Film

aEwkVS ftltyfekwvje, [url=http://hvycqwgzfelz.com/]hvycqwgzfelz[/url], [link=http://xpelgjvbzfeu.com/]xpelgjvbzfeu[/link], http://qelrafyrtdgv.com/

As the 50th anniversary of Ghana’s independence from British Colonial ends, two new films, from WORLDwrite’s Pricking the Missionary Position, suggest freedom and autonomy must still be fought for. Keeping Africa Small challenges Western NGO practices in Africa. However well meaning they may be, their programmes get up the noses of everyone – from fishermen to shanty town inhabitants. Godbless, Wofa, De Roy and local fishermen and women loathe the peanuts offered and sanctimonious lessons in good behaviour. They are not ignorant; they are articulate and angry. They want jobs and material advancement. As Godbless tells us: "Africans have big brains, big aspirations... and want to live in liberty."

As the 50th anniversary of Ghana’s independence from British Colonial ends, two new films, from WORLDwrite’s Pricking the Missionary Position, suggest freedom and autonomy must still be fought for. Keeping Africa Small challenges Western NGO practices in Africa. However well meaning they may be, their programmes get up the noses of everyone – from fishermen to shanty town inhabitants. Godbless, Wofa, De Roy and local fishermen and women loathe the peanuts offered and sanctimonious lessons in good behaviour. They are not ignorant; they are articulate and angry. They want jobs and material advancement. As Godbless tells us: "Africans have big brains, big aspirations... and want to live in liberty."

This is a short 5- part documentary made in Sept. 2006 where two guys from VBS.tv decide to visit Baghdad to interview Iraq's only Heavy Metal band. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK9ZkW0HabQ

Dear Film Fans, My student film, 'The Scarlet Avenger', is currently playing on YouTube.com in 3 separate chapters. It's a tribute to all the 1940s action/adventure serials that inspired movies like 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', 'The Rocketeer', 'The Phantom' and 'The Shadow'. It's my dream to turn it into a feature one day. I'd love you to check it out. Chapter 1 of 3 can be found at : [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV5FelaScrc[/url] Chapter 2: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoxqr49QNP8[/url] Chapter 3: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKJGRzQjC5c[/url]

A Group of San Francisco Bay film makers are working on a project and would like some feedback. Currently there are audition footage and a 10 minute version done for a film class. More content will be added as we movie into production beginning in February http://myspace.com/eyeforatoothmovie

What a shame that Tim Luckhurst, Ruth Dudley Edwards (a "Wanna Be Brit" if there ever was one) and all the other "Brit attrocity apologists" can't/won't wake up and smell they coffee. There were many attrocities commited by the Black and Tans at the time the movie is set to try and somehow "gloss over the fact" by somehow saying that the IRA were equally as vicious and murderous pathetic and so typical of you guys. "What can one expect from a pig but a grunt?" is one expession that comes to mind.

I must say the major American films this year were a trifle dissappointing. Some major directors I respect very much released films beneath their abilities (i.e. Robert Altman, Martin Scorsese). As the year reaches it end, I was almost teary eyed at the lack 2006's lack-luster line-up. However, I recently caught wind of a film that changed my perspective about this year, maybe even cinema in general. It's called MODERN MAN. I saw a screener and unfortunately I think it's only playing in Los Angeles. But if you can, try to catch it. It is a truly anomalous and beautiful film. I find no one's heard of the film, so rather than bore you with a plot summary I'm gonna include the website (which I had to struggle to find) www.27parts.com

The film itself may be nice but it would be better for the informed "democrat" to read about the atrocities comitted by these "liberators". Refer to the "marocchinate" after the battles at Monte Cassino, and you will be enlightnede. These atrocities have been pretty much swept under the carpet by the Allies, especially the French and the Italian governments that followed

It is difficult to do justice to Steven Howe's review of Ken Loach's new film The Wind That Shakes The Barley as I have not seen it yet. But as the review is headlined as being an analysis of whether Mr Loach's film has the historical content correct or not and the fact Howe, being anti republican cannot restrain himself in critiquing the artistic content of the movie, I thought I would add a couple of comments prior to seeing the film. Mr Howe complains that most of the actors in the film speak with Cork accents, implying this is just another case of an English man misunderstand Ireland for the poor fool cannot even understand the Irish talk with differing accents.

I find it odd that Jane Kimmiment treats Paradise Now as something other than a film. I say, other than a film, because no matter how political the subject matter of film it is still film and not political treatise. Also, why do film critics, except for those of Palestinian or Arab background, not raise the same questions about Israeli films that deal with the conflict? Does "Munich" go far enough in explaining the Palestinian point of view? Why is that question not as widely asked as the kind of question Kimmiment raises in her review? We have a Palestinian film that questions suicide bombing in a society that is now undergoing creeping ethnic cleansing. Sorry for those who find this harsh language, but that is happening, whether someone finds that way of putting it "civil" or not. Because the film does not move to the abstract philosphical level and make an explicit statement that it is always wrong to target civilians for violence, it may not "go far enough." Meanwhile, across the green line, there are Israeli politicians in the Israeli government who openly advocate cleansing what was once Palestine of all Palestinian Arabs. Other politicians, who are experts in public relations, to soften these radicals, openly state, "oh, no. We don't believe in targeting civilians, we try our best not to do so," etc. Yet, their actions belie their rhetoric.

"the convention blesses the toolkit of government measures to support cultural diversity" ...sounds like propaganda. "the convention educates the world that cultural products are different from ordinary commodities" ...sounds like mercantilism. "for the benefit of developing countries, it creates a fund to help them in producing local distinctive cultural product" ..sounds like feudalism. "most significant, the convention dissuades countries from further trade liberalisation in the cultural sector, and strengthens their hand in resisting pressure to do so" ...sounds like protectionism.

"Saraband is devoid of any references to the world beyond: there are no cars, no other people, no television news, no social democracy, no cities, no wars (except personal ones), no prime-ministerial assassinations, no European constitutional crisis, no African famines, no America." -Ken Worple, "Return trip, Dalarna to Dallas" Writing from relatively pacific Northern California, this world is perhaps someone's idea of very heaven, if they aspire to live among psychological essences rather than circumstantial accidents, making for only ultra-domestic tragedy/sympathy, as Worple notes. But really live like Swedes? Are Swedes really like this? If so, their having achieved an ultra-stable culture has given them the freedom to go gentle into that long, late-lit northern night.

Hello, I am a Director of Development for a production company based in NYC. Our company is currently searching for intelligent readers to assist us in developing the next wave of films we produce. Our ideal applicants have a through knowledge of film, can write concisely and clearly, and can devote a minimum of 2 hrs per day. If any of you guys are interested please email me @ filmbuff@mailshack.com for more details. Thank you for your time and dedication to cinema. Sincerely, Director of Development NYC Message was edited by: davidshemtov

I've seen Sally Potter's film YES (in Minneapolis,MN,USA). I like the 'ambgiuities" of the Lebanese man, the willingness to show racism upfront (in kitchen scenes)which is all too rare in ANY films. But, I came away thinking that the Irish-American woman represented something reactionary POSING as "progressive". Here there's a tshirt that says"Love Sees No Color" echoing inter-racial relationships where by whites "prove" their anti-racism by having love affairs with people of color. In YES, I felt this was part of what was going on...but, even more, what was represented was the old saw of "numbed" white person turning to the "exotic"(person of color) to feel 'alive". Or in YES, rather than DEAL WITH her empty marriage, the woman distracts herself with the love affair.Also important was the CLASS content: the white American & her politician husband are obviously wealthy, while her Lebanese lover is akitchen-worker(tho I was glad to see it at leas recognized that he was a dr who wasn't allowed to practice his profession as an immigrant). I'm not sure I ever really BELIEVED love was going on, frankly...what Potter's postion as writer/director is still unclear. (Aesthetic note: the iambic verse script was annoying & UNreal to me. Would ahve preferred 'everyday" language!)

Juliet Mitchell's paean to Jane Fonda is a risible exercise in hero worship and the power movie stars have over the intellectually shallow and easily influenced. "All the way through reading My Life So Far I was haunted by a dotty internal refrain: Jane Fonda undersells herself. A crazy thought, given that her exercise video sold more than any video ever, and then there are the films, and this book … Jane Fonda’s career suggests that we need a new equivalent to “the Midas touch”; not gold but success. Yet I couldn’t rid myself of the thought that she undersells herself. It is part of her attractiveness."

I saw this movie last December, and it was really one of the best movies to come out of the States last year. The genocide that occured in Africa during the focus of the movie (mid-90's) was/is a topic that needs attention and discussion. Did anyone see this movie?

Michael Radford’s adaptation of The Merchant of Venice is a curious mix that neither manages to white-wash nor honestly tackle the controversies of Shakespeare's play. Any modern performance must reckon with the anti-Semitism displayed by many of its characters and Radford deals with this by contextualising it, as concretely as he can, in 16th century Venice. The opening titles provide a brief explanation of the status of Jews as usurers, oppressed by the Christian city state and forbidden property. Unfortunately, this emphasis on context has a tendency to displace the anti-Semitism to the realm of the Other, when it should perhaps cut rather closer to the bone.

The idea of "world cinema" is largely a product of the 1960's, built around modernist auteurs (Satyajit Ray, Bergman, Kurosawa, Rossellini, etc.). Since that time, there have been--as we all know--all sorts of transformations in the global mediascape. How have these changes affected and been reflected in films in the last two decades? I'm looking for suggestions for a "Top 10 List" of global cinema: what films best register (politically? aesthetically?) the most important dimensions of global change? what should "global cinematic literacy" look like?

The Take. A response to Ivan Briscoe’s review on www.openDemocracy I am at a disadvantage in my comment on Ivan Briscoe’s “Taking liberties,” 25 Nov. 2004, a review of The Take by Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis. I have not seen the movie. Not the one ostensibly reviewed and not, thankfully, the one that Ivan Briscoe would prefer to review. My response to this review is political – a terrain Ivan Briscoe inhabits with comfort like a familiar neighborhood. My politics however is not his. For example, despite his appreciation of the nobility of the Argentine workers depicted in the film, he thinks their actions were a “spasm.” Would he then characterize the workers in Barcelona as spasmodic in their occupations to fight fascism in 1936? The differences I see between these two events are considerable, but in neither case is the nobility of the actions to be discounted, nor the implications for political theory.