Home › Forums › Teaching About Asia Forums › Film Festival › Film Festival
The film “Seven Samurai” was over three hours long! After the second hour, I was anxiously expecting to see the bandits enter the village. It was too long for me, but the film was enjoyable. The story is set in Japan in the 16th century when the central authority collapses, war lords control the land, and farmers face severe hardships. I viewed the film with the commentary device on. The insights into the film were provided by Michael Jeck. He lectures and distributes Japanese films. Jecks interjections throughout the movie helped me stay focused during the long film, but mostly importantly he emphasized the nuisances that I would have surely missed.
The conflict confronting the villagers is a group of troublesome bandits. The villagers decided to hire several samurai to deal with them. Two hours of the movie are spent presenting the quandary of the village, the recruitment of the samurai, and then the training of the villagers by the samurai. The last hour and thirty minutes deal with the attack of the village by the bandits.
The film is truly a work of art. Michael Jeck stated that most of the film was shot in a lot. You could not have guessed that. The actors in the movie did an incredible job. I was memorized by each character’s unique personality and how their interactions advanced the plot. Of course, the best character was the comical Kikuchiyo. He is an endearing fellow with some major inner demons. Kikuchiyo is better understood at the end of the film.
I would definitely use the film in my classroom to discuss the tension between the samurai and the peasants, to discuss the political climate in Japan in the 16th century, and the values of the samurai.
Even though the film was long, I highly recommend it.
I viewed The Last Emperor. It was a wonderful film about the last Manchurian emperor of China. I was captivated with the story that was pretty much historically accurate. The story was presented from a very personal and human perspective. I came to feel sympathy toward young P’u Yi who since the age of three was like a prisoner in the Forbidden City. The young actors portraying P’u Yi were extremely artistic in presenting a young Emperor who was callow, naive, and manipulated throughout his life. The movie presents the major events of the Emperor’s life, such as the selection of his wife, the troops of a warlord entering the City to remove him, life in Tientsin, a puppet Emperor in Manchuria, and finally as a prisoner of war.
I wonder if any scenes were actually filmed in the Forbidden City. The sacredness of the City as a symbol of imperial grandeur and China’s glorious past are well presented in this film.
I would definitely use this movie in the classroom to explore the question: “What is the role of the monarchy today?” The movie is also useful in showing the changes in China during the period of life of Emperor P’u Yi. A teacher could use this movie as a spring board to explore world events or those specific to Asia, such as the Japanese invasion into Manchuria, the attack on Pearl Harbor, or Communism in China.
It is a great movie to see.
ENTER THE DRAGON
This section certainly has some interesting reviews of films that I hope to check out at some point. Here is my two cents. I was debating which film to review, when a friend of mine who is, among other things, a certified Bruce Lee nut, loaned me the 30th Anniversary DVD edition. I remember seeing the film as a teenager, but the only thing that really registered was Bruce Lee's ability to kick some serious butt.
Having explored the film a little further, it soon became apparent to me that this is a very important film on some levels. Filmed in 1973, it was the first martial arts movie that was designed for a worldwide audience, and was the first co-production between an American film company (Warner's) and Golden Harvest films, which was owned by Raymond Chow in Hong Kong. The film was written by an American (with input from Lee himself), boasted an ethnically diverse cast, was filmed in and around Hong Kong using many up-and-coming martial arts stars like Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung, and was the first attempt to really sell an Asian actor to an American audience. It was filmed on a budget of $850,000, and went on to make a substantial return worldwide. In fact, it is on several lists of most profitable films of all time. It launched Lee as a bona fide superstar and cultural icon, which only compounded the tragedy of his death at 32 a month before the film premiered in Los Angeles. Ironically, it was the least popular of Lee's films in the Asian market, but it did very well in the US and Europe.
Lee is a Shaolin monk who is recruited by the British to investigate a notorious ex-monk named Han. Han holds a martial arts tournament every three years on his private island, which just happens to be in international waters and outside the jurisdiction of the British. The Brits are convinced that Han is responsible for running a drug and prostitution ring, and they need someone who can infiltrate the tournament to snoop around. Lee is at first reluctant, until of course the Brits tell him that Han is a former member of his temple and is also directly responsible for the death of Lee's sister. The tournament is nothing more than an elaborate ruse, as Han uses it to recruit new talent for his nefarious organization. Thus motivated, Lee travels to the island and meets up with a colorful cast of characters, including: Roper, the cynical-yet-warmhearted gambling addict/karate expert who is on the run from the mob; and Jim Kelly, the African-American karate champ who has escaped relentless persecution at the hands of the police in the deep south. The tournament begins and there are many explosive and original fight scenes during the day, and at night Lee snoops around the island to gather the evidence that the Brits require. Eventually, Han is tipped to the fact that Lee is an agent and they have a fight to the death, while the whole island simultaneously brawls. The troops arrive, order is restored, good has triumphed against evil, and personal scores have been settled.
This is pretty standard fare and is certainly a product of its time. A cheesy 'Shaft'-like theme, replete with crazed wah-wah pedal stomping floats through the entire movie, the dialogue is loaded with dated slang, Jim Kelley sports the quintessential afro and the black militant angle is alluded to at points, the fighters- especially Lee- feel the need to wax poetic about the fighting itself, the adversary is a Dr.No clone, and the story has its share of holes. The movie saves itself on the strength of the fighting scenes, which happen frequently and escalate to the all out brawl that concludes the film. The star of the movie and the reason for the movie is Lee himself. He was a magnetic performer who exudes a cocky confidence and inner anger that is asonishing to witness. What a great physical actor. Basically, the movie is James Bond meets "Shaft".
What is interesting about the film is that Lee is not your typical Asian actor of that time. He is strong, clever, opinionated, stubborn, brave, incredibly gifted, but he also follows a strict code of ethics. Let's face it, he is also the real deal. Remember that many Americans exposure to an "Asian" actor was during "Kung-Fu", starring David Carradine- a westerner dressed up to appear more Asian (Ironically, Lee never got over his anger at being turned down for that role). Flash back a few years prior to that, and Bruce Lee makes his appearance in the seldom seen action series "The Green Lantern" as Kato, the loyal and somewhat quirky sidekick to his American boss. Lee is nobody's sidekick anymore, and he establishes this in the first minute of the film. He is not only a superbly gifted martial artist, but also a teacher, a philosopher, and a man of great morality. Interestingly, the Americans are portrayed in a noble light as well, but they are not without their flaws. Jim Kelly is portrayed as a good man, but he is not adverse to partying and loves to 'get down with the ladies', while O'Harra, one of Han's American thugs, dishonors the tournament by attacking Lee with broken bottles, thereby causing Han and his team to "lose face". Roper refuses to join Han's enterprise, but he is also gambling on the outcome of the fights. The Americans are also not portrayed as physically intimidating, despite their larger frames, but the camera lovingly rolls over Lee, sans shirt throughout a good portion of the film, as he flexes his considerable physique. He is the Asian superman who can do things that other mortals can't even conceive.
The film is problematic for many of the reasons listed above. It would be a hard sell to show this movie in my classroom full of 8th graders (especially with our ridiculous LAUSD Policy). However, and more realistically, most of my students openly talk about seeing such fare as "Saw II", "Hostel" and other excessively gory flicks, so this would be rather tame. But, is is educational? I would argue that it is in certain ways. It does demonstrate the Asian method of combining philosophical thought with physical action, and demonstrates that they are not mutually exclusive. Some of Lee's philosophic utterirngs could be examined and would be an excellent hook to introduce a unit on Zen writing etc. However, I think the greatest value of this film is that it is the first joint US-Chinese cultural enterprise designed at infiltrating American culture and that it spawned an entire genre- big budget action films with Asian actors (Jet Li, Jackie Chan, and many of the 'Hard-Boiled" films from Hong Kong in the 80's). Also, the film was a concerted effort to change the average American's perception of Asian people. After "Enter the Dragon", there was no need to dress up a westerner in exotic clothing and pass him off as Asian (ala 'Kung-Fu'), the stereotypical Asian character was undermined by Lee's adoption of more accessible, but no less authentic, character traits that an American audience could relate to, and even admire (imagine Gary Cooper dispatching the bad guys in "High Noon" with Kung-Fu). The film is an interesting example of cross-cultural pollination, and the students would benefit from being shown how this character came to be, and the great distance travelled to arrive before them on the screen. Placed in the context of China's emergence in the American consciousness in the early 70's (Nixon's overtures to China), and during the end phase of the conflict of Vietnam, this film signalled the beginning of a new era. Asia was nobody's afterthought anymore.
"Tokyo Story" was made in 1953 by Ozu. It is unanimously recognized as a masterpiece. It may be a slow go for most of you in the first thirty minutes but hang in there. Sometimes the camera will hold as long as ten seconds on one scene. Ozu's primary subjects are the rituals and processes of middle class life. It you wish ato peak into middle class life see "Tokyo Story". It is an unvarnished look at Japenese life with the unit of observation being the family and extended family.
The shots are very unconventional. For instance, the train opens the scene as it is traveling off the screen and reappears in the last scene traveling the other direction. The film is about an elderly couple and their children and in-laws, and how they are treated on a vacation. The mother's health takes a turn for the worst at the resort and they travel to the small town to comfort the father. I won't tell you more--- other than to be aware of the use of symmetry by the director. There are no loose ends in this film and all scenes exercise efficiency and sparse resources to deliver a heart wrenching climax. You walk away thinking simpliciy is truly beauty.
For good news, reviews, entertainment, resources, and screening events on Asian-American Films check out the following website:
http://www.asianamerican.film.com
The site provides links for screening events all around the USA, In-depth articles about Asian films and film-makers, Reviews of the good and bad movies, community message boards where members could share news and comments around the area, Resources on film-makers, films, a database, and even casting calls, and Minute Movies.
Log on http://www.asianamerican.film.com and check out this excellent resource for Asian-American Films.
Comic book meets the action film, the comedy, the musical, drama, and the didactic story;"Kung-Fu Hustle" by Stephen Chow is the movie that has it ALL!
"In a time of social unrest and disorder the gangs run amuck. The most feared of them all is the Axe Gang. Only in the poorest districts, which hold no interest for the gangs can people live in peace" (Kung-Fu Hustle Prologue)
I love-love-love this film! It is one of my ultimate favorites and this is the first time I have ever thought of the possibility of using it in the classroom to teach/review Elements of Literature (Exposition, plot, setting, conflict, complication, climax, denouement, and resolution) as well as, Narrative, and Theme. YES, it is rated R, but I would use it to teach enrichment in an after school or saturday class, AND of course I would get adminstrative and parental consent.
If I could get it approved , I will use this action-packed, fun-filled, great story-line to help my students understand the concepts I mentioned above.
How?
Well, teaching 1st and 3rd-person Narrative can be challenging if you have reluctant and/or low-level readers. Because I have a class with 11 resource students (all with different learning disabilities, and low-low reading skills), I would love to use "Kung-Fu Hustle" to draw the students in. If you think about it, I could hit a lot of the 7th AND 8th grade California English Standards doing this.
See..
The movie is like a cartoon! The characters run, act, fight, and behave like the Road-Runner, Wile E. Coyote, Tom and Jerry, and so forth. The students will definitely be into it. It's funny! Yes, it's in Chinese, and they will HAVE to follow the subtitles, but if they can't, they will be able to follow the action nonetheless.
With the students drawn in, and therefore paying CLOSE attention to the story, I can use it as a jumping base to talk about HOW the characters are depicted and introduced. What are their characteristics? Strengths? Flaws?
Then, we could talk about setting? When and where does the story take place? How do you know? Give examples, explain.
What is the conflict of the story? How do you know? Examples from the film? Do we see the conflict get worse? What are the complications? Discuss, explain.
The students will not have a problem telling me what the Climax is because it is evident. And although there are A LOT of exciting parts in the movie, they will know which scene was the most critical.
After the Climax, students will be asked to discuss the denouement...how are things winding down? What is the resolution? Was the conflict solved? How? Explain and give examples from the movie.
Once we discuss all of these elements (1week), I can always assign the students to rewatch the movie outside of school--and they will and do have access to the film. If I get approval,, they can even watch it in the school's auditorium for the second time during lunch time in 3 days! During their second viewing I will ask them to pay attention to the order of events (plot). What happened first, sencond, third, last? And have them create a flow chart the plot.
Once students have watched "Kung-Fu Hustle" at least twice, we can review the above mentioned elements and begin talking about theme. This film has soo many positive messages! World peace, redemption, kindness, love, etc.
Finally, we could discuss the characteristics of narrative by examining short stories. As a culminating task students will have the option to write a narrative assuming the persona of a character from the film or from one of the stories studied, and retell one event of the story in the 1st or 3rd-person point of view.
This of course will take about 2-3 weeks, 2-5 if we want to discuss the symbolism within the film.
I know the use of this film in the teaching of middle-school students is HIGHLY unlikely, but it is an exciting idea...maybe it be better for high-school or college students in basic English classes. Who knows! But I know I would get great results if it could be done.
What do you think?
On Oct. 1, 2007, the USC U.S.-China Institute will screen a dramatic documentary. My Dream is about a performing arts troupe where all the performers have overcome some disability in order to express themselves through music or dance. The troupe has performed at Carnegie Hall and Kennedy Center. Prior to the screening, we'll feature a discussion among specialists about the perceptions toward the disabled in China and efforts to meet their needs.
To be sure that you get reminders about this screening, please go to the USC U.S.-China Institute website (http://china.usc.edu) and sign up for the newsletter. You can also sign up by sending your contact information to mailto:uschina@usc.edu
I have lefft this posting until last because it is the one I did not want to do. I do not watch movies unless forced to because I simply do not enjoy them. I know this makes me an enemy of many people, especially in Los Angeles and all it's film glory, but I would rather read.
Since I had to watch and review a film I decided to see one that many of my friends had urged me to see. I rented Memoirs of a Geisha. I knew that there was probably very little useful footage for use in my elementary classroom, but I had hoped for a couple of 2 minute clips I could use in relation to other topics. I am not sure that I got any clips out of watching this film, but it certainly was beautiful cinematography. I did not know anything about the story line and so I was a bit confused at times but overall I thought it was a tolerable movie. I may even read the book to get a better grasp of the story line (in my opinion, a better way to spend 145 minutes).
Despite not being able to use this film in my classroom, I feel that it equipped me with more knowledge of East Asia and an aspect of Japan's history. I recall having once learned all about the Kimono and think I have been inspired to do more research on the meaning behind them. This may lead to a useful lesson. I also want to know more about the Japanese perspective on WWII and am going to seek out books on the topic. Again, I am sure the inspiration the film gave me to research other topics will lead to another useful lesson.
One thing I did like about the film was the presentation of Geisha as being almost like a competative sport. This is an angle I had not previously considered. The competition and jealousy between the girls was fierce and they strategically planned each of their moves to out-do the other. They were also simultaneously striving to be the best Geisha while questioning if they really wanted that life... and interesting juxtaposition.
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is an adventurous story of noble warriors in feudal China. It's also the story of a love between one warrior and the fiancée of a fallen comrade, a woman in which it would be dishonorable for him to pursue. It follows the life of a beautiful teenage daughter (Zhang Ziyi) of a governor, who longs desperately for freedom in the face of an impending arranged marriage. This movie is filled both with action packed sequences as well as a great storyline.
Although I couldn’t really show this movie in its entirety to my sixth grade class (because of the rating), I would love to use some clips for my history class. Especially notable are the themes of thievery, loyalty, duty and unrequited love that unfold in this movie. These values are very much part of Asian culture. In today’s world of reality tv, I think it would be interesting for my students to see a culture where you cannot think of yourself first. It would be great to use to show them the core values held in ancient China, and how those values affcted their daily lives. In addition, if I were to get permission slips or taught an older age, I would love to use this during my narrative unit. It follows the basic plot line well. While most movies do, this would be a good way to tie Chinese culture in my class, discussing with the students the conflict, subplots, climax, resolution, and of course theme, all the while learning Chinese culture.
.
ANCIENT CHINA: THE ROOTS OF AGRICULTURE is a film created by The History Channel as part of the Where Did It Come From? series. I showed this film to my sixth grade students when learning about Ancient China. This film can be purchased from TheHistoryChannel.com as a DVD entitled Where Did It Come From?: Ancient China: Agriculture for $24.95. The film is 50 minutes long.
This is a great film to show students about the ingenuity of the ancient Chinese civilization who faced problems of maintaining a stable food supply that would need to a feed a large population of people. This film traces the origins of modern agricultural technology that was influenced by many ancient Chinese inventions such as the wheelbarrow, the hoe, cast iron plow, seed drill, and chain pump. Host Michael Cuillen travels back to 22 centuries back in time and reveals how Chinese farmers increase productivity and made numerous contributions to modern agriculture as well.
What was great about this film was that students got to see the ancient farming inventions created by the Chinese in the past and the modern farming equipment that was influenced by the Chinese. There was also a segment that recreated some of the early Chinese inventions such as the seed drill and the chain pump that pumps water uphill.
After watching the video, my students were really impressed with the ingenuity of the Chinese and can connect modern agriculture to Chinese history.
Akira Kurosawa is, quite simply, the greatest film director of the twentieth century. The early Orson Welles (Citizen Kane and, far less successfully, The Magnificent Ambersons) and Ingmar Bergman (his entire oeuvre) in their best moments equal Kurosawa. But no one exceeds him for startling originality, technical virtuosity and the sheer force of his stunning visual and dramatic presentations. New directors may emerge in the future, of course, to challenge Kurosawa's mastery. But the American and international films I have seen since Kurosawa's death--especially the epic attempts, such as the later Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and their many clones--continue to convince me that Kurosawa's supremacy remains secure.
Kurosawa in his long career produced what his most astute critic, Donald Richie, calls "a relentless succession of masterpieces." To single out one as the best is invidious. But if we have to do this, as I am doing here, then the obvious choice is the brilliant battle epic known in Engllish as The Seven Samurai. (I hedge my choice by calling it his greatest epic film, thereby eliminating from consideration astonishing mini-epics like Hidden Fortress and Yojimbo and contemporary masterpieces such as Ikiru.) Schininin no Samurai was first released in Japan in 1954 at 207 minutes and two years later in the US as The Seven Samurai in a drastically cut version that runs a little over two hours. Even in its truncated version the film is overwhelming in its visual power and narrative sweep and precision. I first saw it back in the '60s on television, and even with the small black-and-white screen and the heavy cutting and the unspeakable intrusion of commercials, I was stunned and humbled. No first viewing of any film has ever affected me as powerfully, not even my first encounter with Citizen Kane (which I first saw under similar deplorable conditions). Now that the full running time of almost three and a half hours has been available in the US in restored editions for the past several decades, it is easy to compare the cut and original versions and see that what the American editors excised back in the '50s were the deliberate repetitions of events and actions, the formal frozen kata that precede the sword duels and the abundance of details, in closeups and long shots, that contribute to the Zen-like intensity and almost meditative mindfulness of the full viewing experience. However, like any incomparable work of art, The Seven Samura is not to all tastes. Posts to this thread have criticized the film as overlong, boring or generally alienating. In no way does it conform to the venerable American pacing tradition best exemplified in Billy Wilder's ironic anecdote. (Wilder once complained that a European director could open his film with three shots of clouds, just clouds, and the audience would sit still for it; but while an American audience would sit still for the first shot of clouds, in the second there had better be an airplane, and in the third shot it had better explode.) Like any truly great and groundbreaking film, The Seven Samurai forces us to reconsider and redefine our sense of films, how they work and what they mean.
The film opens with a long shot of a gang of bandits on horseback attaining the ridge of a low mountain that overlooks a small village and its meager rice fields. In a terse bit of dialogue the bandit chieftain announces that this will be their next target, but a subordinate reminds him that they pillaged this place last year and had better give it a while longer to recover before they hit it again. The bandit chieftain agrees and the bandits ride off, to return on a later day when the time, and the rice, is ripe. A terrified villager, who has been hiding and has overheard this grim discourse, emerges from the undergrowth with a look of sick horror on his face and hurries down the mountainside to alert the other villagers of the peril they will soon face. So far, so basic. It could have come from a number of the great John Ford westerns that inspired Kurosawa (such as the sinister Walter Brennan at the beginning of My Darling Clementine). But Kurosawa looks nothing like Ford. The bandits are shot in extreme closeups from below, their horses' heads twitching violently back and forth, as if they would throw off these ragged and desperate men on their backs, desperate almost as the starving villagers they plan to rob and rape on another day. The village is brought to agitated life in scenes of angry discussions about what to do and how the farmers can defend themselves against the bandits. In one breathtaking sequence Manzo (Kamatari Fujiwara) approaches his teenage daughter Shino (Keiko Tsushima) with knife in hand. The terrified girl, knowing well, as the audience does not, what is in store for her, flees desperately, pursued by her frantic father, who cuts off her long, shining dark hair as she weeps helplessly, the father hoping to disguise her as a boy and spare her from rape and abduction at the hands of the bandits. A later sequence, even more startling in its intensity of action and revelation, occurs when Katsushiro (Isao Kimura), a young disciple of the head samurai Kambei Shimada (Takashi Shimura), chases after what he thinks is a disobedient boy until he catches Shino and, attempting to subdue him (her), pulls open her tunic and realizes, to his embarrassment and dismay, that she is a young woman. The scene ends with a shot characteristic of Kurosawa: an extreme long shot with the two characters at opposite ends of the frame, in a field of bright flowers, panting for breath, embarrassed, exhausted and excited, a perfect stillness charged with furious erotic energy.
Toshiro Mifune, who plays Kikuchiyo, the peasant who would become a samurai, is a great actor with a range that extends from broad comic slapstick to the heights of tragic anger and desolation, and Western audiences understandably see him as the "star" of The Seven Samurai, but that role belongs to Takashi Shimura, a magisterial actor who has played many parts, leading and supporting, for Kurosawa (who, like his model John Ford, knew the value of a versatile stock company). Shimura plays Kambei Shimada, the ronin, or masterless samurai, who recruits the other six and becomes their unofficial leader. We first see Shimada as an accidental savior called upon by a poor family to save their young child, who has been captured and is being held hostage inside a small house by a psychotic criminal who threatens to kill her. Shimada asks for the peasants to bring him a bowl of water, with which he wets his head then calmly shaves it, using a straightedge razor. Then he enters the house with a begging bowl, in the guise of a Buddhist monk, as the criminal screams at him, threatening to kill the child. Seconds later we see the criminal stagger out and fall to his death in subtle, exquisite slow motion (a device first employed by Kurosawa and later exploited and vulgarized by Sam Peckinpah, Sam Raimi, the Wachowski brothers and hack action directors too numerous to mention). Shimada comes out with the child in his arms, having performed this act of salvation as a matter of honor and skill. He continues to be the moral focus of the film, the man who recruits six other poor, masterless samurai to undertake the defense of a starving village for the payment of a few bowls of rice. He is not the most skillfull of the samurai. That honor belongs to Kyuzo (Seiji Miyaguchi)), the ultimate swordsman who goes out by himself in the rain to practice his technique, only to fall in the end, in one of the most ironic moments in world cinema, before a bullet fired from a Portuguese musket possessed by the bandits, a dark foreshadowing of the fate of Tokugawa Japan as a consequence of its first contact with the West. Kambei Shimada is the lesser warior but the wiser and the one who survives, along with his young disciple Katsushiro, to stand before the heaped-up graves of the other five in a shot that consciously echoes the conclusion of John Ford's The Lost Patrol. It is Shimada who announces, to the confusion of his disciple Katsushiro, that, once again, they have lost, that the farmers are the ones who have won, not the samurai who lie buried beneath the heaped-up graves. As magnificent as the battle scenes are, nothing in the film feels quite as magnificent as this subdued ending, quiet and powerful as anything in Milton, in which Kurosawa expresses visually and emotionally the great, dark theme of Homer's Iliad: that warfare brings no honor or glory to its warriors, nothing of value except the bleak fact of their survival, for those fortunate enough to survive.
If you love film, you must see The Seven Samurai. It is an obligation, not a choice. But don't see it when you're tired or pressed for time or with a crowd hungry for some fast martial-arts action. See it alone, or with someone who loves film as much as you do. Open yourself to it and let it do its work on you and, at the end of almost three and a half hours, it will have changed the way you look at film and film-making and, most probably, yourself.
Leigh Clark
Monroe High School
Jia Hongsheng was a rising actor who had roles in films and television series when he began to experience psychological problems. His family sticks with him despite his many difficulties and his sometimes abusive behavior. Jia recovers his ability to function and wrote and stars in this film. The Chinese name of the film is Zuotian 昨天 or Yesterday. Jia becomes addicted to the Beatles and is especially fascinated by John Lennon.
This is a great film exploring obligations among family members.
Quitting will screen at 5:30 am on 11/13/07 on IFC (Direct TV 550), so set your recorder up.
I took the opportunity to go to the last day of the AFI film festival at the Arclight this weekend to see Please Vote For Me. This film is a documentary about democratic class elections at an elementary school in Wuhan. The director, Weijun Chen, is a TV producer in Wuhan, who attended a documentary film workshop, let by Don Edlers and the people at WhyDemocracy.net. This organization set out, with lots of funding, to make 12 films from all around the world, on the topic of democracy. Given that in China you, A) don't talk about democracy and B) don't usually get a bunch of Chinese doumentary filmmakers all together to write proposals for films about democracy, the WhyDemocracy.net people held a workshop to explain what the purpose of the project was and to elicit ideas from Chinese filmmakers.
Weijun Chen had footage of a colleague's son boasting about why he wanted to be the next primer of China. This film, eventually led to the idea of holding democratic elections for class monitor in a 3rd class in Wuhan. The child on the original video, Cheng Cheng, is one of three children in the 3rd grade class chosen by the teacher to run for class monitor. The other children are Luo Lei (the incumbent, bully, child of a police officer and polica captain), and Xiafei Xo (daughter to a divorced school administrative assistant).
The documentary follows the children home and sees the parents coaching each one in the ways of elections, debating, and dirty fighting. Bribery, taunting, and bullying all have their place in the election. The winner is announced after bringing gifts for the entire class for mid-autumn festival.
The film is both a fascinating look at how democracy plays out in its purest form with children who have few preconceived notions of voting, fairplay, and winning by merit alone. It's also a fascinating look at Chinese culture and how children are treated (and treat) their parents.
It was a hysterical and sometimes shocking view of democracy![Edit by="aronan on Nov 19, 7:29:13 AM"][/Edit]
Not loo long I saw the Chinese Bicycle Thief. It was a wonderfully beautiful mvie. It reminded me of the Italian movie by Vittorio De Sica with Aldo Fabrizi by the same name: The Bicycle Thief. The Chinese movie does not seem to provide a time period when it is taking place. The Italian movie takes place after WWII and one its important messages relates to the phenomenal utilitarian use of the bicycle in post-war Italy: it replaced, in a certain sense, the donkey and the mule for transportation purposes both of people and goods. I believe the Chinese movie could easily be taking place within the last 10-20 years. It too shows then importance of the bicycle as a means of transportation in a society changing from an agrarian culture to a manufacturing based economy. I enjoy viewing and analyzing movies from various cultural backgrounds and observe the way in which cultures view themselvels ... and then come to my own conclusions. The Bicycle provides the means of supporting one's family and its loss can be devasting to the point of sacrificing ones' own life to protect it and to keep it running safely and efficiently. It is a beautiful movie and I would recomment=d the viewing of bothe the Italian and the Chinese movie.
Not loo long I saw the Chinese Bicycle Thief. It was a wonderfully beautiful mvie. It reminded me of the Italian movie by Vittorio De Sica with Aldo Fabrizi by the same name: The Bicycle Thief. The Chinese movie does not seem to provide a time period when it is taking place. The Italian movie takes place after WWII and one its important messages relates to the phenomenal utilitarian use of the bicycle in post-war Italy: it replaced, in a certain sense, the donkey and the mule for transportation purposes both of people and goods. I believe the Chinese movie could easily be taking place within the last 10-20 years. It too shows then importance of the bicycle as a means of transportation in a society changing from an agrarian culture to a manufacturing based economy. I enjoy viewing and analyzing movies from various cultural backgrounds and observe the way in which cultures view themselvels ... and then come to my own conclusions. The Bicycle provides the means of supporting one's family and its loss can be devasting to the point of sacrificing ones' own life to protect it and to keep it running safely and efficiently. It is a beautiful movie and I would recomment=d the viewing of bothe the Italian and the Chinese movie.