Daily Archives: October 24th, 2017

VIFF 2017 Review: Dragonfly Eyes

dragonfly_eyes-h_2017

Dragonfly Eyes is a feature drama done through surveillance footage. This is one of the many surveillance images used in the film.

Dragonfly Eyes is a Chinese experimental film that attempts to use surveillance camera footage as a way to tell a story. It’s a unique story in its own.

The story begins in a Buddhist monastery. A young girl named Qing Ting, which means ‘dragonfly,’ has left the monastery in search of a better life. Ke Fan is a young man working a job at a cow farm. One day he catches the attention of Qing Ting. They have conversation, but it’s brief. She knows him and his farm work, but she tries to keep a public distance from him. She’s concerned for her social status about how she’ll look conversating with a ‘farm boy.’

Eventually she admits that she does love him and the two become a couple. However Qing Ting loses her job at a cleaner’s when a pushy rich woman gets more demanding and then demands Qing Ting be fired. Ke Fan swears to Qing Ting he will gets revenge for her. He does just that by driving in front of the rich couple’s car and smashing in their front at a red light. The incident lands Ke Fan a four-year prison term.

Four years have passed and Ke Fan is released from prison. The first thing he does is try to look for Qing Ting. He goes to where she used to live, goes to her former jobs. No sign. Then he learns of an internet celebrity by the name of Xiao Xiao. He sees her and notices that it’s Qing Ting. He tries to conversate with her, but she keeps on denying she’s Qing Ting. Then one day, she gives negative comments about a singing star. That leads to a lot of online flack delivered to her. Xiao Xiao is devastated and it drives her to suicide. Ke Fan learns of this. He feels what he must do is undergo plastic surgery to have Qing Ting’s face. After the operation, he returns to the monastery where she used to serve. It is there she chooses to stay.

This is definitely a film you can call experimental. You can also describe it as ambitious for Xu Bing. One thing we learn is that China is a country full of surveillance cameras. The average person’s face is seen on surveillance cameras 300 times a day. The cameras are all state-run. It is through this that Xu Bing came up with the idea to do a fictional story through use of surveillance. I tried to be as observant as I could with the film. I was trying to spot out if Xu Bing was using the same actors to play Ke Fan and Qing Ting. One thing about the film is that the parts are voiced over by Lui Yongfang for Qing Ting and Su Shangqing for Ke Fan.

I do give Xu Bing kudos for trying to make a film of this caliber and this experimental. However I have to say that it is flawed. The biggest thing is a story that appeared to make sense from time to time, but ended in a bizarre fashion. How does one try to keep the spirit of a deceased person alive by undergoing plastic surgery to look like them? The scene where Ke Fan joins the monastery made a little more sense as it can be seen as a way to keep Qing Ting’s spirit alive. However the plastic surgery really has me wondering.

I can understand that Xu Bing is trying to make more than one statement to make in this film. I think through the character of Qing Ting, he trying to make a statement of one being consumed by materialism. We have a young girl who leaves the monastery and then gets consumed in the modern world of materialism, and then she commits suicide. Also I feel with this film using surveillance camera footage, I think he’s also trying to make a statement about the chaos of this world we live in. It’s noted when the film goes from footage used as part of the drama shifting to general surveillance footage consisting of car crashes, people on the go, a disaster, a woman drowning in a pond, and even business footage. Whatever statements Xu is trying to make, it doesn’t come across smoothly and it comes across rather confusing. I will acknowledge Xu’s Dragonfly Eyes as a brave first-attempt at a ‘surveillance-drama’ and anticipate better in the years to come.

Dragonfly Eyes is an ambition attempt at creating a live-action film through surveillance footage, but it comes off as messy and confusing.

Advertisements

VIFF 2017 Review: 7 Minutes (7 Minuti)

7 Minutes

7 Minutes is a film about eleven Italian women debating over a labor compromise. It’s a film that gets you thinking.

It’s our impulse that whenever we hear the term ‘Italian film,’ we think of either Life Is Beautiful or something in the spirit of Fellini. 7 Minutes is a completely different film. It’s a film about a serious topic and worth seeing.

The film starts at a textile plant in Italy. There’s been a merger with a big French company. The merger is seen as a threat to 300 female employees as they fear their jobs would be outsourced, and they protest outside. The heads of the Italian company plan to meet with the French CEO Mme. Rochette. However it’s only after Mme. Rochette meets with some of the female protesters that she starts talking with the Italian company.

The heads talk with the CEO in one room. Ten females who are part of the textile section wait in another room expecting anything, even the worst. Bianca is the only woman from the textiles section allowed in the meeting with the bigwigs. She looks onto their discussions in an untrusting matter awaiting their fate.

Finally the news comes to them. No jobs are really in jeopardy. However the eleven including Bianca are given an issue to vote on. They are asked to accept their current jobs as long as they give up seven minutes of their break time. This first seems like a simple thing to vote on; vote ‘yes’ and keep their jobs secure as well as the jobs of the 300 other woman who are now out celebrating. However Bianca is not happy and speaks her disagreement. The others are easier-going and all vote ‘yes’ at first.

However all realize they really need to think this through. They didn’t do it the first time. Some see it as more than a vote on a simple labor issue. Some see it as a test to see how much of a ‘sheep’ to the system they could make of themselves. Others however feel they are justified in voting ‘yes’ and give substantial reasons. Even one worker who’s pregnant feels this vote could affect the future of the daughter she’s carrying inside. A lot of discussion comes of this. We learn it was because of faulty machinery why one ended up in a wheelchair, and was pressured into signing an agreement that it was her fault. we hear from immigrants like Albanian Hira and African Kidal about their own difficulties. Then we hear from Bianca who always got far in the company by playing the system, but now wants to be the courageous one and stand her ground. Then there’s one who’s pregnant and needs to be rushed to the hospital to give birth. Before she leaves, she requests her vote be ‘no.’

Meanwhile time is running out. It’s 4pm. More than five hours have passed and a final vote has not been reached. This is especially infuriating for Mme. Rochette as she has a flight to catch. She becomes impatient and just lets it out on the Italian colleagues in French. However the ten have to come to a vote. Bianca announces her ‘no’ vote and announces she will resign as the labor leader of her group. There is a final vote at the end: five vote ‘yes,’ six vote ‘no.’

This film is very insightful. At first you think this film is about voting over a simple labor compromise, but it’s not. This thing about voting over a seven-minute compromise to their break time would prove to me more than just about that compromise. You’d hear in their conversations that it would be about a lot more. It would be about what other businesses would do. It would be about businesses trying to make other possible compromises in the future. It would even be a test of one’s personal dignity and what they believe in. It’s unfortunate that these women have to vote on this compromise for the sake of hundreds of jobs for other people, but it’s an issue that very common right now and could happen close to home. That’s why this dialogue in the film is so important.

The story isn’t just about the yes-voters and the no-voters stating their case. The story is also about the eleven women involved in the voting. We have eleven women of various different backgrounds. They range in ages from a 60-year old veteran of the place to a 20 year-old newcomer, married or divorced mothers to single women, two immigrants from Albania or Africa, and even a woman disabled from an injury on the job. All of them make their backgrounds and life-experiences known in the film as they all try to reach their final vote. Whenever you hear one of the women state her reason for her vote, what you hear is the story of at least a thousand other women who share her experience. What they say is that valuable.

The film does bring dignity to the six that vote ‘no.’ The film however does not try to make the five women who vote ‘yes’ look like they’re stupid or ‘conformist sheep.’ You just have to hear their stories on why they voted the way they did. The film does keep the dignity of those that voted ‘no,’ but also brought a human side to those that voted ‘yes.’ You’ll see in the film that those that voted ‘yes’ at the very end didn’t do it like they were in a flock of sheep. A lot of heart and soul and a lot of heavy thinking went into their ‘yes’ vote too.

The film is actually based on a stage play by Stefano Massini. I’ve never seen the stage play, but it’s very possible the play was just set in the meeting area with the eleven women discussing the deal. There would have to be some elements needed to bring this play to the big screen and make people want to watch it. I think the element of having the boss from France, Mme. Rochette coming over and holding the meeting adds to it. That scene near the end where she gets frustrated with the long wait and walks out telling off the Italians in French said quite a bit. It had me wondering: “Is that what people in France think of Italians?” It also sent a message of the disconnection between the business hierarchy and workers that obviously exists. Mme. Rochette appears at the beginning to be empathetic with the workers, especially Hira. She appears to be a congenial partner with them especially when she receives the gift of the big mozzarella. However the truth about how she feels gets revealed when the women delay their vote long enough. That doesn’t simply speak of Mme. Rochette, but lots of other CEO’s worldwide. I think a lot of them feel they need to have a disconnection from them in order to make business happen, no matter how cruel.

This film directed by Michele Placido, who co-wrote the screenplay with Toni Trupia and original playwright Stefano Massini, did a very good job in creating an intriguing film where most of the action takes place in one location. Massini’s play on its own is excellent in creating well-dimensioned roles for all eleven women in the play. Placido makes the right additions for the sake of the film while maintaining the importance of the debate as the focal point. The standout actress of the film has to be Ottavia Piccolo. She does a very good job in playing a woman who achieved a lot of success in playing along with the system, but now wants to be the strong one. Piccolo allows her role as Bianca to be a role that speaks as much in silence as she does in dialogue. All eleven women who are part of the voting scene all have roles that are full of volume. Each of the roles represent a woman everyone knows and were well-acted out.

7 Minutes is more than a film about a labor issue being voted upon. It’s also about people in this modern work world, most specifically women, and their feelings coming across as they vote.