In a variety of ways, District 9 was the science fiction film that I’ve been waiting for, since 8^th grade and since Arthur C. Clarke’s brilliant short-story “History Lesson”. D9, much like Clarke’s story is a science fiction story only on the surface and in its premise, at its heart, it is actually a story exploring the strangeness of human nature and why humans behave and live the way they do.

Set in Johannesburg of an alternate universe, District 9 is an expansion of first-time director Neill Blomkamp’s award-winning short film “Alive in JoBurg”. In this reality, an alien mothership appears out of nowhere in the late eighties carrying about a million and a half aliens, who have apparently lost their way and ended up on earth. These aliens are relocated to the eponymous walled colony in JoBurg where they try to get along to the human way of life, scavenging for rubber tires and catfood.

The aliens are never referred by any name in general apart from the derogatory term “Prawns”. This is the first important point in the film made about the typical human attribute of slanging things (or species in this matter) to their closest resembling objects. As a human, I would put forward this insult fully knowing that if someone were to do the same to me, I would be heavily offended but I cannot help but think how this would apply to an alien. Perhaps, this is the reason why the Prawns never seem to protest when referred to in this derogatory manner. The film escalates the concept of Xenophobia and Racism to its next level- a universal one. Perhaps, it would only be appropriate to call it speciesism. The fact that Blomkamp seeks to set his film in South Africa (as opposed to favorites New York City, Los Angeles or Chicago) takes the film to a very non-epic-Hollywood setting where there will be no dismembered heads of any Statues of Liberty and places it on a the edge of controversy, keeping in mind South Africa’s long history of apartheid.

Blomkamp’s conscious choice of not shying away from the neo-apartheid setting of the film gives it a shot at greatness as it makes a lot of people put forward the question: “What are we waiting for next to discriminate against?” Indeed, while making “Alive in JoBurg”, Blomkamp had apparently interviewed real South Africans on their opinions on the rise in population of Zimbabwean refugees, which no doubt brought forward a lot of frank opinions and used that footage as part of the short film and made it look like these remarks were directed at the aliens. The feature version no doubt stays true to the same spirit.

Blomkamp uses hand-held camera heavily in a mixture of mockumentary-esque scenes that seem to have been taken from a South African adaptation of ‘The Office’ and straight-forward dramatic scenes where the viewer is left wondering just who is handling the camera now. The film is special effects heavy in terms of the Alien characters and how the humans just seem to vapourize when shot with one of the alien weapons but it really shines through in a fine performance from Sharlto Copley, the lead actor who starts out as a good-natured fumbling nerd working at a corporate position to a fugitive on the run, with an unstoppable condition who finds courage to reclaim his life.

District 9, like Arthur C. Clarke’s ‘History Lesson’ is a testament of what Science fiction can be and should be. It eats ‘The War of the Worlds’ for a post-breakfast, pre-lunch snacker and proves that aliens don’t always invade and that we might finally see a new kind of science fiction. An intelligent one.

“The collapse of the conventional German film finally removes the economic basis for a mode of filmmaking whose attitude and practice we reject. With it the new film has a chance to come to life.”  –The Oberhausen Manifesto

In 1962, the cinematic globe was already witness to several revisions, some of which are regarded today as revolutionary. British filmmakers were in the second year of their New Wave with their French counterparts, the Godards and the Truffauts riding the third year of theirs. Across the Atlantic, John Cassavetes had laid the seeds of an independent movement in America through his brilliant Shadows (1959) and it would be a good seven years before Fonda, Hopper and Nicholson would make Easy Rider (1969). The Germans it seems were feeling a little left out.

The term “New German Cinema” has been used interchangeably over the years with other terms in similar spirit such as “German New Wave”, “New German School” etc., to describe a movement in the cinema of Germany during the late 1960s, the 1970s and the early 1980s. While the French and British New Waves had a life expectancy of 7 years, the New German Cinema movement would last longer and lay the foundations for Germany in the cinematic history books.

“German short films by young authors, directors, and producers have in recent years received a large number of prizes at international festivals and gained the recognition of international critics. These works and these successes show that the future of the German film lies in the hands of those who have proven that they speak a new film language.” –The Oberhausen Manifesto

At the closure of the Second World War, Germany was split up into East and West and it was up to its artistic and literary circles to take the responsibility to ‘denazify’ its image.  West Germany in particular took up the task of turning itself into a modern western state against a rising Soviet influence on the eastern side. Cinema was entrusted with the important role of creating hope among the German people and to present the world a Germany healing from its wounds, all the while remaining on a small budget.

The German filmmakers also had to match up to the rising influence of Hollywood films in Europe. By 1962, most of Europe had recovered considerably from the destruction of the Second World War and this was the perfect time for Hollywood to export its product to take advantage of the lack of high budget European productions, with a secondary agenda of giving them a taste of the American Dream and possibly encourage immigration. German cinema could not compete with the Technicolor lushness of Lawrence of Arabia (1962) and the all-star lineup of How The West Was Won (1962) or the global exploits of James Bond in Dr.No (1962), neither could it afford to match up with the brilliant plots of The Manchurian Candidate, To Kill a Mockingbird and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

Something had to be done.

“We declare our intention to create the new German feature film. This new film needs new freedoms. Freedom from the conventions of the established industry. Freedom from the outside influence of commercial partners. Freedom from the control of special interest groups.” –The Oberhausen Manifesto

The 1962 edition of the Oberhausen Short Film Festival was to be a revolutionary gathering. On February 28^th, a group of 26 individuals comprising of filmmakers, artists and writers came together and declared the “death” of the old German cinema, affectionately termed as “Papa’s cinema”. They brought forward the need for a “New German Cinema” and presented the world with a manifesto that simply said that given the chance, they were willing to create that “New” German film that was required and backed their word with the recent success of German short films. This manifesto would find its place in history as the “Oberhausen Manifesto”.

The 26 names that appeared on the manifesto were:  Bodo Blüthner, Boris von Borresholm, Christian Doermer, Bernhard Dörries, Heinz Furchner, Rob Houwer, Ferdinand Khittl, Alexander Kluge, Pitt Koch, Walter Krüttner, Dieter Lemmel, Hans Loeper, Ronald Martini, Hansjürgen Pohland, Raimond Ruehl, Edgar Reitz, Peter Schamoni, Detten Schleiermacher,Fritz Schwennicke, Haro Senft, Franz-Josef Spieker, Hans Rolf Strobel, Heinz Tichawsky, Wolfgang Urchs, Herbert Vesely, Wolf Wirth.

These 26 individuals were committed to forego economical gain in exchange for progressive cinema that would match up Germany to the best in the world. They committed to experimention with narrative structures, exploration of new shooting techniques, bringing a sense of realism and to the telling of compelling stories through a strong emphasis on aesthetics

“We have concrete intellectual, formal, and economic conceptions about the production of the new German film We are as a collective prepared to take economic risks. The old film is dead. We believe in the new one”.  –The Oberhausen Manifesto

In April 1962, the German government took note and announced plans to setup a board to fund the type of films that are demanded by the manifesto and in October 1965, the “Kuratorium Junger Deutsche Film” was setup, approximately translating as “Board for the Young German Film”. With their new found support and funding, the new generation of German filmmakers set out to do what they had promised. The “New” German Cinema was critically well received in film festivals worldwide and was quickly becoming an important movement, though it would still take a few more years until they would catch fire back at home.

At the beginning of the 1970s, German filmmakers such as Werner Herzog, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Wim Wenders and Werner Schroeter were becoming well known names in the festival circuit. These filmmakers went as far as attending their own screenings at cinema halls and taking questions from the audience. Their enthusiasm and constant need to reach out to their viewers was what helped better the movement as it moved into the mid-seventies.

At the 1979 Hamburg Film Festival, another declaration was made. “The Hamburg Declaration” as it was called was a moment of gathering of the original signees of The Oberhausen Manifesto in celebration of their success in creating a “new” German cinema as they had promised 17 years earlier. The declaration put forward the professionalism and dedication they showed and came to the conclusion that their only ally was the spectator.

“That means the people who work, who have wishes, dreams and desires. That means the people who go to the movies, those who do not and that means the people who can imagine a totally different kind of film.”

“The double feature, also known as a double bill, was a motion picture industry phenomenon in which theatre managers would exhibit two films for the price of one, supplanting an earlier format in which one feature film and various short subject reels would be shown.”

-artandpopularculture.com

A shadow detaches itself from the dark staircase and slowly descends into the depths of the void, as if following an unsuspecting victim. Outside, a blonde wearing mink and a veil stands alone in the dark chilly downpour of a drizzle with a lit cigarette in her left hand. A car pulls over and rolls down the window, she leans in and exhales a mist of tobacco smoke. The man inside fans it away with his large hand, his face partly concealed by the harsh streetlight that fails to cut through the front of the car’s top. Then a word is exchanged and the man draws his gun only for the woman to be pushed aside, as the shadow steps out of the camoflauging shade and drowns the man in a flood of glass bullets.

The questionable good wins again, it is time for the Double bills to take to the street and paint the town red. Here are the entires:

• Bonner, Doug: Lucille Ball :: Nathanael West : My Sister Eileen (5th October)
• Ferdinand, Marilyn: Looking for Eric (2009)/ The Castle (1997) (6th October)
• Jourdan, Vincent: Double programme : westerns de série B – partie 1 (6th October)/ Double programme : westerns de série B – partie 2 (7th October)/ Double programme : westerns de série B – partie 3 (8th October)
• Maul, Matt: Sordid Projections (7th October)
• Valluri, Gautam: The Priscilla Proposition – A Double Bill of Guy Pearce in the Aussie Outback (5th October)

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994)

A 27-year old Pearce plays Adam Whitely, a young gay man who performs in drag as his alter-ego Felicia Jollygoodfellow. Pearce’s character is well built and at the same time displays a sort of womanly grace that makes most of the hardened Aussie gents in the film twitch with homophobia. His character is easily the most pronounced and the loudest among the three, other leads including Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith from the Matrix films) and Terrence Stamp (remember Limey?).

The film is a cult-classic among the LGBT and straight folk alike and is a massive road film about the journey to understanding yourself, exploring your inner outback and making choices. The film shines in the fact that it hardly ever gets too emotional and is filled with ample dosages of good humour, coming mostly from the antics of Pearce’s Felicia Jollygoodfellow. Terrence stamp on the other hand delivers probably one of the best performances of his career as a T-woman. The usual macho persona of Stamp is still evident in his blatant sarcasm but takes a backseat during other times. Stamp plays out his part not with reluctance but with all the energy and aura of an operatic god.

Weaving on the other hand, seems to be the most human of the three. The initiator of the journey which forms the central part of the film and the character that is most affected at the end of it, he takes on his role with a sort of honestly and courage mixed with a little helplessness, the sort that reminds you of a reluctant common man trying to win the heart of the beauty queen and eventually settling for the girl next door.

Pearce clearly steals the show and brings life to the film. It’s hard to imagine the film working nearly as good without him. The film features an array of bizarre and brilliantly coloured costumes providing a stark contrast to the bare and muted void of the terrain on which it travels.

The Proposition (2005)

Fast forward 11 years and we have our man taking another journey in the wild Aussie outback, this time with a full grown beard and flies in his face. Set in the 1880s, Pearce plays Charlie Burns, the middle sibling of the Burns brothers, notorious outlaws with a mega price tag on their heads. The film also stars the ever resilient Ray Winstone as Captain Stanley who captures Charlie Burns and his mentally-challenged younger brother and proposes the central proposition that he and his brother may walk free if he captures his elder brother Arthur (played terrificly by Danny Huston) and kills him.

Caught between the Devil and the Deep Sea, Charlie embarks on a rough journey on testing terrain to reach his older brother. The film is scripted by Aussie music legend Nick Cave and directed by John Hillcoat. The film is unforgiving in its cinematography, editing and score, giving you an accurate feel of how merciless the terrain is and what sort of torture the lead character has to endure.

Au contraire to Priscilla, the film features almost no colour whatsoever. The characters seem to merge in and out with the terrain, as if they were merely an extension of it. The colours are muted, the contrast is harsh and there are many flies on almost everybody’s faces.

So without further delay, here is:

The 25 to Cinephiliac Pride List

1. Paris, Texas – Wim Wenders (German/ English)
2. Vertigo – Alfred Hitchcock (English)
   The Man who shot Liberty Valance – John Ford (English)
   Faces – John Cassavetes (English)
   Taxi Driver – Martin Scorsese (English)
   Citizen Kane – Orson Welles (English)
   The Third Man – Carol Reed (English)
   Night on Earth – Jim Jarmusch (English/ Finnish/ Italian)
   Gandhi – Richard Attenborough (English)
   Magnolia – Paul Thomas Anderson (English)
   Mutual Appreciation – Andrew Bujalski (English)
   Spirited Away – Hayao Miyazaki (Japanese)
   Ali: Fear Eats the Soul – Rainer Werner Fassbender (German)
   The Shining – Stanley Kubrick (English)
   Au Revoir Les Enfants – Louis Malle (French)
   Where is the Friend’s Home? – Abbas Kiarostami (Iranian)
   Toy Story – John Lasseter (English)
   City of Sadness – Hou Hsiao-Hsen (Taiwanese)
   Branded to Kill – Seijun Suzuki (Japanese)
   Do you remember Dolly Bell? – Emir Kusturica (Serb0-Croatian)
3. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance – John Ford (English) – watched 9th November, 11:00 pm on PC.
4. Faces - John Cassavetes (English)
5. Taxi Driver – Martin Scorsese (English) – watched 4th October, 12:15 am on DVD player. Film acquired from Anuj Malhotra.
6. Citizen Kane – Orson Welles (English) - watched 15th October, 12:00 am on DVD player.
7. The Third Man – Carol Reed (English)
8. Night on Earth – Jim Jarmusch (English/ Finnish/ Italian/ French) - watched 30th October, 9:40 pm open air screening at the Goethe Institute, K.G.Marg.
9. Gandhi – Richard Attenborough (English) – watched 2nd October, 9:00 pm show on Sony Pix on Gandhi’s 140th Birth Anniversary.
10. Magnolia – Paul Thomas Anderson (English)
11. Mutual Appreciation – Andrew Bujalski (English) - watched 2nd November, 12:00 am on DVD player. Film acquired from Nitesh Rohit.
12. Spirited Away – Hayao Miyazaki (Japanese)
13. Ali: Fear Eats the Soul – Rainer Werner Fassbender (German)
14. The Shining – Stanley Kubrick (English)
15. Au Revoir Les Enfants – Louis Malle (French)
16. Where is the Friend’s Home? – Abbas Kiarostami (Iranian)
17. Toy Story – John Lasseter (English)
18. City of Sadness – Hou Hsiao-Hsen (Taiwanese)
19. Branded to Kill - Seijun Suzuki (Japanese)
20. Do you remember Dolly Bell? – Emir Kusturica (Serbo-Croatian)
21. Rashomon - Akira Kurosawa (Japanese) – watched 3rd October, 3:30 pm. A rare 16mm screening at the Kurosawa repertoire, Siri Fort Auditorium
22. The Battleship Potemkin - Sergei Eisenstein (Silent/ Russian)
23. 8½ - Federico Fellini (Italian)
24. Chinatown - Roman Polanski (English)
25. Recommendation 5

The last five slots are for recommendations, I’d like if you could leave a few recommendations in the comments and depending on if I have already watched the film or not and how difficult it is to attain, I will add the title to to the list.

I will also be updating this page, as I finish watching each of these films and will give you a quick description on how and on what format I’ve watched them.

59 days to go, 20 films to watch!

“The double feature, also known as a double bill, was a motion picture industry phenomenon in which theatre managers would exhibit two films for the price of one, supplanting an earlier format in which one feature film and various short subject reels would be shown.”

-artandpopularculture.com

For those who came in late, the first ever Double Billathon was held between October 22^nd and 26^th, 2007. It was meant to be an annual blogathon but due to my commitments to the big grand rat race, I could not conduct it last year. Ever since I’ve been off the blogosphere in the past one year, I’ve noticed a steady fall in the number of blogathons being proposed which is really such a shame because I remember it as a fun and interactive thing that us cinebloggers do. I hope we see more second and third editions of other great blogathons- the Bizarro, Close-up, the Kurosawathon and the Dance movie blogathon.

The veterans- you know the rules of play. Put on your marketing hat and spread the word!

The new joinees- here are the 3 commandments of the Double Billathon:

• The Blogathon begins on Monday, October 5^th at Midnight IST and ends on Friday, October 9^th at Midnight IST.
• You must form a Double-bill of two films (that usually have something in common) and write an article on them. There is no limit to the number of articles you can submit.
• Innovative post titles are a must! (A nod of respect to the classic Double-bill tradition).

So are you in? Then leave me a comment saying so and I will add you to the list.

Here are some banners to put up on your blogs and websites. Please link them back to the following link:

http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=94

163×420

326×75

Only 75 days to go! So take out that box of Grindhouse VHS tapes from the top of your highly neglected closet and start watching.

Yesterday, July 19^th was BrokenProjector.com’s 2 year anniversary. This is longer than the combined reign of all my day jobs and romantic relationships put together. This blog has taught me a lot of things about cinema, the things that I never could’ve found on my own.  BP was started in July 2007 right after my first involvement with a feature film shooting. I wanted to teach myself more on cinema by writing down my observations and it worked. If I am able to sit with a proven group of cinephiles and speak their language, it is because BP took me to that level.

Most people know it was active more during its first year, the previous one has gone without me writing on a regular basis. This is in part due to my day jobs (I’ve had two in the last year). Life has kept me busy. I’ve moved out of my parent’s home (for the second time), travelled a bit, found a job in the middle of the recession and started exploring Delhi a lot.

It was also the year in which I met the guys at IndianAuteur.com, a bunch of twenty-somethings like myself, trying to make films. It’s always great to hear that you’re not the only nut around. The first few issues had re-publishing of my older articles from BP and then eventually I started writing exclusively for IA issues.

So, on this occasion of 2 year completion I would like to publicly undertake an oath:

“For the remaining length of the year, I shall write one article for every week. That is a total of 24 till December 31^st, 2009.”

I will also be re-designing the entire site, to make it more efficient and interactive. I also plan to add a donation link, keeping in mind my desire to make this blog self-sustaining. Every month I will accept donations till the sum total reaches $10.00 because that’s how much it costs to keep this site running for a month. Once the donations cross $10.00 I will disable the link till the end of the month. I’m curious to see how this works and if my blog can sustain itself.

I’ve tried generating income from the blog in the past through AdWords but I only made $10.00 over the entire span of almost a year that it was up. This time I hope the results are different.

Lately, I’ve been very disappointed with my day job and wished I could be out on the streets, making films, travelling the world and meeting interesting people. But life seldom comes without responsibility, and frankly I have been very negligent of this blog in the past one year or so. Right now, BP is a personification of my love for cinema and my never-ending faith in it.

So thanks dear Reader! Thank you for dropping by time and again and reading what I have to say, it is a privilege I get so little in real world and perhaps that is the reason why my articles come out more like conversations.

What more? I have a surprise for all of you!  Especially for the ones who’ve been around since the days when little BP was still running around in diapers. Want to know what it is? Try guessing! The answer will be revealed tomorrow at 4 pm IST.

Much love to you!

“You tell me; I don’t know! Mumblecore … I don’t know. I have mixed feelings. First of all, if there has to be a term for what we’re doing, I wish it didn’t sound so lame.” -Aaron Katz, Major Mumblecorp

Our story begins in 1958, in the United States of America. Hollywood heavyweight John Cassavetes takes his A-list paycheck and gathers a small crew of trusted men in New York to shoot what will later turn out to be Shadows (1959). Critics and fans of John Cassavetes are not sure what to think of it- after all, it was not a very conventional film. Location shooting, handheld camera, guerrilla tactics, choppy editing and grainy filmstock were all considered inadequate in terms of refined filmmaking. Then someone makes the mistake of complimenting Cassavetes on his tasteful use of handheld camera, which results in John, never quite known for his tolerance, quickly grabbing the man’s collar and yelling in his face:

“You stupid bastard, that’s because we couldn’t afford a tripod!”

Fast forward to 2002, a film shot on 16mm filmstock and a budget less than that of  most cosmopolitan women’s make-up expenditure and going by the rather curious title of Funny Ha-ha catches attention at the South by Southwest festival, unknowingly breaking the bottle to a rising tide. It would be the year 2006, at this very same festival the word “Mumblecore” would become synonymous with what turned out to be a full-fledged cinematic movement. The term was first used by indieWIRE, which used it to describe the type of films that were creating this particular category and to the makers they bestowed upon the honourable title: Mumblecorps. Then there is the story that it was first uttered by Eric Masunaga, a sound editor to describe the way the characters in these films “mumble” to each other so much that sometimes they are barely even audible.

Though still unofficial, the name “mumblecore” serves the purpose for now although there have been other names given to this elusive new genre- “bedhead cinema” they call it, and some even called it “slackavetes” a wink perhaps? To the idol of so many Mumblecorps and the man who first dared to think of it in 1958.

The Traits of a Mumble-film

The most defining trait of a Mumblecore film is perhaps its depiction of truth and a deep need to portray realism in its most uninspiring parts. Real life is nearly 80% uninspiring after all, and directors like Jim Jarmusch have expressed interest in the insignificant space that exists between two significant events- just like how the fractions of silence between two notes in music create what the music really is. And it is this moment of silence which the Mumblefilm dares to tread upon. It’s walks all over it like a big dog and everyone loves it and go “awww, isn’t that cute.”

But the Mumbleness of these films is far from Jarmusch-ian indifference or Linklater-ish slacking for it harvests its silence in depths of realism and real people. That is where a Quiet City (2007) stands on its own and as far away from a Napolean Dynamite as Quentin Tarantino is sometimes from decency.

And what more? The most expensive product of Mumble-factory will cost less than the marked price of the rented digital video camera that it was shot on. Really, Aaron Katz shot Quiet City on a borrowed Panasonic HVX200 which he returned after he finished filming and In Search of a Midnight Kiss (2008) rose out of director Alex Holdridge’s friend trying out a new HD camera that he had then recently purchased and one thing led to another and you know the rest. These very low-end HD cameras form the harsh depth-of-field realist look of the Mumble movies. They don’t look as if they’ve been shot on handycams like an Ellie Parker or The Blair Witch Project but still manage to instill a sense of digital camera realism for the extra layer of truth depiction.

Friends are important, for another common trait of the Mumble art-house is the presence of friends. First of all, most mumblecorps studied together in film school and knew each other probably even before that. They end up helping each other out on projects so much that there is a rather prominent thread of connectivity running through the entire movement, reminding us of the Godard-Truffaut collaborations on Breathless (1960), the infamous firestarter of the French New Wave. So the director of one M-movie might take on a supporting acting role in another’s M-movie and then operate the boom mic on a third film. It’s basically what you would’ve done in your backyard if you had slightly more money and something better than your dad’s home movie camera (although the mumblecorps might just borrow it from you for their next project).

The stories almost always rely on the boomeranging lives of present day 20-somethings: the Generation Y. There is an ample presence of the digital age in the form of chatrooms, craigslist, web 2.0 and other such topics and there probably never was a seasoned actor who played a role in any of these films.

“And I think the main thing that we’re all interested in is getting at a truthful human interaction and using experiences from our own lives and what we observe about the people around us as a template for that.” -Aaron Katz.

Not a Second No-Wave

Although the subject matter and topics of discussion within the films of the No-Wave movement are similar, they don’t tend to have the same need to reach down to a lower level of truth that the mumbloids are craving for. Jarmusch, Kevin Smith, Steve Buschemi, Richard Linklater and a certain percentage of Wes Anderson have invested their faith in the deadpan, the immobile and the patience-testing to create the No-Wave movement of the 1980s and 1990s, Mumblecore doesn’t try that hard.

Dance Party, USA: about a bunch of 20 somethings hanging out at a party. Quiet City: a young woman arrives in New York city, unable to reach her friend befriends a stranger and spends the entire night with him walking across the city, going to a party and then hanging out more on the following day. In Search of a Midnight Kiss: a young man, unemployed and single decides to put up an ad for a new year’s eve date on craigslist and gets a response. Mumblecore indulges in the mundane, the slow-moving and the unassuming, moves it around in its mouth, gargles it and quietly lets it fall out.

Generation D.I.Y.

In these rush-times of Multi-tasking and customizable user interfaces, the Mumblecorps have successfully adapted what is quickly turning out to be the new modern way of life into an age old artform- the philosophy of D.I.Y. So could you really make a few re-writes then go set the camera up and then go hold the boom stick while some guy you knew from college walks into the frame with that girl you cast from a friend of a friend of friend who once did this play when she was twelve? Why not.

Another significant area where the Mumblecorps showed great heart is in the rather tricky mountainous steppes of the distribution sector. Most of these guys just make their own decent looking DVDs and sell them over the internet for anyone who would be interested to pay a reasonable price for them. Aaron Katz went as far as combining his first two films (Dance Party, USA and Quiet City) into a double-disc package for the price of what would generally be a single DVD. Anyway, both his films together add up to a meagre 138 minutes in unison which is still a good 20 minutes short of the latest Batman movie. So why would anyone buy their DVDs? The same reason anyone would buy the EP of an unsigned musician or the rather under-priced work of an upcoming painter- either a sense of finding a rare work of art or just being one of the first to subscribe to what you feel would eventually grow out into a full grown cultural revolution.

But Mumbleness is far from revolution- as far as Quentin Tarantino is sometimes from decency. If the Mumblecorps were to create an impact, it would not be loud enough to be noticed and they wouldn’t bother to re-inforce it. Perhaps it will reach its peak in the first part of the next decade or perhaps it has already reached it highest possible height. Maybe we will see the Mumblecorps getting the backing of major studio players, eventually making them abandon their roots for a more “conventional” direction of filmmaking or maybe not. Maybe they learned from the downfalls of the New Waves- Godard, Truffaut, Richardson, Reisz and Anderson have all abandoned their humble New Wave skins at the first chance to more comfortable means, will the Mumblecorps follow the same winding path? Not sure, we’ll have to just wait and see, after all, it is a revolution sans revolution.

“The harbour becomes the sea
And lighting the house keeps it collision free
Understand the lay of the land
And don’t let it hurt you
Or it will be the first to” -Excerpt from ‘The Water’

 The 15-minute film is directed by Kevin Drew of Broken Social Scene, a canadian rock group consisting also of Leslie Feist among seven others. The film’s surreal storyline is inspired by Feist’s solo song ‘The Water’, and stars Feist herself in one of the three principal roles. For a film that lasts only quarter of an hour, it unravels itself at a brooding pace. There are long establishing shots of snow-covered landscapes, frozen lakes and two characters smoking and carrying a wrapped body. David Fox plays father to Cillian Murphy’s character as both men communicate only through each other’s presence so much so that one can safely quote 98% as a figure of the amount of time the film indulges in complete silence.

 There is a lot of ambiguity in the story but more important than the events taking place in the film is the visual imagery that unfolds around the three characters. There is a sense of loss and regain and a kind of calmness that envelopes them both.

Unfortunately, the film is no longer online for streaming. Hopefully, it will be shared again soon.

In France, school education is “gratuit et compulsaire”- meaning it is free and compulsory. Students are sent to various “levels” of schools according to their academic performance and behavior, resulting in a world where smart kids get to learn and grow with smart kids and the not so smart ones share their classrooms with other under-performers and hope that if they study hard and behave themselves, they will probably get to go to a better school the following year.

This is the setting for the film in question “Entre Les Murs” better known to English audiences as simply “The Class”. The title literally translates into English as “Between the Walls”- a clever title indeed as it signifies the long association that exists between the words “walls” and “classroom” and at the same time brings about the restrictive and claustrophobic nature of being “in between” walls. The premise of the story comes from the semi-autobiographical book written by François Bégaudeau, who rather aptly also takes on the lead role of the French teacher François Marin. The film, like the book follows the teacher’s daily routine at the school (named “Dolto”)- in the classroom and the teacher’s lounge through a whole academic year. Indeed, the camera never leaves the school campus resulting in a concentric irony that while the students are trapped “Between the Walls” of the classroom, the teachers are themselves trapped “Between the Walls” of the school.

Day by day we see the teachers struggle to make sense out of their present situation and try to come up with the “one perfect” way that will apply well to all students in unanimous agreement but we see how futile these attempts are when we follow Monsieur Marin in his racially diverse class and his constant attempts to try and cater to each and every student the best he can. Marin slowly realizes that his classroom is somewhat a miniature France itself- racially diverse, religiously tolerant and connected only by the golden yarn of the French language. This is perhaps the very first time in cinema where an accurate depiction of a racially diverse classroom has been done with such little drama- we see the genius Chinese kid with a complete lack of social skills, the African muslim students who have formed their little group, the new black kid from the Caribbean who is not French but supports the French football team because his island country is one of the off-shore French colonies, the Arab boy who refuses to read out his self-portrait- all so diverse and all in the need of separate attention and a separate method of teaching.

The film raises a lot of important questions in the form of the teachers making some tough decisions that they think are morally viable but at the same time we see the students’ disillusionment in the system is only further confirmed with their acts. Marin, though at first seems unlike his colleagues in terms of being able to better communicate with his students, slowly gets himself involved in questionable methods to bring order to his class. Perhaps, it is this moral ambiguity and the level of realism used in the film bring about the third dimension in vast emboss in this film- it’s not a Freedom Writers (2007) or a Dangerous Minds (1994) both semi-autobiographical accounts of teachers dealing with a racially diverse classroom, but unlike a Hillary Swank or a Michelle Pfeiffer, François Bégaudeau doesn’t end up changing a class that can’t sit together in the same room to a group of individuals who are ready to take a bullet for each other.

On the technical side, the film really shines. Set to the rich, warm palettes of the Parisian sun and with the skillful use of the hand-held camera (a rare skill, often put to bad use by inexperienced cinematographers simply aping their role-models), the film rides on at its own pace over a tolerable time frame of just over two hours. One only notices at the end credits, that there is not a single instance of music in the film and perhaps certain unseasoned audiences may even perceive this film as a documentary. And to an extent, it really is documentary. All the actors playing the students in the film are students of the school themselves and playing roles with the same name as themselves- save for Khoumba and Soulaiman- both names and stories manufactured especially for the film to create certain important plot points in the film.

In the end, one can only debate on how deep or how shallow the film is but it is this very fact that people are sitting around their dinner tables and debating the validity of this film is what makes it a significant film.

“Entre Les Murs” won the prestigious Palmd’Or at the 61st Cannes FilmFestival (2008).—-Elsewhere in the Blogosphere: 

• 20 Favourite DVD releases of 2008: Part I at Cinebeats
• Zero Focus at Coffee, Coffee and More Coffee
• Slumdog Millionarie at Ferdy on Films
• The Big Sky at Only The Cinema
• Milk at Video Arcadia