Author Topic: DOCember Group Marathon 2016  (Read 24028 times)

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #170 on: December 22, 2016, 09:49:17 AM »
May I interject?

Maybe interject is too strong a word. May I sit in on this conversation regarding men for a minute? :) I haven't seen more than the trailer for The Mask You Live In, so I can't speak to that, but I'm interested in this topic and the questions DarkeningHumour is bringing up.

Bondo, I think it's interesting you gravitate toward women peers, because of your dislike of some male attributes. I tend to gravitate toward male peers, for similar reasons. I don't have a lot of interest/patience in some of the more prevalent female traits. This little list is stereotypical, yet it is common enough, that I find it difficult to find many women to relate to.

catty, self critical and critical of others, heiarchal, emotionally needy and manipulative to try and fill the need, superficial, self absorbed, one upmanship, competitive, bossy, judgemental...

It's not a pretty list and I feel sheepish, even typing the words, but these are some of the things I'm not interested in coming anywhere near of. I have better things to do and to think about. This is starting to sound like my The Women review.

That was all precursor to what I wanted to contemplate on. This forum.

It's predominantly male, yet I don't see the issues which are presented in the trailer, or to the traits you find distasteful in men. This is a very complex and varied group here and decidedly male -- straight forward, mature thinkers and I like the energy here very much. Bondo, you like it here. What makes this place different from what you're experiencing elsewhere?

Is it that this place has congregated enlightened ones? :))

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #171 on: December 22, 2016, 10:22:07 AM »
Is it that this place has congregated enlightened ones? :))

Yes. Next question. ;D

Your list of unappealing prevalent female traits are things I can't even deny as it relates to my female friends, yet mostly it doesn't bother me. I sit in a somewhat privileged position in that I'm fairly easily embraced as "one of the girls," but because I'm still not one, I can be left out of some of the social dynamics that are more negative. So I guess I get all the perks without as many of the drawbacks of being in female social circles.

BlueVoid

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1841
    • Movie Fodder
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #172 on: December 22, 2016, 10:29:50 AM »
Shoah
An eye opening documentary about a terrible time in history. We all know how atrocious the Holocaust was, and there have been countless documentaries and specials depicting in great detail the misery that occurred. In 'Shoah', Lanzmann is determined to get an accurate history from eyewitnesses. He doesn't use a single shot archival shot, only the accounts of the survivors and of the ones that helped carryout these atrocities or stood by and watched. He does offer shots of the sites of the death camps as they were at the time of the shooting, which only underscores how unfathomable these exterminations were when the sites today seem so innocuous, even serene, after have been dismantled.

The stories coming from the people who lived through the events are far more powerful than any reenactment or historical pictures could be. The emotion that comes over them as they talk about the nightmare they lived through is enough to overwhelm you and personalizes the stories. It connects the horror that seems so unbelievable to actual humans who lived through it, and reminds you that this happened in a time not so far gone.

My gripes with the movie are not with the content or the interviews that Lanzmann gets. They are phenomenal and riveting. My issues lie in the structure of the film. There is little in the way of a narrative structure. One segment could easily be interchanged with another and little would change. There could have been a more digestible viewing experience had there been a loose structure and perhaps some context. Over the course of the film you do gain context just through the interviews, but it was harder to ascertain than I would have liked and I'm still not sure if I got the full picture.

My other issue is the length. There is a lot of stories worth listening to, and all of it valuable. However it definitely felt like homework, and a lot of that was down to how it was shot. Lanzmann is in no hurry with his camera. Even when there is no narration there are a lot of slow, methodical shots. Compounding that there was no short-handing of the interviews. Lanzmann has no trouble inserting himself into the film, which I think is also a bit of a problem, and he doesn't speak all the languages of the subjects. So you have a situation where Lanzmann asks a question, it gets translated, then you listen to unsubtitled response from the subject, and then listen to it being translated back. This bloats the runtime for no reason.

Despite its length, and bloated structure, the content is invaluable. It gives great insight into the human nature that leads to the type of thinking where genocide is acceptable, and how we as human beings can stand by while something so awful is occurring. It's undoubtedly required viewing.

8/10


Nanook of the North
There is a lot made of the authenticity by Flaherty in creating this documentary. People seem to take issue with the liberties taken in portraying Nanook in reality, changing events, names and staging scenarios. Personally, I'm fine with this. I thought it was somewhat obvious that this is more on the spectrum of 'based on reality' than here is footage taken as they were. It was 1922, cameras were quite big and it was a remote location in freezing temperatures. Exaggerating the truth isn't exactly novel in documentaries. Flaherty may have done some hand-waving to make things possible capture and more appealing to a mass audience, but from what I understand he had the support of the people he was documenting. It was fascinating to watch this footage from a historical perspective. The narrative structure of the film was lacking, but I appreciate the look at the culture.

6.5/10


Sans soleil
This is more a poem than anything else. It's a series of mostly random shots, mostly from Japan but also other various countries. The images themselves are beautiful, but that alone would not be enough to hold my attention. There is a narrative that overlays most of the movie in the form a traveler righting a letter. The female voice over reading it back is hypnotizing, and it adds an additional layer to the video collage and adds philosophical weight to the otherwise random images. Even still the film does drag and get repetitive in places, particularly where there is a lull in the narration. It's still a movie where I could see myself picking it up at any spot and watching it for a bit and getting transfixed by the lyricism of the film.

7.5/10

Triumph of the Will
When I first started watching this I was impressed. Not by the craftsmanship of the film, although it is well made, but by the historic portal it provides. It's a look into a time in history that is so rooted in my mind as being of the past. Seeing these masses heil their leader provides an opportunity to study the faces of the people caught up in a terrible movement when the hysteria was just building. Could they ever know how history would come to view them and their ideals?

This historic fascination soon faded however. The ideology conveyed is none to subtle. It is, after all, a propaganda film. Even viewed through the lens of a filmmaker trying to excite and draw in people to their movement the film seems harsh. Hitler ruled by fear, and it is underscored in here. Always filmed from below looking up, he looms over, leering and shouting, never making overly human movements, like a smile or even facial ticks. It's unnerving.

While this comes across as a documentary, you can feel the artifice on the screen. Yes, its capturing an actual rally, but the settings feel overly ornate, like a movie set, and indeed they were carefully setup with the film in mind. The wide shots, and intricate lighting are all precisely planned and polished. I can't fault any film making here, but its not overly inventive either. It's a bunch of Nazis doing Nazi things, which gets a bit old after awhile.

5/10


Former blog on FlickChart: The Depths of Obscurity
Letterboxd 
iCM
Twitter

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #173 on: December 22, 2016, 11:01:11 AM »
Another true Herzogian moment is when the robotics interviewee claims that there may come a time when a robot could make a film as good as those by Herzog, to which Werner retorts that he seriously doubts that. It's one of those hilarious moments where you know he's not kidding, yet it also brings a remarkable level of humanity to a film about technology because, well, Herzog's probably right. His films are so full of human elements like love and curiosity that it's hard to imagine a robot duplicating this. On a similar note, there is a moment when the question arises whether or not our future ancestors will need the companionship of other humans in the future, or whether, in true WALL-E fashion, they'll be able to survive with only robots. Herzog resists this idea, if subtlety with his film, and I think knowing the type of love of humanity Herzog brings to all of his films helps fill this subtlety in a little more. I really liked this film for these various reasons, and think Herzog is truly a master storyteller, and a tremendous human being on this planet. But the film does lack cohesion in many ways, which makes it lesser Herzog.

The doc was incohesive enough for me not to find any story in it. I also did not detect that level or type of humanity because I was not looking for it. I thought Herzog's rare comments were facile or disingenuous and did not provide the insight I was expecting from a celebrated documentarian.

Bondo, I think it's interesting you gravitate toward women peers, because of your dislike of some male attributes. I tend to gravitate toward male peers, for similar reasons. I don't have a lot of interest/patience in some of the more prevalent female traits. This little list is stereotypical, yet it is common enough, that I find it difficult to find many women to relate to.

catty, self critical and critical of others, heiarchal, emotionally needy and manipulative to try and fill the need, superficial, self absorbed, one upmanship, competitive, bossy, judgemental...

I have a friend that mirrors me in that almost all of her friends are males whereas mine are mostly women. Both of us cannot fathom how the other can spend all of their social time with their opposite sex. Particularly cheap pop psychology would tell you that we are running away from the flaws we see in ourselves by fleeing the similar. I think the truth is darker than that. The reality of the possibility of sex between straight people, however likely, is enough to change how one behaves towards one's opposed sex and how it behaves towards one. I think even the male friends who would never sleep with you will conduct themselves differently if you are a woman than they do with other guys.

Quote
That was all precursor to what I wanted to contemplate on. This forum.

It's predominantly male, yet I don't see the issues which are presented in the trailer, or to the traits you find distasteful in men. This is a very complex and varied group here and decidedly male -- straight forward, mature thinkers and I like the energy here very much. Bondo, you like it here. What makes this place different from what you're experiencing elsewhere?

Is it that this place has congregated enlightened ones? :))

You must bear in mind the specificities of the internet. You cannot be a jock in this forum. No one can see you do a thousand push-ups or grunt noisily as you punch a sparring partner in his inferior face with speed, force and warriorly gusto. Your perfect jawline doesn't make it through the screen and your killer smile might as well be oozing pus for all the good it will do you. There is also no possibility of sex lying beneath the binary stockings of the forum's code and nothing to win. The Box Office games we have are the most competitive thing on the entire boards. This is not an attractive place for extroverted social butterflies. It is a haven for nerds and people who value the worth of a written idea (or in the case of my writing, disastrous puns) somewhere near - whether above or below - the level of the benefits allowed by a real life conversation, with its loud demonstrations of emotion, occasional eye rolls and inescapable physicality. Which is not to say that there are no sportsy types around here. I constantly read about some person or other putting himself through the crucible of a marathon (not you 1SO, a different kind of marathon) or another equally excruciating ordeal. It's just that no one comes here for the same reason they go to the pub and  for many people it's strictly the pub.

TLDR: This is a terrible place to pick up women.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #174 on: December 22, 2016, 11:47:13 AM »
Yes. Next question. ;D

:))

Quote
Your list of unappealing prevalent female traits are things I can't even deny as it relates to my female friends, yet mostly it doesn't bother me. I sit in a somewhat privileged position in that I'm fairly easily embraced as "one of the girls," but because I'm still not one, I can be left out of some of the social dynamics that are more negative. So I guess I get all the perks without as many of the drawbacks of being in female social circles.

Ooh, great point! I too feel like I'm in a privileged position here. I'm one of you, but I also get treated very graciously, which buffers me from the occasional brouhaha. I have the advantage of stepping back and doing one of these.  boys

I also want to interject, my interjection and say what I should have said in my first post. The women here on the forum, ses, saltine, OAD, StarCarly, tiny (are there any other regulars?) are the most enlightened of all! So happy to know these women and to learn from them.

I have a friend that mirrors me in that almost all of her friends are males whereas mine are mostly women. Both of us cannot fathom how the other can spend all of their social time with their opposite sex. Particularly cheap pop psychology would tell you that we are running away from the flaws we see in ourselves by fleeing the similar. I think the truth is darker than that. The reality of the possibility of sex between straight people, however likely, is enough to change how one behaves towards one's opposed sex and how it behaves towards one. I think even the male friends who would never sleep with you will conduct themselves differently if you are a woman than they do with other guys.

I don't know if I would say darker, just human nature. Whatever the natural reason, it's a great thing to be your best self with others. Your observation is so fascinating.

Quote
You must bear in mind the specificities of the internet. You cannot be a jock in this forum. No one can see you do a thousand push-ups or grunt noisily as you punch a sparring partner in his inferior face with speed, force and warriorly gusto. Your perfect jawline doesn't make it through the screen and your killer smile might as well be oozing pus for all the good it will do you. There is also no possibility of sex lying beneath the binary stockings of the forum's code and nothing to win. The Box Office games we have are the most competitive thing on the entire boards. This is not an attractive place for extroverted social butterflies. It is a haven for nerds and people who value the worth of a written idea (or in the case of my writing, disastrous puns) somewhere near - whether above or below - the level of the benefits allowed by a real life conversation, with its loud demonstrations of emotion, occasional eye rolls and inescapable physicality. Which is not to say that there are no sportsy types around here. I constantly read about some person or other putting himself through the crucible of a marathon (not you 1SO, a different kind of marathon) or another equally excruciating ordeal. It's just that no one comes here for the same reason they go to the pub and  for many people it's strictly the pub.

TLDR: This is a terrible place to pick up women.

:D It's their loss.

Fun paragraph to read, DarkeningHumour!

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #175 on: December 22, 2016, 12:00:31 PM »
Like countless artists, I am inspired by sexual frustration.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #176 on: December 22, 2016, 12:14:23 PM »
Bondo, I think it's interesting you gravitate toward women peers, because of your dislike of some male attributes. I tend to gravitate toward male peers, for similar reasons. I don't have a lot of interest/patience in some of the more prevalent female traits. This little list is stereotypical, yet it is common enough, that I find it difficult to find many women to relate to.

catty, self critical and critical of others, heiarchal, emotionally needy and manipulative to try and fill the need, superficial, self absorbed, one upmanship, competitive, bossy, judgemental...

What I find interesting about this list is the last few items: self absorbed, one upmanship, competitive, bossy, judgemental...

These are all very typically "male" attributes as well. The only difference is that men don't get dinged for them. Men are expected to be in charge, competitive, go-getters. When a woman is like that, it's seen as unseemly, not very ladylike.

I also feel like women are self-critical because society constantly tears them down and points out their shortcomings, while society constantly tells men how awesome they are.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 12:16:24 PM by MartinTeller »

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #177 on: December 22, 2016, 12:42:03 PM »
Men are constantly being put down too, except they are not allowed to show that that bothers them because showing weakness is anathema to masculinity.

I was going to comment on those epithets because they stood out to me too. Like Martin, I was going to say that accusations of competitiveness and bossiness are demonstrative of a double standard, which has always annoyed me.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Corndog

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17025
  • Oo-da-lolly, Oo-da-lolly, golly what a day!
    • Corndog Chats
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #178 on: December 22, 2016, 02:24:17 PM »
I Am Not Your Negro (Raoul Peck, 2016) -

I AM NOT YOUR NEGRO is a unique experience in documentary filmmaking in that it is made as a sort of memoir by famed African American author and scholar James Baldwin, as the book he never completed. But it is just as much as a memoir by director Raoul Peck in its construction and visual decisions, as much an interpretation of that book by James Baldwin as seen from Peck's point of view. Similar to CAMERAPERSON from earlier in the year, the film is composed of a myriad of imagines, archival interviews and the like, thrown together with seemingly little purpose or order. But as the film progresses, it somehow ate away at me as the viewer and I managed to become more and more invested in the kaleidoscopic images as they went by. The film is in fact very deliberately put together, and manages to cover lots of ground when it comes to Baldwin and his views on civil rights in his time, and also the current landscape of civil rights. Cutting back and forth between images of Black Lives Matter issues of today to issues in the 1950s and 1960 of Baldwin discussing the same issues with such luminaries as Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, the film pieces together a loose narrative that is able to criticize the current racial climate in this country, especially as the legacy of Malcolm X, MLK and Baldwin himself is reflected upon, while also celebrating them and the progress that has been made in this country but not yet resolved. I really struggled with this film at first, for its apparent lack of structure, only to be completely taken by it upon its conclusion.

***1/2 - Great
"Time is the speed at which the past decays."

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: DOCember Group Marathon 2016
« Reply #179 on: December 22, 2016, 04:20:45 PM »
Like countless artists, I am inspired by sexual frustration.

I hear ya.

What I find interesting about this list is the last few items: self absorbed, one upmanship, competitive, bossy, judgemental...

These are all very typically "male" attributes as well. The only difference is that men don't get dinged for them. Men are expected to be in charge, competitive, go-getters. When a woman is like that, it's seen as unseemly, not very ladylike.

Those are traits I don't like in men either, so I steer clear there as well. A word about competitiveness though. I enjoy competition -- games, sports and such, but it's the idea that life itself is competitive and all aspects therein. This grasping/clawing mentality is what I can't stomach.

Quote
I also feel like women are self-critical because society constantly tears them down and points out their shortcomings,

I will not dispute this! What's worse is they take that self criticism and turn it on their daughters and other women. Women become their our own worst enemies. It's tragic.

Quote
while society constantly tells men how awesome they are.

I don't know about this. The negativity for females is too loud for me to hear what's going on with you men. I would hope you're being told you're awesome, though. :)


Men are constantly being put down too, except they are not allowed to show that that bothers them because showing weakness is anathema to masculinity.

Ugh. This is too bad.  Vulnerability is a hugely attractive attribute.

Quote
I was going to comment on those epithets because they stood out to me too. Like Martin, I was going to say that accusations of competitiveness and bossiness are demonstrative of a double standard, which has always annoyed me.

These things in excess are repugnant no matter the gender. But, I do agree with the double standard you and Martin are pointing out.

 

love