Jesper Andersen: At vise film er ikke nok

”Da John Stewart var vært ved Oscar-uddelingen i 2008, lavede han sjov med, at man nu kunne se “Lawrence af Arabien” på sin iPhone. Men der er millioner af unge, som ikke synes, det er morsomt, og som ikke ville have noget imod at se en klassiker på denne måde.” Det slår Jesper Andersen (Cinemateket i København) fast i en grundig og omfattende rapport, han har skrevet på baggrund af en rejse til 13 filmmuseer og samtaler med 20 af deres programfolk, ”interessen for film udspiller sig – med internettet og dvd-filmen – på flere medier end tidligere, hvilket er en stor udfordring for filmmuseer og cinemateker”, fortsætter han, og det er bare én af udfordringerne, viser hans nøgterne rejsenotater.

“Den bedste måde at bevare film er at vise dem,” mente den berømte grundlægger af Cinémathèque Française, Henri Langlois. Andersen anfører citatet som indledning, og tilføjer fra Langlois’ indlæg på filmmuseernes/filmarkivernes skelsættende kongres i København i 1948, at ”de (cinematekerne) ikke kun skal opbevare (eller sagde han ’bevare’?) film, men også arbejde for at udbrede kendskabet til filmhistorien og filmkunsten.” Det er dette formidlingsaspekt, Jesper Andersen undersøger i en række museer, og hans eget museum prøver bestemt at løbe i front. På Filmstriben.dk er man ligesom simpelthen begyndt forfra med at udstille samlingen på en ny platform. Ti danske film fra forrige århundredes første årtier digitaliseret og lagt på bibliotekernes web-udlån, alle klenodier vel, som Dreyers ”Blade af Satans bog”, 1920, 157 minutter! Det lover godt, men der er langt frem til 2011, og der er formodentlig langt til den del af udlandet, som ikke er USA.

Det med de nye vinduer er imidlertid blot én af udfordringerne for Jesper Andersen og hans kolleger, programredaktørerne på cinematekerne. Han tager i sin rapport fat på en lang række flere hurdler. Det bliver et stort problem katalog. Jeg kan kun anbefale den rapport varmt.

http://www.dfi.dk/Filmhuset/Cinemateket/Rapport-At-vise-film-er-ikke-nok.aspx

http://www.filmstriben.dk/fjernleje/page/article.aspx?id=1431

Doc Discussion/ 4

Jorge Yetano writes: I was reading the posts from Louise Rosen and Mikael Opstrup, and I must say, I have been reflecting on the subject myself for some time now, like most of us, just trying to guess which way things are going to develop, so I can’t help myself commenting. Many problems have been pointed out, the most decisive are: the drastic reduction of TV funding and the saturation of the market, yes, but I also sense other signs. This is more or less how I see it:  talent is now everywhere, where somebody can buy a cheap, tiny, high-performance camera. Cheap tiny high-performance cameras do not make good documentaries, but in talented hands, these cameras will become story-telling devices, and these devices are now in the hands of thousands. That is a fact, and it means there is no longer a centre or a direction that stories from all over the world will take. They just apperar, it is the urge to tell the story going on around you, if you live in a country with poverty, armed conflict or other kinds of trouble, including everyday life. People are telling their own stories, you can see it on the internet: there is no need anymore to go to, say, Venezuela for a documentary if there are cameras in talented hands telling the story in Venezuela. If you want stories you just need the right venues to find them (Storydoc (www.storydoc.gr) was an example). So all of this gives me a feeling (only a feeling) that we are heading towards an “ecology” of documentary. Cameras in talented hands will tell the stories that are around them: local or very local issues, low budgets and deep knowledge of the reality to be filmed (specialization), will be the normal conditions. These stories, if well made, will have a universal sense. Surely talent and storytelling will remain the keys to successful films but the art will become somewhat more like a handicraft if you wish. It actually does sound a little like going back to the origins, but hopefully there will always be a place for bigger documentary productions.

Jorge Yetano is an independent film-maker and producer, based in Zaragoza, Spain, who is currently working, along with his brother Miguel, on the feature-length documentary ON THE SHORE, a visual essay on the origin of summer holidays on the spanish mediterranean coast and it’s consequences in present time. Photo from the production.

Doc Discussion/ 1

If you surf around on websites announcing workshops and pitching fora you might very easily get the impression that everything is fine with documentary financing and coproductions between the countries.

It is not, and it should be discussed.

This is what Louise Rosen wrote to Mikael Opstrup from EDN and me, who thought that her precisely written worries should be shared by others – and eventually commented by other players in the international documentary sector. You are very welcome to join the discussion. We bring the letters below in Doc Discussion 2 & 3.

Louise Rosen is a media executive with over 25 years experience in all areas of the international television and film business. She runs an agency specializing in the financing and distribution of documentaries with particular focus on pre-sales and co-productions, and she has been invited to tutor and lecture all over the world.

Mikael Opstrup was a producer of international documentaries since the 90’s. He worked as production Adviser at The Danish Film Institute 1998-2002 and was from 2002 – 2008 co-owner of Final Cut Productions in Copenhagen. He is now Head of Studies at EDN.

http://www.louiserosenltd.com/

www.edn.dk

Doc Discussion/ 2

Louise Rosen writes:

Dear Tue and Mikael

It was a pleasure working with you again at Storydoc this year. Wonderful that we had a really diverse representation from all over the southern Mediterranean and could spend a day on the Arab Spring with filmmakers from that region. We are living in exciting and yet strange times.

So, speaking of strange times, I wonder when we among the oldtimers are going to start to speak more publicly about the dire state of the indie feature doc world? We keep training and workshopping emerging filmmakers but to what end? I looked back at my notes from my talk last year in Corfu (Storydoc training session, summer 2010) and it brings me to tears. Back then I wrote that in the face of media consolidation and diminishing resources for traditional journalism, the world urgently needs the vision and insight provided by independently produced single docs. All the more true today. But the conditions today are 3 or 4 times worse than they were a year ago.

What can we do? What is in the best interest of the filmmakers? Is this dreadful climate for feature docs the “new normal”? How do we deal with a sector of the television business that has become almost a monopoly – dominated by a few commissioning editors who wield enormous power and influence? What about the growth of film festivals that attract sponsors and increasing audiences but show films that can’t pay for themselves and will vanish into obscurity before they can reach significant numbers of viewers? The world of online, digital distribution is not paying yet. Does this mean that any project requiring more than a filmmaker with a camera, will be lost? No more alternative forms of history or art or science?

I’m hoping that there will be discussions of these important issues sometime soon. Filmmakers in some territories are hitting a “wall” in terms of funding and outlets and this will be the case everywhere before we know it.

I welcome your thoughts on this.

Photo: A film from the catalogue of Louise Rosen.

Doc Discussion/ 3

Mikael Opstrup writes:

Dear Louise

Thanks for your raising the issue about independent, feature docs.

It’s of course a key issue, as you point out. I see it like this: 15 years ago the establishing of a ‘preproduction TV-market’ with all the pitching forums etc. was THE right thing, it brought together the filmmakers and it brought together the filmmakers and the financiers at a time where TV was a major financing factor. In some of the big western European countries like Germany and France and in the Scandinavian countries there was and is a massive national public funding – but it doesn’t change the overall picture in Europe in general.

Now this has changed radically, the TV money has gone down dramatically and there is absolutely a need for a change.

The big question is what today’s equivalent in terms of financing is. I have a clear feeling that we are in a limbo, the old financing has diminished and no new one has come instead. Cross Media, VOD and other online platforms, crowd funding etc. none of it fills the gap and I’m not sure they will or at least I’m not sure which one will?

So the only source that I see apart from these ones is the public funding, which is of course more cultural and national orientated and less market orientated. There is no doubt that public funding and independent doc has a beautiful history together  – in Europe, not talking about the US – but is it realistic? I’m not sure – and I’m not only thinking of the current financial crisis but also beyond this.

Of course – speaking about strategies and future possibilities – one also has to take into consideration what impact the changing formats have on the financing possibilities. Will we see an explosion in shorter formats for web, mobiles etc? Will the digitalization of cinemas open up this location that has almost only been a temple for fiction and alongside screening sports events, operas etc be a possible financial possibility for docs?

Photo: Steam of Life, Finland, 2010, 82 mins. – chosen by Mikael Opstrup.

MandagsDokumentar Efterår 2011

A text in Danish about the unique Copenhagen based documentary screening initiative ”MandagsDokumentar” where films, new and old, Danish and international, are screened, mostly with directors present and/or subjects to be discussed.

Så er det tid til en ny sæson af MandagsDokumentar, det unikke formidlingsinitiativ som blev taget for 9 år siden af Ebbe Preisler, som stadig er den utrættelige primus motor og kurator, som han selv betegner sig. Programmet er sædvanen tro opfindsomt sammensat, der er herlige gensyn med fine film som Claus Bohms designerfilm ”Den magiske orden”, Jon Bang Carlsens mesterlige gennembrudsfilm ”Jenny”, Frank Piaseckis ”Guerilla Girl”, som har været verden rundt og den herlige tegnefilm ”Hellere rask og rig end syg og fattig” af Jannik Hastrup.

For ikke at tale om Morten Henriksens ”Bag Blixens maske” (foto), som er blevet rost til skyerne af Allan Berg på denne blog – og en række sociale og politiske film fra verden omkring os.

Det er fremragende kompetent, det arbejde som Preisler udfører og det er derfor helt uforståeligt, at DFI (Det danske filminstitut) har beskåret tilskuddet til MandagsDokumentar med 25%. Sæt beløbet op igen, det manglede bare!

www.mandagsdokumentar.dk

The Syrian Revolution/ 5

This story has been brought in some Western media… a quote from storyful.com below, more can be read on the site where also the cartoonist’s regime critical works can be watched:

Famous cartoonist and scathing critic of Syria’s Ba’athist regime, Ali Ferzat, has been plucked off the streets of Damascus and badly beaten in an attack blamed on security forces and militiamen loyal to president Bashar al-Assad. They say that the pen is mightier than the sword, but the attack appears to be an attempt to get the prizewinning satirist to sheath his weapon of choice and to silence this voice. Support for Ferzat has been pouring in via his website, his own Facebook page, a Facebook supporter page, and on Twitter.

http://storyful.com/stories/1000007009

http://www.ali-ferzat.com/ar/home.html

D.A. Pennebaker: Monterey Pop

Well, it was a revisit to one of the best – some say the best – music festival documentary. And you are again totally seduced by the power of music and by the superb camera work performed by a team including Richard Leacock (photo), who was the producer together with Pennebaker and who has been subject to a now finished small mini-retrospective series at the Danish Cinemateket in Copemhagen. Close-up after close-up of the performing artists, of the spectators, images of the ambience at the festival and sometimes almost abstract images, sometimes psychedelic, a play with light and shadow, when Leacock and his colleagues move around with their handheld cameras trying to convey to us ”the sense of being there”, as the old master said. What is to be mentioned… Jimi Hendrix setting fire to his guitar, the Who smashing guitars, Janis Joplin in a fantastic performance crying/shouting/singing her pain out, the well-behaved Simon & Garfunkel ”feeling groovy”, wonderful Grace Slick with her Jefferson Airplane, Otis Redding in magnificent silhouette images, Country Joe… and the grande finale with Ravi Shankar that is covered magnificently with shots of him and his two colleagues, mixed with reaction shots from an enthusiastic audience. Wow, a trip down memory lane, and one that still gives you goose bumps.

You can watch a lot of material on YouTube, but you could also buy a dvd of this classic. Do the latter! Google the many places where it can be bought.

USA, 1968, 98 mins.

Igor Mayboroda: Rerberg and Tarkovsky

140 minutes with the subtitle ”The Reverse Side of ”Stalker””. Watched in one shot, you feel exhausted afterwards, and more than happy having experienced the company of Russian artists at their best in a drama put together in a demanding way (lots of subtitles to read for a non-Russian speaking person) with unique archive material, sound interviews, picture interviews, clips from films, film historical comments, intrigues and an insight to the work of the cameraman Gregori Rerberg (1937-1999), the main character of this film, a brilliant speaker about his profession and inspiration sources. Mayboroda’s documentary and documentation of the relationship between Andrei Tarkovsky (1932-86) and Rerberg is unique both in terms of film history and as a story of what actually happened, when Tarkovsky sacked Rerberg as cameraman in ”Stalker” (1979). Until now the primary source was Tarkovsky’s memoirs, Mayboroda brings new knowledge to the sad story.

Here is – taken from the voice-off subtitle texts in the beginning of the film – an edited summary of the conflict: ”The Mirror” (1974) was the peak for both Rerberg and Tarkovsky. Rerberg saved Tarkovsky when he agreed to shoot the film because everybody else refused to do it. Tarkovsky also shot his next film ”Stalker” with Rerberg… during the shooting of ”Stalker” Tarkovsky lost mental and emotional control leading to a collapse of human relations in the film crew. This catastrophe anticipated the collapse of the Soviet Union. The humanist film director Tarkovsky omitted Rerberg from the credits of ”Stalker” in the tradition of Stalin’s era, depriving him of a well-deserved future in the profession. However, it was Rerberg, who guided Tarkovsky back to his proper path during the shooting of ”Stalker”.

Strong words and accusations which are supported by interviews with many colleagues, who – many of them – also were sacked by Tarkovsky, who shot ”Stalker” three times keeping – as it is said by many – the camera style of Rerberg in the final version. The material shot by Rerberg went up in fire so that can not be directly verified.

Many reasons are given for the sacking of Rerberg, and others, from the mouth of Tarkovsky. In a section of the film called ”Italian Dialogues”, Tarkovsky says that Rerberg behaved badly, drank all the time, and delivered material, that was out of focus! The conflict, and Mayboroda’s paying Rerberg justice, takes up a lot of the film’s duration, with many pointing at Larisa, the wife of Tarkovsky, as the intriguing person, who wanted to have big roles in

her husband’s films but were denied so, very much because of Rerberg’s evaluation of her (lacking) talent. But having said so, the film is also a tribute to the art of cinema, and in some sequences itself pure beauty.

Because what Tarkovsky also said about Rerberg was that his images were always “an aspiration for the truth, the truth presupposed by all his previous experience”. Beautiful! And during the whole film, through the archive material with him, Rerberg always praises Tarkovsky. He says that two people have meant most for him, Tarkovsky and the conducter Mravinsky (1903-1988) with whom, Rerberg filmed a documentary. In an excellent montage Mayboroda lets the music from this film and clips from Mravinsky conducting or talking about his métier comment the work and philosophy of Rerberg. It works perfectly and supports the words of Rerberg (about Tarkovsky and himself making ”The Mirror”) – the autobiographical films are those that work best, we reached the subconscious in that film, we succeeded to let ”the inner come out”. Another inspiration for Rerberg was the philosopher Losev (1893-1988) – Viktor Kossakovsky tells how he got Rerberg to do the camera for his student film about Losev, and was so enthusiastic about listening to the philosopher that he forgot to start the camera.

Rerberg himself refers constantly to the influence he got from paintings – he liked them all, from renaissance to Russian avant-garde, except for expressionism, ”I’ve learned from painting my whole life”. His family background was one of music and literature, which the film also describes in a fine way.

A Shakespearean story. Film history. A tribute to film art. Amazing, and of course it makes you want to go back to Tarkovsky again!

Photo: Rerberg (left) and Tarkovsky.

Russia, 2009, 140 mins.

http://www.kinoglaz.fr/u_fiche_film.php?num=4246

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/nov/06/tarkovsky-sheffield-docfest

Contact about the film: mdproject@mail.ru