Films | Mirac Atabey

Here is my filmography presented in an unofficial and non-chronological manner that is accompanied by my thoughts.

2020s

A Hero of Our Time

2023, Turkey, 120 min

A Hero of Our Time (2023) is my debut feature that took eight years to complete, from the first idea to the final edit. It was shot in Pazar, Rize, a small town surrounded by the Black Sea and endless tea plantations in northeastern Turkey, home to me and the Laz People, an indigenous ethnic group of the Caucasus.

The film draws inspiration from Lermontov‘s namesake novel, specifically his main character, Pechorin, and more precisely, Lermontov’s brilliant mention of him in the book’s preface: A portrait built up of all our generation’s vices. And my own central character, Mert, likewise reflects a negative generational portrait in contemporary Turkey. He is a mirror of a generation that is resistant to taking responsibility. And, of course, his reflection is a pretty brutal look at both myself and the rest of my generation whom I once considered heroes of our time: A misled tribe that was deceived by the myths of personal development and stuck in the spaces between their envisioned world and the one they inhabit.

Interactive Cinema Language

This film features 32 static scenes, each captured in a single take. And these scenes aren’t just about what’s on-screen, they’re windows into the unseen world, where actions flow just beyond the frames which are largely guided by the auditory of the film, co-designed with the sound designer, Cenker Kokten. They invite the audience to construct a world in their mind and connect the dots to form characters into a narrative. I’ve experimented with this technique in my short films to adopt interactive cinema language. And now, am now excited to present its refined version in this full-length feature.

Since I do not prioritize storytelling or define myself primarily as a storyteller, I also view this method as a middle ground between traditional storytelling and a non-narrative style I actually adore more (I mean creating an atmospheric setting without following any particular story).

You can also think of this film as a painting collection. But there might be missing pieces, hidden narratives, or events that aren’t what they appear to be. I’ve curated a collection of moments, but I don’t expect the audience to accept it wholly. I don’t demand an emotional transaction or identification with characters. Instead, I invite the audience to be part of the creative team. Even if one thinks that I made a judgment on a character or event, it has to be our collaborative act. So I actually address the film to individuals who are potentially my collaborators.

And, let me mention my absolute collaborators in creating this incomplete narrative: Mert Yasar, with whom I developed the characters when the idea first arose, and Emre Halisdemir who made critical contributions to the plot structure from the shootings to the last day of editing.

Visuals

As you can notice from the stills, my cinematography differs from the drama of high-contrast cinematic visuals. I prefer flatter visuals, where shadows and highlights blend, and the focus is allocated equally to all corners of the frame. Think of it as genre paintings such as the works of Jan Steen and Pieter Bruegel the Elder. You might also spot some visual resemblances with the artistic flavors of Swedish director Roy Andersson.

Here is Jan Steen’s The Dancing Couple (1663). I used his paintings as references for indoor settings, particularly for framing.

Here is Bruegel’s Fall of Icarus (1560). I used his paintings as references for outdoor settings, particularly his use of color palettes. To create depth with colors, I followed his approach of using brown, green, and blue from the foreground to the background. As Bruegel did in the painting, I placed my camera slightly above my characters and looked down at them, which also allowed me to capture the depth of the landscape.

I borrowed not only Bruegel’s visual style but also his narrative approach for some of my scenes. Bruegel often subtly embeds his main subject within a larger panorama (look at the fallen Icarus’s legs in the bottom right). This is a clever technique that can easily be overlooked while the audience observes everything else in the painting. It is a subtle narrative style and gives space to the audience to make their input. Similarly, I used some specific visual elements in the film as narrative devices and left them to the audience to discover and connect them. But they are not symbols or metaphors, they maintain their concrete existence while having a role in the narrative.

I must mention the colorist, Burak Turan, whose skills perfectly align with my style, as he reflected my intentions in the visuals.

Technical Details

The art of cinema started as a technical issue, and it will always remain that way. If a filmmaker says technical details don’t matter, it doesn’t make the technique less important; it simply means they are letting someone else handle it. In other words, they are being directed by others. For me, what you see and hear on screen is also about the tools I use. So here’s a quick overview of the technical aspects behind this film.

Camera and Lighting

One of the most important technical elements in creating my visual style is the lens I use. I work with a single wide-angle lens in my films that has maximum sharpness and minimal distortion at the edges. In this film, I used a 16mm lens on an APS-C sensor camera. However, full-frame or medium-format cameras would be more suitable for my visual style, as they allow for larger focal lengths with less distortion in wide-angle lenses.

I usually light the scenes from a single strong source and a single direction. The direct angle I use makes the image as flat as possible without high contrast. When I use artificial light, I always give a natural reason for the source of the light. For example, a car headlight or a house chandelier. The real light may not come from there, but all light must have a reason. I might, for instance, strengthen sunlight with artificial light, where the source is still the sun. If I can’t find a reason for the light, I prefer not to use it, as it spoils the natural appearance of my frames.

Since I worked with single static shots in this film, I created all the lighting effects during the color correction stage. Together with the colorist, we processed the image as if we were creating a painting. Sometimes, we spent an entire day working on a single frame.

Dialogues and Sound Design

I think one of the biggest issues in world cinema is dialogue clarity. With an emphasis on natural sound design and prominent ambient sounds, the dialogue in many films becomes almost inaudible. So, I approached the dialogue in this film like a Hollywood production: 80% of it was dubbed, with all the actors dubbing their own lines. I achieved this by having the actors repeat their original lines and using the same equipment that I used during the shooting in the dubbing sessions. This allowed us to blend the dubbed and original sounds seamlessly. My goal was for the dialogue to be clear, with ambient sounds highlighted only when necessary.

So, the characters’ voices are heard very clearly, even though they are far away. And the dialogues are not designed to sound like natural live recordings, in contrast to the naturalness of the visuals and acting. Thus, I have disproved the idea that the camera was simply placed and shot much like in a documentary film. What you see may still appear simple, like a documentary, but achieving that simplicity is a very complex task. Everything you see and hear is full-time fiction.

Another thing is that we chose not to use location-specific ambient sounds so that the film would not be tied to the shooting location itself but rather to the world we created within it. As a result, most of the elements, including sound effects and foley, were sourced externally. This approach allowed me to create a unique soundscape for the film, not one based on the shooting location. It also gave me the freedom to make more creative choices during sound design and even rewrite the screenplay based on the soundscapes.

Posters

We collaborated with illustrator Isin Fidan to create the poster image that features our hero in the exact replication of Anthony van Dyck‘s Charles Louis, the King of Bohemia, with slight modifications. The image also resembles Lermontov’s iconic portrait which is a popular choice for his book cover designs.

Rather than just a reflection of the film, I wanted the poster to become a narrative device, specifically a red herring (intentional misleading): a subtle diversion for the audience that leads them to unexpected interpretations. So the idea was to depict him not just as he appears in the film. Actually, I intended to use the original piece as a reference for a unique approach. However, I realized my admiration lay not in the appearance of a 17th-century king but in Van Dyck’s style, which leads us to imitate this grandmaster. I don’t know what Isin feels about it, but I welcome that guilt with pride.

You can access the high-resolution versions of the posters on our Patreon page.

Trailer

Where can I watch the film?

You can access the film on our Patreon page.

Check out the Screening Calendar for the upcoming screenings.

Watch excerpts on YouTube.

Theatrical Release

The film was theatrically released in five cities (Rize, Trabzon, Izmir, Istanbul, and Malatya) in Turkey on May 3, 2024. I am proud that we distributed it through our own distribution company based in Rize, despite all the obstacles from the film industry.

Find the trailer for the Turkish Theatrical Release here.

Screenings

10th October 2023, Antalya Golden Orange Film Festival, Antalya, Turkey: The scheduled screening got canceled, just like the whole festival itself, all thanks to the political chaos in my country and a herd mentality (solidarity they say) among filmmakers.

So, it all started when the festival removed a film (I will not mention its title to avoid further advertising) from the competition at the request of the Ministry of Culture in Turkey, which is one of the sponsors of the festival. The Ministry claimed the film contained terrorist propaganda. Subsequently, the jury issued an ultimatum of resigning as the Ministry’s demand was perceived as censorship. The jury wanted the film back, meanwhile, filmmakers issued another ultimatum of withdrawing their films from the festival. And, when the festival announced that it had taken back the film, the Ministry withdrew its sponsorship from the festival. Absurdly, the film was removed from the selection by the festival once more, but with nearly all filmmakers already having withdrawn their films, the festival found itself without any entries and it was canceled.

As I know that all institutions all over the world may have sensitivities on certain issues, I consider such conflicts to be typical (they are often executed with the means of cancel culture, whereas in our context, ultimatums tend to be more prevalent). So, my interest in this matter was the filmmakers’ point of view rather than the Ministry’s or the festival’s approach. In general, my thoughts on censorship align with Abbas Kiarostami‘s views. To me, deliberately provoking authority is a shortsighted approach and a cheap form of advertisement through victimization. Filmmakers should have the wisdom to manage all forms of censorship, and their way of struggle must be intelligent, creative, and perhaps strategic. By adopting a similar approach, Iranian filmmakers have created a new form of cinema under authoritarian pressures (those who understand Turkish or Iranian, check out this video to listen to Kiarostami’s opinions on censorship and dealing with authority).

So, I had foreseen the potential cancellation of the festival at that time and advised filmmakers to take a more creative, rather than destructive approach to prevent it. I suggested to attend the festival, as our presence, even without a jury or competition, would honor the efforts of both the film crews and the festival staff. We could undertake more impactful actions, and meanwhile, we could have time to evaluate and understand the situation’s underlying truth more accurately. But filmmakers were already very dedicated as if they were waiting for this moment. So, they copied the jury’s stance and withdrew their films. But I did not. Personally and principally, I don’t prefer to partake in collective actions that do not involve productivity. I believe real solidarity is achieved through production and creation. This is something I have learned exactly through filmmaking.

Of course, I understand that some of the filmmakers’ decisions were emotional, as I can empathize with the sense of injustice they feel. However, those activist reactions seemed to be more political rather than emotional. You know, people often seek to save their name based on their political stance and they act in accordance with it without considering the events or facts. I wonder why those filmmakers did not also boycott most European Film Festivals for excluding innocent Russian filmmakers due to the Russian-Ukrainian war. Those festivals have long overlooked Russian culture in favor of boycotts while they have prioritized specific groups and trendy topics, as they often do (nowadays, they show similar favoritism or discrimination against Israelis or (Pro)Palestinians, depending on their stance). In any case, it seems that actions opposing authority in Turkey sell better for our filmmakers, they garner more attention from their target audience. So, in fact, their actions mostly align with opportunist and even capitalist motivations. They tend to appeal to specific segments of society with their boycott because it sells (ironically even the anti-capitalist discourses are preferred because IT SELLS).

Of course, like everyone, I also have capitalist tendencies. My films are my capital, and I naturally tend to seek potential profits from them, even though I perceive them as art. There is nothing wrong with it. But, this doesn’t imply that I’ll do anything for financial gain or any opportunity. I try to be rational and reasonable at the same time. Filmmakers assumed that the Ministry was intentionally attempting to ruin the festival. In fact, this is the same Ministry that has sponsored the festival with the same management for years. What reason would they have to fabricate such claims this year? I understand that we can attribute the source of all these problems to authorities with our conspiracy theories, but there is no point in wasting time on it. Perhaps it would be beneficial to consider their actions with empathy. You know, if you claim to be smart, it is your responsibility to empathize with the other party with whom you have a conflict and devise solutions accordingly. If you can’t do this, perhaps you are not as smart as you believe (or perhaps you find it more beneficial to be a professional victim than a filmmaker).

To me, the festival had to be held no matter what. But, no. Now, I am afraid that this incident will increase the pressure on pre-selection committees. They may start excluding films they find problematic beforehand as they will be afraid of similar conflicts and potential cancellations of their festivals. So, when censorship is in place, we won’t even be aware of it (this is actually already happening all over the world through favoritism, gatekeeping, and backstage politics). Anyway, authority or not, it doesn’t matter which side it came from, filmmakers increased fear with their stance. Ironically, they view it as a positive development and take pride in it. However, they couldn’t escape being involved in a process that led to a disaster for the film and festival crews, as well as the audience. So, just like we face challenges and develop creative solutions in the process of making a film, we faced a similar task in this particular incident. And, to me, it was clear that boycotting, declaring cliché statements, and spreading hashtags were not methods of creating a solution.

As you can imagine, my independent stance on this issue has led to a backlash against me. I am labeled as an authority defender. Surely, there is no need to fuss about it, I accept this as a normal part of my experiences. Interestingly, the responses from individuals or institutions in Turkey seem more predictable and, in a way, more innocent by comparison. They seem just regular social justice warriors. I must say, I have encountered far more cruel and insidious reactions in other countries, including those that are considered more democratic and diverse.

(Note: In a broader context, I believe the predominant issue of filmmakers today is not censorship at all, it is all about self-censorship which I discussed in this post.)

9th December 2023, Bosphorus Film Festival, Istanbul, Turkey: The screening took place at the historical Atlas 1948 cinema. From a technical standpoint, I was highly satisfied. Attendance was low, and approximately half of the theatre was unoccupied (typically, this festival was also being protested by the godfathers of the independent film industry because of another political issue, so it did not attract much attention). However, the audience in attendance showed enthusiasm. There were even a few film enthusiasts who had seen my previous short films and closely followed my works. The festival was well organized. We won the Best First Film Award in the competition.

From left to right: Berat Efe Pullu, Mirac Atabey, Mert Yasar, Emre Halisdemir, Tugba Guven Kurt, Nurhan Halisdemir, Gokhan Baris, Mustafa Kandemir, Hayrettin Halisdemir, Nurettin Kadioglu, Emine Kadioglu, Emrah Gulsen, Hatice Demircioglu

24th March 2024, Sinematek/Sinema Evi, Istanbul, Turkey: This screening was organized by FilmKoop. It was at Sinematek/Sinema Evi, a special place that has the cinematheque culture that you may encounter around the world. Despite its small size, the theater has good quality. As usual, the attendance was low, but, this screening hosted remarkable figures of Turkish Cinema, including Nuri Bilge Ceylan. Following the screening, we had a conversation, and their feedback was unrealistically positive and sincere. You can watch the English-subtitled Q&A session here.

3rd Mary 2024, CineGalaxy, Rize, Turkey: The screening in Rize, where our film was filmed and our company is based, was part of the theatrical release of our film in Turkey. The film theater was spacious, comfortable, and of higher quality than average. I couldn’t have imagined being able to experience our film in this quality in Rize. The attendance exceeded our expectations, and the passion of the audience was encouraging as most of their feedback was very insightful. This event might be a first for our city, which typically doesn’t have much exposure to such film events which are broadly centralized in Istanbul or other big cities.

From left to right: Gokhan Baris, Nurettin Kadioglu, Emine Kadioglu, Mirac Atabey, Yilmaz Atabey, Evrim Cervatoglu, Ahmet Mutlu

10th October 2024, Antalya Golden Orange Film Festival, Antalya, Turkey: After missing our opportunity to screen the film because of the festival’s cancellation the previous year, we went to Antalya as special screening guests exactly one year later, on the same scheduled day as the previous year. Technically, it wasn’t my favorite screening, the Aspendos Theatre had an echo that made the sound pretty absurd, and, true to tradition, attendance was low. Despite that, I have two memorable anecdotes from the event. First, our line producer, Gokhan Baris, made a fantastic comparison: Watching the film again was like gazing into an aquarium. Every time you look, you spot new details, just like noticing a different fish. I love that analogy. The second moment was with a German audience who likened our film to old adventure games. We chatted about my all-time favorite, Monkey Island, and how LucasArts games influenced my visual style. If you want to hear more about our experience, you can watch the English-subtitled Q&A and festival impressions here.

From left to right: Gokhan Baris, Mirac Atabey, Emrah Gulsen, Emre Halisdemir

Festival Circuit

As the festival circuit period ends, I want to share a little note. I am often asked why the film was not featured more widely in film festivals. “Did you submit to Festival X?” Yes, I have submitted to most festivals. Some programmers even contacted me personally to watch and evaluate the film. But, the outcome was consistent: rejection or silence.

Of course, festivals are not the only measure of a film’s merit, many are just promotional platforms that prioritize trendy topics and personalities. But, I still did not expect to be ignored to such an extreme and absurd degree. So, it is a clear disappointment in my case.

But, as a student of Marcus Aurelius, I welcome failure just as much as success. So, here’s a list of film festivals that rejected my film:

Berlin, Cannes, Locarno, Venice, Toronto, San Sebastian, Busan, Tokyo, 3 Continents, Manheim, Kathmandu, Rotterdam, Sundance, Vilnius, Sofia, Fribourg, Trento, IndieLisboa, Seattle, Tribeca, Karlovy Vary, Sarajevo, Bergamo, Jeonju, Transilvania, Shanghai, Valdarno, Valencia, Sopot, Batumi, Kosice, Skip City, Silk Road, Turkei / Deutschland, Munich Turkish

Apart from them, I submitted the film to the non-competitive sections of the Istanbul and Adana film festivals, as it did not meet the criteria for the competition sections, but it was rejected. Additionally, I withdrew the film from consideration at Tallinn Black Nights and MedFilm because of the possibility of premiering at another festival (yes, they can’t always make the final decision, but I know they didn’t like it, as they always want to have the last word).

Set Photo

People standing, from left to right: Melike Kal, Okan Kal, Kadir Vatandas, Ahmet Canbaz, Selahattin Cerrah, Evrim Cervatoglu, Ahmet Mutlu, Dursunali Oral, Emrah Gulsen, Mustafa Kandemir, Emre Halisdemir, Hayrettin Halisdemir, Gokhan Baris, Ebru Terzi, Mirac Atabey

People sitting, from left to right: Osman Zafer Demircelik, Yilmaz Atabey

Credits

The list of people that I collaborated with: Emre Halisdemir, Mert Yasar, Gokhan Baris, Yilmaz Atabey, Ugur Telatar, Emrah Gulsen, Mustafa Kandemir, Elvan Canakoglu, Evrim Cervatoglu, Ahmet Mutlu, Berat Efe Pullu, Nurhan Halisdemir, Hatice Demircioglu, Tugba Guven Kurt, Cemil Kutsal Biber, Erkan Ataman, Kemal Erman, Nurettin Kadioglu, Emine Kadioglu, Mert Naiboglu, Emrah Birben, Danis Sezgin, Okan Kal, Melike Kal, Ebru Terzi, Ali Eren Guven, Burak Turan, Utku Urlu, Cenker Kokten, Alper Ozsen, Ali Oren, Okan Kal, Isin Fidan, Melissa Lara Clissold

You can find details regarding their roles on our production company’s website.

Contributions: Antalya International Film Forum Script Development and Project Design Workshop, San Sebastian Film Festival Work in Progress Europa Selection.

Financial supports: Ministry of Culture and Tourism in Turkey Scriptwriting and Production Fund, Malatya International Film Platform Script Development Award, Meeting Point – Vilnius Lithuania Work in Progress Award, MedFilm International Film Festival Work in Progress Award.

Private funders: Hasan Kadioglu, Dogan Akaroglu, Ali Yasar Kahya, Suleyman Kesimal, Akin Kemal Memisoglu, Turan Karahan, Neset Cakir, Nurettin Ince, Adem Kanber, Leyla Veyisoglu, Yahya Terzi, Zeki Kaboglu, Pazar Ticaret ve Sanayi Odasi, Pazar Ziraat Odasi, 53-8 Cay Ekiciler Kooperatifi, Pazar 4 No’lu Motorlu Tasiyicilar Kooperatifi, Selale Restoran, Ozben AVM, Yaylaci Ticaret

Patreon supporters: Canan Pehlivanoglu, Halil Ibrahim Karaca, Kaveh Vares, Maxwell McIntosh, Rezan Ugurlu, Ezgi Coskun, Serkan Yellice, Oguz Tarhan, Elena Kuznetsova, Mei Ling Li, Cemal Aksu, Luka Vidmar, Gabor Nagy, Amira Zayed, Can Ertan, Ercole Caruso

(Once the picture was locked, we couldn’t include all the supporters in the film credits. So, I have specified the rest of them here. If you still don’t spot your name, that means you’ll be in upcoming projects.)

+ Our $10,000 in-kind post-production award got lost in translation somewhere in Kyiv:

We won this in-kind award at the Boat Meeting Co-Production Market in Ukraine. And we contacted the sponsor company, Star Media, to use it. We asked for color correction, but they said that they could only provide a studio, not a colorist. Next, we went for Foley, and they confirmed it (btw dealing with them was like waiting for a snail that could send a single reply to e-mails every two weeks). After two months, we were all set for the Foley recording, but they said that they couldn’t do it. Their excuse: They have recording facilities for TV projects, not for cinema. In fact, the Foley recording doesn’t change according to project type that much. They differ at the mixing stage.

Anyway, whether it is true or not, it would have been better to know that upfront, but no. And this whole slow-paced e-mail traffic messed with our timeline. They even absurdly offered that they could help us with our next project. To me, it’s like ordering disappointments beforehand. So, we gave it up. I reached out to festival managers regarding this issue but they remained silent. Even I reported it to FIAPF, but they said they couldn’t do a thing.

Now, because of this conflict with a Ukrainian organization (ironically, the sponsor company is from Russia), I can observe that there is skepticism over our project from festivals that declared unconditional support for Ukraine. Sure, I’m worried about the war, but that doesn’t change the fact that the Molodist Film Festival, or Boat Meeting, or rather the sponsor company, defrauded us. All that messed up our financial plan and post-production schedule. And the war wasn’t even on the horizon when all this happened.

So, it appears to be a challenge to deal with those festivals that demand a high level of political correctness on certain issues from filmmakers. Some even can’t bear to hear of Lermontov‘s name, simply because he is from Russia. You know, in the old days, there were religious figures who condemned people as sinners, and today, it is likely to encounter their equivalents, especially in the world of art and culture.

They give you such a piece of paper as an award, but when it is time to deliver the service, you are treated like a dog given a bone. Many of these are just advertising campaigns for festivals and companies. Even if you can use their services, they might deliver poor work and then discard you.

2010s

Permutations

2016, Portugal, 24 min

In 2016, as I approached the final step of my master’s degree in documentary filmmaking at the University of Lusofna in Portugal, I found myself adrift in a sea of uncertainty regarding my graduation project. Back then, I believed that cinema should stand alone as pure audiovisual art, with notions like subject, theme, dramatic structure, conflict, and characters seen as intruding viruses from other disciplines. Therefore, I committed to a certain audiovisual form and style while neglecting all else.

I aimed to capture painting-like static shots similar to Roy Andersson‘s. But I wanted to infuse real-life locations and real people instead of the studio backdrop he chose. My goal wasn’t to replicate reality but to paint an artistic aura onto the actual world around me. So, I wanted to convert my daily surroundings into my artistic medium. And I started the work without any predefined concepts. I let the subject and its themes organically emerge as I worked on the film (that sounds a bit like James Benning‘s early works, but I hadn’t discovered him yet at that time).

Making of

In the Portuguese town of Ericeira, I found the perfect playground for my project. Along the Atlantic coast, this place welcomes surfers from across Europe every weekend and quiets down during weekdays. So, I got the chance to turn my vision into a film, as the town itself became my open studio.

Throughout the project, I followed strict guidelines:

I committed to using images taken in a single, static shot with a 20mm lens.
I split the frames horizontally into thirds: the near, the middle, and the far. And, into every part, I embedded precise visual elements and added depth to the space.
The depth of field always remained sharp.

I focused on the repetitive incidents within the chosen frames. Picture this: A pair of dogs fenced in a house’s courtyard. They howl at those who pass by. It is a daily affair and a repetitive routine. I noted these kinds of events and then made up parallel incidents that could harmonize with them. As an illustration, envision this: The dogs howl at a motorcyclist passing by. But this motorcyclist is an actor I employed. So with similar strategies, I captured some daily life scenes.