Okay, three more movies Friday night, starting with the only Korean film in the festival (or at least the only Korean film I'm seeing in the festival, I don't think there are any others), "Shadows in the Palace". I mention this because I'm a big fan of Korean cinema (it's the only country I'll specifically seek out in the program guide), and it past years they've had a few more Korean films. So while I'm happy to see this movie, more Korean films in the future, please!
Anyway, "Shadows in the Palace" is a beautifully shot, exciting, grotesquely convoluted palace drama/murder mystery/ghost story/torture epic. Hmmm...I got everything I wanted to say in one sentence, I love it when that happens! It has an almost all-female cast, and takes place in the world of palace maids, serving the emperor, the queen, and the emperor's concubines. The plot involves a baby prince (who may or may not be legitimate), a dead woman (who may or may not be a suicide), an investigating nurse (who may or may not be allowed to investigate properly), tons of political machinations (which may or may not destroy her), secretive witnesses (who may or may not be tortured to death) and creepy shadows falling over the palace (which may or may not be ghosts). It's so convoluted, I couldn't really wrap my head around everything. But it's also so beautiful that I want to watch it again and again until I do understand.
So I ran right out of the theater just as the credits started to roll to get to another screen to see "In the City of Sylvia". As it turns out, I might have been better off getting a drink and talking movies with other fans. There is something remarkable about the cinematography in this movie, I'll give it that. The main character is an artist who spends a lot of time in cafes watching people. And the cinematography reflects his eyes, the way that he's very observant and even background characters are somehow filmed as if they're very important. And as a technical exercise it can be very, very interesting. Unfortunately, there just wasn't a story to go with the technical prowess. Day 1: guy sits in a cafe all day and watches people. Day 2: he goes back to the cafe, follows the waitress on her way home, finally talks to her. He thinks she's a girl he met at a club 6 years ago, she isn't, they part ways after he apologizes for talking to her. That is over 2/3 of the movie. I won't even bother giving the rest away. If the technique was used for a story where something actually happened, I'd rave about it all day. As it was, it was a disappointment.
And then it was down to the Stella Artois lounge for a few free beers before the late show screening of "Big Man Japan". Oh my god, this movie is hilarious/awesome/insane! Hitoshi Matsumoto writes, directs, and stars as a sad-sack employee of the department of monster protection. He's a 6th generation superhero, and when electricity is applied to his nipples he becomes a giant "Big Japanese Person" who fights nasty (and hilarious) monsters. Sadly, his ratings have fallen and the populace hasn't embraced him (they point out he causes as much damage as the monsters). A documentary crew follows him around as he explains his work, his sad life (with bricks routinely crashing through his window), and living up to the legend of his grandfather (the adored Big Man #4). The monsters get more insane, the story gets more insane, and it ends with a ridiculous send-up of the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers. I must own this movie! Coming soon on Magnolia's cult label, Magnet Releasing (no date announced yet, but I hope it's soon!)
Monday, May 5, 2008
Friday, May 2, 2008
Jason shows off a picture from SFIFF opening night
It seems so long ago that this marathon started....
Anyway, here's a picture a friend took at opening night, and e-mailed me yesterday. It's the regular hardcore fans lining up for the opening night film:
Anyway, here's a picture a friend took at opening night, and e-mailed me yesterday. It's the regular hardcore fans lining up for the opening night film:
A couple things I like about this pic. First, am I or am I not quite clearly the coolest fucking person in this picture? The hair, the glasses, the trench coat...I'm bad-ass! Second, take a closer look at the bag I'm carrying. Zoom in on the red text near the front...I'm advertising a different film festival (Cinequest)! I'm such a scamp.
Jason goes to SFIFF--day 8
Two more excellent movies last night, with do very interesting Q&A's:
First up was "Stranded: I've Come From a Plane That Crashed in the Mountains". In 1972, a plane carry a Uruguayan rugby team en route to Chile crashed in the Andes. Of the 45 passengers, 16 survived a harrowing 72 day ordeal (including, yes, cannibalism). 2 walked out over several mountains until they found a shepherd, contacted the authorities, and rescued the remaining 14 survivors. This story was made into a book called "Alive!" by Paul Reads, and a narrative film of the same name. I haven't read the book or seen the film, but I knew briefly of the story. Now Uruguayan filmmaker Gonzalo Arijon has made a documentary. He grew up in the same neighborhood as the team, and was friends with many of them since childhood. As a result, he got amazing access and heartfelt interviews from every last survivor. I can't speak to how this compares to the book (which required the survivors' consent on the final draft) or the narrative film (which didn't), but I can say that this is an exceptional, moving, harrowing film that comes about as close as possible to reliving the trauma for the audience (short of actually putting the audience in a plane and crashing them in the Andes). I also can't speak of any insights this movie has which aren't in the book or movie, but I can tell you what struck me most was their thoughtful and devout Catholic approach to their situation. Cannibalism is treated as a form of holy communion. When an avalanche buries their plane (killing some, and leaving the final 16), many recall knowing they would die, and feeling a sense of joy and relief at finally getting to go to heaven (only to be pulled back to their hell on earth). But what struck me most is that when the14 on the plane hear on the radio that the 2 expeditionaries have made it to civilization and are leading a rescue party back, the first thing they do is organize the remains of the victims whom they had to cannibalize. It was most important that they be able to return the remains to the families and explain themselves (it's missing from the movie, but Gonzalo Arijon said in the Q&A that all the families understood, and one mother said straight out that she would've done the same thing).
Here's a pic of SFIFF associate programmer Rod Armstrong with Gonzalo Arijon and his daughter Luna (who did a great job of being really cute):
And then it was time to go to Winnipeg. When Guy Maddin ("Brand on the Brain", "Saddest Music in the World", etc.) shows up to SFIFF, you know I've got to be there. This time, he was commissioned by the Documentary Channel to make a documentary about his hometown of Winnipeg. Knowing Maddin, I have to wonder what the heck they expected to get. What they got was pure, unalloyed Maddin, which was awesome! (if you're a fan, you know what I mean. If not, go become one!) He narrates the entire film while a Guy Maddin impersonator plays him, falling asleep on a train trying to escape Winnipeg. With that framing device, he tells anecdotes of a city with ten times the North American average of sleepwalkers. A town haunted by his mythical mother (star of the 50-years running public access TV show, "Ledge Man"). A town of frozen horse picnics and Happyland being trampled by stampeding gay bison. Golden boy pageants hosted by a corrupt mayor. A land that sold war bonds with an "If Day" when Nazis and fascists invaded Winnipeg. A town with (we assume) the world's only 3-story swimming pool complex--one co-ed, one for girls only, and one for boys only (by the way, I can't get the phrase "Dance of the Hairless Boners" out of my head. If I ever somehow become a pedophile, I'm going on record right here and now saying that I blame Guy Maddin). And there's some weird stuff in it, too, but I wouldn't want to ruin it. Here's Guy Maddin with Rod Armstrong (that guy gets around).
Awesome. Now I'm ready for a weekend marathon. Don't necessarily expect any more posts until Monday, by which time I'll have about a dozen to write.
First up was "Stranded: I've Come From a Plane That Crashed in the Mountains". In 1972, a plane carry a Uruguayan rugby team en route to Chile crashed in the Andes. Of the 45 passengers, 16 survived a harrowing 72 day ordeal (including, yes, cannibalism). 2 walked out over several mountains until they found a shepherd, contacted the authorities, and rescued the remaining 14 survivors. This story was made into a book called "Alive!" by Paul Reads, and a narrative film of the same name. I haven't read the book or seen the film, but I knew briefly of the story. Now Uruguayan filmmaker Gonzalo Arijon has made a documentary. He grew up in the same neighborhood as the team, and was friends with many of them since childhood. As a result, he got amazing access and heartfelt interviews from every last survivor. I can't speak to how this compares to the book (which required the survivors' consent on the final draft) or the narrative film (which didn't), but I can say that this is an exceptional, moving, harrowing film that comes about as close as possible to reliving the trauma for the audience (short of actually putting the audience in a plane and crashing them in the Andes). I also can't speak of any insights this movie has which aren't in the book or movie, but I can tell you what struck me most was their thoughtful and devout Catholic approach to their situation. Cannibalism is treated as a form of holy communion. When an avalanche buries their plane (killing some, and leaving the final 16), many recall knowing they would die, and feeling a sense of joy and relief at finally getting to go to heaven (only to be pulled back to their hell on earth). But what struck me most is that when the14 on the plane hear on the radio that the 2 expeditionaries have made it to civilization and are leading a rescue party back, the first thing they do is organize the remains of the victims whom they had to cannibalize. It was most important that they be able to return the remains to the families and explain themselves (it's missing from the movie, but Gonzalo Arijon said in the Q&A that all the families understood, and one mother said straight out that she would've done the same thing).
Here's a pic of SFIFF associate programmer Rod Armstrong with Gonzalo Arijon and his daughter Luna (who did a great job of being really cute):
And then it was time to go to Winnipeg. When Guy Maddin ("Brand on the Brain", "Saddest Music in the World", etc.) shows up to SFIFF, you know I've got to be there. This time, he was commissioned by the Documentary Channel to make a documentary about his hometown of Winnipeg. Knowing Maddin, I have to wonder what the heck they expected to get. What they got was pure, unalloyed Maddin, which was awesome! (if you're a fan, you know what I mean. If not, go become one!) He narrates the entire film while a Guy Maddin impersonator plays him, falling asleep on a train trying to escape Winnipeg. With that framing device, he tells anecdotes of a city with ten times the North American average of sleepwalkers. A town haunted by his mythical mother (star of the 50-years running public access TV show, "Ledge Man"). A town of frozen horse picnics and Happyland being trampled by stampeding gay bison. Golden boy pageants hosted by a corrupt mayor. A land that sold war bonds with an "If Day" when Nazis and fascists invaded Winnipeg. A town with (we assume) the world's only 3-story swimming pool complex--one co-ed, one for girls only, and one for boys only (by the way, I can't get the phrase "Dance of the Hairless Boners" out of my head. If I ever somehow become a pedophile, I'm going on record right here and now saying that I blame Guy Maddin). And there's some weird stuff in it, too, but I wouldn't want to ruin it. Here's Guy Maddin with Rod Armstrong (that guy gets around).
Awesome. Now I'm ready for a weekend marathon. Don't necessarily expect any more posts until Monday, by which time I'll have about a dozen to write.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Jason updates his schedule and tells you what he'll see for the rest of SFIFF
I'm pretty well set now. First, let's review what I've seen so far:
Thursday, April 24
7:00 pm at the Castro: The Last Mistress
Friday, April 25
at the Kabuki
7:00 pm: Alexandra
8:45 pm: Black Belt
10:30 pm: Mother of Tears
Saturday, April 26
at the Kabuki all day
1:00 pm: Just Like Home
3:45 pm: The Toe Tactic
6:45 pm: Ice People
9:00 pm: Water Lilies
11:45 pm: Go Go Tales
Sunday, April 27
PFA for this day
1:30 pm: Forbidden Lie$
3:45 pm: Latent Argentina
6:00 pm: Leave Her to Heaven
8:30 pm: You, the Living
Monday, April 28
at the PFA
6:30 pm: Traveling with Pets
9:00 pm: Sleep Dealer
Tuesday, April 29
Kabuki
7:30 pm: The POV Award: Errol Morris, with Standard Operating Procedure
Wednesday, April 30
at the PFA
6:30 pm: Vasermil
8:55 pm: Mock up on Mu
Thursday, May 1 (reviews of these movies coming soon!)
At the Kabuki
6:00 pm: Stranded: I've Come From a Plane That Crashed in the Mountains
9:30 pm: My Winnipeg (woo hoo! Guy Maddin!)
And now what I'm looking forward to:
Friday, May 2
Still at the Kabuki
7:00 pm: Shadows in the Palace
9:00 pm: In the City of Sylvia
11:00 pm: Big Man Japan
Saturday, May 3
At the Kabuki
12:45 pm: Orz Boys
3:30 pm: Linger
A huge gap where I can get a nice dinner or drinks or something. I've actually lost over 5 lbs. this festival from skipping meals to see movies.
7:00 or 7:30 pm: The Wackness (still some confusion here, because the printed mini-guide shows this at 7:30, but the website and the thicker program guide says 7:00.
9:15 pm: A Journey with Peter Sellars (this actually depends on the timing of the show before, but if I miss this then I'll have another big gap where I can eat and drink before I see...)
11:00 pm: Timecrimes
Sunday, May 4
Starting at the Kabuki
10:00 am: Secret members-only screening
12:30 pm: Up the Yangtze
3:45 pm: The Art of Negative Thinking
then walk up the street to the Clay Theater
6:00 pm: A Girl Cut in Two
9:00 pm: Secret
Monday, May 5
Back to the PFA
6:30 pm: Cochochi
8:55 pm: Secrecy
Tuesday, May 6
Start at the Clay
6:45 pm: La France
Then down to the Kabuki
9:15 pm: Redbelt (I know it's getting a wide release, but I'm treating myself to it here because it's David fuckin' Mamet)
Wednesday, May 7
Skip the festival, go to the Hypnodrome to see "Starslyderz"
Thursday, May 8
Castro Theater
7:00 pm: Gonzo: the Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson
Then off to the closing night party
So the interesting thing about all this is that since closing night is a special ticket, I won't be using my Cinevisa for the last two days of the festival. So it's time for another jasonwatchesmovies giveaway contest!
I'm not going out of my way to hand off the Cinevisa, so you must be present to win. That is, you must find me Tuesday and correctly answer the trivia question, and I will give you the pass (after I use it to see "Redbelt"). The contest starts as soon as I exit the Clay Theater (after seeing "La France") and start walking down to the Kabuki. If you win, you'll have to find me after "Redbelt" to pick up the Cinevisa. Any attempts earlier than that are automatically disqualified.
So as long as I'm making my readers talk to me in person, I might as well make them hit on me, so here's the contest: walk up to me before "Redbelt" starts (or after it ends if there is no winner, but please not during the movie) and say, "Hey Jason," and then recite the most romantic line in the history of cinema. Whoever delivers the best line wins. (hint: there is actually a line I'm thinking of, but you won't find it on this blog. Longtime readers might know my sensibilities and be able to guess).
Thursday, April 24
7:00 pm at the Castro: The Last Mistress
Friday, April 25
at the Kabuki
7:00 pm: Alexandra
8:45 pm: Black Belt
10:30 pm: Mother of Tears
Saturday, April 26
at the Kabuki all day
1:00 pm: Just Like Home
3:45 pm: The Toe Tactic
6:45 pm: Ice People
9:00 pm: Water Lilies
11:45 pm: Go Go Tales
Sunday, April 27
PFA for this day
1:30 pm: Forbidden Lie$
3:45 pm: Latent Argentina
6:00 pm: Leave Her to Heaven
8:30 pm: You, the Living
Monday, April 28
at the PFA
6:30 pm: Traveling with Pets
9:00 pm: Sleep Dealer
Tuesday, April 29
Kabuki
7:30 pm: The POV Award: Errol Morris, with Standard Operating Procedure
Wednesday, April 30
at the PFA
6:30 pm: Vasermil
8:55 pm: Mock up on Mu
Thursday, May 1 (reviews of these movies coming soon!)
At the Kabuki
6:00 pm: Stranded: I've Come From a Plane That Crashed in the Mountains
9:30 pm: My Winnipeg (woo hoo! Guy Maddin!)
And now what I'm looking forward to:
Friday, May 2
Still at the Kabuki
7:00 pm: Shadows in the Palace
9:00 pm: In the City of Sylvia
11:00 pm: Big Man Japan
Saturday, May 3
At the Kabuki
12:45 pm: Orz Boys
3:30 pm: Linger
A huge gap where I can get a nice dinner or drinks or something. I've actually lost over 5 lbs. this festival from skipping meals to see movies.
7:00 or 7:30 pm: The Wackness (still some confusion here, because the printed mini-guide shows this at 7:30, but the website and the thicker program guide says 7:00.
9:15 pm: A Journey with Peter Sellars (this actually depends on the timing of the show before, but if I miss this then I'll have another big gap where I can eat and drink before I see...)
11:00 pm: Timecrimes
Sunday, May 4
Starting at the Kabuki
10:00 am: Secret members-only screening
12:30 pm: Up the Yangtze
3:45 pm: The Art of Negative Thinking
then walk up the street to the Clay Theater
6:00 pm: A Girl Cut in Two
9:00 pm: Secret
Monday, May 5
Back to the PFA
6:30 pm: Cochochi
8:55 pm: Secrecy
Tuesday, May 6
Start at the Clay
6:45 pm: La France
Then down to the Kabuki
9:15 pm: Redbelt (I know it's getting a wide release, but I'm treating myself to it here because it's David fuckin' Mamet)
Wednesday, May 7
Skip the festival, go to the Hypnodrome to see "Starslyderz"
Thursday, May 8
Castro Theater
7:00 pm: Gonzo: the Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson
Then off to the closing night party
So the interesting thing about all this is that since closing night is a special ticket, I won't be using my Cinevisa for the last two days of the festival. So it's time for another jasonwatchesmovies giveaway contest!
I'm not going out of my way to hand off the Cinevisa, so you must be present to win. That is, you must find me Tuesday and correctly answer the trivia question, and I will give you the pass (after I use it to see "Redbelt"). The contest starts as soon as I exit the Clay Theater (after seeing "La France") and start walking down to the Kabuki. If you win, you'll have to find me after "Redbelt" to pick up the Cinevisa. Any attempts earlier than that are automatically disqualified.
So as long as I'm making my readers talk to me in person, I might as well make them hit on me, so here's the contest: walk up to me before "Redbelt" starts (or after it ends if there is no winner, but please not during the movie) and say, "Hey Jason," and then recite the most romantic line in the history of cinema. Whoever delivers the best line wins. (hint: there is actually a line I'm thinking of, but you won't find it on this blog. Longtime readers might know my sensibilities and be able to guess).
Jason goes to SFIFF--day 7
Two movies last night, at the PFA. Let's just do this quickly.
First up "Vasermil", an Israeli film about youth violence and tension between Ethiopian, Russian, and Israeli Jews and about soccer. Shlomi is a racist pizza-delivery boy who's captain of his school soccer team. Adiel is an Ethiopian immigrant with mad skills but prefers pick-up games with his friends. Dima is a sullen Russian teen who's crazy good at the piano, has never played soccer, but is a fearless thug. They're naturally enemies, but when they're all put on the same team (Dima is originally the equipment manager, but becomes goalie after an injury), soccer and the forced teamwork starts to bring them together. It becomes an escape from the violence in the rest of their lives, but violence and trouble continues to barge in and threaten them. Good story, well told, I enjoyed it.
And then it was time for an insane story, bizarrely told. "Mock up on Mu" is Craig Baldwin's very strange found footage collage narrative. Baldwin himself described "collage narrative" as (possibly oxy?)moronic. Anyway, he uses found footage collage and a smattering of live-action shots to tell a story of L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology founder and ruler of the moon (or Mu) in the year 2019. He formed a conspiracy with Lockheed Martin (the guy, not just his company) to build a super-weapon so he can return from exile to earth. Our hero is Jack Parsons, founder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who had faked his own death and lived as a b-movie actor for several years. Marjorie Cameron, beatnik artist and occultist is at first Hubbard's spy who later turns to Parson's side. They fight him with powerful sex magic with the help of Aleister Crowley (who might just be the Xenu that Hubbard trapped in the center of the earth ages ago). A weird sci-fi conspiracy theory. Now go Google some of those people and see how much of it is based on truth. That's the freaky part (yes, in real life the founder of JPL was a notorious occultist who was mentored by Crowley and practiced sex magic with Marjorie Cameron, whom he married). Here's a pic of director Craig Baldwin, who's kind of a nut:
That was so much fun!
First up "Vasermil", an Israeli film about youth violence and tension between Ethiopian, Russian, and Israeli Jews and about soccer. Shlomi is a racist pizza-delivery boy who's captain of his school soccer team. Adiel is an Ethiopian immigrant with mad skills but prefers pick-up games with his friends. Dima is a sullen Russian teen who's crazy good at the piano, has never played soccer, but is a fearless thug. They're naturally enemies, but when they're all put on the same team (Dima is originally the equipment manager, but becomes goalie after an injury), soccer and the forced teamwork starts to bring them together. It becomes an escape from the violence in the rest of their lives, but violence and trouble continues to barge in and threaten them. Good story, well told, I enjoyed it.
And then it was time for an insane story, bizarrely told. "Mock up on Mu" is Craig Baldwin's very strange found footage collage narrative. Baldwin himself described "collage narrative" as (possibly oxy?)moronic. Anyway, he uses found footage collage and a smattering of live-action shots to tell a story of L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology founder and ruler of the moon (or Mu) in the year 2019. He formed a conspiracy with Lockheed Martin (the guy, not just his company) to build a super-weapon so he can return from exile to earth. Our hero is Jack Parsons, founder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who had faked his own death and lived as a b-movie actor for several years. Marjorie Cameron, beatnik artist and occultist is at first Hubbard's spy who later turns to Parson's side. They fight him with powerful sex magic with the help of Aleister Crowley (who might just be the Xenu that Hubbard trapped in the center of the earth ages ago). A weird sci-fi conspiracy theory. Now go Google some of those people and see how much of it is based on truth. That's the freaky part (yes, in real life the founder of JPL was a notorious occultist who was mentored by Crowley and practiced sex magic with Marjorie Cameron, whom he married). Here's a pic of director Craig Baldwin, who's kind of a nut:
That was so much fun!
Jason goes to SFIFF and sees Errol Morris (on day 6)
Just one event last Tuesday, but it was a good one! Errol Morris receiving the festival's Persistence of Vision Award. The program included an onstage interview of Morris (interviewed by culture critic B. Ruby Rich from Santa Cruz), then a screening of his new film, "Standard Operating Procedure", and finally a Q&A about that film.
So first the interview. I've only seen a couple of his films, but I knew he specialized in the direct interview documentary style. What I didn't know was how he's so obsessed with eye contact that he invented what his wife termed the "interrotron"--basically a pair of cameras, with teleprompters in each one, but instead of scrolling text, he places the video feed of each camera into the teleprompter of the other. That way you make eye contact with the interviewer/interviewee, and also make eye contact with the camera. As a tech geek, that delighted me. The other thing I didn't know, and couldn't really guess from his movies, is that Errol Morris is a very, very funny guy, and he's Jewish (I got kind of an Elliot Gould vibe from him). He makes very smart, sarcastic observations about his life, his work, etc. (he claims he's never made money off his documentaries, he makes a living filming commercials), and had the whole audience laughing. Which is a little unsettling, because we then watched a very serious, traumatic film about Abu Ghraib. But more on that in a bit. Here's a pic of Errol Morris and B. Ruby Rich on stage:
Okay, now on to the movie. "Standard Operating Procedure" is about Abu Ghraib, as I said. Specifically it's about the pictures that surfaced from there (you know, the naked Iraqi pile, Lyndie England smiling and pointing, etc.), and how they tell a story but tell an incomplete story. He interviewed 5 of the seven "bad apples" (including Lyndie England), but was denied access to the two who remain in prison. He also interviews the forensic investigator who organized all the digital photos, found the timestamps in the metadata, deduced the time offsets (one of the three cameras was off by as much as a year), and put together a case against them--a bit of a departure, but appealed to my geek sensibility. It's pretty traumatic to view these photographs again (unblurred now, so this is the first time for me seeing some of the more pornographic ones), but the interviews do a great job of putting them in context, at least from one point of view. And ultimately, it makes a convincing case that the photographs distort the truth as much as reveal (basically, abuses did happen, but the right people were not necessarily blamed). Near the end, one of the interviewees makes an interesting point. He says that this (what's in the pictures) wasn't abuse, this was humiliation or "softening up". Abuse happened, behind closed doors where there were no cameras, and hence the actual abusers got off scott free. Basically the interviewees present themselves as fundamentally good people, stuck in a bad situation, who were then made scapegoats.
Now there's a little controversy about this film. First, the very premise that the photographs don't tell the true story upsets some people, as does the "scapegoats" charge. More importantly, there's a controversy because Errol Morris paid the subjects for their interview (one didn't want payment--and Errol didn't reveal who--but Errol insisted since he had paid the other 4). Now this controversy makes very little sense to me. Certainly they have the right to tell their side of the story, and to make this movie without paying them would've been gross exploitation (especially if you've come to believe they're scapegoats and not really bad apples). More importantly, how does payment in this case taint anything they say. I'm trying to imagine myself in their situation and thinking 'well, if they aren't going to pay me, I'll tell the truth, but if they pay me I'll be be self-serving and duplicitous.' That makes no sense.
Okay, and I want to say something about being self-serving. All the interviewees, to some extent, were self-serving. That's obvious, because they want to clear their names and because I honestly believe (from making eye contact with them, thank you interrotron!) that they honestly believe themselves to be fundamentally good people who were put in a really shitty situation. They make a convincing case that as soon as the pictures came out, they were doomed to be scapegoats no matter their level of involvement (one of them produces letters home describing how she took pictures in order to prove abuse was going on). However, in this I feel a distinct lack of the voice of Charles Graner. He was recognized as sort of the ringleader of the bad apples, and as such is still in prison and couldn't be interviewed. While the interviewees make a case that they're scapegoats, in doing so they seem to make Graner the scapegoat. I'd be very interested, as soon as he's released, to hear his side of the story. Everybody else seems to believe he or she is fundamentally a good person. I'd be very interested in seeing Graner make the case that he's fundamentally good, too. Perhaps as bonus material on the 10th anniversary DVD?
Anyway, I'll just leave by saying the film and Q&A were so interesting that nearly everyone on the bus I took to BART was still talking about it. Pretty impressive.
So first the interview. I've only seen a couple of his films, but I knew he specialized in the direct interview documentary style. What I didn't know was how he's so obsessed with eye contact that he invented what his wife termed the "interrotron"--basically a pair of cameras, with teleprompters in each one, but instead of scrolling text, he places the video feed of each camera into the teleprompter of the other. That way you make eye contact with the interviewer/interviewee, and also make eye contact with the camera. As a tech geek, that delighted me. The other thing I didn't know, and couldn't really guess from his movies, is that Errol Morris is a very, very funny guy, and he's Jewish (I got kind of an Elliot Gould vibe from him). He makes very smart, sarcastic observations about his life, his work, etc. (he claims he's never made money off his documentaries, he makes a living filming commercials), and had the whole audience laughing. Which is a little unsettling, because we then watched a very serious, traumatic film about Abu Ghraib. But more on that in a bit. Here's a pic of Errol Morris and B. Ruby Rich on stage:
Okay, now on to the movie. "Standard Operating Procedure" is about Abu Ghraib, as I said. Specifically it's about the pictures that surfaced from there (you know, the naked Iraqi pile, Lyndie England smiling and pointing, etc.), and how they tell a story but tell an incomplete story. He interviewed 5 of the seven "bad apples" (including Lyndie England), but was denied access to the two who remain in prison. He also interviews the forensic investigator who organized all the digital photos, found the timestamps in the metadata, deduced the time offsets (one of the three cameras was off by as much as a year), and put together a case against them--a bit of a departure, but appealed to my geek sensibility. It's pretty traumatic to view these photographs again (unblurred now, so this is the first time for me seeing some of the more pornographic ones), but the interviews do a great job of putting them in context, at least from one point of view. And ultimately, it makes a convincing case that the photographs distort the truth as much as reveal (basically, abuses did happen, but the right people were not necessarily blamed). Near the end, one of the interviewees makes an interesting point. He says that this (what's in the pictures) wasn't abuse, this was humiliation or "softening up". Abuse happened, behind closed doors where there were no cameras, and hence the actual abusers got off scott free. Basically the interviewees present themselves as fundamentally good people, stuck in a bad situation, who were then made scapegoats.
Now there's a little controversy about this film. First, the very premise that the photographs don't tell the true story upsets some people, as does the "scapegoats" charge. More importantly, there's a controversy because Errol Morris paid the subjects for their interview (one didn't want payment--and Errol didn't reveal who--but Errol insisted since he had paid the other 4). Now this controversy makes very little sense to me. Certainly they have the right to tell their side of the story, and to make this movie without paying them would've been gross exploitation (especially if you've come to believe they're scapegoats and not really bad apples). More importantly, how does payment in this case taint anything they say. I'm trying to imagine myself in their situation and thinking 'well, if they aren't going to pay me, I'll tell the truth, but if they pay me I'll be be self-serving and duplicitous.' That makes no sense.
Okay, and I want to say something about being self-serving. All the interviewees, to some extent, were self-serving. That's obvious, because they want to clear their names and because I honestly believe (from making eye contact with them, thank you interrotron!) that they honestly believe themselves to be fundamentally good people who were put in a really shitty situation. They make a convincing case that as soon as the pictures came out, they were doomed to be scapegoats no matter their level of involvement (one of them produces letters home describing how she took pictures in order to prove abuse was going on). However, in this I feel a distinct lack of the voice of Charles Graner. He was recognized as sort of the ringleader of the bad apples, and as such is still in prison and couldn't be interviewed. While the interviewees make a case that they're scapegoats, in doing so they seem to make Graner the scapegoat. I'd be very interested, as soon as he's released, to hear his side of the story. Everybody else seems to believe he or she is fundamentally a good person. I'd be very interested in seeing Graner make the case that he's fundamentally good, too. Perhaps as bonus material on the 10th anniversary DVD?
Anyway, I'll just leave by saying the film and Q&A were so interesting that nearly everyone on the bus I took to BART was still talking about it. Pretty impressive.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Jason goes to SFIFF--day 5
2 movies last Monday, both at the PFA, and both great.
First the Russian movie, "Travelling with Pets". As the movie opens, a young woman is being treated gruffly by and older man (we later learn that's her husband, although at first she refers to him as her "master", but that might have been a subtitle translation thing). They live at a remote train station, tend his prize cow, and sell the milk to the people on the train. Suddenly, he drops dead from a heart attack. While this is something she's secretly wanted, she's now faced with what to do with A) his body, and B) the rest of her life. Turns out, she's an orphan, who was taken from the orphanage when she was 16 to be married to this man, who has mistreated her for 19 years. Well, she solves problem A by putting his body on a hand rail cart and taking him into town. She guesses she'll take his body to the hospital, although she's not sure if that's right. And she finds help with problem A and a possible solution for problem B when she meets Sergei. He helpfully tells her the morgue is the place to take the body, and even loads the body in his truck and takes her there. And then they start a little romance, although she's a bit to socially maladjusted for it to work right the first time. The real story is how she, through increasing flashes of artistic creativity, works out from the hole 19 years of abuse has dug for her. To me, that's what this movie is all about. A life--a beautiful, creative, funny, loving life--that's been stomped down for over half of her 35 years, and finally having a chance to come out of the darkness, live, and express herself. And that's a beautiful thing to watch.
And then there was the near-future Mexica sci-fi "Sleep Dealer". In the near future, America has solved it's immigration crisis. Of course, we want immigrant labor without the messy human problems (you know--food, shelter, health, etc) that comes with having actual immigrants. So there's a huge Cybracero facility in Tijuana where thousands of Mexicans are hooked up, Matrix-style, to a virtual reality world where they control robots in America (and elsewhere, I seem to recall there's at least a passing reference to driving a cab in London). These robots pick our fruit, build our skyscrapers, etc., while the controllers in Tijuana slowly lose their sense of reality and drop into comas. It's win-win! (that was sarcastic, don't write me angry letters). A lot of the American infrastructure is built around protecting their water assets, as Mexican rivers are now "owned" by American corporations, who charge local villagers an arm and a leg for water. Memo Cruz (Luis Fernando Peña) is one of those villagers, and with his dad he goes to get water on a regular basis. In his free time, he's an amateur hacker who likes to eavesdrop on conversations. However, when he eavesdrops on the security firm talking about "aqua terrorism", his signal is detected, he's mistaken for a terrorist, and his satellite dish is taken out by a drone (piloted virtually by a Hispanic American, and broadcast live on TV). This destroys his setup, and kills his father, and sets him off alone to Tijuana to make whatever living he can as one of these cybraceros. There's also a subplot with a love interest there in Tijuana and people selling their own memories online (both for entertainment and for surveillance). It's an amazing, inventive sci-fi thriller that's chock-full of topical satire and bizarre visuals. I loved it.
First the Russian movie, "Travelling with Pets". As the movie opens, a young woman is being treated gruffly by and older man (we later learn that's her husband, although at first she refers to him as her "master", but that might have been a subtitle translation thing). They live at a remote train station, tend his prize cow, and sell the milk to the people on the train. Suddenly, he drops dead from a heart attack. While this is something she's secretly wanted, she's now faced with what to do with A) his body, and B) the rest of her life. Turns out, she's an orphan, who was taken from the orphanage when she was 16 to be married to this man, who has mistreated her for 19 years. Well, she solves problem A by putting his body on a hand rail cart and taking him into town. She guesses she'll take his body to the hospital, although she's not sure if that's right. And she finds help with problem A and a possible solution for problem B when she meets Sergei. He helpfully tells her the morgue is the place to take the body, and even loads the body in his truck and takes her there. And then they start a little romance, although she's a bit to socially maladjusted for it to work right the first time. The real story is how she, through increasing flashes of artistic creativity, works out from the hole 19 years of abuse has dug for her. To me, that's what this movie is all about. A life--a beautiful, creative, funny, loving life--that's been stomped down for over half of her 35 years, and finally having a chance to come out of the darkness, live, and express herself. And that's a beautiful thing to watch.
And then there was the near-future Mexica sci-fi "Sleep Dealer". In the near future, America has solved it's immigration crisis. Of course, we want immigrant labor without the messy human problems (you know--food, shelter, health, etc) that comes with having actual immigrants. So there's a huge Cybracero facility in Tijuana where thousands of Mexicans are hooked up, Matrix-style, to a virtual reality world where they control robots in America (and elsewhere, I seem to recall there's at least a passing reference to driving a cab in London). These robots pick our fruit, build our skyscrapers, etc., while the controllers in Tijuana slowly lose their sense of reality and drop into comas. It's win-win! (that was sarcastic, don't write me angry letters). A lot of the American infrastructure is built around protecting their water assets, as Mexican rivers are now "owned" by American corporations, who charge local villagers an arm and a leg for water. Memo Cruz (Luis Fernando Peña) is one of those villagers, and with his dad he goes to get water on a regular basis. In his free time, he's an amateur hacker who likes to eavesdrop on conversations. However, when he eavesdrops on the security firm talking about "aqua terrorism", his signal is detected, he's mistaken for a terrorist, and his satellite dish is taken out by a drone (piloted virtually by a Hispanic American, and broadcast live on TV). This destroys his setup, and kills his father, and sets him off alone to Tijuana to make whatever living he can as one of these cybraceros. There's also a subplot with a love interest there in Tijuana and people selling their own memories online (both for entertainment and for surveillance). It's an amazing, inventive sci-fi thriller that's chock-full of topical satire and bizarre visuals. I loved it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)