history

The Singing Revolution
Editor’s Note: I have to make par­tic­ular men­tion of the film’s excel­lent and com­pre­hensive web site. The dir­ectors have done a great job using the web to gen­erate interest and obtain screening dates in cities across North America. As a result of audi­ence interest expressed on the web site, the film will open in Toronto on April 25th and play until May 1st (with a pos­sible exten­sion depending on ticket sales) at the Carlton Cinema. Check the link the week before for showtimes.

The Singing Revolution (2006, Directors: James Tusty and Maureen Castle Tusty): My wife and I are big fans of small coun­tries. We will visit Iceland this fall and have taken hol­i­days in Cuba, Slovenia and Uruguay in the past few years. There’s some­thing inspiring about the indom­it­ab­ility of small nations, espe­cially if they’ve been force­fully occu­pied or dom­in­ated by other coun­tries. Estonia cer­tainly fits the bill, and my dream trip is to one day spend a week each in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. James Tusty and Maureen Castle Tusty are a hus­band and wife team who have doc­u­mented the unique struggle of Estonia to emerge from the Soviet Union as an inde­pendent nation, and they’ve cre­ated a won­derful film.

For most of its his­tory, Estonia has been dom­in­ated by much larger coun­tries, and the 20th cen­tury was par­tic­u­larly cruel. This country of just over a mil­lion gained its inde­pend­ence in 1920 only to be invaded by the Soviet Union in 1939. As World War II raged, Hitler’s armies occu­pied Estonia as part of their inva­sion of the Soviet Union, and so there was another for­eign occu­pier. By 1944, though, the Nazis had been expelled by the resur­gent Red Army and for the better part of the next half-century, Estonia was occu­pied by Soviet troops and for­cibly integ­rated into the USSR. But Estonia also had a very strong cul­tural tra­di­tion of folk singing, and des­pite its small size, pos­sesses one of the largest col­lec­tions of folk songs in the world. Every five years since 1869, a huge folk singing fest­ival called Laulupidu was held in the uni­ver­sity town of Tartu. At these events, huge choirs of 25,000–30,000 would sing on stage at the same time, expressing their unity and pride in their national iden­tity. During the Soviet occu­pa­tion, these fest­ivals were prac­tic­ally the only allowed outlet for Estonian cul­ture, des­pite being, for the most part co-opted to pro­mote Communist ideas. At the end of the offi­cial pro­gram (Communist songs sung in Russian), the choirs were allowed to sing three or four songs in Estonian. At the 1947 fest­ival, Estonian com­poser Gustav Ernasaks presented a new song he’d written based on a century-old Estonian poem. “Mu isamaa on minu arm” (“Land of My Fathers, Land That I Love”) became the unof­fi­cial Estonian national anthem and was sung lustily by the crowds at each fest­ival. In 1969, at the centen­nial of the fest­ival, the Soviet author­ities banned it, but the crowds spon­tan­eously took it up and sang it sev­eral times. It’s clear how much singing and this fest­ival meant to the Estonian national identity.

When Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in 1985 with his policies of “glas­nost” and “peres­troika”, the Estonians saw their chance to reclaim their cul­ture and their inde­pend­ence. Political dis­sid­ents used music to inspire protest, and by 1991, Estonia had declared inde­pend­ence. Unlike its Baltic neigh­bours Latvia and Lithuania, there was no viol­ence des­pite the threat of Soviet retali­ation. The Estonian char­acter values patience. As nar­rator Linda Hunt expresses it, “patience is a weapon, cau­tion, a virtue.” Because of their small size, the Estonian res­ist­ance knew it could never tri­umph by force, and so they care­fully nav­ig­ated a very del­icate pro­cess and achieved a prac­tic­ally blood­less vic­tory. The film does a good job of doc­u­menting these amazing and tension-filled days.

Today, Estonia is a thriving demo­cracy, a member of NATO and the European Union. The music fest­ival con­tinues, and for those who were involved in this still-fresh revolu­tion, it is a place to share their memories with their chil­dren. And of course to sing “Mu isamaa on minu arm”, loudly and without fear.

If I have one small cri­ti­cism of the film, it would be its micro­scopic focus on Estonia to the exclu­sion of the other Baltic Republics. There are a few tan­tal­izing men­tions of events going on in Latvia and Lithuania (in par­tic­ular, a protest where cit­izens of all three coun­tries joined hands and cre­ated a 600km long human chain to protest the Soviet occu­pa­tion), but it would have been enlight­ening to see in more detail how these three small coun­tries worked together to take on the entire Soviet Union. Three dis­tinct cul­tures, yes, but also three neces­sary allies. Perhaps that story will have to wait for my own trip.

Official Site
Trailer

8/10(8/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

All The President’s Men

by James McNally on September 18, 2007

in DVD

All The President's Men

All The President’s Men (Director: Alan J. Pakula): I was seven years old when the Watergate scandal broke in 1972, and I learned about it mostly from reading Mad magazine, believe it or not. Still, 35 years later, I’m not exactly sure exactly what happened, and I ser­i­ously believe that nobody under 50 even cares. But what Watergate showed us is that the abuse of power in a demo­cracy is not new, but that stupid and evil people some­times don’t get away with their crimes. That is, if the media is doing its job.

All The President’s Men was ori­gin­ally a book pub­lished by the two men respons­ible for breaking the story, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, both reporters for the Washington Post at the time of the scandal. Pakula’s film teamed up two of the era’s hot­test actors, Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford, and attempted to dram­atize the story of per­haps the biggest polit­ical scandal of the 20th cen­tury. But though the film scooped four Oscars (including an adapted screen­play Oscar for writer William Goldman), I don’t think it’s aged well.

Audiences approaching the film today with little back­ground know­ledge will come away baffled, since the story moves along at break­neck pace, with names being tossed out with no con­text. The film­makers may have assumed that in 1976, people would still be familiar with the story, since it occu­pied the news­pa­pers for months on end. But without that back­ground, it can seem pretty opaque. As well, we learn next to nothing about any of the char­ac­ters, most not­ably our intrepid journ­al­ists. Worst of all, des­pite a run­ning time well over two hours, the con­clu­sion of the film is remark­ably weak. A final road­b­lock seems to be wrapped up hastily and the ending dis­ap­points with nothing but a tele­type machine informing us of sev­eral indict­ments. There’s not even any archival footage of Nixon talking about the scandal, nor of his resignation.

Mad Magazine, December 1974

Despite its obvious weak­nesses, I still feel this is an important film, because it inspires the belief that journalism’s func­tion is to empower demo­cracy by speaking the truth to power. It’s out­rageous that increasing cor­porate own­er­ship and con­sol­id­a­tion of the media land­scape has left our demo­cracy weaker and less account­able. My only wish would be for someone to make a strong doc­u­mentary about Watergate to edu­cate a younger gen­er­a­tion. Maybe they could even recycle some of Mad’s satir­ical Watergate songs.

7/10(7/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Miss Universe 1929 – Lisl Goldarbeiter. A Queen in Wien

Miss Universe 1929 – Lisl Goldarbeiter. A Queen in Wien (Director: Péter Forgács, Austria/Netherlands/Hungary, 2006): The title isn’t the only thing unwieldy about this film. Based on the old photos and films of Maritz (Marci) Tanzer, the film attempts to trace Marci’s love for his cousin Lisl Goldarbeiter, “the most beau­tiful woman who ever lived,” and Austria’s first Miss Universe. The action takes place over the course of their life­times, encom­passing war and peace, Naziism and Communism, Austria and Hungary. There is a won­derful story in here, but I con­stantly found the way the film was con­structed mad­dening and annoying. Film clips appear out of sequence, are repeated, and are pur­posely cropped or panned in such a way as to draw atten­tion to the dir­ector. In addi­tion, the grating soundtrack kept pulling me out of the story rather than drawing me in. The decision to nar­rate the film in English was ill-advised, also, since some of the nar­ra­tion isn’t trans­lated cor­rectly. For example, I highly doubt that Marci Tanzer was “cap­tiv­ated as a pris­oner of war” by the Russian army.

Lisl was indeed a very beau­tiful woman, and Marci’s ded­ic­a­tion to her is touching. There is value in Marci’s old films as a social his­tory, and there is a good love story here. I just felt it wasn’t well-told.

5/10(5/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

They Chose China

They Chose China (Canada, 2005, Director: Shui-Bo Wang, 52 minutes): An utterly com­pel­ling look at a for­gotten group of US pris­oners of war who refused to be repat­ri­ated to the United States after the Korean War. At the time, these 20-odd sol­diers were branded “turn­coats and traitors” by red-baiting Senator Joseph McCarthy. In archival films, we see them making state­ments against Senator McCarthy and the cur­rent polit­ical cli­mate in America, and although many of these archival films seem to have been cre­ated for pro­pa­ganda reasons by the Chinese, the men claim that they were never mis­treated in the prisoner-of-war camps. In fact, we see them organ­izing games and sports, even an “Inter-Camp Olympics”! Of course, having these men stay in China was a huge pro­pa­ganda coup and they were quickly sent for “edu­ca­tion” on the his­tory of socialism and the Chinese Communist Party. Despite that, some stayed and even mar­ried in China. Gradually, most of the men returned to the United States, where they faced courts mar­tial and scorn from the media and public.

It was a strange and almost for­gotten episode in the Cold War and there is still a lot of ambi­guity about what really motiv­ated the men to stay. At the time, the American media spec­u­lated that they had been brain­washed (like in The Manchurian Candidate), but it didn’t appear that simple. It was just as clear that when the men returned home, the media used them in its own sort of pro­pa­ganda war. One man’s inter­view with Mike Wallace was painful to watch, as Wallace con­tinued to use the term “turn­coat and traitor” over and over again. They were very dif­ferent times.

The director’s voice over, in Chinese-accented English, was some­times a little dif­fi­cult to follow, but he did make clear that he con­sidered these men heroes for trying to build bridges between enemies, and I’d tend to agree with that sen­ti­ment, even with so many ques­tions left unanswered.

More inform­a­tion on the film from the National Film Board of Canada

8/10(8/10)

EYE Weekly: *** (out of 5) (review)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Hearts and Minds

Hearts and Minds (Director: Peter Davis, US, 1974): A powerful doc­u­mentary about American involve­ment in the Vietnam war. Perhaps the reason it packs such a punch is that it was filmed before the war was actu­ally over, and it argued pas­sion­ately that America’s involve­ment was wrong. For that reason, at the time of its release it was quite con­tro­ver­sial. Now, almost thirty years later, his­tory has caught up with Peter Davis’ film, and its argu­ments seem almost self-evident. That is, unless you look at the cur­rent American involve­ment in Afghanistan and Iraq. Personally, I couldn’t stop thinking about those coun­tries while watching the film. When the inter­viewer asks a former bomber pilot whether America or Americans have learned any­thing from their exper­i­ence in Vietnam, he laments, “I think we’re trying hard not to.” Sadly, I think his­tory has proven him right.

One of the most com­pel­ling sub­jects of the film is Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the 7,000-page Pentagon Papers to the media in 1971. This doc­u­ment was a report, com­mis­sioned by the US Army and clas­si­fied as top secret, of American decision-making in Vietnam from 1945–1968. Ellsberg was pro­sec­uted for his actions, but the case was dis­missed on grounds of gov­ern­ment mis­con­duct against him. His recently pub­lished memoir Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers looks like a fas­cin­ating read.

10/10(10/10)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }