see, saw

Taking a page from Daniela's blog, I decided to post a couple of new places I've been to recently.

Stuff on my cat
Holla back Boston

I also just watched This Is What Democracy Looks Like. Well I watched part of it, most of it I think. I got frustrated by it and turned it off before it was over. It was very disappointing.

I've thought about it and I don't think my dislike of the movie reflects a rigid distaste for nontraditional documentary format. I suspect it might be influenced by my tendency to dislike nonlinearity in movies unless it is very very well done. And even when it is, I find it more welcome in something I am watching primarily for entertainment/artistic value than in something I'm watching primarily for information, perspective, cogency, and potency.

The movie included lengthy swaths of poor quality music (and other audio) and photoshoplike filtered collage/montages. These dominated the film to the point where it seemed they superceded any discernable nonfiltered or neon glow applied "what happened" content. At one point I said to A____ "This is what a music video looks like. Did fucking Bono produce this or something?" A___ replied "No, if he had the audio quality would be better..."

Content. I know, there is not a single defintion. If this had been billed as an art film, then it had plenty of content. Not necessarily plenty good, but plenty. However artsily done it was meant to be though, the main purpose was not (only) to present an art film. So what the purpose? I thought the idea was to present what happened at the 1999 WTO protests from the protestors' perspectives. This is not unlike what it says on the film's website

An Untold Story - Out of a sea of footage and multiple narratives, THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE weaves an elegant, powerful story that leaves the viewer feeling hope. "We set out to tell a story of empowerment and resistance," says Rowley (a co-director). "We've all heard again and again about random violence and broken windows, about protectionist trade unions and naive hippies. Even as activists, we turned Seattle into a story about repression and police violence. With 'Democracy' we wanted to tell a story of the power we have when we come together, a story of people standing up against the repressive machinery of the system and winning."

Ok, it's a story. They use the word "story" a lot so I guess I can't be blamed for expecting even a sense of narrative. But I think Mr. Rowley and I have different notions of what the word "story" means.

Yes, there is always a slant in any documentary. But when the majority of the content consists of images like red "paint" splashed, super-exposed, cliche images floating on a sea of cop vs. kid melee footage which has been grained and slowed to the point where it is physically nearly impossible to actually SEE what is going on even in the clip, you sort of start feeling like slant is all there is.

I'd cry if all (alternative) documentaries were as traditional, dry, and well, boringly done as Howard Zinn: You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train, but Democracy strays so far to another extreme that any point or story which isn't completely lost in the mix becomes suspect due to the nature of the mix itself.

God damn, I guess I'm a square.