Hayfilm film studio after Hamo Beknazaryan was privatized in 2005. The state decided not to keep the film production studio and sold it to the SC MEDIA CITY holding, which belongs to the family of the Gafeschyans. The company undertook a number of responsibilities before buying the film studio. These responsibilities include construction of the entire premises, technical furnishing, and digitalization of the Armenian movies, which are the property of the public and in some cases have copyright too.
Following the privatization the Gafeschyan family announced the promising large programs to be done with the film studio. According to them, it would become the largest film studio in the region (with stands, laboratories, hotel complex and modern facilities). The promises were big and very optimistic as they reminded of the beginning of the great future of the Armenian film production. In 2005 the director of the Hayfilm company, renown film producer Ruben Gevorgyants assured that in two years, in 2007 the studio would be entirely reconstructed with all modern facilities and the film production of the Armenian company will be very attractive for the film producers of Iran, Georgia, as well as other countries of the world. He assured that the state company had been wasted and it had to be privatized to give a new breath. Bagrat Sargsyan, the representative of the Gafeschyans’ family and the head of the Armenia TV company said that the Hayfilm would become like Hollywood.
Reminder: the owner paid only USD770k to buy the Hayfilm company from the state and undertook a responsibility to invest minimum 70 million on reconstructing the building, furnishing it with modern technical facilities and making all the film production studios modern. However, during the past 5 years not only nothing has been done in the Hayfilm, but the other rooms became out of order as well. The walls remind us of a war attack. The Gafeschyan family assured that the construction works would finish till 2009.
Five years have passed since the signature of the privatization agreement. During all this time colorful screens have been shown on Armenia TV telling about the nice and intensive construction works at the Hayfilm, stating that new and modern facilities have been bought and brought to the studio. If all these programs are collected and made a screened movie, people would understand that the studio had to be built and finished long ago (the programs also spoke of building panorama elevators, modern facilities, air conditioning and heating systems). However, the situation is not the described optimistic picture and the studio reminds a building after war. In addition, journalists and other unauthorized people are not generally allowed to enter the Hayfilm studio. However, the short movie taken in a semi-confidential condition (we have that film) shows that this film studio, which used to be very active and full of people, is in a very poor situation now. And the information broadcast on the air of Armenia TV was not true. Several days ago they announced that the studio had purchased powerful new light generator enabling to make film recordings without interruptions. In the mentioned program they have shown how the beautiful and nice boxes were being taken out of trucks and taken to the company. However, later it turned out that the light generator has not been used in the Hayfilm since it was purchased and from the very first day it has been used in the Armenia TV company. It appeared in the yard of the Hayfilm studio only on the day of the mentioned TV program. The same thing happened to a number of new video cameras and optical facilities, which were used for the purposes of the private TV company and have not given anything to the film studio.
Where are the promised and long-expected filming studios and laboratory? As Levon Atoyants says, in the past the Hayfilm used to have a laboratory of processing black and white movies, which was a unique laboratory and there was another laboratory like that only in Mosfilm. This laboratory has disappeared; the old one has been taken out and a new one has not been built instead. Nothing remains from the two large stands with special acoustics. “There were filming and other relative facilities there, which were old but in order. All these things were annihilated, they promised us fantastic changes, but nothing came true,” says the renown film cinematographer. As well as the tools and decorations for making cartoons have disappeared or spoilt. Besides the vehicles (including 150 vehicles, the price of which is higher than the price officially paid for the privatization of the entire studio together with the assets and the surrounding territory), they have harmed the professional staff too. The masters and people in charge of making decorations and other relative work have nothing to there now. Before there used to be 275 professionals in the Hayfilm, but now it employs only 6 people, and there are no cinematographers among them.
Certainly in such conditions the new owners have failed to do another responsibility they have undertaken, which is the creation of an adequate environment and condition for film production. The facts don’t need any comments. During the past five years the Hayfilm has not produced any films. All these facts can serve a ground for the government to cancel the privatization agreement of the Hayfilm on the occasion of the upcoming celebration of the 90th anniversary of the Hayfilm.
“Da Vinci” and the Armenian movie production
In the agreement of the film studio privatization it was agreed that the primary responsibility of the new owners would be the digitalization of the national culture belonging film fund. During one year about 400 movies had to be digitalized and saved on discs. Since the privatization of the Hayfilm 47 role play full-length movies have been digitalized, and 58 movies have passed the first phase of digitalization. When speaking of digitalization often the quality is ignored. In 2009 the RA ministry of culture convened a specific ad hoc to check the quality of the movie digitalization. This commission, which consisted of film producers, cinematographers and operators, did not like the work. “The work is done with impermissible approach to the requirements, in the films the technical qualities of the stagers (film producers, operators, composers, etc.), as well as the color and light compositions are changed. The lights and colors are not distributed equally, the shades of black and white are missing, i.e. the black and white movies are dark. The specifications of the color qualities and brightness are not taken into account,” writes the professional conclusion of the committee.
In parallel with this conclusion the Armenia TV broadcast a program saying that the CS films did not choose the easiest way and bought the most expensive facilities and the Da Vinci system. According to specialists, the Da Vinci is not a digitalization but a color tool. Film producer Satik Stepanyan studied at the film prodders institute in Leningrad, and says, “The digitalization process should start from processing the film strip. It should be cleaned with hand, repaired, in case of dry cracks it should be made wet, after which it can be scanned. In order to have high quality digitalization, only the negatives of the film strips should be used, which they failed to do.”
The members of the committee in charge of examining the quality of digitalization agree with this opinion. “During the time as a result of the films getting dry and physical damages of perforation, during the scanning process there were vertical and horizontal strays of the picture (the picture shakes). For digitalizing the films they used the positive film copies, during which the cracks and small damages on the film strip remained on the picture.”
Without any serious professional analysis anybody can see that after the digitalization the picture colors of the Armenian films are not clear. “As a result of losing the balance of black and white, the brightness and contrast, they have lost the deepness of the picture,” concluded the Armenian specialists, who informed the ministry of culture of the pictures, which have been changed with computers artificially and differ from the original.
In many cases the synchronizing of the voice and picture did not match as they did not take into account the consistency of seconds and pictures. The computer works with 25 pictures in a second, and the film strip with 24 pictures in a second. This was the result why the voice and pictures were not synchronized. “In order to get the original voice quality of the movie they have to use the 35mm magnet film, and if the photo phonogram is damaged, the voice will not follow the picture,” says S. Stepanyan.
They did not care about the quality of the movies and the only thing they worried about is the beautiful presentation of the works they did. In the programs shown by the Armenia TV they are praising the work they have done but they don’t say anything about the quality.
The committee also states that very often the Russian copies of the Armenian movies were digitalized, as a result of which the titers were kept in the Russian language.
“Together with specilists people with good taste of color should take part in the digitalization works too, otherwise the films will lose their face. The impression is that during 80 years all the Armenian movies were captured by one operator as all the films have the same face,” says L. Atoyan. People say the digitalization was done by non-professional self-educated people. “The authors’ notions of the movies were not kept,” says film producer Albert Mkrtchyan.
Eventually they have to take into consideration the fact that the movies are spoilt when they are digitalized with one drawn mask. “If the digitalization had to be done this way, then we must confess that we have failed it,” says L.Atoyan.
The film producers who are worried about the future of the Hayfilm say that the only thing that can save the studio is to return back to the government. It should be nationalized and categorized with the national strategic objects such as the Matenadaran (depository of old manuscripts) or the national theatre of opera and ballet (which fortunately are still under the protection of the state). The fact is that the owners of the Hayfilm have breached the provisions of the agreement and are not able to develop the studio. It is very surprising that the state officials are not doing anything and are ignoring the opinions of specialists, and even they don’t try to bring this company back under the state protection.
Nune Hakhverdyan