Nanook and Flaherty

Nanook of the North was the first silent documentary made by Robert J. Flaherty in 1922. Flaherty learned to use a motion picture camera while he was a mining engineer in the Canadian arctic. Because of Nanook of the North, Flaherty is credited as being the father of documentary film. Nanook of The North was a commercial success and became known the world over. 

Despite the success of Nanook of The North, Flaherty is often criticized for being the director that he was. While making Nanook of The North, Flaherty fathered a son with one of his actresses Nila whom he never raised or acknowledged. Grierson said "Flaherty is like a feudal barren with his retainers". While filming Man of Aran and other films, locals were so poor they became easily exploited by Flaherty who used them in often dangerous or misrepresented situations. It was said that Flaherty wasn't interested in reality, it was how he could fit what was going on in his vision as if it was a piece of poetry. 

Here is my initial response...

During previewing of Nanook of The North, I can honestly say that I had no knowledge of this film. From the title I assume it was about someone or something in the north. After seeing the film I could understand how you could infer that it had to do with Eskimoes, however, "Nanook" could be a name from a lot of different places. I felt that the films had two modes, poetic and observational. Poetic because it had formal organization, it that you followed the character through his day to day life and observational in that you were directly engaged with the characters and how they survived. The film begins with Nanook, an Eskimo with his family. It is funny when Nanook gets in his Kayak only to find his children hiding inside. This is the first taste of how happy the family seams as a group. 

The music was purely background. It did not change much, rather pleasantly constant throughout the film. I felt Nanook had a lot of action for a documentary. During the film, you were able to see Nanook go fishing with a harpoon and an ivory lure. Then a successful walrus hunt. Followed by Nanook catching a snow fox, building an igloo, restraining his sled dogs, and best of all; pulling a seal that was big as him through three feet of ice. I was very impressed by all the variety this film had. 

During the film there was various clips of text letting you know what was going on in between scenes. The text gave you understanding while explaining who Nanook was, where he lived, and the reason for the film. 

My initial reaction to the film was that the film was made as a documentation of the Eskimos way of life. It evoked emotions relating to the family unit and how Nanook was the provider. Nanook of the North portrayed day to day life as Nanook and his family survived. They ate many of their meals raw and used different techniques to struggle through the harsh subzero environment. Even with all the captured desperation, you still see Nanook smile, which I believe captures the message of the whole film "happiness despite harsh conditions". Strengths and weaknesses of the film by today's standards would be technology. This film was made in the 1920's yet still captures the audience by showing real behavior by Nanook and his family. There is no "acting" or dramatization(remember this was my initial response), only real life experiences captured on film. The ending text follows the howling of Nanook's dog that is actually part wolf and how this typifies life in the frozen wasteland.

That was my initial response to Nanook of the North. After discovering how much fabrication went into the making, I began to see that even a documentary can be a recreation at best. Nanook was more a person like you and me. He understood how a camera worked and would help disassemble and reassemble the device. Nanook used a gun to hunt seal, not a harpoon. Nanook was a character of fiction portraying a way of life that had been lost. The white man had come and had changed things forever, however, I believe the commercial success of this film was by reason of people becoming more advanced themselves and looking back at something that had been left behind. People around the world saw Nanook pull a seal out of the frigid ice that was larger than he was. They believed just as I did that he actually did this because it was a movie about an amazing person. This is what Flaherty wanted you to think. Flaherty followed the same formula of the family unit to steal your sympathy and become directly involved in what was going on. He knew that the success of the film depended on you relating to the characters no matter what.    

In conclusion, Robert Flaherty is credited for being the father of documentary film. He did this by fabricating scenes  and recreations so that you would have something to watch and say "wow". A true pioneer and innovator, Robert Flaherty never let fiction get in the way of fact or at least the pretend documentation of it.   

Presentation Schedule

That was interesting to talk about the docs we saw yesterday. I'm looking forward to these presentations too--which will give you a concise history of documentary film making with clips and connections in just one class period (OK, two or three, if we include the first few classes, and Van's presentation on Vertov and Erik's on Flaherty)! So, I've got Rikki coming to class next Monday to talk about social activism in the documentary film, and Jason coming (we hope) to show us a clip from his in-progress documentary about Haiti.

I'm pasting in the presentation schedule for the rest of the block. Let me know if you see anything I need to change.

See you all right at 4:00 (or a close to that as you can get!) tomorrow!

Documentary Presentations in class

1/18 Flaherty Erik

Grierson

Vertov Van

2/1 Ivens Tiara

Riefenstahl Steven

Lorenz Drew

Capra Heather

Jennings Dan

2/13 About Face Van

½ Revolution Heather

The Law in these Parts Steve

Chasing Ice Meg

2/15 Invisible War Tiara

China Heavyweight Dan

Finding North Drew

Atomic States Mark

The Law in These Parts

I will be presenting on this film and can't wait to do so! 


I was incredibly struck by the way in which the director played on the themes of subjectivity and structure (systems of government, in this case Israel). As director Ra'anan Alexandrowicz puts it in the Sundance catalogue “This film is not about the people who broke the law, but about those entrusted with the law.” This is a fascinating take on his work and, I believe, slightly misleading on two points. First, the film was by no means about the lives and struggles of those lawyers, judges, lobbyists and Israeli state officials. It is about the structure of power they facilitate in order to occupy Palestine. The individuals are place holders in the world of international relations (remember that the establishment of the state of Israeli was sanctioned by the Allies in 1946). Second, and I think the film even illustrates this point, is that the law is not "entrusted" in the sense of divine law, but created, forced and established. The law is malleable, intimately tied to human beings and their motives and a construction of social relations.


The film, as I read it, was an essay in five parts that aimed at posing a question, not answering one. That question is simply: "what is the moral foundation of the Israeli occupation of Palestine?" However, that question has a myriad elements, dimension and perspectives that are by no means easily untangled. But I maintain that this is the central question being asked. Not, as the Sundance catalogue frames the question: "Alexandrowicz asks—in both simple and profound terms—can justice truly be served in the occupied territories given the current system of law administered by Israel for Palestinians?"  


The Law in These Parts is not a film arguing for the justice of the system in question, but a film about justice. How is "justice" carried out? What do we- first world Sundancers- call justice? Who has access to justice? What role does violence play in justice? These, again, as I see it, are the questions that the film proposes to ask through the question of foundation. Not trite contemplative questions about the justice served when Palestinians are being forcibly ejected from their homes, as Sundance would have it. The narration of a structure of power, told from within that structure, can not answer questions of its justice in any "objective" fashion. It can only articulate the demands of that systems… what it means by justice. (Remember that the film was financed by the state of Israel and produced by Israeli's). The answers are left to subjects… faithful to an idea. (about this I will undoubtedly have some arguments to make) 


The staggering scope of the film, in my opinion, is that the question of Israel is a question of the first world in general. Israel is a close ally of the United States and as voting citizens we condone their actions through our support- or inactivity- of our government. The film continually plays on this motif of subject/structure in fascinating ways I can't wait to share and explore together!

AWARDS!!!!!

Three of the films we saw this past week got awards at the big awards night at Sundance.  Just thought I’d share it with you people. The entire list of awards can be found at: https://www.sundance.org/press-center/release/2012-sundance-film-festival-awards/

The World Cinema Jury Prize: Documentary was presented by Nick Fraser to:
The Law in These Parts / Israel (Director: Ra'anan Alexandrowicz) — Israel's 43-year military legal system in the Occupied Palestinian Territories unfolds through provocative interviews with the system’s architects and historical footage showing the enactment of these laws upon the Palestinian population.

The Audience Award: U.S. Documentary, Presented by Acura, was presented by Mike Birbiglia to:
The Invisible War / U.S.A. (Director: Kirby Dick) — An investigative and powerfully emotional examination of the epidemic of rape of soldiers within the U.S. military, the institutions that cover up its existence and the profound personal and social consequences that arise from it.

The Excellence in Cinematography Award: U.S. Documentary was presented by Tia Lessin to:
Chasing Ice / U.S.A. (Director: Jeff Orlowski) — Science, spectacle and human passion mix in this stunningly cinematic portrait as National Geographic photographer James Balog captures time-lapse photography of glaciers over several years providing tangible visual evidence of climate change.

Late as always

Struggling with my thoughts has delayed a post to the blog. Chasing Ice was the film that got the most reaction from me as I see it was with others. Reading Tiara’s post thought provoking as it was, I still cannot get behind the film as a whole. I agree that integrating a human aspect to this global dilemma was essential for this film to provoke public awareness. However, the film became the public awareness of James Balog the artist, than the awareness of what he was trying to document. The filmmaker along with James Balog both use technology to their benefit with some amazing results. Balog and his engineering skillz capture the visually unseen narrative of global warming. Filmmaker Jeff Orlowski does an incredible job with sound. The sound we are actually hearing is not the sound being made in those beautiful shots instead he used with other techniques contact microphones. I know it sounds fairly clear what contact microphones are but if not here is Wikipedia’s definition, “A contact microphone, otherwise known as a pickup or a piezo, is a form of microphone designed to sense audio vibrations through solid objects. Unlike normal air microphones, contact mics act as transducers which pick up vibrations and convert them into a voltage which can then be made audible.” So cool… Orlowski picked what sounds he felt best suited each glacier crumbling moment. Back to my issue with the film, with all the amazing technological tools being used we instead get practically an entire film of Balog, his leg, crying family members, and Balog’s own tears. What about global warming? The pretty pictures have so much to say, but too bad for them the artist had more. At one point in the Q&A Balog stated that he was trying to, “reveal the truth through images,” I think he was able to do that, but his ego as an artist became the focus of the film not the actual truth he was risking life and limb for. I am not sure if it was Orlowski’s choice to make Balog’s personal story the primary focus rather than global warming, all I can say is this film was good if you wanted to know about James Balog the artist and his life’s accomplishments.

Chasing "Chasing Ice"

After the nightmare I went through on Wednesday of having lost my tickets to both "Finding North" and "Chasing Ice," I decided to attempt to see them anyway. I drove up to Salt Lake, not knowing whether I would be able to purchase scalped tickets or what. By the end of the night, I was able to see "Finding North," but unfortunately I was unable to see "Chasing Ice." Still, I was determined to see it, and I decided to chase after it. On Friday morning, I drove up to Park City to waitlist the film for the 9:00 am showing. I woke up before it was light at like 5:30, and then upon my arrival at 7:00 I was waitlisted as #6 to get in. I ended up sitting in the front row and got a crick in my neck for having to look up for so long, but at least I had finally made it. The chase was over. In case you were still wondering: yes, I'm a big fat dork.

Anyway, I know yesterday was the last day to post for our first assignment, but as for with just about everything this week, I have been running like an entire day behind, so I can only hope this still counts.

Tiara so beautifully covered the social implications of this film in her posting, as well as the structure of the film, so I am going to try to focus on the cinematography. For me, the cinematography alone was enough to warrant this film a four star rating. I had been excited all week to see the use of time lapse photography, as my brother and I have been experimenting with the medium, ourselves. So my expectations were doubly rewarded when the film turned out to be so self-reflexive, showing all of the pitfalls with the technology behind time lapse photography. The film seemed to be nearly just as concerned with the story of how it came to be made as it was with the subject of the retreating glaciers. There were two major story arcs that I could see in the film (the story of global warming and the story of how the film was made), which were given almost equal emphasis, making it difficult to tell which was the plot and which was the sub-plot at times. But of course, the story of global warming and much of mankind's seemingly intentional ignorance of its implications, was the main focus of the film. Still, the how-they-made-it elements of the film were beautifully crafted into the film's framework, almost fusing together with the story of global warming at times. This rather large sub-plot mirrored the main plot of the global warming debate and accentuated the tone of the film, which was urgency, bordering on helplessness. At one point in the film, it was sort of left up in the air whether it is already too late for us to do anything about climate change. All we can do is follow the example of this photographer, and do anything and everything we know how to do, and then simply hope that it wasn't too late.

I know that I said I was mostly going to talk about cinematography, but when you start talking about this film, it pulls you into talking about its subject matter. I guess that's what makes this such a good documentary. Like it says of documentaries in our readings, a documentary (and I'm paraphrasing, because I don't recall the Greek word that was used) inspires us to expand our knowledge. This film does exactly that. Still, I wanted to talk about the beautiful juxtaposition of the aurora borealis against the night sky as it lit up the towering blocks of ice. I wanted to talk about the majesty of the gargantuan glaciers as they were caught on film calving into the ocean. I wanted to talk about the amazing destructive power they demonstrated as they rolled around like thundering 600-foot tall whales. This film has so many amazing visuals in it that are all worth talking about, but they were used in such a way that the viewer is made to really focus on understanding and feeling the threat of global warming. Like it was said in the film, charts and numbers just don't do it for most people. But when you see the images, your jaw drops, either figuratively or literally, just as there was a 12 year old boy at one point in the film who literally drops his jaw.

a few photos, and for Monday

Just a few photos from my camera--(some I didn't take, and sorry about the undead look!).

For Monday, (phew, I know, but nevertheless) come prepared to talk about the films we've seen relative to Nichols' modes or your blog posts or whatever else interests you. I will talk a bit (more) about Grierson, Tiara will present on Ivens, and Stephen on Riefenstahl.

Yesterday's screenings were interesting. I confess to being sad it's over. I wonder how the people in last year's class feel about this year's films relative to last year's. Certainly it seemed less exhausting, maybe because our final film was like a piece of Godiva chocolate (yummy, pretty, not too challenging or spicy), not a marathon like the Interrupters.

Atomic States of America Democracy Now! Video

Hi all,

Here's a link to a Democracy Now! news segment featuring the Atomic States of America: http://www.democracynow.org/2012/1/24/the_atomic_states_of_america_exploring

China Heavyweight

 Drew and I with coach Qi Moxiang

Chasing Ice - Epitome of Documentary

Jans, you bring up a good point about preferring a "purely poetic documentary" and I think I may have preferred one as well—but only because I am aware of the reality of global warming/climate change. I don't necessarily need a person (Balog) there to bring that humanistic relation to the photographic evidence, which is what I think Orlowski could have been trying to do when he focused on Balog’s knee injury and family. 

  

Since it was emphasized that people don't believe in climate change, making Balog the main character seems to have tied the nature in, in a way that people would actually believe his photographs and believe climate change is real—rather than just seeing pictures of ice (or lack of) in a National Geographic magazine. The results of Balog’s project are indeed magnificent, but the film was about Balog’s survey project and how his project is the story of nature. If he wasn’t the focus, I don’t think people who see this film would have the opportunity to realistically experience a type of intimate connection that humans and nature possess--and, those who are in denial about the issue may not have the chance to change perspective if the story was not told from Balog's perspective.

I do think Chasing Ice is my favorite film so far. I also think that from my own opinion of documentary, Chasing Ice is the epitome of it. There is a clear story here with a distinct beginning, middle and end. It’s a story about how these images were captured and why.

This is the way I see it: (Beginning/issue) People don’t believe climate change, but Balog notices ice retreat and wants to photograph it to aware the public; (Middle/conflict) First 6 months into project are a waste, camera’s timers don’t work, had to figure out what was wrong and how to fix them; (End/resolution) Made new software for camera, second round of photos worked, beautiful yet frightening pictures were captured, and now the visuals can bring the public awareness on our reality. Project is a success. 

The Invisible War on Radio West

This radio interview might be interesting to whomever is presenting about The Invisible War. A few days ago, SLC-based radio host, Doug Fabrizio, did an hour long show about the film. You can listen to the entire broadcast by following this link: http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/12412-sundance-invisible-war and scrolling about 1/3 down the page to the link that says "listen."

Ice

I agree with Jans that the personal focus on Balog was a distraction in Chasing Ice. The audience response after the film when Balog joined the crew on stage made it seem obvious that most audience members viewed him as the film's central character. And maybe in an individualistic culture such as the U.S. it makes sense for a filmmaker to have a strong central human character in a film. However, for me, the ice and the natural landscapes in this film were so powerful and mesmerizing that I saw nature as being the films central character, and I really started to become frustrated when the focus of the film shifted from nature on a large scale to focus on the minutia of one individual human experience.

I do understand that without Balog's determination and his devotion to this subject that we'd never have these beautiful images. So, I am grateful to him on that level -- but his work is so much larger than what he is and it would have been nice to see it stand on its own.

The government will do the right thing only after every other option is exhausted.

About Chasing Ice and Finding North.

(Please don’t rap more, Jans,

we can all live your verse sans)

but your first blog entries are due by Saturday!

so rap or rhyme or write, respond some way.

Both films were more polished that the others we have seen, with the exception of The Art of Rap, which Drew rightly identifies as a vanity piece for Ice T (but still, great to see those poetic masters compose!).

It pleased me to see the stage full of women involved in Finding North for the Q & A, as opposed to a few guys or mostly guys and a woman. It was obvious the filmmakers were well-financed and skilled, with Jeff Bridges and T-Bone Burnett adding their voices to the film for extra gravitas. It’s almost like we expect to see a sound track available (maybe it is!). They certainly found sympathetic and varied people on whom to focus, which made the film even more powerful. We recognize the degree to which hunger negatively impacts all these remarkable hard working people with tremendous potential. The urban poor and rural poor all suffer. The food deserts and teacher teaching honeydew, the relationship between obesity and poverty—the film touched on many issues, and judging by the Q & A about how that junk food winds up in the food pantries, there were many issues left out. They did seem to suggest we have the solutions. My favorite quote, maybe of all time

The government will do the right thing only after every other option is exhausted.

(Ties to Invisible War, Chasing Ice, Finding North…)

Chasing Ice was beautiful. I did want to ask that young filmmaker, Orlowski, how he got involved in the project (which seemed a sort of vanity project for/about Balog). From the web site, it looks like he got involved with Balog as videographer for the EIS (why do they call it that? To get Extreme in the name?). For me, the moving ice, the stupendous photographs and photographic records got bogged down when the film backed away to talk about Balog and his determination and his knee and his family members. I guess that was to trace an individual artist’s devotion to his craft and the environment, but I would have preferred a visual poem (perhaps a purely poetic documentary) about human impact and receding ice, without the distraction of Balog. Am I the only one who felt that way?

Loved Mark’s comments on ½ Revolution. Tiara and I were agreed that it was amazing to be there and see the revolution unfolding—but those stylish filmers (not willing to go as far as filmmakers) did not seem to be of the revolution (that’s at least part of the reason why they could leave).

My thoughts on Something From Nothing

My thoughts on Something From Nothing

It was definitely entertaining and easier to watch then some of the other films we've seen, still it was severely lacking a narrative structure. I would have preferred a chronological retelling of the history of Hip-Hop, tracing it's development through it's many distinct eras and an explanation of how its various sub-genres emerged. Instead, it offered a bunch of seemingly random interviews, grouped together geographically instead of chronologically. Many of the interviews were insightful, or at least entertaining, but they were lacking context. The artists that were interviewed individual significance to Hip-Hop was never explained. At times the film seemed to merely be a vanity project for director Ice-T, with excessive shots of him walking in slow-motion, or looking thoughtfully into the distance, while he spoke in voice-over. There were several notable artists that were not interviewed or even mentioned (though that may be because they refused to take part in the project). The film seemed to assume that the viewers already had a basic understanding of Hip-Hop and who the artists being interviewed were. Still, compared to many of the deadly-serious topics of the other films we've seen, it was nice to take in some light entertainment.

Same same but different

1/2 Revolution was intriguing to me as I have lived through those kinds of riot. The images punched me right in the stomach. As mark noted, it seemed after a while that the film was more about the filmmakers than the revolution, but then again, It was about the revolution as they experienced it. I have a special place in my heart for the handhelds although they sometimes give me motion sickness. But they do capture the unsettledness, and chaos running through your body in that kind of situation.

Let's rap about the movies

ok, this is really bad, but I can't help myself...

Let’s rap about the movies…

Revolution is scary not groovy

But the filmmakers should’a told a story.

Five part structure, not too gory

By the people, for the people, Not!

Those women and men abused, full stop!

Patriarchy, the military, nothing to be done?

Saturday’s films not exactly fun.

Rugged individualism and socialism meet,

China, boxing, and Mohammed Ali, sweet!

Saturated colors, astounding rhymes and beat

Filmmaker barely civil, and glory be Ice-T.

Monday’s movies lighter and mighty.

**with apologies to the master rappers in the movie:)