Back to issue

Full text - PDF


UDC 791.43.01

T. G. Kokhan, PhD, Associate Professor
Institute of Culture Studies of the National Academy of Arts of Ukraine

50–52, Schevchenko boulevard, Kyiv, 01032,Ukraine


The article analyses the position of Ukrainian scientists, represented in their works during the first two decades of the XXI century, when the influence of the basis of the cultural analyses on the development of cinema critics has become appreciable. The accent has been made on new approaches both to the history of Ukrainian cinema in trying to understand personalized approach prevails and to the estimation of subject direction of the films shoot on the boundary of the XX – XXI centuries. It is underlined that film expert's attention was concentrated on the further improvement of notion-categorical apparatus which provides investigations in film critics. It is shown that film science outlines some human problems which having historical cultural traditions, can appear as aesthetical-artistic reference points in creative process. It is declared that the important aspect of the article is dedicated to the fixation of the art studies formation history in the process of cinema development. The role of Danish producer Urban Gad, the author of the book "Cinema, its means and aims" is marked. It is indicated that while constantly shooting films U.Gad summarized his own experience of work in the cinema making in the first European investigation in the cinema studies. It is underlined that taking into consideration the dynamics of cinematograph's development, using of historical and cultural achievements of the past as reference points for modern cinema theory demands caution and correctness. In the context of this thesis systematization and analysis of works of Ukrainian film critics on the activities of national cinematograph's development are presented both actual and expediency. It is shown that using in the cinema study fundamental principles of cultural analysis in particular cross-scientific personalization a composed element of biographic method – to correlate cinema analysis with material of such human sciences as aesthetics, ethics and psychology. It is noticed that taking into consideration collective character of the creation in cinematograph the principle of personalization objectively appraises the contribution of each representative of the cinematic group within the creative process.

Key words: Ukrainian film science, personalized approach, time, area, artistic truth, national context.


1. Braterska-Dron, M.T. (2009). Interpretatzia narizhnyh ponyat moralnisnoi svidomosti v kinomystetzvi: monografia (The interpretation of basic notiores of moral conscience in cinematography). Kyiv, Vydav-vo NPU imeni M. P. Dragomanova.

2. Brjuhovetzka, L. I. (2004). Kino jak svitogljad. Dovshenko і Paradzanov. (Cinema as ideology: Dovshenko and Paradjanov), Kino. Teatr, No 3, 24–29.

3. Brjuhovetzka, O. V. (2011). Kontzeptzia shva v psyhoanalizi і teorii kino (The conception of "seam" in psychoanalysis and in the theory of cinema). Magisterium Kulturologia. Kyiv, NAUKMA, No 42, 9–15.

4. Zubavina, I. B. (2008). Chas i prostir u kinematografii: monografiya (Time and area in cinematography). Kyiv, Tchek.

5. Lukjanetz, V. S. (2002). Prostir i chas (Area and time). Filosofsky entzyklopedychnyi slovnyk (FES): dovidkove vydannya. Kyiv, Abris.

6. Musienko, O.S. (2018). Modernizm & avangard: ednist protyleshnostei. Kinematograf XX stolitja: monografia (Modernism & advance quard: the unity of contrasts. Cinematograph of the XX-th century). Kyiv, Logos.

7. Pogrebnjak, G. P. (2003).Tvorchii ersperyment v avtorskomu kinematografi (Creational experiment in author's cinematography). Mystetztvoznavstvo Ukrainy: zb. nauk. pratz. No 3, 207 – 214.

8. Sabadash, Y. S. (2019). Kulturotvorchy potentzial mystetztvoznavstva: do postanovky problemy (Cultural – creational potential of study of art to the problem's putting). Suchasna culturologia aktualizatzia theoretyko-praktychnych vymiriv: kolectyvna monographiya. Lira, 164–183.

9. Sobutsky, M. A. (2005). Kino jak sposib filosofuvannja (Cinema as a mode of philosophic thinking). Kino. Teatr, No 3, 8–10.

10. Trymbach, S.V. (2007). Olexandr Dovshenko: zagybel bogiv monographiya (Olexandr Dovshenko: god's death. The identification of the author in national time – area). Vinnytza, GLOBUS – PRES.

11. Cherkov, G. A. (2008). Problema pravdy u suchasnomu igrovomu kinematografi (The problem of truth in modern feature cinematography). avtoref. dis. ... kand. mistectvoznav., spec. 17.00.04. Kyiv.

© T. G. Kokhan 2020