A few inquiries on and around Vidas Secas - please respond
Vidas Secas, like Glauber Rocha's Deus e o Diabo na Terra do Sol (screening this Tuesday), is a revolutionary film. Made before the military coup d'etat of 1964 that would lead to years of repression and political corruption in Brazil, it was already a call to arms.
Nelson Pereira dos Santos said in a recent interview: "Poverty [...] is a permanent theme in all my films; it's not possible to think about national identity without including the very serious problem of absolute poverty in some parts of Brazil. It's inadmissible for a man of the twentieth century to live alongside poverty, and the essential point in the struggle of anyone who wants to participate in the social movement in Brazil is the elimination of poverty. Obviously poverty in Brazil is a political question, because the Brazilian elites, the "lords of power", have to be aware of the threat of poverty because interests combine to make this situation permanent... There are many effective measures to be taken in order to neutralize a political situation and the exploitation of labor, which has little changed since the time of slavery... There is an archaic Brazil producing a quantity of people who have nowhere to live. The issue here is agrarian reform and is the great message of the book Vidas Secas, and consequently of my film..."
The shocking thing, of course, is that so little has changed since the novel was written and the film was made. There are even more starving migrant workers in Brazil than before -- millions and millions of people.
To me, the political situation in Brazil is somewhat similar to the one in the U.S. When the powers that be mobilize on an issue, it's often to protect a wealthy elite. There is also racism in this since that wealthy elite is mostly white and most of the poor people in this country are black and Latino.
It's the same in Brazil: the Natives, the blacks, and other minority communities are the ones who suffer.
Dos Santos seems to imply that it's a filmmaker's responsibility to address the question of National Identity. In this, all the social issues will consequently come into play.
Some questions for you guys.
- What are some potential links between dos Santos' aesthetic concerns and his social concerns? How does "The Aesthetic of Hunger" (see Glauber Rocha essay in textbook) correspond to the film Vidas Secas?
- Do you think filmmakers from the U.S. today are addressing, in an honest and satisfactory way, the question of National Identity, or, in plain words, what it is to be an American? If so, list some examples and why. Also, as film students and people who are committed to film in some way or another, how do you weigh social issues in the kinds of films that you see or the kinds of films you would like to make/be involved in?
I would like everyone to please respond to these two items. For those of you who have not posted before, this is your chance to catch up!
[The above is the book jacket cover for the English translation of Graciliano Ramos' Vidas Secas, which is widely available and has some very nice illustrations.]
Nelson Pereira dos Santos said in a recent interview: "Poverty [...] is a permanent theme in all my films; it's not possible to think about national identity without including the very serious problem of absolute poverty in some parts of Brazil. It's inadmissible for a man of the twentieth century to live alongside poverty, and the essential point in the struggle of anyone who wants to participate in the social movement in Brazil is the elimination of poverty. Obviously poverty in Brazil is a political question, because the Brazilian elites, the "lords of power", have to be aware of the threat of poverty because interests combine to make this situation permanent... There are many effective measures to be taken in order to neutralize a political situation and the exploitation of labor, which has little changed since the time of slavery... There is an archaic Brazil producing a quantity of people who have nowhere to live. The issue here is agrarian reform and is the great message of the book Vidas Secas, and consequently of my film..."
The shocking thing, of course, is that so little has changed since the novel was written and the film was made. There are even more starving migrant workers in Brazil than before -- millions and millions of people.
To me, the political situation in Brazil is somewhat similar to the one in the U.S. When the powers that be mobilize on an issue, it's often to protect a wealthy elite. There is also racism in this since that wealthy elite is mostly white and most of the poor people in this country are black and Latino.
It's the same in Brazil: the Natives, the blacks, and other minority communities are the ones who suffer.
Dos Santos seems to imply that it's a filmmaker's responsibility to address the question of National Identity. In this, all the social issues will consequently come into play.
Some questions for you guys.
- What are some potential links between dos Santos' aesthetic concerns and his social concerns? How does "The Aesthetic of Hunger" (see Glauber Rocha essay in textbook) correspond to the film Vidas Secas?
- Do you think filmmakers from the U.S. today are addressing, in an honest and satisfactory way, the question of National Identity, or, in plain words, what it is to be an American? If so, list some examples and why. Also, as film students and people who are committed to film in some way or another, how do you weigh social issues in the kinds of films that you see or the kinds of films you would like to make/be involved in?
I would like everyone to please respond to these two items. For those of you who have not posted before, this is your chance to catch up!
[The above is the book jacket cover for the English translation of Graciliano Ramos' Vidas Secas, which is widely available and has some very nice illustrations.]
posted by Gabe Klinger at 2:18 PM
5 Comments:
1. He makes a very hungry movie; it demands our involvement. It is not at all a large production, nor does it sensationalize. He tells things very realistically and though there are subjective elements (such as the camera work), it is never imposing or manipulative. This is a quote that I found most compelling from the essay (it's a bit long...):
"Rather than sensationalize his subject by concentrating on pathetic and dramtic confrontations, he portrays, generally, only the most quotidian of events. His characters, rather than being rude transcendental poets, strumming guitars at streamside and mouthing the rustic wisdom of the simple folk, are moving in their inarticulateness, in their unequal struggle with language. Rather than make them the exemplary victims of a quasi-metaphysical injustice or the patient sufferers of human cruelty, his characters are simply oppressed by a social situation; they are neither more nor less noble than other people."
2. Two examples that came to my mind instantly are Charles Burnett's Killer of Sheep and Robert Altman's Nashville (both from the 1970s). The former is similar to Vidas Secas in its treatment of the characters and their situation, which is to be a poor African American and a human being trying to provide for one's family in America. The latter is perhaps a bit sensationalized, but nonetheless a great rumination on the importance of superstars and delusions of grandeur, and don't forget that unseen politician endorsed by all of those great Country music stars. Nashville is one of the best examples I can think of about what it is to live within the bombardment of American culture.
Social issues play an enormous part in movies I see, it is hard to get away from them, but my main interest in my own filmmaking has less to do with Nationalist identity and more to do with the universal human condition, that is more interesting to me.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Man, that movie was really crazy it did remind me of the dust bowl era here in the States. I wonder if I had made that analogy had Mr. Gabe not told me. It also reminds me of this German movie we saw, the title escapes me. What happened was allied troops in WWII had to escape Nazi forces by slipping underneath them in the sewers. They had to walk for the majority of the movies into an uncertain, nasty, and dark environment. This is almost like Vidas only on the earth's surfrace. Life was uncertain and also so was where they were going. They just kept moving hoping their life would get better, but especially at the end it didn't look like it was going to get better anytime soon. In the german movie they either were trapped by sewage bars, ran into Nazi troops, or died via mines or suicide. The movie was to me as sad as the bicycle theif because there really seemed like no hope. Like their life was purgatory. Which sucks.
film you are talkig about is vada's Kanal
what are we being told about the national identity in american film today.Look no further than to The Marine, starring some wrestler. Very few film's now a day's even come close to presenting characters that are identifiable with the audience.
* Polish movie
* Wajda's Kanal
Post a Comment
<< Home