Gulnara Abikeyeva: Kazakhskaia novaia volna

Almaty: Tselinny Centre of Contemporary Culture, 2021, ISBN 978–601–06–7425–7, 400 pp. 

Author

Nikolai Domashev

Abstract

The present review examines the book on the nature of the Kazakh New Wave edited by Gulnara Abikeyeva and provides an overview of how this cultural phenomenon entered the global scene. In particular, it discusses a number of factors that ensured the Kazakh New Wave’s rise to fame, including institutional support, rigorous training, and passionate practitioners.

Keywords

Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Kazakh New Wave, strategies for success in arts, Soviet Union, Soviet cinema, post-Soviet cinema, history of regional film industry, sociology of creativity, anthropology of breakthroughs

A perspicacious reader can follow the wonderful book by Gulnara Abikeyeva on many levels. On one level, it stands as a powerful witness to momentous transformations which quaked the Soviet Union in the second half of the 1980s. The centrifugal forces have been at work, tearing up the fabric of economic, social and cultural ties. The centre still had illusions of control, while the periphery rapidly descended into despair. On another level, it represents a stunning visual feast with 177 illustrations. They include not just still frames from the cited films, but also, remarkably, behind-the-scenes photographs, which provide a good idea of how film crews managed their tasks. In cinéma vérité-like tradition, the reader confronts the explicit deconstruction of the films’ purported reality. Yet, on another level, the book legitimises cinema mythology by demonstrating how the magnificent six of the Kazakh New Wave took the world by storm. They put their country on the global map. They made international festivals eagerly wait for their upcoming releases. They redefined their national cinema once and for all. The author of eleven books about cinema and the Chevalier of the French Order of Arts and Letters, Abikeyeva gracefully introduces us to their recipes for success via thought-provoking interviews, which she mostly conducted herself in the second half of 2020–first half of 2021. This recipe book includes censorship hurdles, mouthwatering manti and an unwavering commitment to presenting unique creative viewpoints. It is my intention to demonstrate that the reviewed book should be read as a checklist for success relevant for other cinema professionals wherever and whenever they live.

The book consists of thirteen major parts and has a highly original structure, with historical and critical essays (odd chapters) alternating with interviews with Kazakh New Wave directors (even chapters). Thus, the first chapter traces the beginnings of the Kazakh New Wave; the third narrates the opinions of Moscow film critics regarding the Kazakh New Wave phenomenon; the fifth sheds light on the way the film critics outside of the Soviet Union perceived the new films from Kazakhstan; the seventh elucidates the reactions of the film critics in Kazakhstan regarding the renaissance of their own cinema; the ninth reflects on various international film festivals which welcomed innovative motion pictures from Kazakhstan; the eleventh contains two critical pieces outlining Russian (written by Andrei Plakhov specifically for this book) and U.S. (by Kent Jones, from 2003) perspectives on what the New Wave has been and has become; and the final, the thirteenth chapter, presents two critical pieces, both written specifically for this book, delving into the European (by Eugenie Zvonkine) and Asian (by Philip Cheah) perception of the Kazakh New Wave thirty years after its initial splash. The second, fourth, sixth, eighth, tenth, and twelfth chapters are interviews with Rashid Nugmanov, Serik Aprymov Abai Karpykov, Ardak Amirkulov, Amir Karakulov, and Darezhan Omirbaev, respectively. Every interview block comes with an exhaustive filmography, including such important information as premiere date, participation in festivals, awards received as well as fragments of critical reviews written in different years.

But what was the Kazakh New Wave exactly? The core of this group of successful film directors consisted of six people whose interviews are featured in even chapters. One can even argue that their teacher, the person who taught them the art of cinematography, Sergei Soloviov, should also be included in this group. Starting from 1988, they released a number of highly acclaimed films that performed very well at diverse international film festivals: from Venice to Montreal, to Tehran, to Tokyo. These films collectively amassed more than 100 awards. One dimension of the group’s success was that their films resonated with the viewers because of unique storylines. The other dimension lies in opening up Kazakhstan first to Soviet viewers and later to the outside world as a country rich in meanings, meditations, and metaphors. In this way, the filmmakers contend, their works helped to rebuild the fractured identities of ordinary Kazakhs and contributed to nation-building once the Soviet Union disintegrated. Abikeyeva persuasively argues that the New Wave concluded in 2001, when the film Jol / The Road (Darezhan Omirbaev, 2001, Kazakhstan) premiered.

The guru behind the Kazakh New Wave, Soloviov, was a maverick himself. When he was just thirty years old, his film Sto dnei posle detstva / One Hundred Days After Childhood (Sergei Soloviov, 1975, Soviet Union) received the Silver Bear for Best Director at the 25th annual Berlin International Film Festival. His next film, Spasatelʹ / The Lifeguard (Sergei Soloviov, 1980, Soviet Union) received the Special Jury Mention at the Venice Film Festival. So, when the already acclaimed director decided to shoot his next film Chuzhaia belaia i riaboi / Wild pigeon (Sergei Soloviov, 1986, Soviet Union), he was certain of getting the official approval. However, censorship interfered, and he was forbidden to shoot it. Nevertheless, he found a creative solution: to shoot the movie entirely in the Kazakh language in Kazakhstan. The story goes that, disoriented in local culture, Soloviov wanted to try a famous local dish, and the hosts treated him to the delectable home-made manti, which made him feel completely at home (24). This was the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

The Chairman of the State Committee of Cinematography of Kazakhstan, Olzhas Suleimenov, later asked Soloviov to train an unusual batch of aspiring film students from Kazakhstan. To be eligible, the potential students had to go through an extremely rigorous two-stage selection process: first in their own republic and then at the Gerasimov Institute of Cinematography (VGIK) in Moscow, the oldest film school in the world. This was the defining difference from the way students from the Soviet Union Republics usually came to study in Moscow. Instead of matriculating into VGIK after entrance exams, the future New Wavemakers had to prove their artistic vision and passion twice. Soloviov’s main criterion for student selection was that they had to spark an interest to demonstrate their talent. The potential students had another defining feature. By the time of their application, they would have already obtained a higher education. Additionally, they would have possessed at least some professional expertise, since they would have been in the workforce for some time. Yet, these students longed for something more, for something greater, for the chance to be different. This explains why they answered the call for applications to the Institute. So far, we can see that creativity while dealing with bureaucracy, delicious food, signs of talent, and yearning for the out-of-ordinary experience are all indicators of a successful cultural collaboration team. What other ingredients are there?

Intensive training over a period of three years (usually VGIK students spent five years at their alma mater) has certainly played its part, too. Amir Karakulov recalled (281-282) how he always had to get to the Institute by eight in the morning in order to watch scheduled screenings of world-renowned masters of cinema: Robert Bresson, Jean-Luc Godard, Pier Paolo Pasolini, and others. The Kazakh New Wavemakers reminisced in their interviews that they obtained consistently abundant feedback from their principal teacher as well as from other teaching staff. Importantly, the feedback was honest and targeted: students’ strengths and weaknesses would become a subject to either specific praise or substantive criticism.

That three-year experimental program was also unique in another aspect: the aspiring film directors, screenwriters, cinematographers, and production designers studied together, which dramatically enhanced teamwork and laid the foundation for future collaborations. The unprecedented and generous mutual agreement between the State Committees of Cinematography of Kazakhstan and the Soviet Union respectively, guaranteed the students the right and the resources to make their debut full-length films so that they could fulfil final graduation requirements.

Nugmanov, one of the most influential New Wavemakers, whose first degree was in architecture, started his director career with the widely successful film Igla / The Needle (Rashid Nugmanov, 1988, Soviet Union). Various film experts concur that this film launched the Kazakh New Wave. In the first year of its release, more than fourteen million spectators watched it in the Soviet Union, making Igla the second-most-watched film in the country that year. It received the main award at the International Film Festival in Nuremberg in 1990. It also quickly achieved a cult status. Nugmanov is equally famous for coining the name of the cultural phenomenon he and his colleagues embodied: the Kazakh New Wave. The film director vividly narrated this story in the interview published in the reviewed book (Second Chapter). This strategic move aimed to attract the attention of producers and film festival directors during the Moscow International Film Festival in 1989 (37-38). That festival did not feature any films from Kazakhstan, and Nugmanov was determined to change the status quo. The subsequent promotional campaign proved to be very effective, as Tony Safford, the then director of the Sundance Film Festival, brought a number of films from Kazakhstan to the festival held in January 1990 in the United States. The first film reviews already featured the term “New Wave”, and it quickly spread, both abroad and in the Soviet Union.

Chapters three, five, and seven of the book document how crucial domestic and foreign film reviews have been in spreading information about the new cultural phenomenon and building up its lasting success. Such well-known periodicals as Iskusstvo kino (Film Art), Sovetskyi ekran (Soviet Screen), Sovetskaia kulʹtura (Soviet Culture), as well as others, often devoted entire sections of their issues to discussing the striking novelty of Kazakh films and their authors. The first foreign introductory review titled “Kazakhstan Wave” appeared in the British journal Sight and Sound, № 59.1 (Winter 1989/1990), while Ludmila Pruner explored this nascent cultural phenomenon at greater length in her article “The New Wave in Kazakh Cinema” in Slavic Review, 1992, № 4 (159). Many researchers abroad debated over the years the path the Kazakh film industry was taking. Such scholars as Azade-Ayse Rorlich (USA), Gönül Dönmez-Colin (Türkiye/Canada), Gregory A. Waller (USA), Ron Holloway (USA/Germany), Kent Jones (USA), Jane Knox-Voina (USA), Michael Rouland (USA), Birgit Beumers (Germany), Peter Rollberg (USA), Eugenie Zvonkine (Russia/France), Rashmi Doraiswamy (India), and Kim Ji-Seok (South Korea) greatly contributed to promoting the films and the spirit of the Kazakh phenomenon. Thanks to their tireless work and meaningful advocacy, international festival organisers and selection committees discovered the world of Kazakh cinema and dared to feature it in their respective venues. This audacious bet has paid off handsomely as the selected films turned out to be the hidden gemstones of originality and ardour.

Any aspiring filmmaker knows that the pinnacle of creative success shines bright from the festival peaks. Winning a prize there cements the capstone of a creative endeavour. Chapter nine of the book explicitly sheds light on the myriad festivals which welcomed the New Wavemakers. The Kazakh films gained many prestigious film awards in the 1990s. One of the highest honours went to Omirbaev’s film Killer / Killer (Darezhan Omirbaev, 1998, Kazakhstan) as it garnered the Un Certain Regard Award at the 1998 Cannes Film Festival (274). Hollywood’s enfant terrible, Quentin Tarantino, once threatened to resign from the jury of the Taormina Film Fest, unless other jury members agreed to give the main award to Karakulov’s Golubinyi zvonar / The Dove’s Bell-Ringer (Amir Karakulov, 1994, Kazakhstan) (292). This has truly been the golden decade for Kazakhstan’s film industry, since half of all local motion pictures participated in international film festivals and many of them came back with awards. By the early 2000s, the Wave was gone, but it certainly left its indelible mark.

As I have stated earlier, Abikeyeva’s book steers its reader towards a recipe for success in producing impactful films. What suggestions can one extract from the themes of the book? First, when the life around you seems pointless, turn your despair into intense energy of soul-searching coupled with a burning desire to acquire new professional skills. Second, find a trustworthy and reliable person qualified to deliver abundant, objective and honest feedback on your long-term performance. Third, learn as much as you can from your motivated and hard-working peers. Share your expertise and draw inspiration from them. Finally, not if but when you become stuck either in the sequence of difficult decisions or in the maze of an unfamiliar culture, dust off that huge kazan, fill it with water, boil it well, and let the steam thoroughly infuse the playfully spicy manti. Bon appétit and have a great collaboration!

Nikolai Domashev

Independent Scholar

Bio

Nikolai Domashev is a graduate of the Central European University (Budapest, Hungary). He conducts research in sociology and anthropology with particular emphasis on global and urban issues. The nexus of narratives and innovations drives his thinking.

Filmography

Karakulov, Amir.1994. Golubinyi zvonar / The Dove’s Bell-Ringer. Kazakhfilm.

Nugmanov, Rashid. 1988. Igla / The Needle. Kazakhfilm.p

Omirbaev, Darezhan. 1998. Killer / Killer. NPTs, Kadam, Artcam International.

Omirbaev, Darezhan. 2001. Jol / The Road. Epicentre Films, Artcam International, NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation), Kazakhfilm.

Soloviov, Sergei. 1975. Sto dnei posle detstva / One Hundred Days After Childhood. Mosfilm.

Soloviov, Sergei.1980. Spasatelʹ / The Lifeguard. Mosfilm.

Soloviov, Sergei. 1986. Chuzhaia belaia i riaboi / Wild pigeon. Kazakhfilm, Mosfilm.

Suggested Citation

Domashev, Nikolai. 2026. “Gulnara Abikeyeva: Kazakhskaia novaia volna / Kazakh New Wave”. Apparatus. Film, Media and Digital Cultures in Central and Eastern Europe 22. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17892/app.2026.00022.448

URL: http://www.apparatusjournal.net/

Copyright: The text of this article has been published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This licence does not apply to the media referenced in the article, which are subject to the individual rights owner's terms