Dokufest Prizren 2016

For years we have been following the festival in Prizren Kosova long-distance. This year – the festival dates are August 5-13 – it will be different. I will be there. Nevertheless – apart from enjoying the atmosphere and the open air screenings and all the side events – it will be a challenge to put together a film programme as there is so much interesting to choose from.

I say so after studying the press release that came out today announcing ”full slate of films for its 15th. jubilee edition, running from August 5 – 13 in the city of Prizren, Kosovo. Culled from yet another year of record number of submissions, the festival will showcase a selection of 238 films from 57 countries across 6 competitive sections and more than a dozen specially curated programs…”

It is impossible to mention all the elements – check the website, link below – but it is indeed impressive what is on the menu with the mix of

more classical competitive programs and special focus sections. Should be an inspiration for new festivals that are looking for a way to go, a profile, a (film) political statement to make.

In that respect one more quote from the press release: ”Corruption is central theme of the festival this year and its local, as well as global social context and consequences, will be highlighted and explored through a number of events, including panels, discussions with filmmakers and invited international and local experts, workshops and tech conference. A hand picked film program focusing on the issue of Corruption as well as two other phenomena that go hand in hand with it, Power and Lies, has been specially curated to coincide with the theme…”

9 films are in that section, we have written about ”A Good American” by Friedrich Moser, ”Behemoth” by Zhao Liang and Vitaly Mansky’s ”Under the Sun” – and I have read so much about ”The Lovers and the Despot”, ”Houston, We Have a Problem” and ”Weiner” – just some titles that will be on my viewing list in Prizren.

Much more will be written about this festival.

http://dokufest.com/dokufest-xv-announces-full-slate-festival-theme/

Claas Danielsen – New Job

His name has been on filmkommentaren.dk since our site started as I have been covering the DokLeipzig festival, where Claas Danielsen was the festival director from 2004 till 2014. Before that I worked with him when Documentary Campus was Discovery Campus – well our friendship goes long back to the 1990’es, where Claas as filmmaker came to the Balticum Film & TV Festival on the island of Bornholm shortly after he had graduated from film school.

His love for documentaries is big and his talent for developing initiatives like the mentioned (as well as the Dok.Incubator) is obvious. Now he got an offer he could not refuse – to become the CEO (in German Geschäftsführer) of Mitteldeutschen Medienförderung MDM following in the footsteps of respected Manfred Schmidt, who set it all up in 1998. The MDM operates in Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt und Thüringen. Claas starts in his new job by December 1st.

The budget of MDM is (according to a FB post by DOK.Incubator)

€12,8 mio. I know that the MDM is to support all kind of film genres including documentaries, and that Claas (who now can stay in Leipzig with his family) probably will have a lot of administrative duties… nevertheless, want to remind him of fine words from his opening speech of DOKLeipzig in 2009:   

…  what is special about documentary film. Documentary films are constantly surprising. I discover the unknown or re-discover seemingly familiar things through the filmmaker’s eyes. Documentary films often tackle uncomfortable, suppressed issues and go straight for the core.

The filmmaker’s attitude allows me to change my perspective, get a fresh look at the world. A really good film is marked by an attitude that I recognise in the choice of protagonists, in the images, words, sounds, rhythm, even in the elisions. This subjective and authentic attitude reveals the filmmaker, just as the protagonists are revealed in front of the camera. Of course it makes them vulnerable, too – precisely because they reveal themselves.

A good film opens up a space – a space for reflection, for association, for understanding, for finding meaning. It does not explain everything, has the courage to leave gaps, has no qualms about being irritating and thus ultimately brings me the gift of intellectual freedom.

A good film also opens up a space for emotions, enabling me to gain an emotional understanding of the world. And it leaves interpretation to me – I am taken seriously as a unique spiritual and emotional being…

Congratulations to Claas Danielsen.

http://www.mdm-online.de/index.php?id=9&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=1304&cHash=97f39780a0f44a933cf0b9e46fb2e007

Robert Frank’s Don’t Blink In New York

I got an email from Laura Israel this morning, the director of the film on Robert Frank, with whom she has working for years as an editor. “Getting the Word Out” she wrote and told that the film is running at the wonderful New York cinema Film Forum July 13-26 = from tomorrow. Later today the producer Melinda Shopsin posted a reference to an enthusiastic review of the film by Matthew Eng, Tribecafilm.com. It deserves a quote, see below and remember that we have several texts on Frank on this site. I also want to recommend the website of the film.

…Don’t Blink is the rare documentary — and Israel the rare documentarian-cum-cinematic curator — that understands that the best way to elicit both appreciation and understanding for an artist’s creations is to allow us to see these creations first-hand. And when the creations in-question are as electrifying and contextually-profuse as Frank’s, it’s especially hard to look away. His famously era-specific photography is so striking in the direct spontaneity of its gritty Americana, the scattered snippets of his films so arresting in their shaggy ecstasy, that as each of his works slips and seeps into one another, one can’t help but struggle to keep up…

https://tribecafilm.com/stories/don-t-blink-robert-frank-is-one-of-the-most-original-art-documentaries-in-years-laura-israel

http://www.dontblinkrobertfrank.com

Documentary Winners in Karlovy Vary

I could not find the information on the website of the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival – luckily Danish jury member Sigrid Dyekjær posted on FB the decisions made by her and colleagues Laurent Bécue-Renard and Hana  Kulhánková:

The Grand Prix for Best Documentary Film is given to LOVETRUE by Alma Har’el (photo). The jury motivation:

Often, filmmakers play the role of therapists for their characters. With great audacity and imagination Alma Har’el goes a step further in LoveTrue. Through intimacy and respect, the director is allowing her protagonists to elaborate and represent images of trauma from early in their lives. These psychodramas become parts of many layers in this innovative film, cinematographically pushing the boundaries of storytelling while addressing the inherent difficulties of the universal journey of love.

The catalogue description of the film goes like this: The highly anticipated sophomore effort from an Israeli director who has returned five years after her successful debut Bombay Beach, this time to uncover the essence of something as universal as the emotion of love. A documentary essay interweaving three true life stories and exposing naïve notions of the existence of “true” love that is free of pain. (USA, 82 mins., 2016)

The jury gave an honorary mention to “Ama-San” by Cládia Varejão, here is the catalogue description:

This lightly lyrical documentary takes us to a remote corner of Japan, where a community of traditional pearl hunters sets out to sea each day to dive down several metres below the surface in search of shellfish, octopuses, sea urchins and lobsters. If we adjust our breathing rhythm to the tranquil tempo of the passing scenes we will be rewarded with a fascinating world where, in equal measure, time-honoured rituals and companionable warmth introduce a sense of requisite harmony.

http://www.kviff.com/en/homepage

Miguel Llansó: CRUMBS

SYNOPSIS

I denne etiopiske sci-fi møder vi Candy, der træt af at samle krummerne fra den sammenbrudte civilisation, drømmer sit liv væk, mens han lever i evig frygt. Da fartøjet på himlen begynder at bevæge sig efter en række mærkelige hændelser, tvinges vores lillebitte helt ud på en surrealistisk, episk rejse, der fører ham gennem post-apokalyptiske, etiopiske landskaber, hvor han møder sig selv, sin frygt og hekse, Julemanden og andengenerations-nazister. Blot for at opdage, at det han længe har troet på, slet ikke er, som han forventede. (Africa Reframed, programtekst)

Etiopien 2015

Filmen vises på onsdag 13. juli 19:00 på udstillingen AFRICA REFRAMED i Øksnehallen, København.

AFRICA REFRAMED – Afrikansk samtidsfotografi i Øksnehallen, København 18. juni-2. august 2016.

http://www.africareframed.com/#africareframed(filmprogrammet er inkluderet her)

SYNOPSIS

Sci-fi from Ethiopia. Tired of picking up the crumbs of gone-by civilizations, Candy dreams his life away when not living in a state of perpetual fear. When the spaceship in the sky begins to turn on and after a series of freak incidents, our miniature-sized hero will be forced to embark on a surreal epic journey that will lead him through the post-apocalyptic Ethiopian landscape as he confronts himself, his fears and witches, Santa Claus and second generation Nazis: only to discover that what he had long believed is not what he expected. (Afrika Reframed programme)

Director: Miguel Llansó, Ethiopia 2015

Documentaries in Karlovy Vary

Until saturday July 9th the festival in Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic is on and the red-carpet mainly feature film festival has a fine eye for documentaries as well. As part of the schedule the Jihlava Festival (20th edition this year late October!) presents what they call ”docu talents” from Eastern Europe, and the 51st Karlovy Vary event has a competition for documentary films.

12 films are listed with a good variety of new and old talents… many of them directors known for works praised previously on this site. Like Polish Michal Marczak who presents his ”All These Sleepless Nights” with which, quote from the catalogue, the director ”reconfirms his reputation as a nonconformist who is ever veering from the parameters of the traditional documentary toward hybrid forms.” Like he did way back with ”At the Edge of Russia” that I met when I was working for the training programme Ex Oriente. Equally talented is Daniel Abma, whose ”Transit Havana” I saw a couple of months ago and characterised as ” a well told character driven, emotional and informational, visually excellent documentary”. Shot in Cuba, great characters and a slogan for Cuban politics, ”Homophobia no, socialismo si”.

A third younger director, Mohamed Siam from Egypt, has for years been working on – quote from the catalogue of the festival – ” a

scathing report on the dissolution of his homeland, whose people had barely tasted their suddenly-acquired freedom when they found themselves choking on the turbulent events of the months that followed”. Siam was at the DoxBox festival in Damascus in 2011 with the idea to this film that now completed is ”Whose Country”. I have high expectations. As I have for new films by the veterans, very much acclaimed Vitaly Mansky and Miroslav Janek.

After his festival success ”Under the Sun” Mansky turns the camera towards his own background with ”Close Relations” that has this catalogue annotation:

“I became a Russian citizen simply because I happened to live in Moscow when the Soviet Union broke apart,” says the celebrated Ukrainian documentarist. A few decades later his family in Ukraine face the dramatic consequences of further turbulent change, and their fresh experience of the revolution shows us that the media presentation of the country’s East-West dichotomy is deeply flawed.”

On the top of my list of ”Must See”, however, is Czech master Miroslav Janek’s ”Normal Autistic Film” (PHOTO) that goes like this:

”A foremost Czech documentarist with a unique authorial vision challenges us once and for all to stop perceiving autism as a medical diagnosis. Let’s take hold of the surrounding chaos and overload our senses! In such a state one may understand autism as a fascinating way of thinking that’s often maddeningly difficult to decipher.”

Read about all the films on

http://www.kviff.com/en/programme/catalog-of-films/sekce/591-documentary-films-competition

 

Alex Holmes: Stop at Nothing

… the Lance Armstrong Story, to include the subtitle, was screened last night at the DR2 Dokumania, whose editors apparently do not hesitate to bring sport documentaries during events like Wimbledon (last week ”Serena” (Williams) was shown), and now, when the first stages of Tour de France are broadcast on tv screens all over, and is very popular in Denmark, a documentary about Lance Armstrong. One should think that there was enough sport on the channels, but here came another documentary on Lance Armstrong. I am sure many do remember the Alex Gibney documentary, where the director was finishing a portrait of the bicycle superman, when the news broke that he had been doped, confessed by himself in an Oprah show. In 2013. The director went back to Armstrong and made an interview with him that became the backbone of a film that shows a lot of material from the Tour with Armstrong in the winning role.

There is much less bicycling in this documentary that has its focus on the portrait of man – who happens to be an athlete – who is characterised by one of the many interviewed as a sociopath, who made his own myth, who bought victories, broke every decent rule of ”normal” friendship, shouted at one former team mate after the other, when they had suggested that he was doped, used his cancer illness in the foreground when going public… The film goes step by step into a case that we have heard about so many times, and is merciless in its portrait of the (lack of) human qualities of the Shakespearean Armstrong. No sympathy at all. I would not say that I had that for him in Gibney’s film that in a way makes him an archetype of a madman, who gets away with all king of lies without any scruples whatsoever.

As usual for the Dokumania series – stylistically a formatted, designed tv documentary.

For Danish readers – the film is available for a period on dr.dk

Australia, 2014, 90 mins.

Sibs Shongwe-La Mer: Necktie Youth

På udstillingen AFRICA REFRAMED – Afrikansk samtidsfotografi i Øksnehallen vises onsdag aftener i juli en række film. I morgen 6. juli 19:00 er det den sydafrikanske NECKTIE YOUTH fra 2015 som er instrueret af Sibs Shongwe-La Mer.

SYNOPSIS

Shongwe-La Mers s/h film er en fortælling om utilpassede unge, dårlige stoffer, bravado og selvmord, og udspiller sig i de grønne middelklasseforstæder til Johannesburg. Filmen begynder et år efter Jabz’ veninde Emily død, som hun af ukendte årsager livestreamede på nettet. Et dokumentarfimhold vil finde sandheden om hendes død, mens Jabz og andre, der kendte Emily, bare vil glemme. Jabz og September cruiser rundt i byen i en lånt Jaguar, mens de snakker om race, politik og bizarre seksuelle møder. En række tilsyneladende tilfældige begivenheder fra butikstyveri på apoteket over en slåskamp i en spiritusforretning og et foruroligende besøg hos deres drag-pusher fører dem i sidste ende i armene på de smukke, bikiniklædte, jødiske tvillinger, Tali og Rafi. Høje på dyr vin og stoffer tumler gruppen rundt i en barnlig, euforisk dis, men gennem det hele holder Jabz og September fast i hinanden i forsøget på at udtrykke det, alle de unge i byen søger: ønsket om medfølelse og identitet i store doser. (Afrika Reframed, programtekst)

SYNOPSIS

Shot in black and white, Shongwe-La Mer’s films is a tale of disaffected youth, bad drugs, bravado

and suicide, set amongst the leafy suburbs of middleclass Johannesburg. Its one year after the death of Jabz’s friend Emily who mysteriously livestreamed her own suicide on the internet. While

a documentary crew tries to make sense of her death, Jabz and others who knew Emily are desperate to forget. Jabz and September float through the city in a borrowed Jaguar, mouthing off

about race, politics and bizarre sexual encounters. A series of seemingly random events, from

shoplifting pharmaceuticals to picking a fight in a liquor store, to a disturbing visit to their cross-dressing drug dealer, eventually leads them to the home (and the arms) of beautiful bikiniclad Jewish twins, Tali and Rafi. Expensive wine is opened and more drugs consumed as the group

descends into a childlike euphoric haze. Through it all Jabz and September cling to each other, trying to express the feeling shared by all the kids in the city; a desire for compassion and identity in large doses.

Necktie Youth (2015), director: Sibs Shongwe-La Mer, South Africa 2015

https://vimeo.com/124532257 (trailer)

http://www.indiewire.com/2015/04/tribeca-review-drugs-and-sex-define-necktie-youth-a-south-african-kids-62868/ (Review)

AFRICA REFRAMED – Afrikansk samtidsfotografi i Øksnehallen, København 18. juni-2. august 2016.

http://www.africareframed.com/#africareframed (filmprogrammet er inkluderet her)

Lars Johanssons film og bøger

Det er en bog. Det er en film. Det er nat. (Marguerite Duras: Elskeren fra Nordkina, 1991/2012)

Lars Johansson er den anden af de to fotografer (den første som jeg har skrevet om i forgårs er Finn Larsen) med udstillingen i Øksnehallen, København, ”Ung i Randers 1978-1979”, som Tue Steen Müller for nogle dage siden, som altså tidligere nævnt, anmeldte begejstret her på Filmkommentaren og derfor må jeg igen lige repetere de tos arbejdsmæssige løbebaner, i dag altså Lars Johanssons. Om et af hans allerførste arbejder filmen Anholt, som han skrev, instruerede og fotograferede i 1988, lavede jeg en programtekst. Den tager jeg lige frem igen og citerer et sted fra den:

”… Efter vi har set os gennem det lange vinterafsnit klippes der til kirken, hvor lyset står ind på øens degn Ejner Boisen som for filmholdet alene synger Jakob Knudsens salme. Trygge ved vi at ved årenes sortering vil bestemte af vort sprogs udsagn, vort lands billeder, de musikstykker, vi kender fra opdragelsen, vende tilbage. Nok umistelige simpelthen, ”luft og bølge blusser i brand, i glød…” Sætningen får her nye betydninger, fordi filmens billeder af havet nænsomt har inddraget Noldes erfaringer, hans tilkæmpede akvareller fra Sild. Og da selve personen, der synger er skolelæreren på øen, må den tanke, hvormed vi ser filmen en tur om ad vores litterære bevidstheds ø og dens degn i Martin A. Hansens bog og filmens scener tager farve herfra. Da det jo er Anholt konkret her henter den endelig som en selvfølge viden fra Tang Kristensen, fra Achton Friis og fortolkende indsigt i myternes væsen fra Vagn Lundbys værk. Respekten for de andres arbejde har i den udforskning, den afdækning af feltet, som det lange filmarbjde også var, bragt instruktøren vidt omkring og afstedkommet rækker af inspirationspunkter, tydeligst måske fra malerkunsten, så de ligger som lag af indsigt under de nye billeder. Søndergaards havs blå oprørthed og knoklede mennesker, som på én gang er store nok til at håndtere det element og ydmygt små på den vældige flade af vand og luft. Høsts hvide længer og sorte portrum med hjemlig tryghed.”

FILMOGRAFI

Røgdykker, 1985. Om mandsmod og professionalisme. Om munterhed og sammenhold. Et filmisk hyldestdigt til et røgdykkerhold ved Københavns Brandvæsen. Stilen veksler mellem både lyrisk og dramatisk reportage og en scenisk stilisering som hos Jørgen Leth.

Anholt, stedet, rejsen, 1988. Om stedets betydning og om at rejse dertil og om at være der. Om tilstedeværelse, altså. Og så om et anderledes integreret liv i naturen, i kulturen, i historien. Og om Guds bestemmelse med menneskene. Igen en stilvekslen som i forrige film.

Hvem slukker lyset, 1989. Filmen er et frikvarter, en opgave fra aftenskolerne. Og der var kun én chance for at løse opgaven, det skulle være grundlæggende morsomt. Så filmen studerer den morsomste mand, den kunne forestille sig, Finn Nørbygård, katalogiserer hans bedste (og morsomste greb) og beder ham på det repertoire gennemspille tre små episoder og alle fire roller i hver af dem.

Traveller’s Tale, 1994. Her udvides rejsemotivet fra Anholtfilmen. Den rejsende slår sig ikke ned, men når til gengæld sted efter sted. Menneskene, han møder, fascinerer også hurtigere skiftende, og på dette bagtæppe af europæiske billeder dukker erotikken op sammen med denne nye energi. Nærværet er konstant, også i ganske korte scener. Blikket bliver introduceret. Den lyriske reportage er enerådende i stilen, visse afsnit griber tilbage i en stor og international dokumentarisk tradition.

Traveller’s Tale

Mellem lys og skygge, 1996. Og filmen om den københavnske arkitektur bliver en fortsættelse derved, at dette æstetiske emne skildres som bagtæppe, mens undersøgelsen af kvinden i mandens blik er i forgrunden under selve handlingen gennem en eftermiddag, en aften og en nat i den sommervarme by. Konstruktionen udvides med en på forhånd fastlagt og skrevet dialog.

Højholt, 1997. Og blikket vendes indad i en spejling, skønt opgaven er at skildre en digters eneboerliv, som ikke flytter sig ud af dets fysiske sted, men til gengæld lever den rigeste indre eksistens. I teksten. I rytmen. I gentagelsen. Og filmen hviler tryg i en gedigen reportage, som til gengæld udsættes for tankespring og –udfordringer, i dialogen for det første og i klipningen for det andet.

Højholt

Simona, 1998. Det erotiske motiv, som dukkede op i Traveller’s Tale, isoleres nu, og blikket bliver det afgørende greb. Dette er så Lars Johanssons første samlede kvindeskildring, en arbejdsopgave, som fortsætter over efterfølgende værker frem til senest romanerne Signe, 2006 og Signes hjemkomst, 2014. Et stykke af vejen er det mandens forelskede blik, som skildrer. I romanen skifter denne synsvinkel afgørende.

Blod og håb, 2001. Filmen om det militære opgør bliver (som denne begivenhed altid er) en afbrydelse. Ved ekstra grundig research og mange reportagerejser og journalistiske greb skildres den europæiske borgerkrig som en fortsættelse af undersøgelsen, bekymringen og vemodet, som var bagtæppe for møderne med kvinderne i rejsefilmen fra 1994.

Den tyske hemmelighed, 2004. Her knyttes trådene. Rejsen sydpå i verdensdelen, alvorlige og ærbødige møder med de andre i klassisk sikre reportagescener i deres rum. Mandens blik er nu på hans kvinde, hustruen. Og hans film skildrer hendes projekt. Og selve researchen bliver filmens materiale. Æstetikken fornys afgørende med det detektiviske greb. Filmen bliver spændende. Historien er nu omsider i Lars Johanssons arbejde det, hvorom alt drejer sig. Så en roman måtte blive det næste.

Den tyske hemmelighed

BIBLIOGRAFI

Udsatte egne – det er mig. Samtaler med Per Højholt, 1998. Det med bøger var for så vidt begyndt nogle år tidligere. Det var mødet med Per Højholt ved arbejdet med filmen i 1997, som satte ekstra gang i skriveriet. Altså ud over filmmanuskripterne, som Lars Johansson hele tiden havde skrevet selv. I en interviewbog med Per Højholt undersøger Lars Johansson dokumentarisk så at sige forfatterens arbejdsvirkelighed muntert og alvorligt, dagligdagens handlinger og æstetiske overvejelser.

Signe, 2006. Hustruens projekt i Den tyske hemmelighed er at opspore sin far, som hun mener er en tysk officer Felix M udstationeret ved den tyske hærs hovedkvarter i Silkeborg, det følger filmen og historien foldes nu ud i romanformen over 600 sider. Det er Lars Johanssons svigermor, Signe Gondrup som følges fra kærlighedsmødet i Silkeborg over deres samliv i hans hjem i Bøhmen til de kommer fra hinanden på flugt fra de fremrykkende russiske tropper hen mod krigens slutning. Derefter Signes kamp for overlevelse i det besatte Tysklands rå kaos. Lars Johansson romanfortælling hviler på omfattende, omhyggelig og kritisk journalistisk dokumentarisk research og han har udskiftet sit blik med Signes, alt fortælles og tænkes i hendes bevidsthed i en overbevisende skildring af en stærk kvindes syn på og håndtering af en voldsom skæbne.

Dancing Charlie, 2008. Verdenskrigen er også baggrundstæppet for den på samme måde i sin velundersøgte dokumentariske basis intense skildring af et menneskes kamp for overlevelse under mere end barske vilkår. Baggrunden er historien om en flydedok med 1500 krigsfanger som i nogle af krigens sidste døgn driver over Østersøen og strander på Langeland. Danskeren Niels-Erik Ohlsson er blandt dem og i hans mentale registreringer skildrer Lars Johansson de forfærdende begivenheder om bord. Blikket er nu en mands, en ung mands og en gammel mands i ét greb. En yngre kvinde opsøger den gamle Niels-Erik Ohlsson med sit blik på begivenhederne dengang og sammen undersøger de hvad fortrængningerne dækker, de mandlige og det kvindelige konfronteres.

Signes hjemkomst, 2014. Bogen genoptager fortællingen ved Signe Gondrups ankomst til den danske grænse. Hun har sit nyfødte barn med sig. Og Lars Johanssons fortællegreb er de samme som udvikles så alt ses i den modige kvindes blik, en fængsling for en lille forseelse dengang i Silkeborg, livet i arrest og senere fængsel og efter løsladelsen en beslutsom søgen arbejde og bolig i København. Stadig leder hun gennem forbindelser i Tyskland efter sin forsvundne elskede, efter Felix Markworth, og sporer ham til sidst i Braunschweig. Hun rejser dertil. Lars Johanssons skrivekunst kulminerer så her foreløbigt i skildringen af den bombede by i en sproglig rekonstruktion hvilende på detaljerede arkivstudier overført som oplevet i en fortvivlet kvindes sind.

LINKS

http://www.larsjohansson.info/ (Lars Johanssons hjemmeside)

http://filmcentralen.dk/alle/film/hojholt-en-film-af-lars-johansson (Højholt, streaming)

http://filmcentralen.dk/alle/film/den-tyske-hemmelighed-en-film-om-krig-kaerlighed-og-logn (Den tyske hemmelighed, streaming)

Foto øverst: Lars Johansson på arbejde i 1978 fotograferet af Finn Larsen.

Andrei Nekrasov: The Magnitsky Act

… has the subtitle ”Behind the Scenes” and indeed this is what it does, or rather where he takes us, Andrei Nekrasov, known for his controversial film on the poisoning of Litvinenko, for his ”Russian Lessons” that deals with the Russian-Georgian war and for his tv series ”Farewell Comrades”. In other words Nekrasov is an experienced, professional director behind big international films. His new film digs into what actually happened to Sergey Magnitsky, who died in a Moscow prison in 2009, where he had been sitting for 380 days, arrested by the police after having reported a financial tax fraud of considerable size. To the authorities.

Magnitsky, a young lawyer, was hired by American lawyer and investor, based in London, William Browder, who has been insisting, since then, on Magnitsky being tortured to death, and has made himself a human rights activist and a ”Public Enemy no. 1” of Putin’s Russia.

Browder went to the US Congress, had an Magnitsky Act passed and signed by President Obama, an act that made Russian officials involved in human rights conflicts banned to enter the US.

About the overall narrative of the film: Step by step, Nekrasov gets closer to people and documents around the case, an insight that makes him question, whether Magnitsky was actually beaten with death as the consequence or whether he died a natural death… and whether this whole story was set up by Browder to clean himself for being involved in the fraud.

I read about the film being taken off the program at the Norwegian Film Festival in Grimstad – the festival was threatened to be sued by Browder and his lawyers – and I read that it was not shown at a planned screening at the European Council because Browder presented papers stating that the film was full of wrong statements and conclusions – for the same reason broadcaster arte/ZDF has put the film on hold to investigate… The film, however, was screened on the initiative of the producer Piraya Films, in Oslo, in Washington at a closed session and at the Moscow International Film Festival some days ago. At the two latter mentioned events raising upheated debates.

A ”hot” film in other words. Thanks to brave Norwegian Torstein Grude from the production company Piraya in Stavanger Norway for letting me watch the film AS A FILM and not as a piece of investigative journalism even if it is also what it is…

So here comes an attempt to make a film review of a film that with its narrative structure includes several film styles, several angles.

This is what makes it interesting, the richness in approaches with three main personalities, Magnitsky, Browder and Nekrasov.

It starts with Nekrasov, who hears about the Magnitsky case and wants to make it into a film. He contacts Browder, who since 2009 has told the story again and again, is a good storyteller, who seems convincing when he talks in between the dramatized sequences of Magnitsky being beaten up in the prison, as Browder says, Magnitsky being arrested in his home by the policemen in front of his wife and two children, the corrupt policemen having meetings with mafia guys in night clubs, the involved mysteriously being killed one after the other, the interrogation by the policemen – ”if you sign here that you did not tell the truth when you reported the crime, you can go home…”. So here Nekrasov presents Browder’s version of the truth. Classical drama with the voice of Browder taking us through the story.

Even if these sequences are sometimes a bit too cliché-filled in the décor, they ”survive” because of the good actors playing Magnitsky and the police officer Karpov. The drama-documentary set-up has music ”from wall to wall” (apparently this is what stories like this must have, it is beyond my understanding that it is necessary), anyway the drama parts are not only interrupted by interviews but also by tv news clips that communicate how the media treated the case.

But slowly disappears the drama documentary and the film director Nekrasov becomes the investigative journalist, who goes from place to place, from Moscow to London to New York, searching for the truth, discovering that Magnitsky was called upon as a witness in the financial fraud case and not as someone accused, and that he never mentioned the name(s) of the policemen in the first official report. Karpov from the police, one of those criminalised by Browder, suddenly comes into the film in a scene, where Nekrasov asks the actor who plays him to be present at the meeting, where Karpov tells Nekrasov his version of the case and why he sued Browder in London, a case that the English court did not want to deal with. Nekrasov often includes the making of the film in  the film by letting the viewer see the actors being directed, the cameraman with the camera and himself and the editor in the editing room. It is done without stopping the flow of the film.   

It is towards the last third of the film that my notes say ”now it is too complicated”, at least for me, I could not follow the story, when Nekrasov compares documents in Russian and English translation (he calls it manipulation) and explains how Browder and his company performed their creative money game. I get that Nekrasov wants to to prove that Browder lies and manipulates to whitewash his actions and make himself a name, but I don’t get the detailed arguments. Therefore I turned my attention to watching a more and more engaged, almost obsessed investigator Nekrasov, who goes deeper and deeper and who also – and here we are far from the ”heroic” journalist kliché – is in doubt. Is it right what I am doing? Me who has always been critical to my country Russia and to the politics of Putin, me who had to flee the same country because of my criticism… I am now being accused of supporting the same regime.  

Even if I have to say that there are doubting scenes/sequences that I find over the top: Nekrasov in chairs contemplating, Nekrasov standing at the window thinking etc. etc. Storytelling clichés… Even so I never doubt the honesty of Nekrasov and his feelings: This is a drama documentary and an investigative documentary and a first person film essay rich in content and form, and courageous in its approach…

… is he right or not – I can not say, let me ”hide” behind the former CIA intelligence officer Philip Giraldi, who – according to the FB of producer Torstein Grude – as one of the first saw the film, and wrote about it, link below:   

”To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented documents in the case that contradict much of what Nekrasov has presented in his film. But in my experience as an intelligence officer I have learned that documents are easily forged, altered, or destroyed so considerable care must be exercised in discovering the provenance and authenticity of the evidence being provided. It is not clear that that has been the case. It might be that Browder and Magnitsky have been the victims of a corrupt and venal state, but it just might be the other way around. In my experience perceived wisdom on any given subject usually turns out to be incorrect…”

Below there are also links to newspaper articles, American and Russian orientated, about this “scandalous” film that Washington Post called “agitprop”… Torstein Grude says, that he plans to make a follow-up on the media and how they treat(ed) the film. He is going to have a lot of material to draw from!

But first, let this film be shown all over, let debates be held. They will be one-sided first of all, but please bring in nuances as well. From my side: Respect!

Norway, 2016, 145 mins.

http://www.unz.com/article/the-magnitsky-hoax/

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/world/europe/sergei-magnitsky-russia-vladimir-putin.html?_r=0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/russian-agitprop-lands-in-washington/2016/06/19/784805ec-33dc-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html

https://www.rt.com/news/346642-magnitsky-film-shown-washington/

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-film-challenges-story-behind-us-human-rights-223526531–politics.html

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/behind-the-scenes-of-the-magnitsky-act-op-ed/573943.html

http://www.rferl.org/content/magnitsky-film-on-hold-european-tv-channel-arte/27704772.html