Ada Bligaard Søby: Petey & Ginger

Ada Bligaard Søby har i lidt mere end syv år været i gang med et konsekvent filmisk værk, som med undertitlen til den seneste af de syv film, det består af, også samlet kan kaldes a testament to the awesomeness of mankind. Det er store ord, men de siges på en stilfærdig måde. Der larmes ikke i hendes film, men hver rystende detalje, hvert udbrud af pludseligt vid præcist på plads i konstruktionerne, er fyldt med intens og sagte alvor: dette er mine ønsker for menneskets fremtid, og i et kaos af nutidig moralsk og materiel sammenbrud skimtes i filmene en forunderlig blid fasthed og en ærbødighed over for enhver kulturs integritet og historie. Alle filmene har, uden at Ada Bligaard Søby har rystet på hånden, i et og alt intenst levet op til de store ord. Der har været bygget og bygget på værket.

Sådan er det derfor selvfølgelig med den syvende og seneste film, Petey & Ginger(2012), som havde premiere på CPH:DOX i november og har været sendt for nylig på DR K. Den skal ikke først og fremmest nye veje, den skal videre med det, værket er i gang med. Så den vender tryg tilbage til den første film, American Losers (2006) i tema, den amerikanske kultur, og i kunstnerisk greb, en sammenstilling af en kvindes og en mands biografier og liv nu. I denne tilbagevenden, i denne sunde vedholdenhed fremstår den som en rig variation i en filmisk passacaglia.

Som i American Losers lægger Ada Bligaard kortene på bordet fra begyndelsen: jeg er ved at lave en film med mine venner, de er her: og vi får en scene med et samvær en aften. Instruktøren har samlet dem til en fest, et måltid i hvert fald, vi er formodentlig ved optagelsernes afslutning, de præsenterer sig for hinanden, de kender nemlig ikke hinanden, i hvert fald ikke alle, de er musikere i samme band, en del af dem, og så er der to, som er gift med hinanden, og der er fotografen Adam Nilsson og Ada Bligaard selv. Det er en hurtig, lidt genert og aldeles autentisk scene, sådan er det med det. Og herefter er filmen i gang, de to hovedpersoner skiller sig ud fra de andre medvirkende. Som i den første film: ”Ginger er min bedste ven, Petey er også min bedste ven”, kunne der have stået på speedmarker skilte. De to tager over og kommenterer deres samfund, deres tid og deres egne biografier, som de fortæller markante træk fra.

Det bliver til et helt andet end vanligt tidsbillede af årtierne omkring årtusindskiftet, Ada Bligaard tegner, en anden USA historie. Imperiets storhed er, ser det ud til, forbi, det er forfaldets kapitler, som nu skrives. Det vokser til en overvejelse af magthavernes, de økonomiske beslutningstageres dekadence, til en meditation over frådseriet og den flossede moral for øjnene af flere og flere fattige blandt menneskene, flere og flere, som lever sat på gaden åbenbart som følge af finansfolkenes dispositioner.

Men nogle af menneskene er rene af hjertet, og Petey og Ginger hører til den gruppe, på hver deres måde, som dog både er forskellige og ligner hinanden. Ada Bligaard kæmper som i andre film af sine film, ud over den nævnte American Losers og særlig fornemt i Meet me in Berlin (2007), en film om et muligt møde mellem hende og ham, så forskellige, men bevæget af den samme ømhed for hinanden i et mærkeligt fællesskab, hun arbejder energisk, men med dejlig let hånd på at holde balancen mellem de to personer, hun hver gang placerer på vippen. Og det bliver hver gang til klippekunstens vanskelige balancegang, på én gang holde fokus for iagttagelserne og balance i de ligevægtede karakterers udvikling. Netop det er Ada Bligaards særkende, et af dem. Det kan hun, det er en del af den cinematografiske musikalitet hun er begavet med.

En anden del af talentet er det hos hende selvfølgelige, men ganske særprægede billedsyn, som driver kameraet til optagelser, hvis stilfærdige skønhed berører dybt, ikke kun mig, men for eksempel også juryen, som gav hende prisen på CPH:DOX 2010. Den begrundede valget af De nøgne fra Skt. Petersborg (2010) med instruktørens ”særligt kreative udtryk og evne til vedholdende at være i stand til at imponere sit publikum med et stærkt visuelt udtryk”… “Scenerne er bundet sammen med et unikt blik og en meget personlig palet af farver, situationer, stemninger og følelser.” Det samme kunne siges om alle Ada Bligaards film og således også om Petey & Ginger. Ved sine egne optagelser, ved sine instruktioner til den kongenialt fotograferende Adam Nilsson og i høj grad også ved den overraskende dristige brug af arkivmateriale, ofte ganske privat og ofte af overfladisk set ret tvivlsom kvalitet, ser hun og aflokker det besynderlige æstetiske kvaliteter, der udgør billedmæssige territorier, som til nu var ukendte for i hvert fald mig. I sig selv en opdagelsesrejse.

En tredje del af Ada Bligaards kunstneriske særpræg er alvoren bag det hele og den ganske originale og naturlige evne, hun har til nå dybde i den filmiske tænkning. Petey & Ginger bliver og er således først og fremmest et personligt essay om moderne fattigdom på grundlag af en antropologisk undersøgelse, en poetisk og filmisk etnografi, som kommer tydeligt igennem. Efter at have set filmen sidder jeg helt stille, for det her er egentligt tankevækkende. Det er ikke en bekymring, dog, det ligner, men det er noget mere, det er en stille fortvivlelse. Ada Bligaard Søby ser det vist ikke selv sådan, jeg læser imidlertid filmen sådan, og så rigt er værket, det kan bag ryggen på sin autor forstås ud fra en lang række andre forudsætninger, og jeg er sikker på, der er svar til dem alle. Elementerne er for så vidt enkle og sædvanlige, men kvaliteten af dem er overraskende og overrumplende, ny og frigørende. Jeg har ikke set det tilsvarende i nogen anden af den nye bølge af berømmede danske dokumentarfilm. Dette er enestående i filmverdenens nu. Måske er Ada Bligaards arbejde især mærket af en munter uskyld på trods, på sin måde lig Peteys og Gingers liv.

Ada Bligaard Søby: Petey & Ginger, Danmark, 2012. 59 min. Manuskript: Ada Bligaard Søby, medvirkende: Ginger Partington og Petey Damnit, fotografi: Adam Nilsson og Ada Bligaard Søby, klip: Charlotte Munk Bengtsen, musik: The Oh Sees (og mange flere), lyddesign: Roar Skau Olsen, producer: Morten Kjems Juhl, Anna Byvald og Frank Mauceri, produktion og salg: Beofilm interfere@beofilm.dk  www.beofilm.dk

http://peteygingerfilm.com/#Home   

Murphy/ MediaStorm:A Darkness Visible: Afghanistan

In a quest for taking a viewer beyond the headlines, Seamus Murphy embarks on a journey through Afghanistan, the land he has grown to love and its culture and people that never ceased to amaze.

A long-term project by acclaimed documentary photographer Murphy with a contribution of the footage from the Afghan Film Organization and Augustin Pictures was produced by the award-winning New York-based multimedia production studio MediaStorm. Based on 14 trips between 1994 and 2010, “A Darkness Visible: Afghanistan” charts people’s journey to find their way in the country deluged by the political upheaval. From the Soviet invasion and the mujahideen resistance to the Taliban and the American occupation, the film deftly traces thirty years of Afghan history telling a tale of war through the eyes of ordinary people. In times of war, there is loss and fear but there is also a place for hope, dreams, and even love. The production portrays war giving it a face. The toll should not be esteemed in numbers. Be it a commander of the mujahideen resistance or a member of a typical Afghan family, the life of a man is equally precious and fragile once the war knocks on the door.

“A Darkness Visible: Afghanistan” finds a compelling way to deliver its intricate web of stories by utilizing multiple media and fusing photography, audio-visual material, and external footage. Its dramaturgy follows a clear structure by plotting different chapters of Afghan history. The presentation of the film, therefore, is undeniably comprehensible and adds an educational value. Its powerful black-and-white imagery is captivating, enduring, and will be distinctly ingrained into one’s memory.

Candid, with much tender and care, Murphy tells the story of Afghanistan. They say, “No one comes to Afghanistan once.” Indeed, there is something about this land that captures imagination and allures to come back. But as the shadow of the war lingers long, “there is a moment when you hold your breath knowing that something so bright might just become dark again.”

USA, 2011, MediaStorm, webdocumentary.

http://mediastorm.com/publication/a-darkness-visible-afghanistan

Dror Moreh: The Gatekeepers

This Academy Award Nominee 2013 – and it was also nominated for the main prize at idfa in November 2012 – has troubled my mind for days since I watched it. Which I did a couple of times. Why? Because it is so well crafted and effectively told? Yes, but many films are. Because it gives you an intelligent, mature, open-minded and critical insight to a world that you did not know about? Through (again) an effective use of storytelling elements that give you associations to fiction thrillers that takes place in the fascinating world of secret agents? Yes, but is that a sufficient explanation? No, it is not, it all comes down to the talking faces, the six former heads of Shin Bet, the Israeli internal secret service (contrary to Mossad, the external), and to what they say, and to how they say it. Seldom have talking faces been so well situated, you listen and you watch and you get the director’s description and interpretation ”in-between” the faces – rooms full of computer-screens with faces and names, air shots on targets, archive corridors of drawers with cards of suspected terrorists AND unique archive material of Palestinians being arrested and led to interrogations. As well as the known archive with Arafat and Rabin shaking hands with Clinton in the middle, and all the material around the murder of Rabin etc. And excellent computer graphic work that is used to give life to photos.

The six have since 1980 represented a secret service in a country that is in a constant fight with terror and with itself. You might have thought that many horrible events should not be talked about, but they are talked about in this film, that from that point of view is a journalistic scoop. Far away from the quick news clips we are used to from television, the six get their time to talk and to make this viewer shocked and confused. And the questions put to them are all the time direct and right to the point.

Take the oldest of them, Avraham Shalom (who was Shin Bet head 1980-86), a nice grandpa with red braces. Does not look like a man, whose job it was to run a secret service (even if there is a slight ressemblance to Alec Guinness in Tinker, Tailor…). You get empathy for him until you hear about his role in the 1984 Bus 300 incident, where he ordered the execution of two terrorists

(his terminology), who had kidnapped a bus. They were caught alive, injured, Shalom, in the film, told the soldiers to ”finish them off”. A later Head of the Service characterises him as a ”bully, ”a tough guy”. He lost his job after Bus 300. He talks very nice and appears as a cultivated man, who has lost hope in any peace process, and then suddenly his words reveal his look at ”the other”, ”the enemy”. And then he suddenly indirectly states that what Israel has done to the Palestinians today is a bit like what the Nazis did to the Jews!

Shalom and several of the others keep coming back to the theme of lack of security policy. They have no good things to say about the politicians, who want to be presented with two options, when decisions are to be made, no nuances, ”not with strategies only tactics” and ”forget about morality”. These words from high rank officials with a long career in the IDF and in the secret service are more than shocking, presented in this intelligent, analytical frame that also, of course, is the History of Israel with the ”Palestinian Issue” being constantly present.

Information on how the Shin Bet functions? Indeed – the recruitment policy for hiring collaborators in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza is brought forward. The professional Intelligence work. And how to target terrorists and try to kill only those targeted and not innocent civilians. Which often has failed. As it failed for Carmi Gillon (1994-1996) to establish enough security for Rabin, who was killed by an Israeli extremist in 1995. ”I suddenly saw a different Israel”, the killer changed history and conequently the work of Shin Bet that included the settlements as areas of operation.

I could go on with examples of what is being said, let me finish with Yuval Diskin (2005-2011), who in the first four minutes catches the viewer’s attention, and the core of the visual side of the the film, by talking about the perfect ”sterile” operation, illustrated by air photography, from the pov of where the killing bomb will come from, targeting a moving car, that explodes and completes the mission: Killing. ”It feels a bit unnatural”, he says, ”when you know  that they were human beings”. Later he is the one opposing the government policy, stating that after all this he has almost become a leftist. ”We’ve become Cruel”.

Israel, 96 mins. 

PS.

Below the link to the website of the film, which gives additional biographical information on the sic head of Shin Bet.

And please do also read the full article by Gideon Levy in Israeli newspaper Haaretz, here is a quote from the conclusion, he makes:

Rolling their eyes, they pass responsibility on to the political leadership, whose role they scorned, as if they could not have influenced much more, or tortured and assassinated much less. As if they did not know at the time that alongside the successful counter-terror operations, the question of how much terror their cruel methods ignited cried out for an answer. How many new terrorists were born in the interrogation cells in which tens of thousands of people were shaken, beaten, bound, humiliated and tortured with the monstrous methods whose use they have admitted.

There are countries in which individuals who are responsible for similar deeds have been prosecuted; in others they at least expressed remorse years later. Not so for our Shin Bet heads. Here they are welcome guests in every news studio or party, celebrities whose opinions are valued, stars who decorate party slates, national heroes no one would think to repudiate…

http://www.thegatekeepersfilm.com/

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-gatekeepers.premium-1.490739

DocPoint Helsinki

The programme of the Finnish documentary film festival reflects again that the festival selectors know what they are doing – and they should in a country that has such a high standard in documentary culture.

From January 22-27 more than a hundred films will be shown. Personally I am not sure I like the thematic curating approach that is used to section the films to be screened on the website, I find it confusing, but behind headlines like ”Der Prozess”, ”Hard Day’s Night”, ”Higher Ground”, ”Home Sweet Home”, ”Kaleidoscope”, you find many exciting works like Eugene Jarecki’s ”The House I Live In”,  Jerome le Maire’s ”Tea or Electricity”, ”Private Universe” by Helena Trestikova, ”The Gatekeepers” by Dror Moreh and ”The Reluctant Revolutionary” by Sean McAllister – to mention those seen by this blogger.

There is a retrospective of films by Mario Ruspoli, ”surrealist as a documentarist”. Have to confess that I know his name but do not remember having seen any of his films. I quote from the site of Cinema du Réel 2012, where a retrospective was held: “Mario Ruspoli (1925-1986), one of the pioneers of the modern documentary, explored and experimented with image and sound techniques, yet his work remains unfamiliar to many despite its richness, its eclecticism and its historical importance. This year (2012), Cinéma du réel is proposing some of his classics and little gems.” And now DocPoint does the same. Bravo!

There is – of course – a series of New Finnish documentaries, 13, with good names like Susanna Helke, “American Vagabond”, the original and touching “Finnish Blood Swedish Heart” by Mika Ronkainen and “Hilton” by Virpi Suutari. There is “North by Northwest” with films from Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, Norway and Denmark. I mention the films that have been reviewed on this blog: “Winter go Away”, “The Will” (“Testamentet”) and “Documentarian” – at the same time as I would like to raise attention for Lithuanian Giedre Beinoriute’s “Conversation on Serious Topics” (photo) that will be reviewed here as soon as I get the final version of a film, I was priviliged to watch when in rough cut state.

And there are more sections ending up with the “Winners and Bestsellers”, 12 films and I am happy for the Finnish audience that they are to watch “I am Breathing” by Emma Davie and Morag McKinnon and many more films that have been at DOKLeipzig and idfa.

http://docpoint.info/en/content/etusivu

Oscar Nominations January 10/2

So, the nominations have been announced. For the Best Feature Documentary. We will know the winner by February 24. Apart from ”5 Broken Cameras” with Burnat and Davidi, the nominees (= names) will be determined later. The names here are the directors of the films. 

5 Broken Cameras (Emad Burnat and Guy Davidi)

The Gatekeepers (Dror Moreh) (photo)

How to Survive a Plague (David France)

The Invisible War (Kirby Dick)

Searching for Sugar Man (Malik Bendjelloul)

There is a tradition for writing “… and why is this film not nominated”, I will not do so, just say that of course many other films could have been on the list. Instead I will salute the presence of the two films from Israel/Palestine as well as “Searching for Sugar Man”, which contrary to the other films do not deal with politics or social matters/activism. I had some reservations about “The Invisible War” (see post below) and I still have not seen “How to survive a Plague”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/10/oscars-2013-nominations-list

http://oscar.go.com/nominees

Cinema Eye Honors 2013

Awards are being lined up to be distributed these days. The Oscar nominees will be announced in a couple of hours and in three days the Golde Globe comes up. Good for cinema with all this artificial competition?, maybe, good for publicity for the documentary genre in general, I think so. Here is another one, Cinema Eye, quite interesting:

Just a couple of lines about the Cinema Eye Honors taken from the press release that was received this morning: The Cinema Eye Honors were founded in 2007 to recognize excellence in artistry and craft in nonfiction filmmaking.  It remains the only international nonfiction award to recognize the whole creative team, presenting annual craft awards in directing, producing, cinematography, editing, composing and graphic design/animation.

Lovely to see “5 Broken Cameras” (photo) by Emad Burnat and Guy Davidi to receive the main recognition for “Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking”. Michael Moore accepted the award for the two directors, saying ““I personally feel it’s one of the most beautiful pieces of artistic cinema, you don’t see this on the evening news. You don’t see Palestinians portrayed this way.”

Direction prize went to Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady for “Detropia”, the audience chose “Bully” by Lee Hirsch and Jeff Orlowski was honored for an outstanding achievement in cinematography for “Chasing Ice”. Not to forget a film close to the heart of this blogger, “Argentinian Lesson” by Wojciech Staron, which got the “Spotlight Award”. More to be read about on the website, also that a Legacy Award was presented to Chris Hegedus and D A Pennebaker for “The War Room”, a classic in documentary history.

http://www.cinemaeyehonors.com/

Oscar Nominations January 10

At the beginning of December 2012 15 documentary flms were shortlisted. Tomorrow (I am writing this January 9 late evening) 15 will become 5. Originally there were 126 official submissions, that were taken down to these 15:

Alison Klayman’S “Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry,”

Lee Hirsch’s “Bully,”

Jeff Orlowski’s “Chasing Ice,” (photo)

Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s “Detropia”,

Rory Kennedy’s “Ethel”,

Emad Burnat and Guy Davidi’s “5 Broken Cameras“,

Dror Moreh’s “The Gatekeepers,”

Eugene Jarecki’s “The House I Live In,”

David France’s “How To Survive a Plague”,

Bart Layton’s “The Imposter”,

Kirby Dick’s “The Invisible War,”

Alex Gibney’s “Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God,”

Malik Bendjelloul’s “Searching for Sugar Man,”

Mojtaba Mirtahmasb and Jafar Panahi’s “This Is Not a Film”,

Peter Nicks’ “The Waiting Room”.

I have seen 6 of them and they are all good films although I found ”The Invisible War” (shown on Danish DR yesterday night) far too long and repititive touching a very important theme: sexual abuse in the American army. Of the others I read in Danish newspapers a lukewarm review of the film about Ai Weiwei, Juste Eigminaite praised ”Chasing Ice” on filmkommentaren.dk, Bart Layton’s ”The Imposter” is on all hit lists as an original film, Alex Gibney is a fine filmmaker…

Why bother? There are many great films that should have been nominated for an Oscar. Of course, but having been in New York during the month of December, checking the movies pages of newspapers, watching tabloid US television, you get hooked and seeing ”5 Broken Cameras”, ”The Gatekeepers” (review will follow one of the coming days), ”Searching for Sugarman” and ”This is not a Film” among the 15, quality is there. The question is how many of these 4 will survive for the final? We will know tomorrow.

Sevara Pan

Sevara Pan is the name of our first 2013 guest writer. She is of Uzbek-Korean origin, was born in Siberia (Russia) back in the 1980’s. She was raised in Central Asia in the post-Soviet period and moved to Germany where she was educated in social sciences with focus on media communications. After assisting the industry team of DOK Leipzig, she worked on a number of international co-productions in Leipzig, Berlin, and Brussels. Since July 2012, she has been working at Documentary Campus as editor for one of its initiatives — reelisor, an online networking platform for documentary professionals within and outside Europe.

Sevara Pan makes her debut with the two posts below. Welcome!

Apted & Miroshnichenko: The Up Series

As the 56Up landmark documentary has started to roll out in US theaters past weekend, it might be just the right time to take a look at its Russian equivalent that was broadcast on ARTE in winter of 2012.

Inspired by the UK-based Granada’s World in Action documentary directed by Michael Apted,  the Russian director Sergej Miroshnichenko too dares to probe the statement by the Jesuit maxim “Give me the child until he is seven and I will give you the man” in his 28Up series “Born in the USSR.”

The first footage that now looks like a few generations old, was filmed in the 80’s. “Born in the USSR” is the film about a group of ordinary 7-year-old children taken from all over the expansive territory of the Soviet Union and the course of their lives in the post-Soviet era.

Alike Apted, Miroshnichenko revisits children every seven years with the gaze of an interested observer coming to their lives to ask the questions of love, marriage, success, career, class, and prejudices. Yet “Born in the USSR” goes beyond the hypothesis that lies at the heart of the original film — whatever happens by 7 sets the course. Sure, Apted never claimed to have been able to predict lives of those children but he did articulate on the idea of the core personality, that look in the eye, and the essence that one sees in the faces of 7-year-olds manifesting itself later in their adult lives. Deftly inter-cut footage from earlier films with contemporary interviews puts forth Apted’s surprising discoveries that seem to support the ruminations of the Up series.

However, I reckon, “Born in the USSR” excels in bringing to light accounts of ordinary lives in resonate with changing times. “Born in the USSR” masterfully tells the stories of very different people who were born in the empire that aimed for uniformity. They come from Russia, the Baltic states, Caucasus, and Central Asia. They witnessed the fall of the Soviet command and found themselves in the environment of transition with the prospects, values, and norms that have changed drastically. 

“Born in the USSR” is more than a film about life in the post-Soviet era. It is even more than a mere collection of biographies. Direct and unpretentious, it raises a universal question about growing up, about hopes and dreams, adult realities and their disappointments, and the big question is what life has in store in times where nothing is certain.

Dongnan & Doran: The Sound of Vision

“I wasn’t sure if I felt special or left out”, Frank Senior reflects on a moment of realization of being blind. Thought-provoking and insightful, this 8-minute documentary, conceived as part of the International Documentary Challenge, captures a glimpse of a man’s journey in the world unseen. Blind from birth, a native New Yorker walks us through the city he has never seen. Alien to light, he finds colors in sounds, voices, and music.

A beautiful short film by aspiring New York-based filmmakers Dongnan Chen and Julia Doran, that is a PBS premiere, available online on POV until September 13, 2016.

Additional information: Frank Senior works as a guide at the Dialogue in the Dark exhibition in New York City. He leads groups of people through a tour of simulated Manhattan — specially constructed dark rooms in which sound, scent, wind, temperature, and texture convey the characteristics of the environment. In the world without pictures, “it is all about combining other senses and letting them come out and play.” Over 7 million people have experienced Dialogue in the Dark in over 30 countries and 130 cities worldwide.

http://www.pbs.org/pov/soundofvision/