aracagök, Z. Ve Doğan, B.). İstanbul: Metis Yayınevi.
Uygun, Z.M., Sevindi, K.( 2011). Ümit Ünal: Hayatlarımızı Kurmak İçin Bazı Şeyleri Görmezden Geliyoruz. Hayalperdesi 25.
Teksoy, R.(2005). Rekin Teksoy’un Sinema Tarihi. Birinci Cilt. İstanbul: Oğlak Yayıncılık.
Stam, R. (2014). Sinema Teorisine Giriş. (Çev. Salman, S. ve Asatekin, Ç.). Ayrıntı Yayınları, İstanbul.
Sözen, M. (2013). Sinemasal Dramaturgi ve Örnek Bir Çözümleme. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Güzel Sanatlar Fakültesi Hakemli Dergisi (11).
Scott, J. (1995). Tahakküm ve Direniş Sanatları. (Çev. A. Türker). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Öztürk, S., Uğur, G. (2016). Ümit Ünal ile Söyleşi. Sinefilozofi (2).
Onaran, O. (1997). Türk Sinemasında Anlatı Üstüne Bir Deneme, Onat Kutlar’a Armağan Sinema Yazıları Kitabı İçinde Bir Bölüm. Ankara: Doruk Yayınları.
Monaco, J. (2006). Yeni Dalga. (Çev. E. Yılmaz). İstanbul: Artı Bir Kitap.
Kundakçı, F.S. (2013). Heteroseksizm ve Ötekileştirme Eleştirisi. Liberal Düşünce (71).
Canbazoğlu, C. (08.06.1993). Yeşilçam’da Senaryo Yazarı Olmak. Cumhuriyet, sayfa 2.
Büker, S., Topçu, G. (2010). Sinema: Tarih-Kuram-Eleştiri. İstanbul: Kırmızı Kedi Yayınevi.
Butler, A.M. (2011). Film Çalışmaları. (Çev. A. Toprak). İstanbul: Kalkedon Yayınları.
Bazin, A. (1966). Çağdaş Sinemanın Sorunları. (Çev. N. Özön). Ankara: Bilgi Yayın Evi.
Ayraç Dergisi (102. Sayı), “Bana Göre Kıyamet” Nisan 2018, İstanbul.
Altyazı Dergisi (180. Sayı), “İntikam Yemeği” Şubat 2018, İstanbul.