I was interested in seeing Mr. Jones at the VIFF as it’s based on a topic of my interest: the Holodomor or Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. It’s an intriguing story with a relevant message for today’s world.
In 1933, Gareth Jones is a 28 year-old Welsh journalist who is very good at getting stories. He was the first foreign journalist to fly with Hitler and Goebbels at the start of Hitler’s regime while working as an advisor for British statesman Herman Lloyd George. During the time, he discovered of Hitler’s intentions to wage war. His story fell to deaf ears in the press and his job as advisor is dropped due to budget cuts. Despite being dropped, George gave Jones a letter of recommendation. He hopes to use it to go to the USSR to find an investigative journalist. Before he does, he gets a phone call from a friend named Paul Kleb in the USSR. He talks of how the economy is booming in Russia, but he is about to tell of something terrible happening in Ukraine… and then he gets disconnected.
Jones arrives in Moscow. His trip is regulated from start to finish: what he does, how long he stays and where he goes. That’s how things are in the USSR. In fact his job as a foreign journalist is under heavy scrutiny by national officials during his stay and no foreign journalist is allowed outside of Moscow. He arrives at the hotel in Moscow of New York Times bureau chief Walter Duranty. Duranty welcomes him and introduces him to his assistant Ada Brooks. Jones is expected to be in the USSR for seven days but he can only stay at the hotel for two days. Duranty offers Jones to stay and partake in the late-night partying. At the parties is all kinds of debauchery from prostitutes to heroin shooting to even homosexual advances. Jones wants none of this as he knows Paul Kleb was killed in Ukraine and has to find out why.
Jones finds a train headed to Eastern Ukraine. He breezes past security to stow away on it. When he arrives in Ukraine, he steps off to see the farmed grains loaded onto trucks by the Soviet army, but people dead in the snow and farmers starving. He tries to get answers. He goes to soldiers putting the bagged grain in a truck. He asks in English where it’s going, but is suspected as a spy. Soldiers go out chasing and shooting after him. Fortunately, Jones is able to evade the pursuit. He comes across some children who sing a haunting song to him of the death and starvation happening around him. He goes to a house which is in a photograph he holds, but sees the residents dead in their beds. Jones goes into a town where he sees the Soviet army take the dead bodies in the snow and pile them in a sled to be buried in a mass grave. They even take a baby that’s alive and still crying. Jones goes into a house where he is able to find living residents. They give him something to eat, which appears to be meat, and from Kolya. He soon learns they’re staying alive by cannibalism, and Kolya is a famine fatality.
Soon Jones is captured by Soviet forces. The Communist government commands him to be silent by using the lives of six British auto workers as hostages. Jones tries to plead with Walter Duranty to expose the truth of what’s happening, but Duranty is ‘in bed’ with the Soviet regime. Duranty has a habit of writing of the ‘Worker’s Revolution’ in the USSR like he romanticizing it. In fact Duranty has the reputation of being known as ‘Our Man In Moscow.’ Ada however is more supportive towards Jones and believes he has to get the story out. This can’t be hidden and knowing that Jones is to be sent back to the UK, she encourages him to make the truth known.
Back in the UK, Jones can’t get any British paper to buy into his revelations of a man-made famine. The government either doesn’t want to believe it, or fear it will jeopardize diplomatic relations with the USSR. This upsets Jones as he knows this must be stopped. The events upset him so much, he can’t stop himself from breaking down in tears in his hometown. However he has an opportunity to talk to William Randolph Hearst while at a newspaper office. Hearst, however is extremely busy and will only allow Jones thirty seconds to state his case. However when he mentions of the death of Paul Kleb, that grabs Hearst’s ear and makes Hearst want to hear everything Jones saw. Finally the story ‘Famine In Ukraine’ makes the front page of the New York Times. Jones is defamed. He is not allowed in the USSR again. Duranty is also defamed, but never had his Pulitzer Prize rescinded. Nevertheless George Orwell is caught in the intrigue of Jones’ pursuits and it inspires him to write ‘Animal Farm’ published ten years after Jones was shot to death.
I’ll admit any story about the Holodomor catches my interest. I’m of Ukrainian ancestry. My great-grandparents arrived in Canada around the 1890’s-early 1900’s. They came here long before World War I even started, before Ukrainian land was annexed as part of the USSR and before the Holodomor. This film showcases the Holodomor and is possibly one of the best cinematic depictions of it, but the Holodomor is not the biggest theme of the film. The biggest theme of the film is about censorship in the USSR at the time. All the censorship that happened in the film is an example of the censorship that happened in the USSR since it began after World War II until it broke down in the mid-80’s to when it dissolved in 1991. All news was censored. Nothing but good news was to be published in Soviet newspapers and whatever negative news could not hit either Soviet news nor news to the outside world. Phone wires were tapped and letters were opened and investigated by authorities before it reached the mailboxes of the citizens or outsiders. Even speaking negative words of the Communist government would get one a jail sentence. The Soviet media promoted propaganda to glorify itself and its Communist system and vilify the capitalist system in the United States.
As seen through Gareth, the Soviet system was also restrictive to outsiders. The system decided if a person from an outside country could visit, where they could go and stay and for how long. There were already six British autoworkers who were treated like hostages at the time and threatened with death to have the UK comply to their demands. You can understand just what Jones had to face in order to get the truth out.
Gareth had good reason to pursue the story. It’s not just trying to find out why Paul Kleb died, but Ukraine had personal interest to him as his mother taught English in Ukraine in the 1890’s. Gareth even had barriers in journalism to overcome once he had his story. He had top journalist Walter Duranty to deal with. Duranty had a big reputation at stake and kept insisting that the Holodomor isn’t happening. It isn’t until Jones meets with William Randolph Hearst that he finally gets a willing ear. The big feud between Duranty and Jones shows how even in what is supposed to be the ‘free world,’ there is still a lot of truths that are suppressed or even denied. Seeing all that goes on can make one wonder if this is happening today in what is supposed to be free countries. If we are really getting this freedom of speech or if we’re getting a lot of concocted stories.
This film is great in making a point about journalism and getting the truth out. There are a lot of truth even in today’s world that need to be exposed, but are covered up. The film does a good job in making a moment of past history, and the journalistic feuding surrounding it, make for a relevant message for today. Even the fact that Gareth was shot to death in 1935 while investigating a story in Chinese territory bordering Russia (which many consider to be a Soviet plot of revenge) reminds us of how many journalists risk their lives to uncover truths.
The film was very good at making its point. However the story didn’t seem to be heading on a straight path. There were times when moments that only deserved a certain time, like all the debauchery at Duranty’s hotel party, was slowed down and given more screen time than necessary. Even the moments of the journalistic feuding and political feuding appeared to take too long. The moments involving Jones witnessing the Holodomor in Ukraine were given the best screen time and the best on-screen depiction. It showed a lot of brutal honesty of the Holodomor, including that of cannibalism. It may have taken over less than half the screen-time, but it was done in excellent detail and gave the right haunting feel to this moment of tragedy.
Veteran director Agnieszka Holland teams up with emerging writer Andrea Chalupa to bring this story to the big screen. The story is one of great personal interest to Holland as she is well-knowledged of the Holodomor. Holland also has renown for her depictions of the Holocaust in some of her films. She does a very good job in directing the story, even if there are some moments of irrelevance or moments drawn out longer than they should be. James Norton does a good job in his portrayal of journalist Gareth Jones, but his part could have been developed more. Most of the parts didn’t have too much development and could have had more done with it. Nevertheless, Peter Saarsgard was able to make Walter Duranty hateable on the big screen. Vanessa Kirby was able to make her role of Ada gain more dimension over time.
Mr. Jones is about more than just about the Holodomor. It’s also about the topic of censorship that is just as relevant now with the ‘freedom of speech’ we’re led to believe we have in the ‘free world.’
One thing about the VIFF is that it will show films done by Canadian directors or people close to home. In fact the VIFF credits itself as the film festival that shows the most Canadian films: shorts and feature-length. One example this year of a feature-length Canadian film shown at the VIFF was Tales Of Two Who Dreamt which was a unique documentary.
The film begins with a man, Sandor Laska, telling a story of a boy who turned into bird after a dream. Over time, we the director is planning to make a small film of this story. Even a makeup artists is seen putting a beak on the son Alexander.
What we get is something else. We hear the story of the father and the Laska family. They are refugees living in a tall apartment in Toronto specifically for refugees. They are Romani people from Hungary. They seek refuge in Canada because they are of an oppressed minority and often face discrimination.
As they live in the apartment awaiting approval of their status in Canada, we learn there are many Romani families also seeking refuge. Often they meet together and party together. The children play soccer on the apartment’s field together often with refugee kids from other countries.
Time passes as the family continues to pursue both dreams: the dream of doing the film and the dream of immigrating to Canada. In the end, neither happen. Their immigration case wasn’t approved and they have to return back to Hungary where they really have nothing to return to. The film that was to be made couldn’t be done. The family were deported back before it could be completed.
This film is a good eye opener to the Romani people that seek refuge. They are a people who number in the tens of millions spread across various countries of Europe. They are people whose lifestyle are considered questionable. They are a people who value their cultural roots in music and dance often to the point they neglect working a real job. They live their lives their own way; many of which are illiterate.
The Romanis are seen by the other people in the country as lazy, irresponsible or even the ‘scum of the earth.’ They are often referred to as ‘Bohemians’ or ‘gypsies’: the latter of which they consider to be a slur. They’ve had their discrimination over the decades and centuries. They were even one of the groups of people executed during the holocaust. Discrimination against them still continues today in various European countries. Some countries like Italy have passed anti-Romani laws. Some countries like Hungary let discrimination go freely. You can easily see why a family like the Laskas would try to seek refuge in Canada.
Sometimes when you see the struggle of the Laskas and other Romanis in the apartment as they seek their residency status, you sometimes think this film is about the refugee situation as a whole. What you see the Romanis struggling with is often what you see most refugees struggling with. That tall apartment with nets on the outside put on after the death of a six year-old boy who fell off his 19th floor balcony tells a lot about the place where refugees wait to hear their fates in Canada. At the end, you get thinking that the Laskas didn’t succeed in escaping what they attempted to escape. Sandor talks about how the interpreter didn’t state his case right to the judge and that had to be why his residency status was revoked. Sometimes it makes you sense could the interpreter have an anti-Romani attitude? Did he misinterpret purposefully so that the Laska did fail and then get sent back to Hungary to return to their discrimination? It does get you thinking.
Directors Nicolas Pareda and Andrea Bussmann turn the film into a docudrama. There are times when the film gets ready to film the ‘birdboy’ story, times when they focus on another family who are to be part of the skit, times when they focus on the apartment building as a whole, and times when they focus on the Laskas and their reality. It’s a mix of various shots from family struggles to kids playing to young adults holding a party. The two directors try to piece together the many stories. There are times when scenes are shown with a score of a Romani song sung a capella. There are even times when they include Timea’s scratchy violin-playing as score to a scene in the film. Sometimes it hits, sometimes it misses. There are times when the mixed organization appears to work and then there are times when the film feels disjointed. I think the film aimed to be creative in its documentation during times when it wasn’t supposed to be.
Despite the film’s noticeable imperfections, I would have to say the best thing about this film is that it gave a voice to a people. This was a chance for Romani refugees to tell their story of what they faced and why they came to Canada along with the hopes for their children. The adding in of the ‘birdboy’ story adds color to the film as it is a Romani tale. You can see why the film is called Tales Of Two Who Dreamt. The first dreamer was the ‘birdboy’ and the second dreamer was Sandor Laska. I’ll admit I was disappointed at the end to learn the ‘birdboy’ film was never finished. But it’s something that just happens and you saw why.
Tales Of Two Who Dreamt is a documentary that’s noticeably disjointed in a lot of areas. It is still very valuable as it gives an image of the refugee situation Canada is trying to deal with.