Igår passade jag på att bläddra igenom bloggen efter att ha publicerat mitt inlägg om Ullared och insåg att det har blivit en hel del serierekommendationer här i bloggen. Därför tänkte jag ändra på det idag genom att rekommendera en film, något som visade sig vara bra mycket svårare än vad jag räknat med.

Efter att ha gått igenom TV-tablån ett flertal så hittar jag endast två filmer på samtliga kanaler som inte är filmkanaler och båda dessa två sänds på SVT1. Först har vi Människors rike tidigt på eftermiddagen och därefter följer Paradise now på kvällen. En film som överraskade mig positivt när jag såg den.

I serieväg så har vi åter igen en storkväll där det visas NCIS, NCIS: LA, House och Desperate housewives. Där utöver har vi en mängd matcher i kvällens Champions League och personligen så kommer jag vara klistrad framför FC Barcelona – Inter i hopp om att få se Zlatan göra mål på sin gamla klubb.

Handling för Paradise Now

Palestinsk-israelisk- fransk-tyskt drama från 2004. Said och Khaled är två palestinska män som är trötta på hopplösheten i konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina. De beslutar sig för att ta saken i egna händer och bli självmordsbombare. Filmen handlar om de 24 timmarna före attentatet då de, med bomben runt magen, inför sina närmaste måste låtsas som att allt är som vanligt.

20:00 – Äntligen hemma på TV4
21:45 – Paradise Now på SVT1

Länktips: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]

This will be my sixth year covering the Cairo International Film Festival and I have to admit, I still feel excited about it. Fully aware of its shortcomings, I’ve had my share of its good moments and blunders.

Even though many critics would say (and I agree) that the selection of films are not the best, it’s still an opportunity to watch a lot of non-commercial non-Hollywood films and meet people passionate about filmmaking — artists not just stars.

But who am I kidding; it’s also an opportunity to rub shoulders with the stars.

Name dropping

It’s there that I interviewed Morgan Freeman, which became the highlight of my life for a year. I had the pleasure to have lunch with him along with Pakinam Amer, Tamara Yousry, Yasmine Shehata and Mariam Abu Ouf. He struck us all as a man with the spirit and passion of a 20-something, not the veteran actor in his late 60s.

It’s there that I met Mustafa Al-Akkad (director/producer of The Message and Omar El Mokhtar), one year before he died in Jordan’s 2005 bombings.

It’s there that I saw Omar Sharif for the first time in real life. I interviewed him later on.

And I briefly met Hany Abu-Assad (Paradise Now), during the premiere of Leilat Sequot Baghdad (a personal favorite).

I’ve also attended press conferences for Susan Sarandon and Charlize Theron.

Susan Sarandon in Cairo. By Sarah El Sirgany

A female reporter gave Thero a gift at this press conference and went out and hugged her. -By Sarah El Sirgany

During this year, a young Egyptian actor was relentlessly hitting on the stars (there’s no other way to describe his comments and questions to them at press conferences). I think he also told Theron at the press conference that she’s cute or something along these lines. And Alicia Silverstone eventually told him “I’m married.”

This actor and others like him aside, I’ve met a host of filmmakers from all around the world, passionate about what they do. Some swore never to come back — director Juanma Bajo Ulloa of the brilliant film Fragil is one of them — and others like French director Safy Nebbou, who I met in 2004, came back last year to win another prize.

Criticism from participating filmmakers range from lack of organization to allegations that the winning films are known way before the closing ceremony. Concerning that one of those winning filmmakers told me, award in hand, that he had received a call a couple of days before the closing telling him to travel to Egypt and he’ll find a pleasant surprise, this proposition isn’t that far fetched.

There’s a consensus in criticism that the local press are only interested in covering Egyptian and Arab films, leaving the screenings of beautiful foreign films relatively empty. (Foreign press is largely absent). One Indian producer/director approached me a couple of years ago, asking if I could help him invite more journalists to his morning screening. I did, but still, my film contacts at the time couldn’t fill the hall.

Live Scandals

I’ve also watched a lot scandals unfold. An Egyptian producer and a critic took the ‘discussion’  to a whole new level, and if it weren’t for the stage separating the two, the fight would have definitely got physical.

Aside from how they described each other when interviewed later (‘Ostaz eh, da combarss,’ the producer told us), it turned out that the reason for the fight wasn’t the film as we thought. A knowledgeable source from the industry claimed that this specific critic was criticizing the performance of one new actress, who was secretly married to this producer, who didn’t want anyone badmouthing his trophy wife. But that was unconfirmed.

In the screening of Dunia (officially translated as “Don’t Kiss Me in the Eye”), Lebanese director Jocelyne Saab and Egyptian film critic Khaireya El Beshlawy were also inches away from physically attacking each others after yet another scandalous press conference, with each calling the other crazy in later interviews.

Hala Khalil’s Cut and Paste’s screening wasn’t scandalous but it was full of theatricals.

The screening of Inas El-Degheidy’s El Bahethat An El Horreya (Freedom Seekers) should be credited for uniting the feminists female critics with the all-mucho male critics, as both camps struggled to hold their laughs during and after the screening. Some laughed out loud though. And they all joked about its absurdity and bad filmmaking in harmonious unison. Bless You Inas.

Lost in Translation?

The problem, which can be blamed for the scandals and the unintelligent comments that plague the post-film discussions, is the labeling: In English-language schedules, it’s referred to as a press conference, but in Arabic-language schedules, it’s referred to as nadwa or a panel discussion.

It leaves room for people, some supposedly established film critics, to take the microphone and share with the rest of us their experience watching film. Aside from the fact that many of them have a lot of space in their newspapers and magazines to do just that, often enough time runs out before more important and relevant questions about the film, its script and production are asked or answered.

Sometimes, the nadwa/press conference moderators feel obliged to either tell off the person with the mic or take the opportunity to share their own experience with the class. Some of those moderators/critics even offer more elaborate and opinionated translations (usually from English to Arabic) of the filmmakers’ answers.

My reaction ranges from bored to embarrassed. My dear friend and colleague Joseph Fahim (Daily News Egypt’s culture editor and film critic and the person to follow in this or any festival) once wrote that my way of coping with these nadwa/conferences is to draw people hanging or shooting themselves. Unfortunately, it’s true.

TV, grrr

But my problems aren’t limited to the questions. Every year I get really close to punching a TV reporter in the face, with ART’s Bousy Shalaby on top of the list. All have a sense of self entitlement to cut off any conversation to grab any director/actor/scriptwriter by the hand and lead them outside the hall. There’s absolutely no regard to the journalist or critic talking to this filmmaker or the others who have been waiting for their turn in the conversation/interview.

They brush off anyone loud criticism with “It’s TV” with a how-can’t-you-understand-you-insignificant-creature look. I have no idea if I should blame the video cameras for fueling this sense of entitlement. But if you ever hear about a journalist beating a TV station’s crew with their own camera, there’s a 90 percent chance it’ll be me.

I’ve met few filmmakers who didn’t allow this to happen, politely telling off people who cut into conversations. Dutch filmmaker Albert ter Heerdt is one of those people.

I’ll still go to this year’s festival, but I like every year I’ll be cautious about blunders. This is however not a professional analysis of the festival or the unconfirmed allegations of financial corruption. Many of the world’s top film critics and publications have wrote detailed studies of its shortcomings and how it can be fixed. But every year, festival organizers choose to ignore that. They don’t even invite those top critics and others like them. And that’s only one of the reason why the festival doesn’t get adequate coverage in international media, that if it get any at all.

Disclaimer: I’ve put too many links here, more than I usually do. This post is readable without those links. But if you a drama addict, some of the stories I linked to document in more detail some of weirdest incidents I’ve witnessed. Unfortunately, some stories are not available online anymore or have been included in online archives that require payment for access. Some of those unavailable stories though were aggregated by other websites and blogs and this is why, some links don’t direct to newspapers/magazine websites.

A round up of last year’s festival:

by Matthew Groves

Well it’s official, I had my first negative film experience at AFI Fest 2009.  To preface this though, I must say that there may be a little over-exaggeration here for a couple reasons.  One, I got out of one screening not too long before this film and I thought it was the best of the festival.  Two and lastly, for some reason, someone screwed up the order so they played the second chapter before the first.  The film is separated into multiple chapters, stating first chapter, second chapter, etc.  We noticed this because the film started with no title cards and jumped to the second chapter, it was literally separated into multiple chapters and then we got title cards and the prologue and the first chapter.  Despite these two problems, I still support my original position that I saw a film that as it progressed became more and more of a train wreck.  These first two chapters I thought were actually very good and effective, and that wasn’t my issue with that film, but the later chapters, where things became frustrating.  Oddly, as I have researched this film, it has won multiple awards including one at the famed and respected Cannes Film Festival and it is Israel’s foreign language Oscar entry, Ajami.

To be honest, I can’t really summarize the plot because the film got to the point where it juggled so many characters and storylines and then started to get so nonlinear I really couldn’t follow the events for that long in the later chapters.  There are a handful of central characters that are Palestinian youths, including Nasri (Fouad Habash) who is a partial narrator and brother of Omar (Shahir Kabaha) and then Omar is accompanied by fellow workers at a restaurant and friends, Malek (Ibrahim Frege) and Binji (co-writer/director Scandar Copti).  To be honest though, for the most part, that’s all I can tell plot wise from the film.  The film starts out pretty simple, but as it progresses from chapter to chapter it starts to juggle more and more minor characters and this film is nonlinear, multi-threaded film in the mold of something like Crash.  Much like the failure that is Crash, it tries to study important issues of race, class, religion, poverty, and crime in the Palestinian-Israeli experience, but honestly it draws so simply on all of those fronts that the film fails miserably by the end.  Also much like Crash, the film doesn’t focus and dig deep on it’s subject well enough to really say anything, hopefully, this film will not get nominated and become a foreign version of Crash.  We shall see.

One of the other frustrating things is this film illuminates a certain trend that has mostly died out, but this film proves it is not dead yet.  That trend is doing these broad multi-character, multi-thread nonlinear films dealing with social issues or situations.  Although, I don’t mean to demean all films that attempt this because there are ones that do similar things whether they are linear or nonlinear that really are great films.  Films such as City of God, Traffic, the works of Mexican director, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, and most recently the Italian gangster film, Gomorrah, which are precisely executed, rich, stunning and beautiful examples of where this kind of film can go right.  Some have praised Ajami comparing it to some of these films, but while these films are truly solid and almost perfectly executed and original films, Ajami plays like a bad mixture of all of them.  It plays like many of the films that were spawned from Crash including the all-too obvious titled, Crossing Over.  As the film progresses it really just gets more confusing, frustrating, muddled and overall convoluted.

To be perfectly honest, I tracked with and was liking this film for a while, but once the film tried to connect all the dots and get even more into flashbacks and what not the more the film suffered.  I would have given the film more credit for what it was trying if the structure and plotting wasn’t such a mess really though.   I gave Ajami that chance until it got wholly and dramatically absurd, including a stereotype, spoiler alert, killing off an innocent character in order to get a dramatic shock from the audience and while I would have praised a number of performances near the beginning of the film by the end, I was ready to walk out and became perturbed by the overall exercise.

So basically the film was poorly conceived exercise that confused and exacerbated this reviewer and made him honestly yearn for those other much better and brilliant films listed above.  If you are thinking of seeing of this film, please don’t and check out those other films and if you are looking for good cinema from both Israel and Palestine then check out films like The Bubble, although not an endorsement fully, because I haven’t seen it, Paradise Now, Ushpizin, and Waltz with Bashir.  Hopefully, the Academy will wise up and won’t acknowledge a film that is trying so much, but basically failing at most of what it is trying to accomplish.

Picture Source:

http://www.notes.co.il/giora/user/Ajami_poster.jpg

A magia do cinema não se resume apenas a filmes com grandes produções e repleto de efeitos especiais, engana-se quem pensa assim. Muitas vezes toda essa magia pode ser transmitida, e bem transmitida através de um curta. No caso de Histórias de Direitos Humanos, em 22 curtas. Criado pelo Escritório do Alto Comissariado para os Direitos Humanos em 2008 para comemorar o 60º aniversário da Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos, esse longa-metragem é na verdade uma série de 22 curtas dirigidos por 25 cineastas e videoartistas renomados de diferentes partes do mundo.

O filme é inspirado e constituído por um cruzamento de temas que representam o Direito à Cultura, Desenvolvimento, Dignidade e Justiça, Meio Ambiente, Gênero e Participação. Feito esse cruzamento de forma aleatória, alguns curtas conseguem ir além do tema proposto e abordar mais de um tema. A variedade de temas e de estilo, faz com que o resultado seja agradável.

Em meio a tantos trabalhos há pérolas raras, assim como coisas não tão valiosas assim. Destaco Um Garoto, Um Muro e Um Burro do diretor Hany Abu-Assad que dirigiu também o magnífico Paradise Now (2005). Como disse há uma diversidade muito grande de estilos e gêneros, podemos encontrar desde algo psicodélico como Bebo a Água na Qual Você se Banha de Pipilotti Rist, até algo trash como A Travessia de Murali Nair.

Há momentos comoventes como nos dramas A Manga e Lily e Ra, e ainda filmes onde a verdadeira ação está completamente implícita, sem diálogos, mas bem nítida e real como é o caso de Impasse de Bram Schouw. Contudo não são apenas coisas isoladas, os filmes são repletos de denúncias e apelos sociais, um pedido de justiça e igualdade.

Relação de curtas que compõe o filme:

- Jogos Perigosos (Dangerous Games) de Marina Abramovic, Holanda;

- Viagem (Voyege) de Walter Salles & Daniela Thomas, Brasil;

- Os Filmes a Fazer (Dês Films à Faire) de Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster & Ange Leccia, França;

- Impasse (Impasse) de Bram Schouw, Holanda;

- A Voz (The Voice) de Sergei Bodrov, Rússia;

- A Travessia (The Crossing) de Murali Nair, Índia;

- A Manga (La Mangue) de Idrissa Ouédraogo, Burkina Faso;

- E Quanto a Mim? (What About Me?) de Shira Geffen & Edgar Keret, Israel;

- Confiança (Trust) de Runa Islam, Reino Unido;

- O que Significa “Dignidade”? (What Does Dignity Mean?) de Abderrahmane Sissako, Mauritânia;

- Sobras (Sobras) de Pablo Trapero, Argentina;

- Homens Móveis (Móbile Men) de Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Tailândia;

- Café Preto (Black Breakfast) de Zhang-Ke Jia, China;

- Um Conto Sobre Água (A Water Tale) de Francesco Jodice, Itália;

- Bebo a Água na Qual Você se Banha (I Drink Your Bath Water) de Pipilotti Rist, Suíça;

- A Vitória Sobre os Sacos Plásticos (La Victoire sur lês Sachets) de Sarkis, França;

- Lily e Ra (Lily And Ra) de Armagan Ballantyne, Nova Zelândia;

- A Partida Final (The Final Match) de Saman Salour, Irã;

- Teto de Vidro (Glass Ceiling) de Teresa Serrano, México;

- Um Garoto, Um Muro e Um Burro (A Boy, a Wall and a Donkey) de Hany Abu-Assad, Palestina;

- Sol Garrido (Garish Sun) de Charles Meaux, França;

- Participação (Participation) de Jasmila Žbanic, Bósnia.

Obs.: a lista não se encontra na ordem de exibição, segue a ordem do catálogo, que para saber mais você pode fazer o Download AQUI (em inglês).

Trailer:

I’m writing my senior thesis this year on (deep breath) how ideologies behind terrorism and anti-terrorist operations are shown in films from America and the Middle East. So far this has basically meant that I watch all sorts of violent and/or depressing movies and am usually a lot of fun to be around afterwards, but at some point, it did start to feel more like someone doing work and less like an emotional pincushion. After all, what’s one more exploding bus, as long as it’s just on your computer screen?

This week, however, I’ve been focusing on “Paradise Now” (dir. Hany Abu-Assad), and I’ve got to tell you, all that “de-sensitivity” stuff has turned out to be a load of crap, because it’s gotten progressively more heartbreaking each time I watch it. Instead of the tragedy losing its effect, I just feel like I’m caught in this recurring loop of these characters (who I’ve now spent so much time with), leaving a human wake that extends on both sides of the conflict.

The film follows Khaled and Said, two best friends who are young, aimless and living in the West Bank, after they find out that they’ve been picked to carry out a terrorist operation in Tel Aviv. From the moment we meet them, we hope that something goes wrong, that these men don’t go through with this horrible act because they are so likable, or at the very least, so recognizable. Things do go awry, as you might expect of a movie longer than twenty minutes, but this leaves only one of the men to question the mission while the other becomes more convicted in its necessity.

For all its overt discussion of terrorism’s role in the resistance, the movie somehow escapes coming off as didactic. Suicide bombing by no means justified in the story, rather, given a face, which is sometimes all the discomfort the audience can handle. The real tragedy is not that young Palestinians are forced to terrorist means, but that they are convinced from both sides that they this is their only option, which not only perpetuates the violence in the conflict, but destroys the families and community they leave behind.

Beautifully shot and brilliantly edited, I can’t recommend “Paradise Now” highly enough. And if you don’t believe me, check out the American trailer below, which has some really confusing Alexi Murdoch music playing over shots of the West Bank.

Há tempos esperava para ver esse filme, mas consegui finalmente no domingo passado. O Grupo Baader-Meinhof tem o grande mérito de associar uma narrativa extremamente detalhada do ponto de vista histórico – vale como documentário e quase-aula sobre o grupo real – e, ao mesmo tempo, manter um ritmo frenético de ação.

Em filmes sobre terroristas (Paradise Now é o exemplo recente), tenho uma tendência a simpatizar com as teses radicais e compreender o porquê das opções, por mais insanas que pareçam. No entanto, não dá pra assistir esse filme e concordar com a RAF (Rote Armée Fraktion, nome oficial do GB-M). Após desconfiar muito, agora pude perceber o quão nonsense foi esse “euroterrorismo” dos anos 70, incluindo o caso do Battisti. Todas as ações violentas do grupo serviam para liberar presos de outra ação violenta, que tinha base na repressão a outra ação, e, ao final, ninguém tinha uma bandeira concreta. Não é à toa que, até hoje, a Alemanha pune com severidade o incêndio criminoso.

Vale como excelente reflexão sobre os limites da política e da radicalização, além do momento impagável do Andreas Baader num treinamento na Jordânia. Recomendadíssimo.

Visto no Cinema Rosa e Silva, 4 de outubro de 2009.

by Matthew Groves

Confrontational.  Bloated.  Excessive.  Gratuitous.  Black and White in the most disgusting way.  These are only a few of the words that describe the absolute trainwreck of a film, The Baader Meinhof Complex.  The unfortunate fact that this film received an Oscar nomination for Germany shows more about Hollywood than it does about actual quality, the film is written Bernd Eichinger, the writer of Downfall (another, but far superior German Oscar nominee), so we just nominate the another film of his!  Too bad the film, even with its two and half-hour length, cannot slow down to develop any kind of emotion much less basic pacing and structure, throws a whole cast of characters, probably running in the hundreds with no explanation who they are, and a long and eventually laborious history of scenarios that doesn’t give a clue to the audience what is going on and what are the stakes.   There are films that are ambitious and then there are films that are so ambitious and unfocused that it makes you question why the film was made in the first place.  This film squarely fits in that second category.

Ulrike Meinhof (Martina Gedreck) looks on in horror as police beat protesters, near the beginning of the film.

Set in the 1960’s, a large groups of the German youth, who are descendents of the Nazi generation, have grown up only in a time of strife, tumult, and hardship that has marked the post-WWII era in Germany.  They decide to protest Germany and what they saw as a new rise of fascism and it’s connection to what they see as American imperialism in Vietnam as well as other places.  The authorities, especially the police meet those who protest are met with beatings, imprisonments, and shot to death.  So they decide to fight back, creating a revolutionary terrorist group based on a model of Communist ideology, known as the Red Army Faction, that infamously .  The Red Army Faction was, at the time, a huge influential group, who was one of the first militant groups around the world and with their ever-growing popularity amongst the younger generations in Germany, the militant guerrilla idea spread across the world.  The film derives it’s title from two of the three main leaders in the group, journalist, Ulrike Meinhof (Martina Gedeck) and  counterculture wild man, Andreas Baader (Moritz Bleibtreu), being led as by Baader’s lover, Gudrun Ensslin (Johanna Wokalek).  At first Meinhof is skeptical and questions whether she wants to be a part of the group, but eventually Baader and Ensslin wear on her and she turns from left-leaning journalist to all-out propagandist for the group.  The Faction ramps up their operations carrying out more and more assassinations, bombings, and the like and the government counters by being more and more brutal continuing an extreme, deadly game of tit for tat.

Andreas Baader (Moritz Bleibtreu) and Gudrun Ensslin (Johanna Wokalek), lovers and fellow revolutionary leaders in The Red Army Faction.

Yet the group is also pursued by policeman Horst Herold (Bruno Ganz), man who is a thoughtful man, who finds the governments harsh tactics to be counterproductive, and he constantly calls for the police to understand members of The Red Army Faction so they can defeat them with the least amount of bloodshed possible.  Herold also sees how the more brutal the state is the more public is on militants’ side.  It is interesting to see this one element of the film, and it is probably one of the redeemable parts, especially with a great performance by Ganz, but unfortunately, every other plot part of the film vastly fails.

While the acting by the leads is good, the film still paints them with such a black and white brush.  Rather than she them as human beings with many shades of grey, the screenwriter decides to just show them as horrible killers with no empathy or heart too them, which is torturous to watch after a while.  Personally, I’d rather see them as villains but with maybe a bit more than just irredeemable characters who are soulless.  Also, I’m a bit of a political junkie and history buff, but I was amazed by how lost I was even getting with the film.  The film takes place over about 10-15 years and without knowing all the details of the history, I even was confused about what was going.  I can’t even imagine what a more mainstream audience would think or if they would just give up in frustration.

Alexandra Maria Lara, one of the many great European actors and actresses whose talent is completely wasted in this film. Lara is a fine actress from films like Downfall, Control, and Youth Without Youth.

Another major problem and probably the most insidious is the use of violence in the film.  It gets to a point in the film, that point where I was kind of lost with a whole host of minor characters that were introduced and I didn’t even know, starting to malicious kill and bomb many people and the filmmaker, director Uli Edel, decides to show it in every detail.  It was like I was watching a Hollywood production where they were just uplifting the violence to a disturbing extent.  For me, I can watch violent films, but if it is a film about ideas and it doesn’t follow through on them and continues to show violence on a grand scale in the vast majority of the film then that is a major turnoff for me.  If Edel wanted to make a better film, he should have focused, shown less, cut down the runtime, developed some stories and characters, and show some nuance for crying out loud!  I don’t know about you, but I don’t know who was asking for a film about terrorism that eventually becomes a black and white neo-con wet dream of what militants look like.

If this film doesn’t interest you and if it does, I definitely didn’t do my job, then check out other much superior films about terrorism including, Battle of Algiers, Munich, Paradise Now, Michael Collins, and countless others.  Films that The Baader Meinhof Complex wish it could be, but is not even close in the slightest.

Picture Sources:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1607174400/tt0765432

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2951779584/tt0765432

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1559270656/tt0765432

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2750452992/tt0765432

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1508939008/tt0765432

Here’s my short take on why everyone should watch the 2005 film, “Paradise Now.”

It is a powerful film with an important, unbiased, message about the Israeli-Palestinian territorial occupation conflict.  It covers the important topic of suicide bombers, but rather than document the process by which a suicide bomber carries through with it’s mission, it takes a look into the lives of the bombers themselves.

Without ruining the ending of the movie, this film shows the daily life Palestinians, and the struggle they face. It allows the viewers to understand why this two men are driven to the actions they commit in the movie, and it shows the transformation of the two main characters (Khaled and Said) intenetions.

For many English-speakers, this film may be a turn off because it will require you to not only intellectually think about the message of the move, but also read subtitiles, at it was filmed in Arabic.

I highly recomment watching this film — it is a mere hour and a half long, but it’s message will last forever.

Peace.

As vezes não damos o verdadeiro valor a filmes pouco conhecidos e produções modestas. Para muitos um bom filme é aquele com excelentes atores, com grande investimento financeiro ou repleto de efeitos especiais, porém muitos filmes que possuíam todos esses requisitos chegaram ao fracasso, dando prejuízos aos produtores.

Com Paradise Now, filme criado e dirigido por Hany Abu-Assad, não é assim. Esse é um filme onde suas maiores apostas são os diálogos e um roteiro denso que em seus 88 minutos prendem a atenção de quem assiste sem precisar, para isso, de ação ou suspense. O filme tem um roteiro simples e ao mesmo tempo bem trabalhado, que poderia ser facilmente confundido com a vida real devido à forte verossimilhança.

Somos apresentados a dois palestinos, amigos de infância, Khaled (Ali Suliman) e Said (Kais Nashif), que são recrutados para realizar um atentado suicida em Tel Aviv. Paradise Now acompanha as últimas horas desses dois amigos, quando são levados à fronteira com bombas presas ao corpo. Eles acabam se perdendo um do outro. Separados, eles têm de enfrentar seu destino e suas próprias convicções.

Esse filme contundente chega a ser polêmico por levar ao cinema uma realidade dificilmente vista nesse meio. Além de ganhar o globo de Ouro de Melhor Filme Estrangeiro e vários prêmios no Festival de Berlim, recebeu indicação ao Oscar de melhor filme estrangeiro. Durante o desenrolar do enredo somo incitados a pensar, junto com os personagens, sobre o sentido da vida, aquilo que acreditamos ou qual o propósito das coisas. Tudo isso agregado a temas como política, religião, família e amizade.

Algo a se notar é a forma como o autor mostra que cada um pode tomar seu rumo e criar seu próprio destino. Isso pode ser facilmente notado quando vemos pessoas, que foram criadas no mesmo ambiente, com as mesmas crenças e os mesmo hábitos, tomarem decisões diferentes em situações decisivas. Sem contar na forte emoção que este belo filme é capaz de passar.

Há muito tempo não via um filme que me surpreendesse tanto, a princípio o que pode parecer tedioso torna-se envolvente e chega a nos comover, fazendo nos pensar sobre como somos acomodados com a vida, e esperamos acontecer aquilo que está escrito, sendo que nós podemos mudar os fatos que ainda estão por acontecer.

Trailer:

Photograph from the Living Theatre’s now legendary 1968 performance of Paradise Now at Yale Repertory Theatre; ten performers and audience members were arrested for public indecency.

Co‐founder and Artistic Director Judith Malina will be in residency at Yale School of Drama, September 14‐15.  Free public screenings of Signals Through the Flames and Resist!, documentaries about the work of the Living Theatre, will be held at Yale Repertory Theatre (1120 Chapel Street, at York Street) on September 14 and 15 respectively at 7:30PM.

The Beinecke Library acquired the Living Theatre Archive in 2008. Among the largest archives ever acquired by the Yale Collection of American Literature, the Living Theatre archive includes some 300 boxes of records, correspondence, scripts, photographs, journals, diaries, audio-visual materials, personal papers, and publicity materials documenting the influential theater company and its founders and principal figures, Julian Beck and Judith Malina. The archive documents in detail the Living Theatre’s development of imaginative alternatives to the commercial theater, including pioneering the unconventional staging of poetic drama, including works by Gertrude Stein and William Carlos Williams among many others, and various experiments in public and political theater and collective arts. This will be a premier archive for the study of 20th century American theater.

More information about the Living Theatre at the Yale School of Drama is available online: The Living Theatre at the Yale; a description of the archive can be found here: Living Theatre Records.

2005: Paradise Now di Hany Abu-Assad

Il film è stato presentato in anteprima mondiale alla 55esima Berlinale dove ha ricevuto numerosi premi, tra cui quello di Amnesty International e dei lettori del Berliner Morgenpost, nonché il premio per il miglior film europeo.

“Difficile trovare soggetto più incandescente di quello affrontato da ‘Paradise Now’” ha scritto giustamente Il Messaggero.

Hany Abu-Assad, nativo di Nazareth ma abitante in Danimarca, ha girato il film proprio a Nablus (in condizioni complicatissime, spesso sotto le bombe e i raid aerei), dove l’idea stessa di pace appare sconfitta in partenza, e ha inteso (con il maggior distacco possibile) registrare la vita quotidiana della popolazione palestinese nei territori occupati (la posizione geografica di Nablus, schiacciata in una valle lunga e stretta, sommata ai posti di controllo dell’esercito israeliano, danno alla città un’atmosfera di claustrofobia palpabile).

Abu-Assad ci mostra le motivazioni degli attentatori e lo sfondo su cui si muovono, un ritratto impressionante non solo della psicologia di due “kamikaze per caso” ma anche della fenomenologia di un conflitto tanto apparentemente assurdo quanto tragicamente irrefrenabile: senza giudicare e scavando oltre il contingente per cercare l’uomo, i suoi pensieri e sentimenti (e con una leggerezza che permette anche l’affacciarsi di una certa ironia liberatoria).

Qualcuno ha detto che per fare un buon film occorrono tre cose (storia tensione e realtà). E’ indubbio che il lavoro di Abu-Assad le possiede tutte e tre. Asciutto, essenziale, teso… cattura da subito l’attenzione dello spettatore, spettatore che si immerge completamente in una piccola storia che parla di un grande conflitto, in un racconto che ha una morale ma che non pretende di fare la morale.

Come ha scritto più di un critico, Paradise Now recupera la miglior lezione del cinema politico/civile (si pensi al Pontecorvo di La Battaglia di Algeri), un film in cui realtà e finzione si mescolano perfettamente e senza sbavature e il cui pregio maggiore è avere il coraggio di presentare gli attentatori né come mostri né come martiri né come eroi né tantomeno come esaltati. Cercando di esplorare le motivazioni che portano degli esseri umani ad uccidere e ad essere uccisi, guardando dentro di loro, si scopre che sono delle persone (e il fatto che sono delle semplici persone rende il tutto più tragico e terribile). Il film ci dà la possibilità di conoscere una realtà che ci riguarda tutti, ma da un punto di vista completamente nuovo. Paradise Now mostra la tragedia di diventare assassino e assassinato allo stesso tempo: ci fa comprendere da dove vengono, come possono diventare e come fare affinché questi uomini e i motivi della loro esistenza vengano meno.

Ottimo il cast, dai due protagonisti Kais Nashef e Ali Suleiman (due giovani attori del teatro palestinesi) alle due attrici qui inevitabilmente in parti di contorno, Lubna Azabal (vista recentemente in I tempi che cambiano) e Hiam Habbas (eccezionale protagonista de La sposa siriana Il giardino di limoni L’ospite inatteso).

scheda

sito americano

note:

premi e riconoscimenti su IMDb

I actually saw Paradise Now over a month ago and have waited to write my review because I didn’t have the words to describe my feelings concerning this film. For some reason, this movie rubbed me the wrong way. Perhaps that’s the point, but I’m not sure the chaffing was due to the quality of the filmmaking.

My greatest struggle in this film centered on the believeabilty of the main character Said (Kais Nashif). The choices made by Said, if accurate to reality, made no sense to me. Again, this may be the point. But to say that Westerners and those in the Middle East don’t understand the world in the same way is not really saying much of anything. What is it exactly (or, at least, more exactly) that causes or encourages this gulf in worldview? Addressing that question would have made for more interesting viewing. Yet, as I’ve said in other reviews, to knock a story for not addressing a question you want it to address is unfair. Still, concerning the story they have chosen to tell, it is one that I neither comprehended nor enjoyed terribly much.

O filme brasileiro Cidade de Deus, de Fernando Meirelles e Kátia Lung (Domésticas), está na lista dos melhores filmes estrangeiros, em eleição da revista norte-americana Paste. A publicação listou as 25 produções de fora dos Estados Unidos mais importantes da década, havaliando não necessáriamente o número de prêmios. O único filme nacional da lista, tem um extenso currículo de premiações e indicações, destacando o Bafta de Edição/Montagem e as quatro nominações ao Oscar.

Aclamado munidalmente, Cidade de Deus relata de forma brilhante, três décadas do desenvolvimento do tráfico de drogas no Rio de Janeiro. O roteiro indicado ao Oscar, de Bráulio Mantovani, não é linear, mas não é confuso ao espectador, em sua forma crua de registrar diversos fatos descritos no livro homônimo de Paulo Lins. Nos cinemas brasileiros o longa de Meirelles registrou mais de 3 milhões de espectadores.

Confira abaixo a relação completa das 25 produções “extrangeiras” ou melhor não norte-americanas, que foram apontadas na lista. Alguns, dos que mais me agradaram, estão destaque.

25. Maria Cheia de Graça

24. Persépolis

Menina Iraniana larga o sonho de ser profeta para se tornar revolucionária. Indicado ao Oscar de Animação.

23. Volver

22. Deixe ela Entrar

21. Oldboy

15 anos preso e sedento por explicações e vingança. Fábula sensacional que venceu o Grand Prix em Cannes.

20. Gomorra

19. A Queda – As Últimas Horas de Hitler

Produção alemã que conta os momentos finais do füher é uma obra prima sobre a ruína da ganância.

18. Paradise Now

O outro lado da moeda é visto neste filme sobre a guerra entre Palestinos e Judeus. Filme monosprezado pela academia norte-americana que conquistou o mundo com sua franqueza ao retratar o lado palestino do conflito.

17. Yesterday

16. Entre os Muros da Escola

15. Ninguém pode Saber

14. The best of youth

13. E sua mãe Também

Filme que projetou dois astros: Gael García Bernal e Diego Luna, no drama adolescente do diretor Alfonso Cuerón.

12. O Fabuloso Destino de Amélie Poulain

Lírico e encantador. Amelie Poulain conquistou o mundo com uma forma de fazer cinema poético que havia se perdido no tempo. Ainda mensão honrosa para a fotográfia divina da produção.

11. 4 meses, 3 semanas e 2 dias

10. Cache

9. Amores Brutos

Traição, Angústia, Pecado, Egoísmo, Esperança, Dor e Morte. Primeiro capítulo da Trilogia da Perda, do diretor Alejandro Gonzalés Iñarritu, que continou com 21Gramas e Babel.

8. A vida dos Outros

7. Amor à flor da pele

6. A Viagem de Chihiro

5. Fale com Ela

4. Cidade de Deus

Apogeu da Retomada do cinema brasileiro, sucesso de públido e crítica, e a consagração de Fernando Meirelles.

3. O Escafandro e a Borboleta

2. O Tigre e o Dragão

O diretor Ang Lee redireciona o olhar para a China e mostra ao ocidente o grande cinema oriental.

1. O Labirinto do Fauno

O terror da Guerra Civil Espanhola é o pano de fundo para a fábula invendada por uma menina para ousar fugir do mundo real. Filme adulto que explora a mitologia dos contos infantis e a fantasia. Trabalho do diretor Guilhermino Del Toro, que assumiu a adaptação de O Hobbit, do autor de O Senhor dos Anéis.

Fonte: CineClik

Fábio Prina_17/06/2009

paradise now @ imdb

more @ bbc.co.uk

(Originally posted on January 6th 2009 at http://stoa.usp.br/tom/weblog/40328.html)

FILME: PARADISE NOW

Título Original: Paradise Now
Gênero: Drama
Tempo de Duração: 90 minutos
Ano de Lançamento: (França / Alemanha / Israel / Holanda) 2005
Estúdio: Augustus Film / Razor Film Produktion GmbH / Lumen Films / arte France Cinéma
Distribuição: Warner Independent Pictures / Europa Filmes
Direção: Hany Abu-Assad
Roteiro: Hany Abu-Assad, Bero Beyer e Pierre Hodgson
Produção: Bero Beyer
Elenco
Kais Nashef (Said)
Ali Suliman (Khaled)
Lubna Azabal (Suha)
Amer Hlehel (Jamal)
Hiam Abbass (Mãe de Said)
Ashraf Barhom (Abu-Karem)
Mohammad Bustami (Abu-Salim)
Sinopse: Amigos de infância, os palestinos Khaled (Ali Suliman) e Said (Kais Nashef) são recrutados para realizar um atentado suicida em Tel Aviv. Depois de passar com suas famílias o que teoricamente seria a última noite de suas vidas, sem poder revelar a sua missão, eles são levados  à fronteira. A operação não ocorre como o planejado e eles acabam se separando. Distantes um do outro, com bombas escondidas em seus corpos, Khaled e Said devem enfrentar seus destinos e defender suas convicções.

Comentário: interessante e intrigante história que mostra valores e crenças de um mundo sempre em guerra.

MÚSICA: NEW ORDER – BIZARRE LOVE TRIANGLE

Alice Braga

Segundo o JB Online, Alice Braga, atriz brasileira que participou de “Ensaio Sobre a Cegueira” e “Eu sou a lenda”, acaba de ser confirmada para o principal papel feminino de “Onze minutos”, adaptação do livro homônimo de Paulo Coelho:

O filme, que terá direção do palestino Hany Abu-Assad, autor do premiado Paradise now (2005), será co-estrelado pelo americano Mickey Rourke e o francês Vincent Cassel. O produtor é Gianni Nunnari, nome por trás de produções como 300, de Zack Snyder, e Os infiltrados, de Martin Scorsese.

O livro de Coelho fala sobre um jovem brasileira que, desiludida com o final do namoro, vai trabalhar como garota de programa de um clube de Genebra. Alice encarnará a personagem. Rourke viverá o proprietário da casa noturna e Cassel um executivo com quem a protagonista se envolve. O início das filmagens está marcado para junho, no Brasil e na Europa. O lançamento só acontece no ano que vem.

A matéria foi encontrada neste link.

I found out recently that A.R. Rahman, the Academy award winning composer of “Slumdog Millionaire” as well as many other Bollywood films, was inspired by Sufism and converted from Hinduism to Islam in 1989.  His full name is Allah Rakkha Rahman.  He comes from a Tamil background and said “God is Great” in Tamil after he won the first Oscar.  Congratulations to A.R. Rahman as well as to the other Muslim actors in the film including Irrfan Ali Khan, who plays the police inspector, Rubina Ali who plays the young Latika character, Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail who plays the young Salim character and Mozhim Shakim Sheikh Qureshi who played the crippled slum kid.  Both Rubina and Azharuddin are real life “slum dwellers” in Mumbai.

“Slumdog Millionaire” was definitely a great film, and deserved to win Best Picture, as well as Best Director, Danny Boyle.

The film is about a young Muslim kid, Jamal Malik (played by Dev Patel) growing up in the streets of Mumbai and how his life experiences help him answer random quiz show questions on the Indian version of “Who wants to be a Millionaire?”

The story is very moving and the young child actors are amazing in their portrayal of the difficult life in the slums of India.  Some Hindus were critical of the film because they did not like how Hindus were portrayed in the film (A Hindu mob attacks the Muslims in Mumbai and kill Jamal’s mother).  To that I say, “Don’t Complain – because you always portray Muslims as evil and backward in most Bollywood films, so chill out and just enjoy the fact that India and some of its actors, musicians and filmmakers are getting praised and honored on the World Stage!”

The film was raw, yet elegant at the same time.  It didn’t pull any punches and the story was fully engaging throughout the whole film.  Credit goes to the screenplay, cinematography, editing and sound mixing – all of which won Oscars in their respective categories.

I was not surprised with Slumdog’s success because it was an excellent movie, but I was surprised that “Waltz with Bashir”, the Israeli animation about the 1982 Invasion of Lebanon, which was nominated for Best Foreign Film, did not win!

Normally any film for and about Jews, especially about the Holocaust win some type of award from Hollywood.

But of course, “Waltz with Bashir” is no Holocaust film.  It is a unique animation which takes a documentary-type look at  Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and critically examines at how the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces), led by Ariel Sharon at the time, allowed the Lebanese Christian Militia to attack and massacre the Palestinian Refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila.

I guess the Academy, still does not want to give any type of credence to any film which may seem to criticize the state of Israel.  Just as “Paradise Now” the 2005 film by Hany Abu-Assad about two Palestinians who are preparing for a suicide attack in Israel, was also nominated for Best Foreign Film but did not win the Oscar either.

One day, Insha’Allah (God Willing) we will get there – but for now, all the Muslim TV and Film producers, musicians, actors, actresses, and artists need to keep working hard and telling our stories – because we can no longer afford to wait for others to speak on our behalf!

LONG POST ALERT!

Had lost my mojo after my cinematic senses and sensibilities were sledge-hammered beyond redemption. If you are wondering what happened the answer is a single word – Ghajini. I have taken a decision not to watch another blockbuster in theatres but the desire to watch a certain Deepika Padukone in CC2C on the big screen is overwhelming.

The reason for this post is however not Ghajini. I would not subject the readers to more indignation by writing anything else about it and I have wiped my memories of it by watching Memento again. Advise you to do the same else you all may suffer from SHORT TERM MEMORY LOSS.

This part of the year perennially involves discussion boards, brainstorming sessions and opinions on only one thing – The Oscars. This year is no different and daggers have been drawn between cinephiles about:

• Why Slumdog Millionaire is / isn’t a great movie?
• How the west always portrays the 3^rd World (In fact this time it has turned very racist by saying how the ‘White Man’ always portrays India like this)?
• Why Taare Zameen Pe, a good / great movie, was ignored?
• Do we need to be acknowledged by the Academy Awards?
• Are awards important?
• Why does Aamir Khan go to the Oscars when he said he is against awards?
• Is Karan Johar gay?

Okay, I made up the last one.

It’s getting BORING. After having heated discussions which just fall short of fistfights every year (This year included) I have decided to publicly state my stance on the above mentioned issues (as if it matters ).

Bahar haal here it goes:

Slumdog Millionaire was an entertaining movie. I was entertained by the story, the music and the performances. Not for a moment did I delve into deep analyses regarding the ‘dark underbelly’ of India, unrealistic showcasing of India and Indians by the West (What exactly is the true representation of India?) and how did various things happen the way they have happened in the movie. For the third question I have an answer though: creative liberty and suspension of disbelief. However these discussions have stormed the news media and in turn have also created, an uncalled for, massive hate campaign that has even engulfed Amitabh Bachchan in its sway. Everyone has the right to like / dislike a movie but I disagree with everyone who thinks Slumdog Millionaire is a shitty and unrealistic movie (including the self – proclaimed management guru – Arindham Chaudhri).

Those people who think Satyajit Ray’s India is the truest picture of India: Isn’t his representation also confined to a particular segment of India? How is it (his representation) better or truer than Basu Bhattacharya’s India or Ramgopal Varma’s India or for that matter Mani Ratnam’s India?

What exactly is the true representation of India? What exactly is difficult to digest for the critics of the movie? The slums? The filth and the shit? The slimy mafia racket behind the beggars? The call centres? The chai wala working in a call centre? When you have fruit vendors and hotel boys becoming IAS toppers in real life why is this a very unreal thing to show on screen? Has everyone forgotten the background of contestants who have come to KBC and made millions (without any offence meant)? Or thousands at least. I don’t think Danny Boyle would have asked himself these questions before making the movie and thank Lord for that. He wanted to tell a story and he told it in the best way he could which was visually stunning and non-insulting to my intelligence at the least. If it is made by a ‘white man’, so be it. Another gem of a movie which has been forgotten in this melee is Wes Anderson’s The Darjeeling Limited. A brilliant movie set in India which also did not bother to be really authentic about India. Those who have a problem with this so called miss-representation of India should stand up and make a movie which portrays the real India as per them and showcase it to the ‘West’. Until then they should keep shut and watch this fantastically entertaining movie.

We are fast becoming a racist country, no doubts about it. If you don’t believe this statement, for a change you should read the bulletin boards of various forums on rediff, imdb etc. Starting from a North-South divide (it clearly and sadly exists) to a divide based on the India vs the White Man. Had the movie been made by say Madhur Bhandarkar with all Hindi speaking Indian actors and the movie would have been a blockbuster, I am convinced nobody would have questioned about any lack of authenticity in the movie. Just because the movie is gaining world-wide attention we have started looking into authentic portrayal in it. An angry Vijay locking the door from inside and throwing the keys to Peter is authentic? A charming Raj Malhotra staying with the family of Simran without anyone from her family knowing his real identity? Ghajini? Singh Is Kinng? Which part of India exactly has a college like the one in Kuch Kuch Hota Hai? Being the greatest manufacturers of ‘escapist cinema’ why are we even bothered about realism in a movie, which is never pretending to be real.

Of late our official entries suck. Jeans!!! How on earth? Just check the list here. I am sure if investigated properly one can unearth a scandal which will compete with the recent SATYAM scandal for infamy.

Taare Zameen Pe was a very good movie and a moving piece of work which, however, would leave an impression only on the Indian sensibilities. It is very difficult to expect the whole world to warm up to it as the notion of a closely knit family, the pain of leaving the family, staying in a boarding school and getting neglected wouldn’t have wet their eyes as much as ours. If we keep on ignoring movies like Dharm, The Blue Umbrella, 1971 etc. (Check out this) we might never win that elusive recognition (read Oscar). Whenever our selection jury is sending a movie they should at least compare them with movies like Paradise Now, No Man’s Land, Amelie, Pan’s Labyrinth or The Lives of Others. I am sure they would know what movies to send. And when they and all of us see these movies we would know why we don’t win the Oscars. A movie like The Lives of Others is a once in a lifetime movie. Even Guillermo del Toro’s masterpiece Pan’s Labyrinth couldn’t go beyond it, forget about the chances of Rang De Basanti.

Which leads us to the question as to whether our directors and screenplay writers can create the brilliance of an Amelie, The Lives of Others or say a ‘Mar Adentro’. The answer is yes. And we have been making brilliant movies but seldom send them as entries, which explain suicide attempts like Jeans (???) and SLB’s Devdas (a glorified yet hollow orgy of colors and schmaltz). A consistency has to be maintained in the official entries from India (movies like Shwaas and Dharm should be the benchmark for sending entries) and once it is done then someday we may win the Oscars.

Which brings us to another question: Do we need to be acknowledged by the Academy Awards? Absolutely! Which is why we compete in Olympics. The FIFA World Cup. Champions trophy and the Azlan Shah tournament. Miss World and Miss Universe pageants. As we do not have a world body to decide on it we have to go to the ‘Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences’ for the verdict which may not be the most accurate indicator in case of most categories but as far as the best ‘Foreign Film category‘ is concerned is seldom off the mark. We all love acknowledgement, be it in any form. Those who say they do not like acknowledgment are plain lying and awards are important and those who do not want it keep their mouth shut and keep on the good work they do.

Which brings us to another question: Why does Aamir Khan go to the Oscars when he said he is against awards? –> Plain and simple his personal decision like mine is to write this blog and yours to read or ignore. If you are of the school of thought that Filmfare awards are important and a true acknowledgment of merit / cinematic excellence – you are reading the wrong blog, mate. Moreover he also rates the National Awards highly.

Which does not bring us to the last question but still goes: Is Karan Johar gay? –> I leave that to your imagination.

– All we need is love (and lots of money)

Kais Nashef em Paradise Now

É difícil entender o que move o ódio sem fim entre palestinos e israelenses, mas a cada conflito, com crianças palestinas mortas, novos ódios são alimentados.

Esse conflito, que nos últimos dias, provocou a morte de centenas de palestinos, é o pano de fundo do filme Paradise Now, do diretor Heny Abu-Assad. O filme, que ganhou vários prêmios, é realmente belo, dramático e sensível. Em meio ao conflito, o filme traz o drama de dois jovens palestinos incumbidos de serem homens-bombas em Israel. Em meio a trama, uma atuação expressiva e calada do ator Kais Nashef e a beleza de Lubna Azabal. Sem fazer um único discurso, o filme é um libelo a favor da vida.

Leia também em Educação Política:

NA NATUREZA SELVAGEM VALORIZA RAZÃO INSTRUMENTAL

DOCES PODERES: A CONSCIÊNCIA DOS JORNALISTAS

CÓPIA OU DOWNLOAD DE OBRA ARTÍSTICA SEM O INTUITO DE LUCRO NÃO É CRIME E NEM CONTRAVENÇÃO PENAL NO BRASIL

FERNANDO MEIRELLES QUE SE CUIDE, A REVISTA VEJA NÃO DEVE PERDOÁ-LO POR ENTREGAR SEU PRÊMIO AO JUIZ FAUSTO DE SANCTIS

LEI COM COTA PARA MEIA-ENTRADA É UMA ÓTIMA FORMA DE ACABAR COM A MEIA-ENTRADA

Eftersom Martinas värld just nu är min kunde jag inte låta bli att gå in på O- sidan. Hittade där det här. Temat för veckan har varit terrorism (filmer: The Baader-Meinhof Complex, Paradise Now. Nyheter: Bomber i Bombay). Allting handlar om vem som har rätt att definiera vem. Styrkan sitter i antalet. Jag fanns i ett av de där fingrarna. Rostock är fint på försommaren. Vår tid är nu och att drömma om andra är slöseri med tid.