« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »

December 31, 2005

Lazy New Years Day Film Links

I'm slowly starting to settle back into a routine after last week's MLA conference, and one of my first goals is to turn my conference paper into an article, in which I've been thinking about cinematic representations of the military, or more narrowly the war in Iraq, after September 11. With that in mind, I just wanted to bookmark a couple of articles that look interesting. First a NYT article on the upcoming slate of September 11 films, many of which should hit theaters this year.

Second, Benjamin Halligan's "On the Interval Between Reality and Unreality," a response to Zizek's original 9/11 essay published in Senses of Cinema.

Finally, and this isn't really related to my paper, but it's still pretty darn cool: The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' Margaret Herrick Library has launched a searchable online catalog highlighting more than 30,000 motion picture scripts available for research at six Southern California collections (via Alternative Film Guide).

Here's wishing everyone a Happy New Year.

Posted by chuck at 8:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Top Ten Movies of 2005

Inspired by the lists put together by Girish, Sujewa, and Darren and unimpressed by the lists put together by the Washington Post's film reviewers (Hustle & Flow?!?), I've put together a hastily assembled Top Ten list. Like Darren, I chose to select films I saw in the 2005 calendar year, in part because many prominent films aren't widely released to theaters until well after their original release date. And, more to the point, several of the films on my list have not received major distribution.

Here's my modest contribution to the now ubiquitous Ten Best discussion in semi-chronological order, with links to my reviews of the films if available:

Some of the films I wish I'd seen include Barbara Kopple's Bearing Witness, Eugene Jarecki's Why We Fight, Cache and Tristam Shandy, both of which were in Darren's Top Ten, Capote, and After Innocence.

Some of the films that almost made the cut: A History of Violence, The Jacket (I'm too close to the film to think about it in terms of a top ten list), 2046, Good Night and Good Luck, and The Squid and the Whale.

Some other important and entertaining movies that more people should see: The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till,, Guerilla News Network's BatleGround, Hayder Mousa Daffar's The Dreams of Sparrows, the underrated The Education of Shelby Knox, which I saw on PBS, Chris Hansen's The Proper Care and Feeding of an American Messiah, Robert Greenwald's Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Caveh Zahedi's I am a Sex Addict, and Hany Ab-Assad's Paradise Now.

Comments? Observations? Omissions? Feel free to mention your top ten lists in the comments.

Posted by chuck at 3:51 PM | Comments (21) | TrackBack

Even More MLA Wrap-Up

Just a few quick links that empasize some of the other discussions taking place this year at MLA. First, Inside Higher Ed reports on the MLA panel on tenure evaluation and notes that some changes may be on the horizon (this is another panel I wish I had been able to attend). The highlights: less emphasis on the scholarly "monograph," more willingness to accept peer-reviewed online publications as of equal value with "print" publications, a distinction that has become rather silly with so many "print" journals now making their issues online through Project Muse and eventually through such projects as ElectraPress.

Other changes included a reconsideration of the role of outside readers in determining a candidates' qualifications for tenure; a more explicit understanding of how teaching, scholarship, and service contribute to a tenure case; and a renewed emphasis on mentoring tenure-track professors.

I also wanted to highlight the IHE article on some of the changes in what university presses are looking to publish. That process is still somewhat mysterious to me, so I found the article to be fairly useful in demystifying that process to some extent.

Finally, I think I'm the only blogger who was at MLA who didn't meet Scott Eric Kaufman of Acephalous. I do think that Scott's right to note that having a blog can make MLA a little less daunting and alienating than it might normally be. I had the chance to meet up with several other bloggers, including several bloggers who write anonymously.

Posted by chuck at 2:36 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

More MLA Wrap-Up

Here's a second TCS Daily article, "The Kids Are All Right, Dammit," by Nick Gillespie.

First, I think Jonathan's read of Gillespie's TCS Daily article is a good one (I gave it a half-hearted read a few days ago). As Jonathan notes, articles about the MLA convention have a bad habit of attributing agency to a professional organization consisting of over 30,000 people. These articles, which are often written for an audience that is already "negatively predisposed" towards the MLA. Reading Gillespie's article with that audience and that "insider" position in mind, I'd argue that his asides about "political correctness" are worthy of suspicion.

The second article raises a few red flags as well. Gillespie discusses a panel on "English Studies and Political Literacy," a topic I sought to address in my Rhetoric and Democracy coures last fall. The first major prblem is the assumption that professors are confronting the problem of dealing with "increasingly conservative" student populations, a characterization that Gillespie offers little evidence to support, as Rich Puchalsky's comment to an entry at The Valve points out. The Census data used to support this claim shows little change since 1980, although there was a dramatic, and perhaps unsurprising, change from 1970 to 1980. To be fair, this description of an increasingly conservative student population may have come from the professors themselves, but Gillespie accepts it at face value. In fact, it's probably the case that something far more complicated is happening when it comes to students' political beliefs, one that cannot be represented by the census statistics that rely upon people to self-identify within a liberal-conservative-moderate spectrum.

Some important points did come out of the panel: Mark Bauerlein did point out the importance of political literacy, which again is something I sought to emphasize in the Rhetoric and Democracy course I mentioned earlier, in which I required studnets to follow election coverage and arguments (including the major deates) and to analyze those arguments on their strengths and weaknesses. I am often suspicious of claims about declining political literacy, encountered in such venues as David Mindich's Tuned Out: Why Americans Under 40 Don't Follow the News, in part becuase these models sometimes rely upon a Golden Age of a "Tuned In" populace that I'm not sure ever existed (or if it did exist, it was only available to a limited population). That being said, Mindich's book is now high on my reading list.

Gillespie's bias about the MLA does show up in the article in which he describes freshman composition courses as "those dreary required classes which are often little more than clumsy attempts at political indoctrination." The charge of "political indoctrination" is pretty much a right-wing buzzword that has been around since before I began teaching ten years ago, and to describe the classes as "dreary" sets up expectations that they will be. There's also some antipathy when Gillespie notes that one professor identified "openly" as a progressive, as if that's something that ought to be kept secret.

Still, I'm glad that Gillespie highlighted the dicussion that took place at this panel (and I now wish that I had attended) because I do think these issues of political literacy can positively inform the kind of work we do in the composition, literature, and (in my case) media studies classrooms.

Posted by chuck at 1:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Post-MLA Wrap-Up

I'm still recovering from this week's MLA convention here in DC. I think my panel went well enough, especially given the connections my co-panelists and I were able to make with each other. But the non-stop conference activity over the last four days, including frantically finishing my paper, has certainly caught up with me. And the strange non-time of conferences, of spending hours in window-less hotel conference rooms, has also wreaked havoc on my internal clock. Conference time paradoxically slow and fast, with entire days sweeping by quickly, but also incredibly slow, especially in those nervous minutes immediately before a job interview.

While I'm thinking about it, I do want to point to Inside Higher Ed's coverage of the MLA, specifically their discussion of the MLA delegate assembly's decision to pass a resloution opposing the two David Horowitz campaigns to pass legistaltion that would limit the academic freedom of professors.

The resolution is a slight alteration of the original proposal, which, according to IHE, described the Student Bill of Rights as promoting “the teaching of ‘conservative’ ideas that cannot win support through their own merit.” Several of the respondents to the article have complained that the passage provides evidence of left-wing cluelessness run rampant in English departments, but I do think the changed resolution shows that a more pragmatic position prevailed. Michael Bérubé is right to note the removed clause was "deeply problematic" because of the its assumptions Horowitz's intentions.

Another problem is that the "consertavive ideas" clause re-establishes an us-against-them model that is both unproductive and misrepresentative. The false polarization of "left" and "right" can place limitations on thinking in the first place as people seek to identify with the model. But it's also misrepresenttaive in that it assumes that all people of a certain category (or professional body) share the same beliefs and values. That being said, I think the removal of the clause illustrates that the MLA delegate assembly can work fairly well, as the more pragmatic and less problematic version of the proposal was affirmed.

I'm less pleased with the lack of a resolution supporting the striking graduate students at NYU, but I may save my comments on that topic for another post.

Posted by chuck at 12:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 29, 2005

Pillorying and Parodying Washington at the MLA

I've mentioned it before, but I just wanted to extend one last invitation to my film panel tomorrow morning (I'll be talking about The Jacket). Yes, I know it's the last day of MLA. And I know it's early in the morning (8:30 AM), but I'd certainly enjoy having a good crowd, so grab a cup of coffee and please stop by.

Posted by chuck at 8:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 27, 2005

Watching the Watchers

No time for a full response, but I just came across one of those inevitable and tired articles on the annual MLA convention, this one in TCS Daily. In "Who's Afraid of the MLA," we get the usual complaints about "tenured radicals" and "political correctness" run amok.

To be fair, the author, Nick Gillespie, is a member of the MLA and raises the point that few other academic conventions inspire such concern about what we're teaching kids today. And Gillespie does point out the number of panels and papers that focus on traditional readings of canonical texts with paper titles that don't make use of bad puns. I'll have to postpone my longer response to Gillespie's article for now (other MLA-related responsibilities are calling), but one thing I think Gillespie will find is that many papers this year, including my own, are concerned with questions of the human, or more narrowly, of human rights, in an age where those questions are of some importance. To ignore the role of literature (and film) in engaging with those questions would, in my opinion, be a mistake.

Posted by chuck at 9:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 26, 2005

MLA at Home

I've just returned to DC after a quick visit to see my family in Atlanta just in time for this year's MLA conference, which happens to be here in town (maybe you've heard about it). This year, I'll be interviewing for a tenure-track job and delivering a paper (8:30 AM on Friday December 30, Carolina Room, Marriott). The paper is almost done at this point, and I'm trying my best not to think about Ivan Tribble.

The holidays were nice enough, and I may try to write up a review of Walk the Line, this year's annual family Christmas get-out-of-the-house movie, later this week, but I'm guessing most people who care have already seen it (I'll admit that I liked it much more than I expected).

But what I've been thinking about this afternoon is the experience of having MLA in the town where you live. There are some distinct benefits of having MLA on your home turf. You can sleep in your own bed at night, and it's certainly a lot cheaper. And, of course, you know your way around the city. But I'm also finding it more difficult than usual to transition into MLA mode. Traveling to MLA has become an annual rite. Finding a cab to the MLA hotel, checking into the MLA hotel, and getting settled in the hotel are all part of that routine, the deliberate decision to enter into MLA mode.

I'm not whining or anything. I'll certainly be comfortable for MLA and I'll be able to retreat to my apartment at the end of the day, but the distinction is an interesting one, especially given the degree to which MLA often feels like its own world, insulated by the concrete, steel, and reflective glass that keep the rest of the city out.

But if you're planning to be at MLA, you're certainly welcome to drop by my panel (it's at 8:30 AM, so I'll understand if you're not awake). It's probably a bit late to plan an MLA blogger meetup, but if you'd like to meet for drinks (caffienated or alcoholic), feel free to email me as well (chutry[at]msn[dot]com).

Posted by chuck at 3:11 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

December 19, 2005

Documenting Neighborhood

I received an email tip about a cool new online documentary project, TurnHere, which "chronicles different neighborhoods across the country, focusing on people, culture, history, local businesses and political landscapes through the use of Internet video." It looks like an interesting project, and several DC neighborhoods (including Dupont Circle and Shaw Neighborhood) are already represented.

The Dupont Circle film captures the neighborhood's personality rather well, I think, and even shows one of my favorite DC bookstores.

Posted by chuck at 7:17 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 18, 2005

Sunday Afternoon Film Reads

Just a couple of quick links while I take a short break on my MLA paper (it's moving along pretty well), both via GreenCine. First, a pointer to Roger Ebert's Top Ten List for 2005. The list is an interesting one, even though I still don't understand the hype for Crash. Scroll down for a list of candidates for his "Overlooked Film Festival," held annually in Champaign, Illinois.

I've also been thinking about definitions of and possibilities for "independent cinema" over the last few weeks (these questions inform my MLA paper), so the news, reported here by Anne Thompson, that Dreamworks was sold to Paramount a few days ago was of interest to me. Thompson's analysis makes some sense here: "That DreamWorks couldn't survive as a stand-alone company has everything to do with the words 'studio' and 'independent.'"

And, also relevant to the paper I'm currently writing, James Meek's consideration of Jarhead in the context of previous war films, especially Vietnam films.

Posted by chuck at 5:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Digital Projection and Visual Pleasure

Randall Stross of The New York Times is reporting on the motion picture industry's plans to convert from film to digital projection, focusing specifically on Mark Cuban's 2929 Entertainment and Landmark Theater chain (Cuban has been talking about this story at some length on his blog).

I don't have as much time as I would like to work through the article, but there are a few points worth noting. First, Stross places emphasis on the differences in visual quality between film and digital. He writes,

People in the theater exhibition industry know what many outside it may not: that the transition from film to digital will not improve the visual experience for theater customers. Nothing yet invented can match the richness of film. When digital projection arrives, the best selling point that theater owners can offer may be, 'Don't worry about it; you probably won't notice.'
I do think it's worth holding onto film as a medium, and there are films that use celluloid in ways that are breathtaking. But Stross' comments close down any discussion of the visual and narrative possibilities available to digital that may not be available to film (Steven Soderbergh's recent comments about his latest film, Bubble, are but one example). This notion of "richness" is a constructed category and one that needs to be interrogated.

I think Stross is right to identify the ways in which moviegoing as a practice is changing, and Robert Sklar's comments underline some of these changes, but the habit of merely pointing to declining theater attendance doesn't address how these audiences are engaging with the movies they watch (or how they understand themselves as audiences). Cuban himself points this out in the Times article, noting "the virtues of enjoying a movie in a theater with fellow movie fans." There are plenty of examples of audiences seeing themselves as a collective, ranging from Harry Potter fans who line up for the film's permiere to churches who attended Chronicles of Narnia as a group to politcal activists who attend Robert Greenwald documentary house parties. Megaplex theaters sometimes work against this sense of collectivity, especially when you have half an hour of pre-preview advertising, but Stross' model seems to view moviegoing as essentially solitary ("sitting quietly in the dark with a few dozen others").

Ultimately, it's the movie historian who gets this right (no surprise there). As Sklar points out, "Teenagers' need to get out of the house will keep theaters alive." Moviegoing as a practice will certainly change if digital distribution becomes dominant, but Stross' skepticism overlooks some of what might be valuable about these changes.

Update: Just a quick pointer to A.O. Scott's New York Times article, in which he asks whether some of Hollywood's films aren't bad enough. Scott's point is that the studios are increasingly avoiding the risks that produced notorious "failures" such as Ishtar, Heaven's Gate, and Showgirls, or even something like Apocalypse Now, which while achieving some success is remebered as much because of Coppola's "visionary recklessness."

I'm not sure this article is related to this entry, other than to note Scott's observation that "the studios have delegated artistic ambition to their specialty divisions, which turn out modestly budgeted, sophisticated pictures, the best of which bear the stamp of a filmmaker's uncompromised vision." I may have more to say about Scott's article later, but I need to do some non-blog writing today.

Posted by chuck at 10:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 17, 2005

The Case of the Missing Audience

I need to work on a paper or two, but as I was surfing away from one of the links in my last entry, I came across this Sharon Waxman article in The New York Times on declining attendance in movie theaters (which should not be read to imply a declining interest in movies, of course).

Posted by chuck at 11:45 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Cinephile Blogging

Just a link and comment for now because I'm still working on my first cup of coffee (plus my paper for MLA beckons), but I thought this indieWIRE article on "The Year of the (Film) Blogs" was worth noting. In the article, Steve Rosen notes the increasing number of Oscar-Watch and gossip blogs as well as newspaper-sponsored blogs, such as The New York Times' Carpetbagger, where I found this article. Rosen adds that the art-house chain, Landmark Theatres, is in the process of expanding its online resources by offering blogs by filmmakers and critics.

But what I found most interetsing about the indieWIRE article is the emphasis on what might best be described as "independent" film blogs. As Rosen points out,

Lively, intelligent blogs that feature frequently updated, conversational postings about cinema -- as opposed to celebrity gossip -- are flowering. They're trying to create an interlinked community devoted to those passionately interested in film, similar to what the pioneering urban art houses of the 1950s and 1960s did. And if they haven't yet reached the point where they have a measured impact on box office, they're trying.
Rosen mentions GreenCine, the Twitch blog, and MovieCityIndie among others, but he could have added many others, including Girish's blog or Darren's Long Pauses among many others. But the point is that these film blogs are ushering in a new mode of appreciation for independent cinemas, whether documentary, international, or "indiewood," potentially creating an audience for films that might otherwise disappear beneath most viewers' radars (just last night I caught the important Italian documentary, Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre, thanks to David's link at GreenCine).

Of course there will always be outstanding films that fail to receive the audience they deserve, but this discussion of film blogs seems to stand in stark contrast to the "decay of cinema" arguments that lament the eclipse of a certain mode of cinephilia. I've been thinking about this potential function for film blogs quite a bit recently, in part because I was invited to review several of the films that played at the Washington Jewish Film Festival, and one of my goals with those reviews was to generate interest in films that haven't received a wide audience in the U.S. That's not the only reason I blog, of course, but I think it's worth emphasizing the role of film blogs in facilitating some lively conversation about cinema.

Posted by chuck at 10:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 15, 2005

New Teaching Carnival

If you read my blog, you very likely read New Kid on the Hallway, but just in case you don't, she's just posted the December Teaching Carnival. Lots of good stuff on teaching, and I'd say that even if I wasn't included.

Posting may be infrequent over the next few days as I work on my paper for MLA.

Posted by chuck at 3:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 14, 2005

Winter Soldier

In George Butler's Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry, we get a brief glimpse of the Winter Soldier press conferences that took place over three days in Detroit in February and March of 1972. Now, the 1972 documentary of these press conferences, Winter Soldier, is receiving a limited re-release here in DC and in a few other major cities (Kerry appears briefly in the 1972 documentary). During these press conferences, several panels of young soldiers reported on unimaginable atrocities committed by US soldiers in all branches of the military. The film opens with a brief voice-over explaining the source of the title, before immediately moving into pilot Rusty Sachs' testimony, in which he describes watching as blindfolded Vietnamese prisoners are pushed out of airplanes, a practice he describes as routine. Other soldiers add to this picture, describing atrocities that were relatively common practice.

Visually, the film is stunning in its immediacy, using a cinema verite style to capture the sense of urgency these soldiers clearly feel. In many sequences, the filmmakers favor close-ups, with soldiers such as Scott Camil speaking directly into the camera about the atrocities they witnessed. The documentary is entirely in black-and-white except for fleeting color photgraphs (and perhaps some color Super 8 footage) of the fresh-faced soldiers in Vietnam, creating a stark visual contrast.

Winter Soldier was so controversial that it did not play widely on television or in theaters in the 1970s, playing primarily in smaller venues such as the Whitney Museum, and it's worth noting that the film's re-release was held back until after the 2004 Presidential election out of concern that it might negatively effect Kerry's chances in the election.

This decision speaks to the film's relevance even today. During one sequence, in which a soldier describes their (lck of) training in the Geneva Conventions, it's impossible not to think about the actions of teh soldiers in Abu Ghraib, as Amy Heller points out in this interview with Anthony Kaufman. But aside from the press conference itself, I found many of the "backstage" moments utterly compelling, in particular one sequence in which an African-American soldier comments on the degree to which a history racism informs the treatment of Vietnamese people as less than human (Anne Hornaday, in an incredibly insightful review, also found this scene to be pivotal).

Hornaday also notes the degree to which several of the soldiers, particularly Camil, are struggling in front of the camera "not only with their experiences overseas but also with the very definition of manhood, whether as constructed by cultural mores or one's own inner code." Winter Solider is a powerful experience, not simply as an anti-war document (although that is certainly important), but also as a document of a certain moment in American history when the soldiers' experiences in the war were forcing them to grapple with questions of race and masculinity.

Posted by chuck at 10:48 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

Facundo

I learned early yesterday morning that one of my colleagues in media studies, Facundo Montenegro passed away after a long battle with cancer. I only knew Facundo for a semester but found him to be a warm and generous colleague. I know he will be missed.

Posted by chuck at 1:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 13, 2005

"Underground is Just a Sexier Word for Illegal"

Via Wiley, a Wired interview with Stephen Soderbergh on his upcoming all-digital movie, Bubble, whihc will be released in theaters, on DVD, and on HDTV on the same day, Januray 27. As an attempt to curtail piracy, it's an interesting experiment. Of course, because the film was made for a relatively modest $1.6 million budget, there is significantly less risk involved than a major release (as Soderbergh points out, a movie with Bubble's budget "doesn't have to be a cultural event to turn a profit").

Soderbergh is clearly enthusiastic about the possibilities involved in digital, adding that he believes that within a few years, big-name movie makers (filmmakers now seems imprecise) will be self-distributing. He also adds that digital technologies will encourage more experimentation in releasing radically different cuts of the same movies ("I think it would be really interesting to have a movie out in release and then, just a few weeks later say, 'Here's version 2.0, recut, rescored.'").

I'm pretty convinced that most of Soderbergh's arguments are right. Certainly the window between theatrical release and DVD release will soon be dismissed, especially given the degree to which major films are already "released" through illegal download (here, I'm fairly convinced by Edward Jay Epstein's arguments). And the database aesthetic that Soderbergh describes (featuring radically remixed versions of the same movie) has been discussed by Lev Manovich and Marsha Kinder, among others, for several years now.

Posted by chuck at 10:32 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

From the Vaults

Just a quick link to an upcoming screening at the National Archives: This Thursday night at 5:30 PM, "From the Vaults: The Way We Worked on Film," a program featuring "a selection of short subjects, newsreels, and film clips from the motion picture holdings of the National Archives documenting various occupations, working environments, and labor-saving practices."

The following night features the documentary, Roll on Columbia: Woody Guthrie and the Bonneville Power Administration, which focuses on Guthrie's temporary job with the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bonneville Power Administration.

Both film programs are part of the Archives' temporary exhibit, "The Way We Worked," which features photographs, audio, and video documents of work experiences during the years 1857-1987.

Posted by chuck at 12:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 12, 2005

Miranda July Videos

For my DC readers: I just noticed that the National Museum of Women in the Arts will be screening a collection of Miranda July's short video and sound work tonight at 7 PM (reservations are required). If July's debut feature, Me and You and Everyone We Know is any indication, tonight's program should be quite interesting.

Mentioning July also gives me an excuse to link to her on-going web project, Learning to Love You More, which continues to evolve in really interesting ways, particularly the most recent "assignment," in which contributors are asked to "give advice to yourself in the past."

Posted by chuck at 11:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 11, 2005

Syriana

I'm still sorting through my response to Syriana (IMDB), so this review may seem a little scattered and unfocused. Perhaps instead of viewing this entry as anything remotely resembling a final take on the film, this entry will serve as a starting point towards something else (further discussion? an article?). Syriana, written and directed by Traffic screenwriter Stephen Gaghan, presents a multi-threaded narrative focusing on several different individuals and organizations who are involved in protecting U.S. oil interests, including oil executives, Gulf emirs, CIA agents, and corporate lawyers, as well as the displaced workers employed at the refineries. The film cuts between the power centers of Washington, Geneva, Tehran, and other unnamed locations in the Persian Gulf. While many critics have suggested that the multiple threads confounding, I think Digby's right to suggest that these plotlines can lead to what he calls a "bracing clarity:" it's about oil. More specifically, it's about the increasing scarcity of that "natural" resource. The film is also, as David Lowery notes, a "contagiously angry" movie in its portrayal of conspiracy, without, at least in my opinion, coming across as overly sanctimonious. But here are a few reasons why I found this film so compelling:

First, Syriana is one of the highest-profile projects by the new indie, Participant Productions (they also produced Murderball, North Country, and Good Night and Good Luck among others). I'll admit to being intrigued by Participant's attempts to use entertainment for social change. According to their website, "Participant believes in the power of media to create great social change. Our goal is to deliver compelling entertainment that will inspire audiences to get involved in the issues that affect us all." It's clear that many of Participant's films are intended to increase political awareness. It's less clear how that will translate into people getting involved, although the website does offer a "take action" resource page (check out the LA Times article on Participant). More on that question in a moment.

Syriana, of course, recalls the 1970s conspiracy movies, such as All the President's Men, The Parallax View, and Three Days of the Condor, that Fredric Jameson analyzed so thoughtfully in The Geopolitical Aesthetic. But, as J. Hoberman points out, in a line worthy of Jameson himself, "Gaghan is less fixated on superstar heroism and more interested in representing a system—if, indeed, that system can be represented." The "system," of course, is global capitalism, but what happens with Syriana seems to offer a subtle shift away from the '70s films that posit the lone indvidual (or indviduals in President's) to a model in which even the ostensible outsiders are implicated or involved on some level. While George Clooney and Matt Damon, among others, add star power to Syriana, they are far less attached to the model of heroism or idealism that we encounter in the conspiracy films of the Watergate era. Without giving too much away, Clooney's CIA agent and Damon's economic advisor are clearly implicated in the loose oil conspiracy that dominates the film. We also see a group of displaced Pakistani teenagers who find themselves suddenly unemployed after one corporate merger and subtly, but surprisingly quickly, tranformed into suicide bombers.

Some spoilers here: The multi-threaded (or hypertext as one critic described it) narrative is elegantly handled (much better than the somewhat manipulative use of multiple film stocks in Soderbergh's Traffic, and the difficulty of sorting through the relationships is part of the point (the LA Times review is good on this point, as is David Lowery's, which I cited earlier). What makes the film so troubling is that, as David implies, the film is so critical of the complicity between a Big Oil merger and the CIA that "it makes a triumph out of the terrorist attack." I'm not quite sure I walked away with that reading, but it's clear that we are meant to compare the suicide attack on the oil tanker with the cold-blooded assassination of the pro-democratization Prince Nasir by the CIA.

This final sequence actually left me feeling somewhat powerless and resigned (David has a slightly different read), and I think that's an unintended consequence of the film's presentation of conspiracy. I need to do some other work this afternoon, but I'm fairly certain that I'll be returning to Syriana in the near-future. It's an incredibly rich film that certainly demands that viewers confront this situation, but I'm not sure if the film offers any potential response to the conspiracy.

Update (11:21 PM): I forgot to mention this before, but one of the sensations that stuck with me the most in my experience of Syriana was the film's overarching masculinity. The only review I've seen that explicitly addresses this topic is Cynthia Fuchs' Pop Matters review. Fuchs notes that "In Syriana, Bob [George Clooney] is only one of several figures -- specifically, fathers -- trying to keep up." Father-son relationships consistently inform the film's dynamics. Bob's son complains about the inability to live a normal teenage life. Bryan's (Matt Damon) status as a father is crucial to his character's opportunism. Prince Nasir's relationship to his father motivates several major plot points. These father-son relationships may very well comment on issues of generational legacy (Jeffrey Wright's Bennett Holiday pointedly refuses to drink in one crucial scene, for example), but it also seems significant that this generation gap is strictly paternalistic. Bob's CIA agent wife goes unseen. The oil executives are resolutely men, Texas Oil Men in the most classic sense. The only female character with any significant screen time is Bryan's wife (played by Amanda Peet), and she is seen only in the world of family and home, often at the breakfast table. Given all of the recent discussion of Valerie Plame, the absence of any female players in this saga seems rather significant, doesn't it?

Technorati tags: , ,

Posted by chuck at 10:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 10, 2005

PandaCam

While doing some blog reading this afternoon, I came across Plutonium Page's link to Animal Planet's live PandaCam feed (requires Real Player), featuring the newborn panda cub, Tai Shan (maybe you've heard of him). Watching the live feed is utterly addictive and more than a little voyeuristic, kind of a panda cub version of The Truman Show.

As I write, the cub is sleeping, allowing a single stationary camera to capture Tai Shan as he sleeps, but earlier today, while the cub ate, played, and explored, you could watch as one camera, close to the ground, would slowly pan before being replaced by another high-angle, overhead shot. The slow camera movement and the impersonal cutting strangely reproduce what feels like the look of a surveillance camera. It's an oddly clinical and scientific look given the intense emotions attached to the newborn panda, an attachment that is no doubt intensified by the fact that pandas are endangered. Plutonium Page also links to the WWF webpage on pandas, which is also worth checking out.

Technorati tags: , ,

Posted by chuck at 3:41 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

Jacket Links

As I mentioned in my previous post, I'm in the process of writing my paper for the MLA conference, and so this blog may turn into a link clearinghouse for the next several days (it's a process I've used several times, and I usually find it quite helpful). Plus, I now have so many pages open at the same time that I need to organize them in some way.

First, a link to a list of articles on The Jacket and director John Maybury at AltWeeklies.com. Among the more interesting articles on that series is Jim Ridley's piece in City Pages.

Second, as I've mentioned Maybury argued in one interview that his film had Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo "as a subtext." At the very least, it's pretty clear that the film does have the current Iraq War as a backdrop. With that in mind, I've been reading Susan Willis' fascinating book, Portents of the Real, which explores the role of the Abu Ghraib photographs in delivering a "body blow to our sanctimonious self-image." Willis builds upon research by Seymour Hersh (2, 3) and readings of the photographs by Susan Sontag and Slavoj Zizek (essays to which I plan to return as I write my paper).

Finally, one of my goals for the paper, which is part of panel entitled "Pillorying and Parodying Washington" is to address the degree to which Hollywood and its independent studios, sometimes referred to as "Indiewood," are addressing the war in Iraq. It should come as no surprise that I find the conservative Hollywood bashing unsatisfying, but with recent projects such as Jarhead,, Syriana and a planned Rob Reiner film about an American soldier wounded in Iraq, among others, it's clear that Hollywood and independents are engaging with the war in complicated ways, but you'll have to attend my MLA panel to hear the precise conclusions I've made about this relationship.

Update: One more link that I'd like to store here: Sahsa Abramsky's article in The Nation, "Supporting the Troops, Doubting the War."

Update 2: One more link to Arundhati Roy's September 29, 2001, Guardian article on September 11 and the early stages of the war on terror (Operation Enduring Freedom).

Posted by chuck at 2:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 9, 2005

"We Live In Fictitious Times"

I'm working in earnest on my paper for MLA (I've been doing some research and reading all semester, of course) and happened to be watching the making-of documentary on the DVD for The Jacket, and the film's director, John Maybury, mentioned the fact that the Iraq War was launched within a few days (if not the exact day) of the March 2003 Oscar ceremony, a detail that is certainly relevant to the film, which focuses on a veteran of the 1991 Gulf War. Maybury describes the surreal experience of watching as ABC cut from Peter Jennings to Billy Crystal back to Jennings to an Oscar acceptance speech.

Until I went back and did some digging, I'd forgotten that the events were so close together, but it's worth noting that this is the ceremony in which Michael Moore made his "fictitious times" speech, in which Moore asserted that "we are now fighting a war for fictitious reasons." The World Socialist Website also reports on the ceremony, specifically mentioning Chris Cooper's Oscar acceptance speech ("In light of all the troubles in the world, I wish us all—peace"), while also emphasizing the jarring experience of watching ABC cut beteween the Oscar ceremony and heavy fighting in Iraq.

Here's a February 18 BBC article that describes the plans for the Oscar ceremony in light of the build-up for war and the Wikipedia chronology for the invasion of Iraq (amazingly enough I never wrote about Moore's speech on my original blog, but here's the month of March 2003, anyway). The CNN article about the Oscar ceremony is also worth noting.

Posted by chuck at 10:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 8, 2005

The New Mixtape

Also via GreenCine, a link to Ethan Brown's Village Voice article, "The New Mixtape," which describes the phenomenon of DIY "DVD Magazines" that have begun to emerge from the hip hop scenes of several cities. Brown reports that

the spliced-up nature of DVD magazines—all of which (for now) are homemade and released straight to the street—has brought comparisons to hip-hop's mixtape scene.
Brown adds that the "street-centric" approach has caused problems for some of the people featured in the DVDs, with Charleston, South Carolina, and Atlanta prosecutors likely to use evidence from the DVDs in criminal cases (Brown notes that this model of distribution can also be connected to the "Stop Snitching" DVD featuring NBA player Carmelo Anthony that circulated a few months ago).

I'm not sure I have anything specific to add here, but the DVD magazines represent an interesting form of DIY distribution, but I am intrigued by the degree to which the rhetoric of authenticity often goes unquestioned in the production of these ultra-low-budget DVDs, particularly when it comes to the performances of street cred that many of these DVDs feature.

Posted by chuck at 4:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Nightmare Links

More links via GreenCine: the BBC reports on The Power of Nightmares, a documentary series that argues that "the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organised terrorist network is an illusion." The folks at GreenCine have already interviewed series director Adam Curtis, who describes himself as a "modern journalist," twice (it's worth noting that the filmmakers avoid using the word documetray to classify the series). The series is also available for legal download at the Internet Archive. See also reviews by Andrew O'Hehir and J. Hoberman.

Posted by chuck at 3:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Birthday 2005

Today's my birthday, and like Collin, I've been thinking a lot about time, calendars, and age often this week. For some reason, I've been agonizing about this birthday more than usual. Like last year, I think it's worth noting that I'm happy with the decisions I made, that I've become the person I am and not the person I expected (or wanted) to be when I was in high school and college.

And I can always console myself with the fact that Teri Hatcher, Kim Basinger, and I share the same birthday. That's gotta count for something, right?

Update: I shoul probably also mention that I share a birthday with Gregg Allman, Jim Morrison, David Carradine, and Mary, Queen of Scots, among others.

Update 2: One more for the list (via Green Cine): Hans-Jürgen Syberberg turns 70 today. I think we've found the director for the imagined screenplay discussed in the comments below.

Posted by chuck at 12:17 AM | Comments (24) | TrackBack

December 7, 2005

Local Call

Tonight I had the good luck of catching Arthur Joffé's Local Call (IMDB) at the Washington Jewish Film Festival and found the film both charmingly funny and surprisingly touching. The film's premise is a relatively simple one: Félix Mandel, a well-known astrophysicist with a wife and son receives a phone call from his father one evening, telling him to recover a black cashmere coat he's just given to a homeless person. But what makes the phone call unusual is that Félix's father has been dead for over two years. The coat's significance, established in an earlier scene when a local tailor refuses to complete a requested alteration, becomes clear only at the end of the film for reasons I won't reveal, at least above the fold. Suffice it to say that the film's final turn addresses the divide between father and son in a very specific way.

It would have been easy for Local Call to fall into the trap of overplaying the comedic or melodramatic aspects of this kind of plot, and to Joffé's credit, the film avoids becoming too maudlin or too shallow. The film's humor erives primaily from the complicated interactions between Félix and his dead father, as is turns out that it costs a lot of money to talk to someone in the afterlife (plus his dad always calls collect). Eventually, because his phone bills are so exorbitant, Félix's wife leaves him, taking their son, for the banker who called attention to Félix's debts. Félix is later evicted from his apartment, banned from hotels, and evebtually fired because of his expensive phone calls (there's a strong echo of The Book of Job here). Gradually the generation gap between father and son is resolved, especially after Félix's material existence continues to decline. This reconciliation is connected in a fairly specific way to Félix finally recovering the lost coat (and from here I'll be revealing details that might qualify as "spoilers").

The alteration that Félix's father wanted (and that the tailor, Cohen, refused to complete) was to sew a Star of David on the lapel. This alteration is revealed very effectively late in the film when Cohen's daughter, Yael, completes the alteration her father was unable to do. The scene is well done, with the viewer recognizing, along with Félix, what the father has requested.

I'm still absorbing this film, but as I've begun to write about it, I'm increasingly convinced that it's a far more subtle and emotionally effective film than I initially realized as I was leaving the theater.

Posted by chuck at 11:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Progressive Film Clubs

I've used this blog recently to address questions about the definition of independent cinema and to reflect on the political role of the house party film screenings. While I've expressed some doubts about the "house party" model, I think they can be useful as a tool for organizing people with similar interests, as this San Francisco Chronicle article argues. I use "house party" in scare quotes because many of the Greenwald films are screened in public or semi-public spaces such as churches, community centers, bars, cafes, and other non-private spaces.

I mention these issues because I received an email tip the other day about the launch of the Ironweed Film Club, which will promote independent filmmakers and "offer movies as a rallying point for Americans who share progressive values." It's basically a monthly subscription service that distributes independent and politically progressive DVDs (if you subscribe to MoveOn.org or The Nation, you've probably heard about it). In their FAQ section, in fact, the folks at Ironweed describe themselves as "a monthly progressive film festival on DVD." Ironweed looks like an interesting concept. The service builds on the successful practices of the house party events associated with the launch of Robert Greenwald's documentaries and also provides indpendent filmmakers with the exposure and buzz they need to promote their films, as many filmmakers confront significant challenges when it comes to distributing their films.

The first film, Wetback: The Undocumented Documentary has been getting some good buzz, and with Bush focusing more attention on illegal immigration issues, it's certainly a pertinent topic. Also included is Where is Iraq?, a short
film that explores the experience of ordinary Iraqis exiled in Jordan after the American invasion. I'll be interested to see the direction this service takes over the next few months, but it certainly seems consistent with the move away from the multiplexes and into other kinds of screening experiences, not all of which are retreats into the private world of the home.

Posted by chuck at 10:12 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

December 5, 2005

Video Mobility

Just noticed that my contribution to the BRAINTRUSTdv roundtable on the new video iPod is now available.

All of the contributions are worth checking out, but I was most intrigued by Tara Veneruso's comparison (her website) of the video iPod, which she redescribes under the term Pocket Cinema, with the intimate, personal screenings of the nickelodeon. Also worth noting is Veneruso's discussion of Films Directed by Women, a website designed to promote awareness of and box office numbers of films directed by women.

Posted by chuck at 10:28 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

The NYU Strike

Michael Berube has the latest on NYU's striking graduate students, including the news that both Andrew Ross and Alan Sokal have signed a letter supporting NYU's striking graduate students and protesting NYU president John Sexton’s threat to withhold a semester’s stipend from graduate student who do not return to work by December 5. Here's the full text of the letter:

PLEASE HELP US HEAD OFF FIASCO AT NYU

Teaching assistants at NYU conducted a union drive in 1999-2000, won an election, and affiliated with the United Auto Workers (in a local that also includes other educational professionals in NYC such as Museum of Modern Art and New York Historical Society employees). The NYU administration fought hard against the union but was ultimately forced to recognize and negotiate with it by the National Labor Relations Board. There followed a 3 year contract that brought the teaching assistants health benefits and a stipend increase. During this time the university ran quite smoothly.

In the summer of 2005, released from the obligation to negotiate by a new Bush-appointed NLRB, the NYU administration un-recognized the union and has been refusing to negotiate with it. Given this extreme provocation, the union had virtually no alternative but to strike.

They began striking on Nov. 9 and several hundred professors have been teaching off-campus so as not to cross the picket line. The administration—really, President John Sexton—steadily refuses to deal with the union. He has ignored a compromise proposal by a former dean. At one point several administrators infiltrated course websites (using the program “Blackboard") so as to be able to determine which faculty and teaching assistants were supporting the strike; this resulted in widespread faculty outrage and the deans quickly withdrew from that effort.

Now President Sexton has again thrown a bombshell: he has threatened that any TAs who do not return to work by Dec. 5 will be deprived of an entire semester’s stipend and those who dare to return to a strike in the next semester will lose an entire year’s funding.

Such an action would be unprecedented. Graduate student employees have struck at many other universities, including those in the Ivy League and those just as anti-union as the NYU administration, but nowhere have such draconian reprisals ever been taken. Moreover, to date American workers retain a right to strike. While employers may well withhold wages during a strike, punishing strikers for a semester or a year afterward is illegal. The basic disagreement between the students and President Sexton is whether they are workers or not, and his point of view must be reckoned with, but surely the action of assistants who believe that they are workers cannot be criminalized because one disagrees.

If this threatened punishment is allowed to happen it will set a disastrous example for democratic debate at universities throughout the country. It would also cause irreparable harm to the reputation of NYU. We believe it will make it much for difficult for the university to recruit and retain the best faculty and graduate students.

Hundreds of faculty have formed a group, Faculty Democracy, to protest President Sexton’s policy and to push for greater administration consultation with faculty on important decisions—a consultation which, if undertaken seriously, might have prevented this whole debacle.

We urge scholars and intellectuals throughout the country to urge President Sexton to drop his threats and agree to negotiate with the union. He can be reached at 70 Washington Square, NY, NY 10012 and by email at john.sexton@nyu.edu .

Please send a copy of your communication to any sender of this letter.

Thank you,

Linda Gordon, History
Andrew Ross, American Studies
Alan Sokal, Physics
Mary-Louise Pratt, Spanish
writing for the group Faculty Democracy, numbering approximately 250

For more information on the strike, see Jonathan's post at The Valve. To sign a petition supporting the students, go here.

Posted by chuck at 12:59 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

December 4, 2005

Ten Days in Gaza

Energized by the Work in Progress panel, I stuck around for the US premiere of Ten Days in Gaza, a documentary produced by Israel's Channel 2 news about Israel's recent disengagement from the Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. The event is clearly a watershed moment in the history of Israel, and the documentary culls together about an hour of live footage from Channel 2's live broadcasts of the evacuations. The result is a powerful film not only about the trauma faced by Israeli soldiers and civilians alike but also about the role of the news cameras in producing these events. The film was introduced by an Israeli journalist, Aharon Barnea, who discussed the coverage of these events and the ongoing peace process.

Even though I believe that the relocation of the settlers is a positive step in the peace process, it's impossible to watch this film and not acknowledge the powerful emotions felt by soldiers and settlers alike, and several scenes feature soldiers, many of whom were no more than 18-20 years old, crying and hugging the people they were evicting. In other scenes, we see settlers (and people sympathetic with the settlers) engaging in various forms of protest, ranging from scrawled messages on the walls of the homes they were leaving to more violent and manipulative behaviors, including one father who dangles his son out of a window, implying that the Israeli government is responsible for placing his family in peril. The intensity of this compilation of live footage adds to the emotional intensity of many of these scenes.

Gradually, it becomes clear that the documentary is engaging in a form of self-critique. The anchors and reporters who narrate what is happeneing are often guilty of emphasizing conflict, whether due to political beliefs or a desire to sustain a captiavted audience. It also becomes clear that the settlers are engaging in their own staged performances, often inciting their children to complain to the soldiers in order to produce a more powerful emotional effect on the audience. Because the documentary consists entirely of Channel 2 news footage, it's impossible, of course, to see what happened off-camera, but it's clear that the settlers are often consciously stage-managing their own evacuation, at least to some degree.

The discussion afterwards served to highlight the degree to which these events are still highly contested, especially with upcoming elections both in Israel and among the Palestinians. Aharon Barnea explained afterwards, for example, that the leaders in the settlements had failed to adequately prepare the settlers for the fact that they would be evacuated and noted that many of the settlers have not come to term with their relocation. He also argued that the fact that the military finished the evacuations in only ten days showed that the majority of citizens supported it. But more than anything Barnea urged determination and sensitivity as guiding forces in moving towards peace and pointed with some optimism towards the upcoming elections, noting that "once you start talking, you can reach understandings."

In a sense, Ten Days in Gaza felt a little rushed, and for viewers without a sense of the history of Israel, the film might have been somewhat confusing and disorienting, but the film itself is utterly compelling viewing, both in terms of portraying the experiences of the settlers and in terms of illustrating the degree to which the media participated in sensationalizing these events.

Posted by chuck at 8:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Work in Progress: Scapegoat on Trial

This morning, I had the wonderful opportunity to attend a "Work in Progress" panel discussion sponsored by the Washington Jewish Film Festival. This year's work in progress was a documentary film, Scapegoat on Trial, co-directed by one of the fathers of cinema verite, Albert Maysles, and Academy Award nominee, Josh Waletzky. The panel was moderated by another documentary filmmaker Aviva Kempner, who directed The Life and Times of Hank Greenberg, among other films.

In Scapegoat on Trial, Maysles and Waletsky will be introducing contemporary audiences to the somewhat forgotten story of the Beilis Affair, in which Mendel Beilis, a Jewish resident in Kiev was framed for the brutal murder of a young Christian boy in March 1911. The framing was cynically concocted by the tsarist secret police and reiled upon the Blood Libel, asserting that the murder was part of a human sacrifice. The case against Beilis collapsed, however, when it became clear that much of the evidence had been fabricated. During the time of the trial, it provoked international outrage, but the story is not as widely known as it should be, in part due to the outbreak of World War I and the subsequent collapse of tsarist Russia. The story is quite obviously significant, if only because it's worth learning about the heroism of the people who protested against the blood libel. But the film is also significant because versions of the blood libel persist to this day, as the recent documentary, Protocols of Zion, points out. In addition, the film raises important questions about the negative effects of demonizing vulnerable groups in order to promote fear and produce genocidal campaigns, as the recent events in Rwanda, Yugoslavia, and Darfur illustrate.

Maysles and Waletzky showed about nine minutes of the film, which is still in production, but even in those brief scenes, I was struck by the wealth of materials they will be using. Perhaps the most compelling material for this wanna-be archivist was footage from a 1913 Russian documentary that told the story of the Beilis Affair, complete with re-enacted scenes of Beilis' arrest and "home movie" clips of his family and other participants in the case, including the corrupt officials who testified against him. In addition, Maysles and Waletzky were able to interview Beilis' 95-year old daughter in her retirement home in the Bronx. I'll admit to being utterly floored by this access to history, and I'm very much looking forward to seeing the completed film.

During the panel, Maysles also noted that the documentary also represents an implicit commentary on the degree to which mass media in the United States is "dedicated to dehumanizing" others, calling specific attention to the dehumanizing images offered in commercials and reality TV. In this context, Maysles recalled the experience of filming the 1955 documentary, Psychiatry in Russia, during the height of the Cold War, only to have the realization that "they're just like us," which of course makes it far more difficult to see the Soviets as enemies.

I'll also admit to being more than a little star-struck by the opportunity to meet Waletzky, Kempner, and especially Maysles, after the panel ended. In particular, I had the chance to talk at some length with Maysles about the role of documentary as potentially humanizing other people. Watching this material and getting a sense of Maysles and Waletzky's plans for the project left me feeling both energized and enthusiastic about the political potential of documentary filmmaking.

Posted by chuck at 6:58 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

December 3, 2005

La Petite Jerusaelm

La Petite Jerusalem (IMDB) focuses on Laura (Fanny Valette), an eighteen-year old student living in Sarcelles, a low-income suburb of Paris known as Little Jerusalem. Laura lives with her mother, who moved to France from Tunisia, and her sister, Mathilde (Elsa Zylberstein) and her husband, Ariel, and their three children. Laura, a serious student of the Torah and of philosophy, specifically the work of Immanuel Kant, whose emphasis on the rational and knowable dominates Laura's thinking. Laura even takes evening walks every evening at 7 PM, in imitation of the legendary stories about Kant's embrace of routine. Of course, Laura's investment in the rational and her faith in the Torah comes into question later in the film when she cautiously, haltingly embarks on an affair with an unreligious Algerian Muslim, Djamel. The cinematography captures the loneliness of these suburbs rather well, particularly in the repeated shots of the empty courtyard next to Laura's building and the overhead shots of these low-income neighborhoods.

It's difficult to watch this film, with its shots of gritty streets and concrete-block housing in suburban Paris and not think about the recent riots that have dominated the news, but the film only briefly tackles what Doug Ireland calls France's lack of any "serious effort to integrate its Muslim and black populations into the French economy and culture." It's clear, of course, that Laura and Djamel's families are struggling financially. Laura's family, for example, decides aginst her renting an apartment in the city in part because it wouldn't be affordable, but also because they worry that she will depart from the family traditions. Later in the film, Ariel is beaten in a brutal attack simply because he is Jewish, prompting Mathilde to worry that Laura should not be taking her evening walks.

As this Variety review notes, Petite also deals frankly with sexual desire as well. Mathilde, in particular, struggles with her obligations to the Torah and a satisfying sexual relationship with her husband. First-time writer-director Karin Albou handles Mathilde and Ariel's cautious exploration nicely, as the two nervously and clumsily demonstrate their passion for each other in new ways. Unlike the City Paper review, which reads the bedroom scenes as implying the director's awkwardness with this material, I think she's simply capturing the caution that these characters might feel in breaking with the only practices they've known.

While I liked La Petite Jerusalem quite a bit and would certainly recommend it, it was somewhat difficult to determine what was particularly new about the film, which sometimes seemed caught up in some of the more familiar tropes of French cinema, particuarly Laura's apparent sexual awakening. In particular, I would have welcomed a more explicit exploration of the tensions that Laura and Djamel's families face as they seek to feel fully integrated in French society. These struggles--conveyed most vividly in the stark images of the separation between the bleak suburban cités and the Parisian city center--seemed crucial to the impossibility of a relationship between Laura and Djamel, but I left wishing for a more explicit exploration of that situation.

Note: La Petite Jerusalem is playing in DC as part of the Washington Jewish Film Festival and will be playing again tomorrow evening at the Aaron and Cecile Goldman Theater. If you're in DC, I'd certainly recommend catching the film. Oh, and tomorrow morning, I'll be attending Work in Progress: Scapegoat on Trial, which also looks quite interesting.

Posted by chuck at 10:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Indie Film Notes

I'm in full putting-out-forest-fire mode, so entries for the next few days may consist of fragments and partial maps of ideas for some articles I'm writing. Today, I'm working through some ideas related to the discussion of "independent cinema" I mentioned a few weeks ago. With that in mind, I'm linking to two somewhat unrelated articles.

The first is simply a promo piece on the Independent Spirit Award nominees. It's tempting, of course, to be dismissive of the definition of "indpendent" represented in these awards, which tends to promote a relatively narrow image of indie, but I'm also interested in thinking about what people working on the "margins" of Hollywood can do politically (this is not to dismiss those working completely outside of Hollywood, of course, but to complicate these boundaries altogether).

Second is a mediageek blog entry on that NYT article on the independent filmmakers who put themselves over $50,000 in debt making their film, which has screened at over a dozen film festivals, gambling that it would get picked up for distribution. The mediageek entry discuses alternatives to the festival model, including touring with your film (much like an indie rock band might tour to promote an album), something Sujewa is planning to do with his film.

Oh, and I just wanted to mention that tonight I'll be catching one of the films at the Washington Jewish Film Festival, the first time in several weeks that I've had a chance to see a movie in the theater (I have been way too busy). Tonight's pick is La Petite Jerusalem, which looks really good.

Update: Here's the DC City Paper article on the Film Festival.

Posted by chuck at 1:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 2, 2005

Voices of Iraq

I've been involved in some other writing projects this week and, thus, have not had time to feed the blog. One of those writing projects involves revisiting my work on documentaries about the war in Iraq, and with that in mind I watched the 2004 documentary, Voices of Iraq (IMDB), in which a group of American producers distributed 150 digital video cameras to Iraqi citizens who then passed them throughout the country. By the time the footage was compiled, over 1,500 Iraqis had filmed aspects of their daily lives, which was then compiled into a two-hour documentary. In fact, in the end credits the director's creidt goes to the "People of Iraq."

The film was made in the summer of 2004, around the time that the first round of elections were taking place, but also at the same time that the Abu Ghraib scandal had begun to break. Despite, the negative effects of the war, we are presented with euphoric images of family dinners, jubilant (male and female) students, and and happily employed workers. All of the people who address the cameras talk readily about their newly acquired freedom to speak against the government. These stories are told in a video verite style that often places emphasis on the amateur filmmaking techniques (clumsy zooms, out of focus shots, poorly framed shots) in order to emphasize their "authenticity."

Of course things aren't so simple, as we all know by now. Documentaries such as Gunner Palace and Occupation: Dreamland, which were filmed at around the same historical moment tell a much different story, one that conveyed many of the divisions within the country that have complicated the Bush war plan. The film itself is a relatively transparent attempt to counteract many of these criticisms, with gloomy American newspaper headlines contratsed with the cheerful images that have been presented in the film, which raises some important questions about how much control the "people of Iraq" really had over the degree to which their stories were organized in the final film, as this Village Voice review points out. Because the Iraqis in the film seem to have been prompted to address a U.S. audience, it's difficult to determine whether some of the interviews might be fabricated and even more difficult to determine what footage was left on the (purely metaphorical) cutting room floor.

For these reasons alone, the film should be treated with more than a little skepticism, but it's difficult not to appreciate the upbeat images. And I'd agree with the Village Voice's Joshua Land that "It's certainly important for American leftists to consider that many Iraqis have benefited from the war that we oppose." At the same time, the film offers little historical context or explanation for the conditions in Iraq both before and after Saddam Hussein's fall. In this sense, to suggest, as Jonathan Curiel does, that Voices of Iraq conveys the situation in Iraq "in all its complexity" and "conflicting viewpoints" is misguided at best. I'll admit that it's relatively easy now to look back at something like Voices of Iraq and to fault the film for its euphoric presentation of the war (and I've done a little of that), but I'm intrigued by the effectiveness of the film's appeal, particularly through its carefully crafted ideology of authenticity.

Posted by chuck at 10:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 1, 2005

Join the Party

For now, just a quick pointer to KF's call for participation in the new ElectraPress blog and wiki.

According to KF, the goal of the ElectraPress website is "to foster this as a space in which those interested in the future of scholarly publishing can be active in shaping that future." Here's a more elaborate description of what she is proposing.

Posted by chuck at 3:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack