It’s a non-fiction documentary. The director said that he intended to film this movie for the first time. The Indonesian farmers tried to film this fact because they were dealing with powerful herbicides with their bare hands and were dying because they were under 40 years old. So I went to Indonesia and took pictures of them, and I feel this strange absurdity in this society. I wanted to know what it was like to travel all over Indonesia, and then the Indonesian paramilitary organization blocked the film production. In the process, the director found out that there was a massacre in Indonesia half a century ago and the film created by commissioning a filmmaker to lead the killing. The old man who was the main character of the massacre was proud of the history of the massacre. So, he was very excited to accept the proposal as a movie. He said that he would include some facts without any doubt then explained how people died in a casual way. The old man was a gangster. The gangster became a paramilitary organization today in Indonesia. In the past, Indonesia was also at the crossroads of capitalism, communism, and alternative. Perhaps the vested interests were capitalism. They used gangsters to kill 2.5 million people in a year. Gangsters claim that the root of ‘gangsters’ is ‘free man.’ and thought it was patriotism to take away the Communist Party, which is the people who adore freedom and obstructs freedom. At the time, Indonesian gangsters were earning money through Hollywood movies. The Communist Party said that they should reject American films, but I think they just cut their profits.
It was hypocrites who freed themselves. The old man said he learned ‘how to murder’ in an American gangster movie. It is a great metaphor. Creatures from the country of capitalism are involved in human life. Gangsters would have appeared cool in the country of freedom, so they were seen as ‘free men’? The Indonesian society seen in the movie was very uncivilized. The power of capital flourished, but the contents were impossible perfection. They talk about intimidation, public broadcasting broadcasts stories about genocide like a heroic story, supports the genocide convention, and justice justifies their massacre by the winners. They did not have the words to express except the word “uncivilized.” It was a disgust itself.
The more the film produced, the old man became more strange. When he saw the reproductions of the massacre in the eyes of the third person, he realized that it was incredibly violent. So he began to have a nightmare and even feared that he was guilty of sin. Nevertheless, he gave the medal to the dead in the surreal scene of the film and put the line of “Thank you for killing me to go to heaven.” No such absurd rationalization could be read in any fiction.
To make history, we know that countless people have been sacrificed. The reason for the massacre in that history was inevitable because people applied for the “making history” role by themselves.
The flow of history is similar. The old man in the movie made himself a role of ‘free man,’ so he was able to avoid the terrible slaughter. When I first saw the work, I thought the people behind the frame were simply victims. But now I believe that there are some perpetrators behind wherever.
Finally, we reminded the plainness of evil. The old man in the movie is a man who loves grandchildren and is full of joy. Nevertheless, he was proud of the massacre. Then, after seeing the killings with the eyes of the third person, and acting the victims, he realizes how evil my actions were. In the end, it is not usually easy to say that we often say ‘live well.’ It is simply not enough to do well to the people you like and do what you need to do. Through self-objectification, we must always react sensitively to the absurdity of human beings. And you should not put on your part. We give too much of a role in our daily lives. ‘I have been in charge of this role, so it is natural and reasonable to do this!’ We should not forget that we also found this kind of role in fiction. Perhaps goodness may be the perfect self.
The thin blue line is a documentary. And it is a film that makes a documentary about the genre. I know the documentary contains the truth, but this film makes me wonder if the documentary contains the truth.
When you look at the movie, you can see that Morris loses his iniquity and Harris, the actual criminal, has escaped the judgment of the law. And thanks to this film, Morris was found not guilty and released. But there are parts of the movie that I can not believe, as the story of a film. Witnesses in the film and those involved in the case testify. However, the testimony of one person is subsequently denied by another. According to their words, the scene of the crime scene continues to repeat, and the real situation becomes blurred. In the end, Harris listens to handcuffs as he talks. I doubt whether the story he has been doing so far has been reliable. Thus, the film takes the form of a documentary that conveys the truth and makes us think again about whether it contains the truth.
The difference between people’s statements is that the memories they depend on when they testify are incomplete. Memory can be erased or configured differently over time. It may or may not be memorable to see the same thing at the moment of remembering something because the individual experienced it. Or they can reorganize their memory to suit their interests and circumstances. But people have no choice but to rely on such memories when they want to know the truth. I have no choice but to rely on my perspective. So I think that human attempts to possess the truth are impossible.
But why are people thirsting for truth? Is it because it has the scarcity that there is only one truth unlike the fact that every individual has? Or is it because we can not possess the truth in the end? If you can have the truth if you pass it through movies and other media, will not it be reproduced? There is a gap between the real and the reproduction. There is a small but dark space between them. People try to catch but never catch.
As the testimony of the people involved in the case comes out, the real case goes on. One voice does not lead the film with the initiative, and many voices make a sound, make up the event and change it. The audience focuses on their individual voices and seeks to verify that they are right. The audience who believes and follows as the voices heard is confused with this form. Which of the many voices is real, or is it really in the movie? For those who believe and follow the narrative, the film questions whether the narrative of the film is reliable. And this is evident in the final scene of the movie. Harris’ handcuffs show his handcuffs and ‘Morris’ has been sentenced to unjustifiable imprisonment, and ‘Harris’ is a criminal.
So thin blue line is documentary real? Can you believe the narrative in the movie? I think they played a role in asking questions and thinking about movies.
<Stories We Tell>is a documentary film interviewing Canadian actor and director Sarah Polley’s family. The beginning of the movie begins with Sarah Polley, Diane, the mother who died of cancer when she was 11 years old.The story gradually goes on and takes the way of releasing the secrets of Sarah Polley’s birth. Of course, the answer to the secret is already known to everyone, but audiences are curiously interested in family stories and interesting stories about the family, as well as the stories of families and relatives who remember one truth. At the beginning of the film, one of the sisters of Sarah Polley told me about the documentary. ‘Who cares about this stupid family thing?’ At first, I thought so. But not at all. Somebody’s family is bigger, bigger, deeper, interesting, and unusual than you think. <Stories We Tell> confuses the boundary between life and movie.
One hour and 48 minutes of family history interviews, which may have been boring, were interesting because the colorful characters differed in the angle of remembering one person, Diane, and other events. Sarah Polley expertly maximizes these points in the film, and the film naturally shows the differences between unique characters. Does the question “Truth” exist as the film moves to the second half? ‘Facts’ seem to exist. But everybody’s idea of it is distorted and transformed, and eventually, it changes slightly depending on the life they have lived and their thinking. The idea of what happens between every person in the world and that person will maintain its objectivity only as ‘fact.’
In conclusion, the film conveys a story of a family in a casual way, an interesting story, and more. Of course, for a static documentary, the timely presentation and the use of OST is also good. I did not know, but Sarah Polley and his parents, Diane and Michael, are all celebrities, so maybe it was not easy to bring out their family story (personal) to worldwide. However, it will be longlasting on audience’s mind and director Sarah’s mind too.
The film that started with the picture of ‘Gleaners’ can be seen in various scenes reminiscent of picking. Those who eat and drink through the trash can and those who roam around the orchard after harvest saw on the screen, but the ability and intention of the director are beyond the level of reality accusation. This film shows the flexibility of thinking free as it’s a hard to define the genre.
The director, who finds the heart-shaped potatoes after shooting people who picked up the potatoes dismantled at the potato farm, collects the heart-shaped potatoes. In the latter half of the film, you can see that the stem grows long and tangled in the heart potatoes. Suddenly, the director grabs the vine and suddenly goes to the famous vineyard and shoots and asks the district judge if it is a crime to pick up the fruit from the harvested orchard.
The association of picking is not limited to picking up food, but it extends to scrap or image (picture, image). In the first place, This film collects simple and beautiful pictures. The director takes a Handycam in one hand and takes a picture of himself and his wrinkled hands and gray hair in the mirror. Moving to the next location, pick up the trucks on the road, a pair of goats on the roadside that make it impossible to pass a passenger car. This mature co-director finds the beauty of the ordinary scenery of everyday life and collects them to complete a beautiful picture.Those who keep their trash cans alive have their own uniqueness, unlike the general prejudice that their lives will be miserable. A salaried person can not withstand the waste of abundance and rummages through the trash can with his philosophy. A master’s degree holder, who is always eating abandoned fruits, sells magazines in front of the station during the day and teaches immigrants in the homeless residence in the evening. A slightly improvised girl, who picks up recycled items and continues her life, cooks the picked chicken and gives it to the more difficult neighbors.
There is no sign of being ashamed of those who pick up abandoned food with a calm expression. Finding food for them was an extension of their lives, and they did not condemn themselves with the narrow-mindedness of some of the societies that lowered their picking. At least it felt to me.
Last Thursday, I finally watched ‘Beauty and the Beast.’ I heard a lot of comments from my friends who watched already. Since the original animation released in 1991, and I watched it in 1994. On that time, we don’t have a DVD, just a VCR. Two of my best videos were ‘Little Mermaid’ and ‘Beauty and the Beast’ had to say goodbye because I watched and rewound too many time. Yes, I love Disney’s movies that are why I covered few Disney’s sings. So I guess there is no spoiler alert on this post because I’m pretty sure most of us watched this film. I was inspired by all the staff’s hard work. For examples, the dresses what Emma Watson’s wore and the 3D worked, etc. At the end, I cried for no reason. I guess it reminds of my childhood. I can’t stop singing myself. Hope you can watch this movie in the theater with the 3D. Why? It’s Emma Watson friends. Emma Watson.
Living in a democracy era, we have the right to vote, which is a tremendous privilege and right. However, the Election Day is a holiday for voter can vote, but some people just enjoyed the day without voting. I think this is a pretty bad problem when I’m facing to these days. So I personally I wondered what if would be like to take a holiday on voting day and get a proved from voting booth like doctor’s note for the student. Then there would be some people would dispute the freedom of right not to vote. But if anyone who does not care about politics that on your living world, at least people should know what kind of person or people running the campaign on their land. On my homeland, Korea and Korea’s now we have to call her a former president of the Republic of Korea she got impeached and engaged the biggest scandal. That’s why I looked up this movie again for myself. Recently, the first female president of the Republic Of Korea, she was impeached. It is very a big happening to our land and most of Koreans be in a chaotic state which included me. Off the record, I’m already in a chaotic state since after 2016 America’s Election Day. It was too embarrassing, and I cannot explain it one by one, but this movie has reached more and more this time. Also, I chose this film because I’m a feminist. Since the movie was the based on the women’s suffrage movement, some people prejudiced the film before the movie released. Unlikely men have been in power since they were born. This movie has a woman’s POV, so it brought up a lot of empathy for females. It was not a film that solely dealt with the ladies’ suffrage. The main character, she is a laundry worker belonging to the British lower class in society, as a wife who works harder than man but getting less paycheck and taking care her sick son. Other suffragette members were crushing windows and get a loud to get attention on their movement, but she doesn’t even care at the beginning because, for her, family and livelihood were more important than women’s suffrage.
But she is also a woman and mother, so she turned into a member of the suffragette. The reasons why she became a member of a suffragette were, women cannot have custody of her children, they are mere possession of their husbands, and they have no choice and to keep their mouth shut even though their daughter were sexually abused by the laundry superintendent because they have to save their jobs. Another character wanted to be a doctor, but she ended up as a pharmacist. However, she cannot open up with her name because she is a female. So she used her husband’s name, and her husband is not even a pharmacist.
We should thanks to Suffragette movement and members because of this movement, we women have the right to vote, and I am feeling grateful to those came up to this movement. I hope many people in Korea, America or the other countries that stood up the corrupt leader of their country should see this movie or why the vote is important and think about why we should vote. If you don’t agree with me, just grab a newspaper or open the news app on your phone and you will see why is so important to voting because voting is your future.
Have you ever think about losing your house, or family? The moment after I was questioning to myself too, it was hit me so hard because I had never thought about it.
On the movie, girls are dragged around like animals, left their families and living horribly; end up in such a terrible way when they are thrown out by Japan soldiers. The director didn’t make that scene; it was the real story from the survivors.
I would like to give a little description of this picture. This picture was informed by Kang, Il Chool who survived, a real character of this movie and the title of this film is ‘A burned girls.’. She draws this when the art therapy session.
I think this movie is for people who are living today and reflect on the sad history of the times that many girls who became Japan’s sex slaves and died because of them. It is not ashamed stories for survivors, a nation that forgets its past has no future, which means if we forget about our history and people should apologize who made this happen and still not a word of apologies, this is shameful.
I was wonder why they titled ‘Spirits’ Homecoming’ for the English title, but after I had watched the movie, I recognize the real meaning of the title. Also, I couldn’t control myself from furious and sadness for awhile because I mentioned it before, this movie was based on the real story with survivors testimony.
I wish Japnese should apologize to remaining survivors with their true heart as soon as they can because many of survivors getting old and in Korea, we only have 44, and they average ages are 90. So, they should clarify their fault to worldwide, and I hope that no such painful history will never arise anywhere in the future.
After I watched ‘Night and Fog’ in the class. I had so many thoughts and feelings, not a good feeling. Because I mentioned in class last time. Korean has the similar historical background from the past and it still the deepest scars for the nation. The first thing I realized it is very real not like the other documentary film because of it usually actors ‘ACTING’ for the scene to tell to the audiences. The most scene in the ‘Night and Fog’ were very disturbed. Once professor caution to us ‘this documentary may disturb you and you will understand once we get that point.’.But I didn’t take that seriously because like I said, actors will’reenact’. However, I was totally wrong, everything was real human and real bodies. Also, a few days ago, I saw the pictures of Korea occupied by Japan on the black and white. It named ‘Nanking Massacre’ I don’t want to phrase on this but this is the Asian version of Auschwitz-Birkenau (holocaust). Japanese army killed massive people and they still not apologize to these countries. when I was young and continuously learning our past, I watched so many documentaries but those were not like ‘Night and Fog’. However, Korean director Cho made a movie about when Japan under attacked Korea. I saw the trailer and bought this movie but watch yet because the trailer already made me so upset and can’t stop my tears. How and what kind people could possibly do such a thing if they are a human being? I wish the victims of those Massacres in rest in peace. Also, I’m going to link to the trailer of ‘Spirits’ Homecoming’ and it will be in my next posting.
Nanook of the North and about Director Robert. Flaherty.
After I watched ‘Nanook of the North’, I searched about director Flaherty. When the golden age of the film has yet to arrive, it has been interesting to work with such dramatic techniques and elements to make the material so interesting and sometimes suggesting interest, tension, and lyrical feelings. It is a work that has already changed in the century, but it is strange that it still gives the feeling of moving to the audience. Flaherty’s work, which can be said to have opened the pavement of documentary, contained people of the North Pole. Their struggle to survive in the cold of the Arctic is dignified and grander than ridiculous. While I searching about that era, many of the movies at that time were travel films. The traveling films at the time were works written in a very Western perspective. It is as if we go on a three-night, four-day trip today to take a picture or video and judge it. It was nothing more than a blog or on Facebook. After half of the last class, a discussion was held in the classroom. The footage of the Eskimos he shot made them look funny. I also remember that there were quite a few words saying that it would be fun for viewers to see these people, and look stupid. The films that were produced at the time were rather judgemental if you look at the life of Flaherty instead of the stories about the lives of white people. He learned to explore from his childhood through his father, admired the secretaries who lived in the unknown and longed for their lives. It was his video work that started with that kind of mind, except that he was told by the professor that he had a child among the women there and received a semi-shock.
I think that on his work, he wanted to communicate with them, to join in life, and to create a work that reflects their point of view. Before taking the picture, he wants like to talk to each other over the head and face to discuss how to film and the film to collaborate with the Eskimo. It seems that they wanted to record their traditional appearance on the film because the traditional appearance would disappear. So, I think Flaherty is more like a historian.