The Social Network: Every Creation Story Needs a Devil

source: www.thesocialnetwork-movie.com

…they just can’t wrap their head around the idea that someone might build something because they like building things.” said the real Mark Zuckerberg in reaction to The Social Network film.

What the real Mark Zuckerberg did not get was that Erica is merely a symbolic device for putting the character’s extreme egoism and narrow-mindedness up for exhibition. Arguably, it is these unique qualities of “Mark Zuckerberg”, among with his vast intelligence and relentless conviction,  that made facebook.com one of the most pronounced sites to this day in terms of design and philosophy.

That Mark Zuckerberg is an asshole easily made him the biggest draw on screen. His disdain towards authority and ignorance towards anyone deemed worthless effortlessly established the character’s charisma. Compared to this alternate Zuckerberg, the real-life counterpart doing on F8 keynote is as animated as a PR droid.

One other element the film has captured so well but was neglected by other reviewers was the desolation and solitude of software developers. The on-screen Zuckerberg, though a genius,  was merely an inarticulate 19 year old boy suffering from the taste of reject and badly in need of comfort. Ironically, the way he saw himself out was to dive deeper into his own world. That was a world where his revenue and fame driven partners Jeff Parker and Saverin could never recognize.

source: www.thesocialnetwork-movie.com

Towards the end of the film, Zuckerberg asked Marylin, the only character sympathetic of him, if he could stay around and “use the computer”, before the screen fades out while he waits for a friend request reply from Erica. In his own twisted ways,  Zuckerberg was as connected to the world as he was isolated from it.

Extended Reading:

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/10/04/the-social-network-fact-vs-fiction/

http://www.facebook.com/thefacebookeffect

Share
Read More

Documentary fatigue

Ever since Moore shook the world with Fahrenheit 9/11, mainstream documentary films have discovered a fool proof formula – pit the protagonists against a mighty yet despicable Goliath, then wrap the central motif around a conspiracy theory or a promise of some shocking truth unveiling. Not only does this structure able to bring the mundane slightly more bearable, it helps to inject a sense of familiarity in the generally soap soaked audience, carefully keeping their interest levels from dwelling throughout the two hours.

Documentary films have therefore evolved from the hardcore BBC style where authenticity and university professors take center stage to the makeshift blockbuster thrillers they have become. While effective in grabbing headlines and generating controversy, one sometimes can’t help but think whether the tradeoffs are worthwhile. Tension and drama are no doubt effective emotion provoking vehicles, but when the dosage gets too frequent, fatigue and detachment can kick in just as quickly. As easy as that is to grasp, film distributors have never been so keen on pushing the noise stirring documentary race to more ridiculous heights.

The argument is not against producing good quality documentary films that are both thought-provoking and dare I say – entertaining. Few would think that Ric O’Barry‘s compassion towards dolphins was an excuse for putting night vision scenes in The Cove. When executed appropriately, the tension helps to put the viewer in the epicenter of the depicted event and make him as involved in the subject matter as the film makers themselves.

However, the abundance of subpar documentary films relegating to shock and gore as cheap marketing tricks have inflicted enough damage on the genre already, making viewers and critics much more skeptical and “rational” than before. On the other hand, right wing critics with a self-proclaimed sense of responsibility to balance the opinions of the world would pour out lengthy counter-arguments with the sole purpose of muddling the original message of the documentary film makers and showcasing their own moral objectivity. Healthy, serious debate is much needed as it teaches us not to accept everything at face value, but most of the ones I came across were merely pseudo arguments with a rational disguise. At the end of the day, this deranged phenomenon causes a set back as confused and less-knowledgeable viewers at large become less sure of what to believe in anymore.

Not all film makers are able to recruit ILM expertise for camera hiding advices and unmanned aircrafts constructions. From The Cove.

So that’s that – documentary film makers should stop adhering to the Moore formula as their impacts are being increasingly watered-down and no meagre budget boosts would help.

Share
Read More

HKIFF 2010 picks

Here’s a list of the films from this year’s HKIFF that seem to appeal to my interest. Conventional and hardly edgy? You bet. Films with a coming-of-age theme or historical/mildly political backgrounds tend to be more inspiring than most, IMHO.

Fish Tank

Synopsis:

FISH TANK is the story of Mia (KATIE JARVIS), a volatile 15-year-old, who is always in trouble and who has become excluded from school and ostracized by her friends. One hot summer’s day her mother (KIERSTON WAREING) brings home a mysterious stranger called Connor (MICHAEL FASSBENDER) who promises to change everything and bring love into all their lives.

http://www.hkiff.org/eng/film/detail/7/34071-fish-tank.html

Share
Read More

2009 music and films – a personal list

09 was full of promises. Particularly broken ones. Though amidst the ruins there sometimes came along works of brilliance that helped to make the unbearable times slightly easier to endure.

21 Guns

Sometimes a song really gets to you not due to its quality but how its context hits you at the appropriate moments. This is the parting swan song that echoed in my head as I saw her ashes being put into place. What can I say? A tragic tune loaded with anger and unjust, just like her life and passing.

Jesus of Suburbia

It’s Green Day revisited year alright. It wasn’t till 09 when I rediscovered this tune and taken to its nihilism and rage. I don’t care if you don’t I don’t care if you don’t I don’t care if you don’t care.

UP

This was quite unexpected. Watching UP was like watching my entire life flashing before my eyes…though unlike Carl Fredricksen, I’m hanging on to the floating house like dear life. At least he had somewhere he could go. At least he doesn’t have long to live before he gets to see his Elly.

証人 Beast Stalker

Moving on to less sentimental choices.  I think Beast Stalker (a 08 film) is undoubtedly the best local film I saw in 09. With the local film industry being stagnated or gone all haywire,  this might remain the most decent film for many years to come. Mark my words.

Let It Be – Remastered

Love the fact how the 2009.09.09 re-issue has rejuvenated the band’s legacy around the world. Pity that “Across The Universe” didn’t sound particularly different. Sometimes efforts to bring back certain things that have passed are destined to be futile. A real shame.

Slumdog Millionaire

There was the initial shock (seeing Dharavi) followed by waves of surprises. The success of the film lied on its transformative power – its ability to change people’s perceptions upon alien cultures and nations. Not to mention how it eventually led me to set foot in Mumbai or learn about Mahatma Gandhi’s life. The chase scene in the beginning is so much more engaging and shocking than any of the pompous CG scenes in Avatar.

Sweetney Todd – The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

A fantastic film I didn’t get to see till this year. The production, characters, sets and music are all top notch. Should have seen it at a cinema. An underrated film this didn’t seem to have garnered enough praises.

Uncharted 2 (ps3 game)

Have to bring up this title again, for its innovation in pushing the gaming media into new narrative heights. In terms of achievement Uncharted 2 should be up there with Shenmue, I reckon.

Marley and I

It wasn’t a film about canines. It was showing us a life that we wished we could have had but knew we never would. I wonder if her tears were shed for the same sentiments. I’d never know.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Anything with David Fincher’s name on it is bound to secure a place on my list. Though criticized for its linearity and unoriginality, Benjamin was great in its own terms. The portrayal of encounters, emotions and departures in life were simply outstanding. Another film that managed to reduce me to a pool of tears (and eventually led to a Varanasi visit).

20th Century Boys Part 2+3

I might be the only one who thoroughly enjoyed all three parts of this trilogy. Seeing how the production team painstakingly re-created the imaginary world from the manga was nerve whacking enough – then seeing how they went an extra mile in exemplifying the key scenes and emotions was beyond moving. People, you guys were missing the point, big time.

Share
Read More

Babel and Determinism

27babe.1.650

Sometimes there are films you’ve heard so much about, they automatically categorize themselves into the “heavy material – not for casual viewing” group. As time wears on, your expectations only grew. Sometimes one become cautious about whether to watch the actual film in the end, as it has already taken a certain form in your mind, and any deviation from that often leads to disappointment or disorientation.

Babel is the case in point.

Critics and reviewers tend to be quite generous towards the film, praising it on the portrayal of universal emotions like pain, suffering and yearning for unity, on the controversy of western imperialism, on the failure of language and senses under certain circumstances, among others.

I wasn’t in such a forgiving mood though. To me, the main draws were the cast (Cate!) and the emphasis on determinism/fatalism/the butterfly effect/casuality…how all events and lives are intermingled and have profound effects on one another regardless of spaces and time. Seems like a formula that can’t go wrong.

But “formula” was exactly what the curse was. About one-third into the film, it couldn’t become more obvious that the characters in the four stories are somehow inter-related. With the suspense given away, the audience was left to see how events would unfold and come to their inevitable ends. And while the unfolding was intense, it regrettably treaded into the waters of TV-style melodrama, with chains of stupid decisions from protagonists made to serve little more than plot devices. What a shame.

In comparison, the little scene depicting Determinism in Benjamin Button (“If the cab driver hadn’t stop for a cup of coffee…”) was much more powerful and convincing. Sometimes ideas like this work better in a more confined context, both in terms of length and space.

Suddenly I feel a bit worried about other films sitting in the same category, like “Constant Gardener”, “2001 Space Odyssey”, “Blade Runner”, “River Kwai”, “Godfather trilogy” and so on… I wish I’m over-reacting.

Share
Read More

there's no "self" – I'm not there, I'm everywhere

Analysis and observations written about I’m Not There.


Characters
——————————

Each actor represents a different part of Dylan’s (or the media’s perception of his) persona.

- interpretation #1:

  • musical nomad (black child Marcus Carl Franklin)
  • Greenwich Village prophet (Christian Bale) who tells the truth through folk music
  • movie-star-turned-lousy-husband-and-father (Heath Ledger)
  • star who neglected his fans (Cate Blanchett)
  • confusing man submitting to an uncomfortable Q&A (Ben Whishaw)
  • outlaw not unlike Billy the Kid (Richard Gere) living in a fantastic world of his own creation

- interpretation #2:

  • Marcus Carl Franklin: embodies the early stages of Dylan’s musical career, imitating Woody Guthrie’s songs while in search of his own voice.
  • Bale: personifying Dylan as the character Jack Rollins. When first presented, he is the folk troubadour, the early 60′s folk hero. He becomes a musical legend and the voice of a generation. Then he seems to disappear. Later in the the film, Rollins reappears to the public eye. While still singing, the character is now a born again Christian and pastor.
  • Heath Ledger: symbolizes the part of Dylan that attempted to settle down and lead a somewhat normal life. Ledger’s character is often away from his wife and children.
  • Cate Blanchett: reproduces the mid-60′s Dylan, the one who defied his fans by going electric, who embraced the art of rock ‘n’ roll, the one who mumbled his way through interviews full of contradictions and sarcastic quips.
  • Ben Whishaw: Dylan the poet. Self-aware of his artistic importance, he confidently and eloquently reflects on his role in musical history as he shifted from one character to another.
  • Richard Gere: the outlaw, Billy The Kid. A man on the run from his own identity. He lives in an unrealistic world. A symbol for the Dylan that wishes to disappear from popular culture.
Concepts
——————————

- This movie really is about how the media has taken a quiet, loner singer-songwriter and made him into something that can’t be reasonably explained.

- The film almost as a spoof of the biopic genre, since it basically pronounces the entire concept of summarising a person through a series of biographical details to be an essentially flawed one. (kenny: in other words, this is a ANTI-BIOGRAPHY film in disguise of a biography film!)

- What the film is most interested in: the problems arising from living in a media-saturated world, and particularly being a public figure in a media-saturated world.

- The approach of this film is a perfectly succinct representational strategy for conveying the postmodern notion of the self as multiple, and the idea that the ‘true’, ‘inner self’ is essentially an illusion.

- The film is not about giving us an understanding of Dylan, but it tries tell us the very impossibility of such a project.

- Dylan, as represented here, is painfully aware of this function of the media, and undertakes not to allow himself to be fixed or pinned down in one image, instead always shifting and reinventing his persona in an attempt to never be misrepresented.

- Through the way he is presented in I’m Not There, Dylan effectively becomes a sort of unwilling postmodern hero whose almost every move is a sidestep away from singularity and coherence – or, more specifically, away from being represented as coherent or singular.

- We are in a hall of endless distorting mirrors, where identity is provisional and appearance is deceptive: whichever Dylan you think he is, he’s not.

- In a sense these quotations exist to conjure up a period, and specifically a period in which media and representation became widely recognised as a political and ideological battleground

- I’m Not There says, among other things, that the presence of politics in works of art, like the presence of the artist’s personality, is at once unavoidable and virtually inexpressible.

- Gere/Dylan/Billy isn’t shot down, he escapes the 19th-century law and finds the 20th-century guitar that once belonged to Woody Guthrie. This moment, with its strikingly “impossible” temporal logic, celebrates the essentially impersonal freedom of art.

Styles and Influences
——————————–

- The documentary-style of Bale’s portion, as well as the continual nods to Godard (the gunshot-cutting of Vivre Sa Vie [1962]), Bergman (the close-up spider of Persona [1966]), and particularly Fellini (the Jude section is shot almost entirely as if it were 8 ½ [1963]).

- Haynes’s references to films like Masculin-Féminin, Petulia, A Hard Day’s Night, 8 1/2, and Darling…serve to underscore that Sixties cinema was always already influencing the cultural-political reality from which Dylan sprang.

- Of course, the earliest, most memorably succinct formulation of this idea—the demolition of a stable, coherent, metaphysically grounded self—came from the 19th-century French poet who inspired Dylan and whom Haynes invokes early on in I’m Not There, Arthur Rimbaud: “Je est un autre” (“I is an other”)

- The film’s commits to devices from the Godard playbook: pastiche, allusion, quotation, the use of actors to construct allegorical or phantasmatic images of people rather than plausibly represent or incarnate them.

- The spiders and Giraffes are a homage to Fellini and Bergman.

Sources:
——————————–
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/reviews/im-not-there.php
http://www.alternatetakes.co.uk/?2008,2,201
http://www.filmlinc.com/fcm/so07/imnotthere.htm
http://dev.wsws.org/articles/2007/dec2007/imno-d28.shtml
wikipedia

Share
Read More
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes