Why short film?

February 24, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

Film critic David Thomson is already saying that awards for short films, documentary and all, should be removed from the main night to make the event crisper.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which gives the most publicized and recognized awards for short films does not seem to distinguish between short films made in the U. S. and those made in “foreign” countries.

There seems to be more recognition for short films in Europe and Asia than in the U.S.

BAFTA, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts opens its short films awards contest only to shorts made in the U. K. We assume there are enough shorts made there and plenty to interest to sustain such a competition.

There isn’t yet a single extensive treatment of what a short film is; how the form of short film persists and how it is set to flourish in the age of digital film making and distribution.

We want to pursue over the next few months these and related questions on short films. Students at Arcadia University will join us in their semester-long study of the topic.

Sad news for cinema accumulates…..

February 24, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

Here are the recent events in the world of cinema, as opposed to the world of DVDs, home-theaters, digital projection, on-demand services, etc.

Film-Makers’ Cooperative is threatened with eviction in New York City. New York Times, February 10, 2009.

Kim’s Video on St. Marks St in New York City is closing, February 6, 2009.

“44 Year old Indie-Film Distributor (New Yorker Films) is closing.” says the New York Times, February 23, 2009.

In a country deprived of “foreign films,” these were few outlets for meaningful cinema.

And it is hard to read this story in isolation from everything else:

Netflix profit up surprising 45 pct. shares rise.” a Reuters story from Forbes.com January 26, 2009

In short, Valentine’s Day!

February 14, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

The Guardian’s film site continues to be one of the best places to visit. For this week, see the Cyber Cinema column: Virtual Valentines

“Kate  Stable’s compendium of the best romantic short films on the web.”

Academy Award (Oscar) nominated short films 2009

February 14, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

Oscar shorts are making rounds of theaters in the U. S. Live action and animated shorts are screened separately, and judging from the trailers and publicity, they will run at least until the Awards event on Sunday. Shorts International, which has released these shorts in theaters will make them available for download in iTunes. The show is a treat, no doubt, as there is a variety in these shorts as much as narrative flexibility, ingenuity of form and a refreshing perspective on film making, especially after Slumdog, Ben Button, etc.

Program for live action shorts includes: Reto Caffi’s (Auf Dee Strecke), On the Line (Switzerland); Steph Green’s New Boy (Ireland); Tivi Magnusson and Dorte Høgh’ The Pig (Denmark); Jochen Alexander and Freydank’s (Spielzeugland) Toyland (Germany); and Elizabeth Marre and Olivier Pont’s  Manon on the Asphalt (France).

When it comes to short films, Academy does not distinguish between American and “foreign” or “foreign language” films. And, there are no American productions this year.

Does that affirm our assumption that the film industry in the U. S. does not value short films or that they do not produce quality short films that stand out in competition to their world/European counterparts? This is what A. O. Scott says in The New York Times;

The nominees reflect the astonishing fact, barely acknowledged during the Academy’s annual ceremony of self-worship, that film is an international art form. The absurd rules and restrictions that govern the best-foreign-language film selections seem not to influence the selection of shorts, which hail from all over the globe, sometimes more than one to a country.

All five films are unique and quite brilliant. Each explores a different narrative form; each has a varied visual theme and all end up achieving much. There is energy in imagination, brevity and leaps in explorations of form in these films that is admirable. Shorts films are the most imaginative form in world cinema and as such, they deserve our attention.

Reto Caffi’s On the Line is the longest of the short films in this program. It is an open ended, unresolved narrative that shows you that the triviality of melodrama, the obvious endings of stories are inconsequential. It is a story of unrequited love of a security guard who spends much of his time on the electronic surveillance system watching his would be love interest. He also catches the same train with her after work and fails to protect the man accompanying her, who dies and causes irreparable harm to the worman. The two of them drift close to each other, as we realize that they both feel guilty for the loss. They are both complicit and the audience shares their lives, can look into their eyes and become the canny surveyors.

Steph Green’s New Boy is a story caught between the innocence of childhood and the weight that we put on children through abuse of their memory, the simplicity of their lives and the tolerance of immigration.  An African boy joins an Irish school and must struggle between the two worlds, the one that is ahead of him and the one that he left behind. It is a film where words matter little, except as idle talk. There is much in his eyes as there is depth to the eyes of all kids. Each is trying to find innocence through mischief, playfulness and independence.

Tivi Magnusson and Dorte Høgh’ The Pig (Denmark) is the richest, most complex of all shorts in the competition and reaffirms the idea that Europe is in search of a new identity. It is struggling but it is also working hard; the “European imaginary” has changed, so to speak.  The film begins in a taxi-cab as it drives an elderly, expressive Danish man to a hospital, with a song that laments the state of Denmark today (something like “Oh, Denmark, what has happened to you?). The patient arrives for a surgery in a lonely, bare room where he notices painting of a pig. It delights him, comforts him and offers him “friendship” in lonely hours. As the neighboring bed in that room is occupied by a Muslim patient, culture clash emerges. Through humor, half-serious but intense argument about tolerance, freedom and expression across cultural divide, the film show how Europe is now struggling within. The bringing of the “other” into the fold brings casual and not-so-casual intensity in everyday affairs. The scope of this short is to paint a picture with lightheartedness but the reach of the narrative is broad and full of depth. The film leaves you thinking of how indeed Denmark has changed and so has Europe.

Jochen Alexander and Freydank’s  Toyland has a traditional narrative structure and the film does what short films aim for, a punch line in a short story and a closure that comes with crisp form of storytelling. It is Germany during the Holocaust and a child is missing. Mother’s frantic search takes us through an emotional back and forth about where her child is and what she would do when she goes to find him as Jews are boarding the train to their tragic fate. The film brings it all to a close, telling a story as Hollywood likes it. There are no ruminations on the larger event in the background, just a simple story of a family, a mother, her search and the life thereafter. Given the context that is so familiar to the audiences, the narrative draws on your emotional reserves. It offers little of its own and perhaps that is where it succeeds.

Elizabeth Marre and Olivier Pont’s  Manon on the Asphalt begins and ends with a mellowful, rich voice of Madeleine Peyroux in her rendition of Bob Dylan’s You’re Gonna Make Me Lonesome When You Go.  It is a brief story of moments before death, when time exists in dimensions we don’t know; memories achieve a form as  yet unknown to us. It is a moment that has beckoned philosophers and poets alike. Film enters into this moment and gives us a glimpse of that mysterious moment when life seems to end or literally ends. The film allows us to enter Manon’s moments on asphalt. We occupy that consciousness for a while. What passes remains only in fleeting images. Narratives can collapse in a moment and they can make moments grow richer.

Any of these shorts could take the Oscar and we ought to be glad. But competition is meant to kill all but one. Internet betting on Oscar odds for shorts is intense. Given what we know of the Oscars, it is likely that Toyland will take the honors but if the awards are given for how shorts open up new avenues of thinking, we may be better off expecting awards for any other short. Until this Sunday, let us assume that the honors for the top live action shorts will go to Tivi Magnusson and Dorte Høgh’ The Pig (Denmark).

What is an Indian film (indeed)?

January 15, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

We will pursue conversation started by our friend and colleague,K. Hariharan of L. V. Prasad Film and TV Academy in Chennai.

For now, here is a piece in The Guardian (beginning with a quote): why Hollywood is making films in India? And, does this make for a “transnational” film?”

Let us return to this issue.

Article by Xan Brooks from the film pages of The Guardian.

Marketing Strategy for Slumdog Millionaire: South Asian Media leading…..

January 14, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

This is an explanation from Gitesh Pandya (Box Office Guru) on how marketing strategy for Slumdog Millionaire:

Slumdog Millionaire was initially released in only six major cities on November 12 and American and desi moviegoers alike were targeted.  I invited the South Asian media to come and see the film early as we screened the film over a month before its release date so journalists could do stories on it in order to raise awareness.  The film was selling out at all theaters and each week more theaters were added in more cities across the country.  The momentum kept building and so before Christmas Fox Searchlight expanded the film to over 600 theaters in big and small cities alike.  It continued to increase its weekend gross every week as people have been recommending it to others making it a true crossover success.

This has been an increasingly effective marketing strategy. Here is an account of recent developments from The New York Times:

“Films Reach Theaters a Drib Here, Drab There.”

Slumdog Millionaire

January 10, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

Quite likely, Slumdog Millionaire will sweep the Golden Globes (nominated in four categories) tomorrow and even more likely, it will take a good share of accolades at the Academy Awards next month. The film is receiving consistent praise for from all quarters, and audiences are clearly enjoying it.  It has received limited release (now a proven marketing strategy) until mid December and now it ranks 7th in box office returns in the U. S.  The film promises to break ground in what it provokes and how it inspires filmmakers, as well as critics in their approach to world cinema.

slumdog-013

Let us give credit where it is due. Slumdog Millionaire is a slick film; effectively photographed, competently edited and has all the elements of a successful blockbuster film made by “foreigners” in a third world country. It deserves all the awards it gets; one hopes it does. The experience of watching the film is pleasurable not merely for aesthetic reasons but because it confirms what we expect from India and its slums, and re-confirms the state of a nation that is nothing but a service-ground for the West. From here, the entire country looks like a gigantic calling center surrounded by slums, and the film proves it.

If film has become “transnational” in the age of globalization, this new category of “transnational” or “world” cannot be assigned innocence. There is always a predisposition toward another culture (culture of the ‘other’) that comes through in the film produced by crossing borders. This perspective is no more biased (if that is the term) than what could be the case in films made within the confines of “national cinema.” But we have to move away from thinking of innocence (which is the hallmark of the Golden Globes, the Academy et al) to thinking of predispositions/proclivities of popular tastes that want to see and confer awards to “foreign” films.

slumdog-043

First, the film is a studied imitation of the narrative techniques that have worked so well for “Bollywood.” It would be a mistake to equate “Bollywood” with simple song and dance sequences.  Slumdog narrative shows how it is possible to move beyond the possibilities of realism, with a good dose of realistic elements strewn in together. The improbable rise of the young Slumdog is made possible by providence, the luck of gods that watch the poor since the rest of humanity seems so cruel. The Slumdog kid survives and even learns English through a stint at the Taj Mahal as a tourist guide. One has to suspend the disbelief that such things are within the realm of reality. The characters work within the accepted region of meaning; they work at call centers; they live in dire poverty; their humanity is intact despite the evil that lurks around them and they always win at the last minute.

Second, the “feel good” aspect of the narrative is what makes the film a winner in the minds of audiences that search for something sympathetic in characters who toil in poverty in the county of the ‘other.’ A. O. Scott wrote in 2004 in The New York Times (What is a Foreign Movie Now?) that there are two kinds of foreign movies (that win acceptance here); the humanist type (mostly about the natives, set in realist mode) and the modernist type (about middle class, city dwellers, reflecting on existential situations). Granted Slumdog is not exactly a “foreign” movie (the Academy prefers “foreign language film,” with entirely dubious nomenclature), it bears all the marks of a film made about another culture, and one that pretends to be “native” in stylistic and narrative claims. So this is neither a humanist film nor a modernist film, but it is now a film that revives a “colonialist” approach to the other. Like all Sally Struthers commercials, the film is intended to make you feel good in the end. For Frank Rich and others, it is a parable for the times in which we live. The good will triumph; the villains will be punished and the poor have a chance of making it on to the sunlit stage of wealth.  You ought to make this acceptable to the audiences that the characters come from a background that you hold in your imagination, that they affirm your view of their conditions and that they can still sign up to the dreams you have signed on to. Why would a film like this fail?

If we embrace the idea of “transnational” cinema uncritically–that the hybrid and symbiotic energies of two or more cultures will always bring about new synthesis–we would be choosing the wrong answer in this game. It would be damaging to embrace this aspect of world cinema without serious examination or we would bring back the old ghost in new garbs.

Third and the final aspect of this film have to do with what it implies rather than what it says clearly in its narrative. (If you have not seen the film, skip this now and return later.) Perhaps Danny Boyle and Co. has unleashed a series of insights on how we must understand poverty and its relationship to success as we define it.  What is “written” for the Slumdog is not his fate. That would be “Frank Rich solution” to the problems of bad times and recession; just wait for the tide to turn and get rid of the culprits who spoil the broth. When we leave the chances of fighting poverty to mere providence (another mark of most “Bollywood” narratives), we ignore what else is “written” in that scenario.  There are hints in Danny Boyle’s work, but in the form of narrative commitment. Each of the victories of Slumdog is “written” on his history, the history of his body. We learned from reading Foucault’s histories that this is where power makes its lasting marks.  The “solution” to this is not to wait for luck of the draw or seeking of any lifeline or asking the audiences for a bailout. The solution is a steady re-writing of that history. The pain on the body has to be re-written. One cannot wait for the answers to match luckily to the questions posed. One has to re-write history written on the bodies by poverty and one has to, of course, force a re-phrasing of questions.

Such is the question re-opened by Slumdog Millionaire and such is the challenge for cinema made across borders.

©Shekhar Deshpande

What is this euphoria about Slumdog?

January 6, 2009 by Shekhar Deshpande

David Thomson profiles Danny Boyle in The Guardian this week. Like  Frank Rich in The New York Times (and many others to echo elsewhere), Thomson calls it the film for the times of recession, a story of rags to riches. That is;  it is a “feel good” movie that is likely to lift us up in bad times.  If there is a message here, it is about how povery is “written” on the bodies of the poor. The lucky coincidence of Slumdog’s success is more about how the game shows attempt to bring out the pathologies of the masses rather than present a  feel good story for the Oscars season.  If you see only the narrative and not its movement, its steady stealing of emotions with principles of pleasure,  you miss everythiing. More on Slumdog later.

Fatih Akin at the edge of heaven!

December 25, 2008 by Shekhar Deshpande

Fatih Akin’s The Edge of Heaven has to be one of the best films of 2008. A complex, interweaving narrative of six characters in Germany and Turkey, it has a deft structure and some of the most memorable performances.  The film is about “going home” in a world where everyone seems to be displaced, either emotionally, physically or both. Turkish immigrants  in Germany (Hambourg) are firmly anchored in both worlds, including Akin himself, born of parents with German and Mexican pedigree in Germany. The narrative shifts from Hamburg to Turkey only to find that the two worlds are so incomplete and so innately connected. Incomplete because the assurance of German identity gives away quicky to larger (European! Cosmopolitan?) perspectives and the search for Turkish identity collapses into questions about revolution, freedom and the possiblity of  “speaking to each other” in a mixed world.

Akin shows, perhaps unbeknownst to himself (the accompanying docu about “making the film” strips away the authorial depth), that this is how the world is shaped now. There is no returning home. It is only a question of returning to our lost ideals or finding new ones. This is encapsulated best by the character of Susanne Staub played by the ever so elegant Hanna Schygulla. As the mother of Lotte, a generous, warm hearted idealist German whose friendship with Nejat propels the narrative into multiple levels of questinos about the new generations in these countries, Hanna Schygulla’s Susanne at once shows the hard nosed tradition of the “older” (core?) Europe but at the same time holds the key to understanding the emerging worlds. She is hesitant first at her daughter’s relationship but then gives in only to realize what commensurability of souls can merge the worlds.

This film is about the new “cosmopolitanism” in world cinema. It is now possible to be anchored in your own soil, your own nationhood, either blessed by the nation-state or by your own loyalties but at the same time belong to that larger world that holds hope for a universal, broader language of humanity.

When it comes to “foreign” cinema, we are never too shocked at how The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences or for that matter, the movie going public in general can ignore what they cannot grasp. There is the irony. The world that should be more worldly believes in parochial values. And those who are locked in more real conflicts than we are, are searching for more meaningful solutions.

© Shekhar Deshpande

December 25, 2008