Leela Naidu: The Person Behind the Image

I think that it was 1966-67 when Doordarshan had shown Bimal Roy’s 1960 movie “Anuradha” and I had fallen in love with Leela Naidu. In the film, she had played the title role of Anuradha, a famous singer and dancer, who follows the man she loves, an idealistic doctor played by Balraj Sahni, to the village where he lives and works. In the process, she has to sacrifice her passion for music and singing. From that movie, the favourite image I have is near the end, when she sings the haunting “Hai re wo din kyon na aayen”.

I think that the idealistic doctor played by Balraj Sahni in this film was one of the reasons that had given me the idea of studying medicine. No wonder the film has been a personal favourite and I have watched it many times.

After “Anuradha”, I had not seen any other film by Leela Naidu for almost four decades. Only a few years ago, I had seen her looking older but still good-looking, in Shyam Benegal’s 1985 film “Trikal”. I had also been sad when I had heard about her death in 2009, at the age of 69.

A couple of months ago when I had come across her autobiography, “Leela – a patchwork life” (Penguin India, 2010), written with Jerry Pinto, I was very tempted to read it and at the same time, I was not very sure that it would be a wise thing.

Through experience I have learned that favourite film persons are better seen through the sepia tinted glasses of nostalgia. Knowing them as persons ruins their magic. However, in the end I had not resisted. The book has definitely changed my perception about Leela Naidu, the person behind the image.

Leela’s early life and upbringing

She was born in France in 1940, during the second world war. Her father was a well-known Indian physicist (Dr Ramaiah Naidu), while her mother was a French musician. Through my own experiences of living in Europe and my mixed Indian-Italian family, I could relate easily to her descriptions of growing up in France and Switzerland, and experiencing the casual discrimination and racism as a mixed race child.

While reading about her childhood in Europe, I found echoes of her life in a place that I had also visited and a person that I had known.

It was not such a big coincidence to find that a celebrity has been to a small little-known place, to which I have also been. The place was Divonne les Bains, a tiny town in France close to the Swiss border. In the book, she tells that once she had accompanied her mother to Divonne for a piano concert.

While reading this part, I had remembered my stays in Divonne with a friend and my walks around the place where they organise concerts in the summer. It was like having a direct connection with her, I could imagine her visiting the place with her mom sixty years ago.

Another coincidence was to find in her book, Abbe Pierre, the founder of Emmaus movement aimed at promoting missionaries for helping poor and destitute persons. Abbe Pierre's figure was a bit similar to that of Mother Teresa. Around twenty years ago, as a part of my humanitarian work with an Italian organisation, I had also met him.

In Leela’s biography, Abbe Pierre appears as a religious teacher in her school in Geneva. He does not make a very flattering figure in it:

I remember the conversation I had with Abbe Pierre, the religious preceptor at the Catholic school in Geneva to which I was sent. “In India” he told the class once, “they revere crocodiles and venerate fish. Their gods are wood and stone.”
If ever there was a misreading of the inclusive tradition of Hinduism, if ever there was a more narrow minded reading of the representation of the Ganga as crocodile and Matasya avatar of Vishnu, I have yet to hear it.
I was young but I was ready to stand my ground against such notions. “But Monsieur l’Abbe”, I said, “The statue of the Virgin Mary in the Chapel is also made of wood.”
He sputtered his contempt of this remark. Of course his statue was only a representation and a mnemonic, a reminder of the beloved Mother Mary. It was not an idol, it was a way of focusing attention on the Divine. I believe that even as he said it, he knew he was a digging a hole for himself, so he changed the subject.

From my own meeting with Abbe Pierre (1912 – 2007) in the early 1990s, I have more pleasant memories as we had briefly talked about Mahatma Gandhi and his work with leprosy affected persons.

However, it is not uncommon to find narrow views among Europeans about Hinduism, focusing on some specific aspects and unable to understand it because it is so different from their religious views, so I could visualise the discussions between a young Leela Naidu and a much younger Abbe Pierre in the 1950s.

Leela Naidu’s life experiences

Many famous persons, from Mahatma Gandhi to Indira Gandhi to Ingrid Bergman, Jean Renoir and different directors and actors of Indian cinema, appear in the book.

As you can guess from the part about Abbe Pierre above, Leela Naidu does not mince words or hide behind banalities to express her opinions about the people. In the book, often she has scathing views about these persons and she shares them without censoring herself. The only parts of her life she does not touch in the book are those related to her first marriage to Mr Tikki Oberoi, her divorce and her battle for the custody of her twin daughters.

Even those of you looking for tit bits about her marriage and divorce to Dom Moraes would be disappointed – she talks about him a bit, but does not go into any details.

About the different famous personas of the cinema world with whom she had worked including Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Satyajit Ray, Shyam Benegal, R. K. Nayyar, Sunil Dutt and Balraj Sahni, she remains a bit critical, calling the ways of working of Indian cinema industry as superficial, with need for constant improvisation due to lack of planning. There are no traces of the usual fawning and divification about these persons that usually appears in books and articles.

For example, her comments about Balraj Sahni during the making of “Anuradha”, shook the gentle nice-guy image I had about him:

Sahni was a perfect gentleman. But like many other perfect gentlemen, he was not above trying his luck. One day he dropped me home from the studios.
“I think of you all the time”, he said.
“That’s kind of you”, I said.
“You are in my head”, he said.
“And how is your dear wife?” I asked. I have found that this question generally manages to quench the libido of the perfect gentlemen.

She has few words of praise for any person in her book. However, she reserves her most caustic comments for the writer-activist Arundhati Roy, with whom she had worked in the film “Electric Moon”. The film was directed by Pradeep Kishen (ex-husband of Ms Roy), while Ms Roy was looking after the production.

I must say I admire the way that Arundhati Roy has turned her status as celebrity writer into a catalyst for causes she cares about, but there was very little of that caring Ms Roy on the sets of Electric Moon …

... and so when I watch her pleading for the disenfranchised and the marginalised, I think back to the ruthless Ms Roy on the sun drenched plateau in Madhya Pradesh and I wonder whether it is easier for us to sympathise with anonymous masses than with the actual people we are confronted with in the real life.

If you like reading nasty stories about the well-known people, which they hide behind their public personas, you will like Leela Naidu’s autobiography.

Conclusions

I think that Ms Naidu had a difficult life even if she was considered as one of the ten most beautiful women of the world by the American magazine Forbes in the 1960s.

Her first marriage in the rich Oberoi family, her divorce, her challenges in being close to her daughters, were difficulties in her personal life. In her working life as well, she laments that did not get her due from Hindi cinema.

I don’t know if it was these difficulties that made her bitter or if it was her character of being an outspoken and direct person that led to some of those problems.

The book is a good read. I could find a lot of resonance of my own life in the parts of the book regarding her work for the U. N. organisations, her travels across different countries, her work with disabled children and her interest in documentary films.

At the same time, I felt a little sad for her that she had so few good things to tell about the people. Most of her stories are about negative experiences. I am sure that people including celebrities are not saints, but I can’t believe that almost everyone we meet has only negative things.

Often, the stories show that the lives of beautiful women are not always very happy - she seemed to fit in with that stereotype.

***

Children & Nationalism - Two Films

Recently I saw the Ukrainian film "The Guide" (Povodyr, 2014) by director Oles Sanin. It was this year's Ukrainian entry for the Oscars in the "Best foreign film" category. This film reminded me of another older film - "Ivan's Childhood" (Ivanovo Detstvo, 1962) by Russian director Ivan Tarkovsky.

Both the films revolve around a child in hostile surroundings, running to save his life. And both the films are about nationalism - "The Guide" is about Ukrainian nationalism and "Ivan's Childhood" is about Russian nationalism. This post looks at both these films.

The Guide (Povodyr)

"The Guide" is set in Ukraine in the 1920s, the period when the Soviet Union had just replaced the Russian empire. The process of creating the Soviet Union was initiated by Lenin following the Russian revolution in February 1917 and was consolidated by Stalin, following the death of Lenin in 1922.

The film follows the travails of an American boy called Peter Shamrock (Anton S. Greene) as he runs away from a Russian agent Vladimir (Oleksandr Kobzar) across Ukraine. In his bag, Peter has some documents detailing Soviet plans of unleashing repression in Ukraine. The papers were hidden there by Peter's father before being killed by the Russian agents working for Vladimir.

During his journey across Ukraine, Peter meets Ivan Kocherga (Stanislav Boklan), a blind Bondura (a music instrument) player. Ivan hides Peter as his nephew, using him as his guide. They are chased by Vladimir but every time, manage to elude the Russian agent. Ivan has his own reasons to hate the Russians - he was an Ukrainian resistance leader and was blinded and left for dead by Vladimir.

Vladimir uses torture and killings in trying to reach Peter. He kills Orysia, Ivan's companion and lover. Finally he also manages to catch Ivan. However, Peter still eludes him. Filled with rage, Vladimir decides to kill Ivan together with all the group of blind singers. Peter follows them and tries to liberate Ivan. Exploding bombs kill Ivan and Vladimir. Peter finally manages to pass the documents about the Ukrainian repression plans to a British journalist and goes back to America.

Ivan's Childhood (Ivanovo Detstvo, 1962)

"Ivan's Childhood" follows the journey of a boy called Ivan (Nikolai Burlyayev), through the eastern front of Germany during the second world war, running away from the German soldiers. Most of the film is about Ivan's journey in a war torn landscape. He is picked up by the Russian soldiers. Ivan has lost his family to the Germans and is seeking revenge by becoming a Russian spy.

Russian army admires Ivan's courage and would like to send him to school, away from the horrors of the war. However, Ivan still thinks only about his revenge from the Germans and goes back behind the enemy lines in his espionage mission. End credits tell that Ivan was discovered and killed by the Germans..

The Two Films

There are some obvious similarities in the themes of the two films - both are about a child running in a hostile territory to save his life. Both films are also characterized by wonderful actors.

In "Ivan's Childhood", the boy is alone in his journey. This film in black and white had marvellous photography, each scene was like a painting in chiaro-scuro with stark symbols of war and destruction in the background. At the same time, the film was almost like a documentary in its austerity, both in its emotions as well as in treatment.

In "The Guide", the boy has a companion, a blind singer. The film is in colour though the colours are muted. This film is also very well photographed. However, it is more melodramatic and emotional. Visually the film creates specific ambiances of 1920s Ukraine - like the rich world of music and artists in a city and the poor world of blind singers-beggars in the countryside. The film is riveting because of the thrill of the chase and escape - the evil Vladimir is never too far behind but Peter always manages to slip through his grip.

The basic ideology of both the films is nationalism - In "Ivan's Childhood", Russians are the good guys, so they are kind, generous and gentle, while the Germans are the bad guys, so they are depicted in all black with nothing to redeem them. In "The Guide", Ukrainians are the good guys while the Russians are the bad guys.

By posing the might of a powerful regime against the struggles of a small child, both films accentuate the good guys versus bad guys binaries.

Russia is another common factor between the two films - in one film Russians are the good guys; in the other, they are the bad guys.

"Ivan's Childhood" had a sub-plot about a young Russian soldier's love for a nurse and exploitation of that nurse by a Russian captain. "The Guide" has many sub-plots - Ukrainian musician Olha and her love for Michael, Peter's father, Vladimir's love for Olha, blind singer Ivan's love for Orysia, Peter's relationship with street children.

Both the films can be seen as propaganda films - aiming to show the cruelty of their enemies/oppressors and the nobility of their own struggles. "Ivan's Childhood" is much more linear and blatant about it, while "The Guide" is cinematically more refined with flashbacks and a thriller-like crescendo of action that culminates in big bomb explosions. Both evoke nationalistic feelings.

Both the films are worth seeing.

***

Bedouins of Negev

Linda Paganelli is a visual anthropologist and a film maker from the seaside town of Rimini (Italy). Since 2011, together with photographer Silvia Boarini and lately SMK video factory, Linda has been involved in the making of a documentary film about a group of Bedouins in the Negev desert in Israel. This post presents an interview with Linda about this film.

***

Sunil: Linda, tell me about this film you are making.

Linda: It's title is "Unrecognized in the Negev" and it is about a group of Bedouins from the village of Al Araqib. There are 38 Bedouin villages in the Negev desert in south of Israel, that are not recognized by the Israeli government. Thus, they are facing demolitions and do not have access to basic services like drinking water, electricity, and health care. The government calls them "invaders" though their villages go back to before the time of the Ottoman Empire.

Sunil: Your film is about one village. How many persons live there?

Linda: The first big demolition of that village was in 2010 when 35 families, about 250-300 persons, lived there. Since then there have been 67 more demolitions and now there are only 4 families left (20 people), though their homes have been bulldozed. So now they have been authorized to live only in the graveyard.

They had become sedentary by the turn of the 20th century, while before they were semi-nomads. This meant that for certain periods of the year, they went away to find pastures for their animals but for the rest of the year, they lived in their ancestral villages. They have roots in those villages and they do not change them.

Sunil: That sounds like some of the semi-nomad groups that I had known in Mongolia. Are the Bedouins culturally different from the Palestinians?

Linda: The Bedouins are a Palestinian-Muslim minority in Israel, half of them are completely urbanized and the other half are living in unrecognized villages trying to keep their lifestyle and fighting against the state coercion. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are under occupation, while Bedouins in the unrecognized villages are under demolition orders, as they do not fit in the State's ideal model of life and their villages are being designed for other purposes - in the case of Al Araqib, for making a forest.

Sunil: I knew about the Israel and Palestine issues but I did not know that there were problems between Israel and the Bedouins. How are Bedouin issues different from the Palestine issues?

Linda: In the war of 1948 when Israel annexed this area, most Bedouins escaped to other Arab countries or to West Bank or Gaza. Only about 11,000 Bedouins were left here and they became Israeli citizens. They have I.D. cards that recognize them as Israeli, however, they are not considered equal to other Israeli citizens.

Sunil: How did you decide to make a film on this issue?

Linda: In summer 2011, I met a photographer, Silvia Boarini, in Ramallah (West Bank, Palestine), who had been visiting the Bedouin villages since 2008. We did some work together and she asked me to accompany her to Negev to visit this village.

We went back there many times and gradually we could build the trust between us and the villagers, by staying with them and listening to their problems. This film came from this experience. It has been very rich and humane experience.

They wish to share their story with the rest of the world and make people aware about what is happening in the Negev right now. That’s why this is a story that really matters, we hope to enrich and inform many people through this documentary.

Now the filming is done and the post-production work is being carried out by SMK Video-Factory in Bologna.

Sunil: Thanks Linda for sharing about your film, best of luck for its success.

***
Note: You can watch a small clip from the Bedouin village in the Negev on Vimeo. Linda and Silvia are also looking for support to complete the film - you can also contribute through Indiegogo.

***

International Festival of Trans Films (2)

Here are some more reviews of the films shown in the International Festival of Films on Transsexual themes "Divergenti 2014" that concluded in Bologna (Italy) on Sunday 25 May.

The jury awards went to: Do alegria do mar e de outras cosas, Brazil (best short film), Fuoristrada, Italy (best documentary) and 52 Tuesdays, Australia (best feature film). In addition, Jotain Silta Valilta (Something in between), a documentary film from Finland received a special mention.

SOMETHING IN BETWEEN (FINLAND, 2013)

The original title of this documentary (45 minutes) by director Riikka Kaihovaara is "Jotain silta Valilta". It tells the story of 27 year old Nino, who is transitioning from a woman to a man. The film is a video-diary of 2-3 year period of this transitioning.

Nino has mothered a child but he shrugs off the "motherly feelings" that he is supposed to have towards his child. Nino is also not sure if he wishes to be a man and how much of his female part, he is willing to cancel. His ideas are uncertain and change many times during this period.

He starts with hormone injections and binds his chest. As his male persona becomes more secure, he decides to get the breast operation, but has some complication during the operation and needs to be re-operated. Even after the second operation, part of his chest looks strange and his desire to stand in the park with his chest open, does not give him the pleasure he was hoping for. In the end, he gets operated once again to improve the appearance of his nipples and this time, the operation goes well.

He finally goes through a formal change of gender and there is a party to celebrate it. However, even then he is not sure that he really wants to be a man. He would prefer to be somewhere in between, not to be forced in to a specific gender.

Often films on transgender themes have good looking persons who have clear ideas and desires. However, the good thing about this film is that Nino comes across as a normal guy with normal confusions - he does not have clear ideas about his gender identity or the path he wishes to follow, and sometimes he changes his mind.

During the film, Nino changes his looks different times, trying different variations of punk with a lot of pins in his nose, ears, cheek, gums, etc. and with shaved head or with a colourful braid. It is an appearance that draws attention. Perhaps, it is a symbolic way of underlining his inability to be "normal".

I also thought that all those pins were a kind of self-punishment for not being "normal" (however, my wife disagreed with this idea).

I am happy that the film got special mention from the festival jury since it is a honest and difficult look at what does it mean to go through the change in gender identities.

OPEN UP TO ME (FINLAND, 2013)

The original title of this feature film (95 min.) by director Simo Halinen is "Kerron Sinulle Kaiken". The film is about two persons - a transgender woman Mauri/Maarit (Leea Klemola) and a school football coach Sami (Peter Franzén).

Maarit has recently completed her transition from male to female, left her old town, family and the job to start a new life in a bigger town, where she is forced to work as a cleaning woman because of lack of opportunities. Her ex-wife is angry with her and does not want her to have any contacts with their teenage daughter Pinja (Emmi Nivala).

Maarit's therapist advises her to be more proactive and to fight for her rights. "Talk to your daughter, get into a relationship", she tells Maarit. A coincidence brings Maarit in contact with Sami and then with his wife Julia (Ria Kataja). Sami and Julia are having problems in their marriage. Maarit is attracted towards sami who reciprocates her feelings. An affair starts. The film follows the consequences of this affair.

Around the story of Maarit, Sami and Julia, are other parallel and intersecting stories - suspicions of the police about the role of Maarit in the suicide of a school friend of Pinja, the sexual confusion of Sami's student Teo (Alex Anton), Maarit's attempts to find a job and her encounters with prostitution.

Usually films about alternate sexuality from Scandinavia present a perfect society where people are respectful of individuals' right to privacy and self-determination of their life choices, and where the institutions are supportive and non-discriminatory. However, "Open up to me" shows that in some areas of life, prejudices and discrimination continue to be strong even in the Scandinavian society. For example, the police automatically treats Maarit as a criminal and a pedophile because she is a transgender person and questions her role as a school counsellor. In another scene, classmates of Pinja make snide remarks about her father's decision to be a woman.

It is a film with a happy ending, though not in the way you may expect when it starts. It has a wonderful lead actress in the form of Leea Klemola, who is very expressive. Among the other actors, I also liked Ria Kataja as Julia. On the other hand, Peter Franzén as Sami is not always convincing. The film is also photographed very well.

You can watch a trailer of this film on Youtube.

About Happiness, About the Sea & About Other Things (Brazil, 2012)

The original title of this Brazilian short film (13 minutes) directed by Ceci Alves is "Do alegria, do mar e de outras coisas".

The film is about a real-life incident that occurred in Salvador (Bahia, Brazil) in 1998 when guys from the military police kidnapped two transgender women Joice and Luana, beat them and then forced them into the sea. Luana died in that incident. Joice testified against the culprits and was put under the witness protection programme.

The film revolves around the song "Mudança" (Change) and talks about Nem Glamour and Joy (instead of Joice and Luana). The film shows Nem (Rodolfo Lima) preparing for her last show in an empty hall, before leaving for the witness protection programme. As she comes out, she remembers that night and her last memories of her friend.

The brief but brutal scenes of violence in the film and evocative words of the song, become a symbol of the violence and human rights violations that often accompany the lives of transgender persons in different parts of the world. The film received the award for best short film in the festival.

The song "Mudanças" by Brazilian singer Vanusa is very beautiful - it talks of a woman's decision to change, to empty the drawers of her memories, to clear the cobwebs of her life, to overcome fear, and to become an adult woman. The words of the song (in Portuguese) are available and you can hear this song on Youtube.

While watching the film, I could feel an immediate connect with the film remembering my long walks on the beach in Salvador de Bahia, where the episode shown in the film had taken place.

She is my husband (Italy, 2013)

The 50 min. long documentary film by Anna Maria Gallone and Gloria Aura Bortolini is about a lawyer, Alessandro Gracis, from a small town in north Italy and his journey for becoming a woman. The original title of the film is "Lei è mio marito".

Alessandro was 12 years old when he first dressed in female clothes. He grew up to be a reputed lawyer, keeping his cross-dressing hidden. He had different relationships with women, but was never married. Then in 2005, when he was 50 years old, he dressed as a woman in the carnival. The compliments he received for being such a good looking woman, reinforced his desire for cross-dressing. At that time he was in relationship with Roberta.

A break-up with Roberta, who went for another relationship, coincided with slow and gradual affirmation of Alessandro's identity as a cross-dresser. Few years later, Roberta came back to his life. Together with Roberta he began a gradual journey from being a cross-dresser to be a transgender woman - through hormone treatment, a breast implant and finally a vaginoplasty (by a surgeon who is herself a transgender person).

In 2009, Alessandra came out as a transgender person in a national conference of the lawyers' association and to her clients, slowly overcoming the prejudices of her family and colleagues. However, legally she did not ask to recognized as a woman and thus in 2012, she was able to marry her companion, Roberta.

The film provides another glimpse into the diversity of transgender issues. Like Nino in "Something in between", Alessandra was also not very sure that she wanted to be a woman and her journey to the genital operation came after a lot of self-doubts and questions. She did not feel attracted towards men but was in love with Roberta (though her relationship shown in the film seems more about non-sexual love and companionship).

Many of the persons in the film remark that Alessandra is very masculine in her likes, attitudes and behaviour - for example, the way she is careless about clothes and accessories of other woman, and her enthusiasm for football. This again goes against the stereotype images prevalent about MtF women.

Galloni, one of the film-directors, explained that Alessandra has to deal with a lot of prejudice but they decided to not to show it in the film. For example, her three sisters have not accepted this change. In the film, one of her sisters' says, "I can't understand it. If he had been gay it would have been easier to understand."

You can watch a trailer of this film on Youtube.

Bruno and Earlene Go To Vegas (USA, 2013)

This 96 min. feature is the first film of British director Simon Savory. It is a road movie full of quirky characters, most of whom also have some kind of sexual issues.

The main characters of the film are Earlene (Ashleigh Sumner) and Bruno (Miles Szanto) who meet one evening in Venice Beach and get drunk and sleep together, without having sex with each other. Together, they start on a journey towards Los Angels in a stolen car. On the way, to escape the police, they meet up with a blond-nice-but-stupid hunk called Billy (Barrett Crake).

In the desert, they reach an isolated ghost town with some strange characters including a couple of ex-stripper guys and an ageing black drag queen who is also a tap dancer. The travellers face a crisis and they must deal with secrets from their past.

It is a beautifully shot film with good editing and music. The quirky characters make it an enjoyable watch.

The film could have been much better with a tighter script. The film is enjoyable, but the script is full of holes.

For example, the relationship between Earlene and Bruno is never clarified and you can't understand what binds them together. Just because an older woman has slept for a night in the same bed with a young guy with unclear sexuality (Bruno is shown as an inter-sexual person), she would follow him next day in a car and then force her way in the office of some secret research organisation to save him from sexual exploitation, seems kind of juvenile and unbelievable.

Another example of not too well thought out script is the issue of money - in some scenes they are shown without any money, but in the next scene, they don't seem to have any problem in buying gas for the car and sleeping in the motels on the way.

The casting of the film is good and most of the performances, starting from that of Sumner, are great. So if you are not too picky about things like the logic of the story and you like quirky characters, you will enjoy this film.

Conclusions

On the whole, the 2014 festival of films on transsexual themes was a great experience - I enjoyed almost all the films. When you are watching one film after another, it is easy to get bored or end up with a headache. However, in none of the films I felt bored.

Compared to 2013, when the different transsexual issues were a novelty for me, this year, I knew the kind of things I could have expected from the festival. Still there were new things to understand and learn.

Human beings are incredibly diverse. We use words like hetreo, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersexual, to talk about sexuality but these are just words - these do not define the incredible variety of life paths and life choices of individuals. It is important not to pigeon-hole people just on the basis of categories but rather we should celebrate the richness of human diversity.

You can also read my two other posts related to the Divergenti 2014 film festival - (1) Divergenti symposium and (2) first part of reviews of films from the festival.

***

International Festival of Trans Films (1)

The annual festival of films on transsexual themes is back in Bologna (Italy) for its 7th edition. I had discovered this festival only last year (2013) and found it to be a wonderful opportunity to challenge some of my prejudices and deeply held ideas about sexuality. This post presents some of the short and long films that I have seen so far in the festival.

Divergenti 2014 Film Festival

The festival of films on transsexual themes is organized by the Italian Movement of Transsexual (MIT) persons based in Bologna (Italy).

I missed the films on the first day of the festival, as that day I was travelling back from Geneva and was too tired to go out. I also missed some films on the second day of the festival, as I had preferred to attend a symposium organized by the festival. Finally, yesterday, the third day of the festival, I could dedicate it to watching films.

Here are some comments on the films I have seen in the festival.

52 Tuesdays (Australia, 2014)

"52 Tuesdays" is a feature film by director Sophie Hyde, and is almost 2 hours long. The film is about a teenage girl called Billie (Tilda Cobham Hervey), who is making a video diary to share her feelings and parts of her life. Billie's parents are separated but are still friendly.

Billie, who was very close to her mother Jane (Del Herbert Jane), is shattered when her mother asks her to leave home and to stay with her father Tom (Beau Travis Williams) for one year. Jane has decided to transit and become a man, and during this process, prefers not to have Billie around in the house.

Billie refuses to accept this forced separation and finally her mother relents - they will meet every Tuesday for a few hours. The film tells the story of the changes in Billie and Jane's lives, through brief glimpses of those 52 Tuesdays spread along the year. It follows Billie's discovery of her own sexuality and friendship with her school mates Josh (Sam Althuizen) and Jasmin (Imogen Archer), and Jane's journey to become James.

Jane's brother Harry (Mario Spate), who is also separated and lives with his sister, and Billie's father Tom, are the other two key figures in the film.

It is a coming of age story about Billie and her final acceptance of the choices made by her mother. At the end it is Tom who makes Billie understand her mother, "You are the person he loved most. He did not want to break the close bond that both of you had. Because of you, he waited so long to become the person he felt himself to be. Inside, he is still the same person, your mother, who loves you more than anyone else. Would you have preferred that he continued to hide and not be what he felt inside?"

The film focuses on relationship issues between Jane/James and Billie, and does not go into prejudices and social discrimination around the issue of changing gender identities in Australia. Tom is almost too good to be true, very understanding and supportive about his ex-wife. Harry, on the other hand, is a more complex character.

I think that if transgender parents decide to initiate transition when their children are adolescent (and entering a problematic life phase), the parent-child relationships are likely to become even more complicated. It would be easier if the transition occurs when the child is younger and can better accept the changes. Or, it may be slightly less complicated, if the child is grown up and mature. The film explains Jane/Jame's reason (the strong bond with his daughter), for not transitioning earlier and thus becomes an opportunity to explore the impact of such a decision on an adolescent.

The film stimulated some questions in my mind - Would it be more difficult for a child to accept a FtM mother or a MtF father? How will the gender of the child influence this acceptance? For example, would it have been easier if Billie had been a guy? I am not sure how all these variables would influence the parents-children relationships and if any general conclusions can be drawn about them.

The most difficult parts of this film for me were those related to Billie's exploration of her sexuality with Jasmin and Josh. These scenes created a strong feeling of unease in me, and were probably determined by my Asian/Indian upbringing in the 1960s-1970s where adolescents, especially girls, experimenting with their sexuality, would have been culturally unacceptable. Thus, the easy acceptance of Billie's sexual explorations by her parents in the film, made me feel as some kind of old fashioned and retrograde person.

Filmed actually on 52 Tuesdays with non-professional actors, film does seem a real-life video diary, and not a make-believe world. Both Tilda and Del Herbert give authentic performances as Billie and Jane/James. You can watch the film's trailer on the film website.

Kiss from the top floor (Mexico, 2013)

This is a short film (12 minutes) and its original title is "Bajo el ultimo techo". The film is about Beto, who lives with his grandparents while his mother has gone off to live in India. One day a new person, Stephania, comes to live in the apartment next door and Beto discovers a fascinating world of art and play in her house. Quickly they become friends.

One day, Stephania tells Beto that when she was young, she was a boy like him and inside her two persons lived - the boy Esteban and the girl Stephania.

The social prejudices against the transgender persons force Stephania to leave the apartment. To say goodbye to his friend, Beto escapes from his apartment and climbs to the top terrace of the building.

It is a simple and uncomplicated film that focuses on children's easy acceptance of those who are different. You can watch the trailor of this film on Vimeo.

The New Dress (Spain, 2007)

The original title of this short film (14 minutes) by director Sergi Perez is "Vestido Nuevo" and is a very moving film about the relationship between a father and his son who wants to dress up as a girl.

The film tells the story of a carnival day in a school. Children are supposed to dress up as the Dalmata dogs but Mario comes dressed up in his sister's pink frock. The principle calls Mario's father to the school.

The film with its surprise ending brought a node to my throat. I think that the film is very manipulative with an absolutely adorable boy - like his father, you can't but love him and yet pity him for his desires because you know that the world will be ruthless with him. The film makes you feel hopeful - even if the world will be cruel to your child, you can make sure that he/she can always count on your love and acceptance.

Therefore, in spite of its manipulativeness, I think that the film is very effective and should be obligatory for all parents, especially for the fathers.

You can watch the full film on Youtube with subtitles in English (Thanks to Rohini for the link) - it is a film that will not fail to touch you!

You're Dead To Me (USA, 2013)

This short film (10 minutes) based in a Latino family is by American-Chinese director Wu Tsang. The film is about a Maxican woman Andrea (Laura Patalano) and her preparations for the "Dia de los muertos" (the day for remembering dead persons), and the visit of her estranged daughter (Harmony Santana) who has chosen to become a man (Gabriel).

Gabriel no longer lives with his mother, because of her fear of social backlash. They can only meet secretly."Where is my lucky cap?" Gabriel asks.

"How much did I love you as my daughter", Andrea tells Gabriel, asking him to wear the white long dress and become a daughter for a short while, "You do that and I promise to give you, your lucky cap."

Hidden and forced into a gender role that he does not want, Gabriel is the ghost that has come to visit his mother on the day of the dead.

The film mixes reality and imagination in a clever way to drive home its point about accepting your children as they are and not to give in to social pressures. It is my "number one" film from this festival so far and I strongly recommend it.

Both the actors, Laura and Harmony are wonderful. Their way of speaking in mixed Spanish and English reminded me of our own mixing of Hindi and English in India. You can watch a trailer of this film on Vimeo.

Conclusions

The international festival of Trans films is a great opportunity to see the films that are normally ignored on TV and cinema halls. From the first group of films, my favourites were "You're dead to me" and "Vestido Nuevo".

I also hope that my comments will encourage you watch these films, at least some of them! Even if you can't watch the full films on Youtube or Vimeo now (except for Vestitdo Nuevo), sooner or later they will become accessible on internet.

***

Do films influence life?

I am a big fan of Kajol (though I was a greater fan of her mom Tanuja and her aunt, Nutan). Over the years she has given some wonderful performances. I wish she would do more films.

Recently while speaking at an event Kajol said that "If you say one gets influenced watching a character, I think it's foolish. Cinema reflects society, society rarely reflects cinema .. Movies show whatever happens in the society. For instance, if a hero smokes on the screen, it is because 90 percent of the country smokes and not the other way round. It's stupid to say one gets influenced by watching on the screen."

I don't know if the news correctly reported her words, but I do not agree with Kajol here. Perhaps she can't think objectively because she is from the film industry and has biased views.

Films do influence people

I think that films and famous film stars as celebrities are very good at influencing people. If that was not true, why would companies pay millions to make them as their brand ambassadors and even more specifically, pay to have their product placements in the films? Are all marketing persons in the big companies spending their money in films without being sure that their product in the films will not have any impact on public?

From Sadhana cut hair to Rajesh Khanna style kurta to the motorbikes used by the heroes and Shatrughan Sinha and Rajnikanth's way of flipping cigarettes, all have influenced millions of persons. If you have a child at home and you have seen her dancing with the suggestive gestures of a Chikni chameli or a Badnam munni, you know that films influence people and how much!

So how much can the films influence?

I am not saying that actors and films can change the society. If only it was so easy, films could have helped us to stop female infanticide, stop dowry deaths, increase literacy, stop child labour and stop violence against women. A society takes from films the things that fit that society's values, and if it does not agree with certain things, it may not take them.

Yet, even if certain values are not taken by large parts of society, they can still promote role models and give courage to individuals to fight with the system. That is how biopics like "Bhaag milkha bhaag" or films showing independent young women who fight for their rights, inspire young men and women.

Anti-smoking guidelines for films

Kajol's argument was motivated in part by the current national guidelines that impose putting up an anti-smoking warning over the smoking scenes in films. I agree that to see such warnings while you are watching a film is distracting and a little unpleasant.

Most Bollywood films are about unbelievable characters in unbelievable situations, so there getting an intrusive reality check does not make a big difference! But occasionally in a good film, the anti-smoking warning in the middle of the scene breaks the film's spell. It takes away from the film. And this rule shoould be changed.

However, having said that, I think that film fraternity from Bollywood needs to look inside its own soul and and ask itself some honest questions. The most important question that I would like them to ask themselves is - are some Indian film-makers taking money to show smoking scenes in our films? May be not directly but indirectly?

I am asking this question since big tobacco companies did pay film-makers and actors in Hollywood to smoke. A research article on this theme that appeared in British Medical Journal wrote:

"In all, almost 200 actors took part in the cigarette endorsements, including two thirds of the top 50 box office Hollywood stars from the late 1930s through to the 1940s. Among others, actors Clark Gable, Spencer Tracey, Joan Crawford, John Wayne, Bette Davis, Betty Grable and singer Al Jolson all appeared in endorsements for brands, such as Lucky Strike, Old Gold, Chesterfield, and Camel.American Tobacco alone paid the stars who endorsed Lucky Strike cigarettes US$ 218,750 in the late 1930s, equivalent to $3.2 million in today's money. Individual stars earned up to $5,000 per year, equivalent to around $75,000 in today's money...The authors say that smoking in movies is associated with teens and young adults starting to smoke themselves, but its persistent presence in mainstream films is rooted in the mutually beneficial deals between the film and tobacco industries in the 1930s and 1940s".

This image on the left shows models trying different poses of cigarette smoking in practice for a TV ad in 1953 (picture by Peter Stackpole ) because tobacco companies wanted to promote smoking as sexy and desirable for women.

Internet is full of reports explaining how tobacco companies have ruthlessly used marketing and paid "experts" to continue to sell their products that are marketed as "feel good, enjoy life" kind of products.

Over the last decade, slowly developed countries are making it difficult for tobacco companies to expand their markets and increase profits - in many countires, percentage of smokers is decreasing. Thus, these companies have increased their efforts in developing countries. In India, reports talk of more than 100% increase in smokers over the past decade.

If you think of tobacco companies trying all kind of tricks almost 100 years ago to influence Americans, I think that today they must be trying 100 times worse tricks to influence people in developing countries! 

Role of films in not encouraging smoking

Personally I feel that certain kinds of smoking must be completely stopped from showing in films - no young hero or heroine should be shown smoking as part of school life or college life or with friends or as young professionals, where the underlying message is "smoking is cool, it is ok to smoke for having a good time". I think that India's censor board should be really strict on this, because flashing warnings over such scenes are not enough discouragement.

On the other hand, in my opinion, film makers should have their creative liberty to show smoking if people are in older age groups, or are shown as addicts or having problems or as villains or underworld dons. I think that associating smoking with negative things in films will also discourage smoking among youngsters.

However, if films show the young hero or heroine smoking as has happened in some recent films, I don't think that film-makers can justify it by saying "this scene is essential to my story". Rather, I feel that such film-makers may be taking money from cigarette companies, to do their publicity and influence young people.

Conclusions

Contrary to what Kajol says, majority of Indians do not smoke - according to a World Health Organization survey in 2009, around 12% of Indian smoked. However, that still means a large number of illness and death associated with smoking in India.

And film-makers should work with Government to work in ways that do not promote smoking among young people. Smoking by young people shown in films as "feel good, enjoy" kind of activities must stop completely.

On the other hand, smoking is part of life, to ask film makers not to show any scene with smoking is not realistic. The Government needs to stop insisting that while watching the films we get anti-smoking warnings.

Smoking is not cool, it is dead-cool!

***

Becoming a woman

The 2011 film by the dutch director Susan Koenen, "I am a girl" (original title: Ik ben een meisje) is about a 13 year old girl, Joppe, her growing up and her crush on a boy. Joppe was born a boy and the film touches on her journey to become a woman.

Story

Joppe has braces, long hair and a beautiful smile. Like her friends, she also dreams of love. She has a crush on Brian, but he does not answer her gestures for going out with her. Then one day Joppe hears from her friends that Brian is going out with another girl and she is sad. "I won't let it keep me down, life will go on", she tells her friends.

At the background of this simple tale of a teenage crush and growing up pains, is the story of Joppe's transformation from a boy to a girl, who wants to become a woman.

Comments

It is a simple film told in a simple way. At one level Joppe's journey of transformation from a boy to a girl seems almost painless. As a very young child she decided that she preferred to be a girl. Initially her family did not agree, but then they accepted her decision and in 5th standard (final year of primary school) she started this journey of transformation.

In the school it seems that Joppe has no problems from her classmates or from other young people. She spends her time with her friends. And when she goes to the middle school, she explains to her classmates about herself, so that everyone knows about what she is going through.

Joppe starts receiving injectable medicines that can stop her body from producing the male hormone, so that her body will not have the typical changes that occur in the boys during puberty - such as deepening of voice, growth of facial and body hair and growth of genitals.

Joppe knows what will be the path of her transformation. When Joppe will be sixteen years old, she can start receiving female hormones so that her body can start having the changes that girls get at puberty - such as more fat on the thighs and buttocks, and development of breasts. Later she will go through surgery so that her genitals will take the female form.

Joppe's journey of transformation is not completely painless though as her experience with Brian shows. Young people in her community may not be cruel or discriminatory to her, but at the same time, she is seen as different and at the beginning of any new relationship with a boy or a man, she will need to face the dilemma of "Can I tell him that I was born a boy?" and then let the boy/man decide if he wishes to continue that relationship.

She is aware that though she can wear a bikini and go to the swimming pool with her friends, she is also a little anxious if others can make out the difference. In the bathroom of the swimming pool, she sees other girls with their growing breasts and the feminine curves, and worries about her own flat chest and curveless body.

Most of all, Joppe is aware that "becoming a woman" is not a journey with an end point, but rather, it is a life long journey where she has to keep on becoming and transforming. And on this journey, she will have to face many other challenges.

About one day making a family with a man, Joppe says, "If he would wish for a family with children, perhaps he can have a child with a surrogate mother. It will be only his biological child, but I won't mind it so much."

***

You can watch "I am a girl" with English subtitles on Aeon Film website - it is free of charge.

Credits
Ik ben een meisje
Director: Susan Koenen
Producer: Albert Klein Haneveld
Editor: Denise Janzée, Susan Koenen
Cinematographer: Reinout Steenhuizen
Sound: Bouwe Mulder

Running Time: 15 minutes
Language: Dutch with English subtitles
Website: www.ikbeneenmeisje.nl

***

Fatal assistance - Reconstruction chaos

"Fatal Assistance", the documentary film by director Raoul Peck, follows the massive destruction in Haiti caused by an earthquake on 12 January 2010. It looks at the promises and the challenges of the country's reconstruction. It paints a dismal picture of the response by the international emergency humanitarian-aid world to the tragedy.

"Fatal Assistance" will be a part of the International Documentary Film festival called "Mondovisioni" that will be held at Kinodromo - Cinema Europa in Bologna (Italy) from January to April 2014. "Fatal Assistance" will be shown on Wednesday 5 March 2014 at 9 PM.

Introduction

Natural disasters like earthquakes, cyclones, floods and landslides and man-made disasters like bombs and wars can cause massive destructions and loss of human lives. The global TV networks and the 24x7 TV news channels provide a trans-national platform to news about such disasters as they occur, showing horrifying images of destruction and human suffering. The reach of the news channels is accompanied by the growth of the social media, so that enterprising individuals can share information, pictures and videos about the events, adding a more personal human element to the far-away news. Usually this results in outpouring of  popular support and donations as people wish to help those affected by the disasters.

A whole "emergency humanitarian aid" industry has sprung-up around natural disasters. Thus industry swings into action as soon as the news breaks out. The roots of this industry are mainly based in the developed world especially in Europe and USA where important humanitarian organisations are based with their offices across the world and with budgets that rival national budgets.

"Fatal Assistance" touches on this theme by focusing on the damages caused to the buildings and homes in Haiti, their impact on peoples' lives and the international humanitarian efforts for their reconstruction.

The Film

On 12 January 2010 a massive earthquake, 7 degrees on the Richter scale, shook Haiti. About 220,000 persons died in the disaster according to the estimates by Haitian Government. Thousands of buildings and homes collapsed in the earthquake. The scenes of the tragedy dominated TV news-screens around the world and countries promised millions of dollars' worth of aid.

An International Commission for Reconstruction of Haiti (ICRH) was formed under the guidance of ex-president of USA Bill Clinton. UN agencies, bilateral government agencies, international emergency humanitarian organisations and NGOs arrived in Haiti to promote the reconstruction and ensure health care, rehabilitation, education and community support.

As months passed, it became clear that aid actually received was a small part of what was promised and it was not enough to cover the cost of US army to clear all the debris of the collapsed buildings and homes. Thus, reconstruction was difficult and extremely limited.

People were forced to come out and occupy whatever open spaces they could find to set up make shift shelters as their homes.

The response by the different agencies and organisations was chaotic. There were many duplications and unnecessary competitions among the organisations in some areas because different organisations had approved projects to carry out the same work - for example, 4 organisations were working on cleaning the same canal. On the other hand, lack of coordination meant that many other areas were left uncovered as no organisation was working there.

Some organisations worked on making new homes. However, this was also not planned properly. In one example shown in the film, a rocky area 18 km away from the city was selected for building homes. It lacked essential services and houses were built without toilets or kitchens, and when it rained, water came inside those houses.

The film also shows the human dimension of the tragedy in different ways - on one hand, important international figures like Clinton and Sean Penn who, in spite of their good intentions, seem to play the role of supermen and heroes, on the other, Haiti's president Preval and prime minister Bellrive, appear powerless in front of the foreigners who have the money and the ideas they wish to implement without talking about them to the locals. In a scene, the Haitian members of ICRH denounce that they are in the commission just in name, they are completely ignored and are not involved in any decisions.

Comments

The film presents a classic textbook case of how not to deal with development work. Unfortunately, in emergency situations, it seems impossible not to fall in the traps of rich donors dictating the kind of "help" they want to give. It is difficult to get out of the chaos because "humanitarian help" is part of countries' foreign policy and trade-commerce related issues are important in the aid-programmes. Thus, millions promised during the emergency, are given through contracts to expatriate companies, who want to earn and for them helping persons is secondary. In the end, large amount of aid-money comes back to them through their own companies.

Interference in the national elections, controlling and deciding without involving local partners, shown in the film are things that are known to all the actors involved in the situation, though they are hidden behind rhetoric and double-speak.

Personally I think that film's message that the money should have been given directly to people, was a little naive. I think that it leads to other problems and tragedies. Corrupt bureaucrats and corrupt politicians on one hand and difficulties of managing huge amounts of sudden cash, both contribute to it.

Local organisations and international NGOs with long history and experiences of working in those communities are both better placed to identify needs and provide appropriate support in emergencies. However they are usually small organisations and can not compete with big multi-national organisations that control the international emergency-aid industry. They are also few and can not respond to the enormous needs that are there in such situations.

Finally I think that nothing can substitute the country's own management capacities and their insistence on coordinating the relief efforts. Ideally they should refuse aid which they can not coordinate. It does become however very difficult to resist the pressures and controls of international organisations, who can bulldoze all the national efforts.

Though the chaos are caused by faulty planning and implementation guidelines and procedures decided in Europe or USA, it is the persons who work at the frontlines for these organisations who take the blame and try to find solutions. The film shows different moments of anguish of such persons, moved by idealism and a desire to help, who find themselves caught between the limits of their roles and their desire to help those whose suffering they are witnessing. They are the ones who salvage the humanitarian aid by their personal humanism and testimony.

***

A different teenage love story

Brazilian director Daniel Ribeiro's film "Eu Não Quero Voltar Sozinho" (I don't want to go back alone) is a Karan Johar's  "Kuch kuch hota hai" kind of film (with similar storyline) but with a difference. It is a cloyingly sweet short film, that left me a little irritated but may be that only means that I am no longer a teenager!

Introduction

The teenage love stories like Karan Johar's early films like "Kuch kuch hota hai" and "Dilwale dulhaniya le jayenge" (there were no real teenagers there, but that is only nitpicking) and hundreds of such romantic films and books all over the world tell stories of beautiful people, who meet, fall in love, face some heartbreaks and then in the end all the misunderstandings are resolved, the guy and his lady love kiss against the sunset and live happily ever after.

However, the teenage romantic worlds are make-believe worlds with make-believe people - everybody is beautiful and perfect with designer clothes - the billionaire handsome guy and lovely virgin princess. If you are fat, short, ugly or worse, if you are disabled or gay, you have no place in this make-believe world, not even as hero's sidekick or heroine's best friend.

Gay and lesbians face a lot of discrimination and barriers, and it is not easy for young gay or lesbian persons to express their sexuality. If they also have a disability then expression of their sexuality becomes even more difficult.

Ribeiro's film is different because his hero is disabled and he is also gay.

The film

Leonardo (Ghilherme Lobo) is a high school student. He is blind. His best friend is Giovana (Tess Amorim), who secretly loves him but for him she is only a friend. She accompanies him to his home every afternoon when the school finishes. Then arrives a new boy in their class - Gabriel (Fabio Audi).

Soon, Gabriel becomes friends with Giovana and Leonardo. He also walks with them after school. Leonardo feels attracted towards Gabriel but does not know how to tell it to him and decides to talk about it to Giovana.

Comments

It is a nice film to watch, simple and uncomplicated. However, there were different reasons why it irritated me a little bit:

(1) The film is based in Brazil but it is the world of rich and white Brazil. The whole class and the teacher are all white and rich looking. I know that Brazil has a lot of multi-colour families, which means that in the same families, some persons may be white, some dark and some in-between. Still, I would have liked the film more if at least some persons in the film were also not-whites.

(2) Everyone in the film is good-looking, perfect and a little artificial. Even Leonardo, who is blind, looks perfect with beautiful eyes.

(3) Everyone is accepting towards Leonardo's disability, no one makes comments about him. Even his being a gay is not an issue. The only dilemmas in the film are the romantic dilemmas - Giovana's heart break and the difficulty of Leonardo to express his feelings. Thus, the film is in an idyllic world.

However, I do recognise that as someone who is no longer young, and who focuses (too much??) on the problems and barriers faced by disabled persons and by non-heterosexual persons, probably I am looking at this film through a distorted lens. The film is a make-believe world to present alternate dreams to people who have a disability and are gay - like all teenagers they also have a need for uncomplicated romantic dreams and the film answers that need.

It is a short film (about 17 minutes) and though it is in Portuguese, you can watch it on Youtube with English subtitles. If you like sweet and romantic films with good-looking actors, watch it and tell me what did you think about it!

***
After I finished watching it, I was re-imagining "Kuch kuch hota hai" - suppose, Rahul (Shahrukh Khan) was secretly in love with Anjali (Kajol) but felt shy of expressing himself, and then Tina (Rani Mukherjee) came to the school and one day Anjali confessed to Rahul that she was in love with Tina ...

***

Marta's suitcase - Carrying pain and fear

"Marta's suitcase" (La maleta de Marta) by director Günter Schweiger is an unusual documentary on a social issue - violence against women. It is unusual because it touches on areas usually ignored by discussions on this subject. The film travels between Spain and Austria, as it looks at the lives of women and men touched by the violence.

"Marta's suitcase" will be a part of the International Documentary film festival "Mondovisioni" to be held in Bologna (Italy) at Kinodromo between January and April 2014.

Introduction

"Violence against women" is also called "domestic violence" as it usually occurs within the home-walls and the perpetrators are mostly husbands/male companions of the women. Less often it may be perpetrated by brothers, fathers or other men in the family. For this reason, it is also called "intimate partner violence". The violence can be emotional, physical and/or sexual.

The impact of emotional violence is usually under-estimated, and people tend to look at it as something not so important. However, it can be equally devastating. It saps away the victims' self-confidence, hopes, dreams and autonomy, leaving the persons more vulnerable. It may also be the first step of a cycle that leads to physical and sexual violence.

Domestic violence is surrounded by a strong sense of stigma and a sense of shame. Thus, women and children who are victims, also feel judged negatively by others and made to feel that it was their fault. Persons and institutions, who are supposed to provide support such as the police, often share the society's mindset that it is not important, it is an internal family matter and that men have a right to hit their wives if their wives do not behave properly. Thus, instead of providing support, they may even ridicule the victims for complaining. On the other hand, organisations providing refuge or support to battered women are sometimes depicted as creating unnecessary fuss and "destroying the families".

Finally, the words "domestic violence" can give an idea that it is about minor violence, in reality, it usually leads to broken bones or even death. It also results in emotional scars that may never heal, not just in the women victims, but also in the children.

Film

Marta, an Andalusian woman in Spain, asked for separation from her husband in 2000. At that time her two daughters were 12 and 15 years old. One day, while Marta was crossing a street, her ex-husband, a pharmacist, attacked her with his car, breaking the bones of her legs and then attacked her with a knife, cutting her in different places including her neck and abdomen. He was sentenced to prison while Marta underwent numerous operations.

The film presents Marta's testimony about what had happened and her fears because her husband is out of prison now and she knows that one day he is waiting to attack her once again and to kill her. The police and the legal system in Spain does not take Marta's complaints seriously, as her ex-husband had completed his punishment and has not done anything illegal. Marta is forced to hide and change homes and towns, in search of a safer place.

The film also talks to some Austrian psychologists and mental health specialists dealing with men who perpetrate violence against women, to discuss why men behave this way. The film also has some interviews with men who had been violent in the past to ask them to explain why they had behaved the way they did.

Comments

It is a very hard hitting film. To watch Marta tell what had happened and look at the signs of the violence on her body, and to hear about how her own mother and other family treated her after the violence, how it changed her relationship with the world and with her daughters, is very moving.

Marta's family from a small town in south of Spain is ashamed of her for bringing dishonour to the family and for having made different life-choices. Her mother felt that what had happened to Marta was her own fault because she had walked out of her marriage.

The film shows that even in a country with excellent support services such as Austria, the persons dealing with victims of violence say that their shelter for battered women had to turn away more than 50% of the women because they did not have enough space for them.

An interesting part of the film is the interviews with psychologists and the men who had been the perpetrators of violence in the past. The issue of domestic violence is kept under wraps and ignored. However when one does talk about it, it is usually in terms of victims' point of view and the services that are needed to support them. In such discussions, the perpetrators are like monsters and criminals, and thus the discussions are exclusively in terms of legal measures for punishing them and for imprisoning them. The film makes you think about this and raises new ideas about prevention and reduction in domestic violence by designing interventions targeted at men.

Violent men, or rather men who come to violence, are usually insecure. When they are confronted with ideas such as their wives may be feeling attraction for other men (real or imagined) or may be leaving them because they are not happy in their marriages,  these men do not have the skills of articulation, expression of their feelings and discussion. Part of it may be because of the way our societies raise male children and adolescents and the societal representations of masculinity and femininity. Thus, the men may also feel as victims and impotent to change anything, responding to the situations they perceive as threats to their self-image and masculinity, only with violence.

The violent men in the film also feel victims. They say, "She made me lose my mind and turn violent". Due to psychological violence that usually precedes physical and sexual violence, often the victims also feel "guilty" that somehow they themselves were responsible for provoking the violence.

However these insights stimulated by the film about the role of the perpetrators in the violence and perpetrator-victim relationships, point towards different and complex issues. Since domestic violence is very common - in some countries, more than 50% of the women face it at least once in their lives, and it affects both rich and poor homes, I think that the issue of male behaviour in the violence requires urgent research and discussions.

The film is a bit long and also a little repetitive, but perhaps that was my impression because I am familiar with the subject and have been involved in research in this area. Almost all the films planned for the Mondovisioni festival that I have seen so far, were 1 hour 10 minutes to 1 hour 25 minutes long. I feel that this length is excessive for documentaries and most of these films could be shorter by 10-20 minutes, and become more incisive. However, this small critcism does not take away from the hard-hitting impact of Marta's suitcase!

***

When Economic Bubbles Burst

Norwegian documentary film When Bubbles Burst (Når boblene brister) by director Hans Petter Moland is about a small town called Vik in Norway that loses its investments, and about their efforts to understand the workings of global economy that led to it. If you are a small investor or a person suffering the impact of global economic crisis, watch this film to understand the issues and to put pressure on your Governments to regulate the banking and financial sectors.

"When Bubbles Burst" will be a part of the International Documentary Film Festival "Mondovisioni" to be held at cinema Kinodromo in Bologna between January to April 2014.

Introduction

The global economic crisis has had a crippling impact on the world's economy since 2008. That crisis is not yet over. It has involved countries like Iceland, Greece, Spain, Italy and Ireland. It has resulted in a prolonged period of recession with loss of jobs and closure of factories in different parts of the world.

This crisis was initiated by the crash of American banking systems due to accumulation of bad debts. At that time, there were talks of saving these banks since otherwise the bank-crash would have wiped out the savings of millions of small investors. At the same time, it was said that banking system was rotten with high level of financial speculation, risky investments, junk bonds, and billions of dollars siphoned off in bonuses to the bankers.

At the end Governments had paid millions of dollars' worth of aid to the banks. However, the proposed reforms of the banking system never took place and many of the major international banks continue to behave as if nothing has changed.

For ordinary persons, it is not easy to understand what had happened and what to expect in future. "When the Bubbles Burst" tries to take an in-depth look at the global economic mechanisms to explain this crisis and to pose some future scenarios, by talking to experts like Joseph Stiglitz, Michael Lewis, Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Carlota Perez.

Film

The film starts in the village of Vik in Norway, an idyllic rural community that dreams of building a tunnel and a road to connect to the nearby town. In 2007, the municipality of Vik had invested the funds for building the road and tunnel in Terra Securities, a "triple A guaranteed savings", through the American Citibank group. However, Terra Securities had turned out to be valueless junk bonds based on bad subprime loans and the municipality had lost all the money.

Two persons from Vik, involved in the investment, travel to USA to try to understand what had happened. The whole film is about their meetings with different experts who explain the why and how of the disconnect between the "financial economy" and "real economy", and how the technological progress has provided the foundation on which speculative financial markets can play "casino" with the banks and economies of the whole world. "Financial economy or the speculative investments are needed and necessary", they say, "because they provide the power to new innovations and development, but they have to be regulated. If financial economy becomes 50 to 70 times real economy, then it is not sustainable and leads to a crash."

They also visit and talk to persons crushed by the financial crisis. The house loans at very low interest rates were given to fuel the financial bubble but with the financial crisis, the value of those houses has decreased by 2/3rds, while people are forced to take loans to pay the bank interests.

They also visit Detroit, a symbol of the economic crisis with its closed and abandoned factories, decaying buildings with broken windows, an apocalyptic vision of the future.

Comments

The film provides an understanding about the diverse and complex factors that influence the creation of economic bubbles and their crashes. The economic crisis is not yet over - it will last another 7-10 years, one expert says. The closure of the crisis will also require regimentation of the financial sector that is resisting to be regulated in any way. Thus the situation may get even worse before a solution will be found, the film says.

One of the most interesting part of the film is the explanation by Carlota Perez about the cycles of expansion and crash of economic bubbles as essential part of our society. Thus economic crisis are "creative destruction", she says.

This is the fifth cycle of technological advancement and economic crisis in modern era, Perez explains. Each cycle takes us into a new golden age of progress. The first cycle was linked to industrial revolution around 1850. It was followed by progress-crisis cycles linked to railways and steam power development and then to the cheap steel linked development that had led to the wall street crash in 1929, followed by the golden age of progress due to constructions in the suburbs, cars, plastics, appliances and cheap oil after the second world war which led to the economic growth of 1960-80s. It had also led to dismantling of financial markets' regulations by persons like Reagan and Thatcher.

Perez explains that each cycle starts with an installation phase, where a new technology comes with the help of few small investors and slowly gathers steam to expand into a financial bubble, leading to the bubble crash and the crisis. This is followed by a golden age of development that requires use of that technology in transforming the society. Her hypothesis is that green economy could be the future for bringing the golden age following the present crisis. However, it would depend upon upon the initiatives of specific Governments to regulate financial economy and to provide support to the direction of the new developments through appropriate policies.

For the construction-car-oil-appliances cycle USA government under Roosevelt had taken lead by providing appropriate policies. For the new cycle of golden age, the experts seem doubtful if the appropriate policies can come from USA or will take place in another part of the world. Thus, the film ends on a hopeful note of a new and better future.

I found the film fascinating for explaining an area of life that I find difficult to understand and also for the way it explains the links between crisis and development.

***

The defector - Leaving North Korea

"The defector" is a documentary film by Korean-Canadian director Ann Shin that follows a group of persons who escape from North Korea in their search for freedom. It is like a thriller as it follows a journey across different Asian countries. The film also makes you reflect on ideas and words like sovereignty, defection, illegal emigrants and human traffickers, usually heard on TV news and perceived as abstract concepts.

"The defector" will be part of Mondovisioni, the International Documentary Film Festival that will be held at Kinodromo cinema in Bologna between January to April 2014.

Introduction

Every year hundreds of thousands of persons leave their countries for dangerous journeys in search of a better life. Many of them lose their lives during these journeys. Some of them are caught during transit in other countries and exploited or imprisoned. Some other are caught in their destination country and sent back. Finally some of them, manage to escape in their destination countries and hide as "clandestines", hoping for some way of legalizing their presence sooner or later.

The clandestines and those who somehow manage to get a legal status in their new homelands, inspire hundreds of other hopefuls from their villages and cities to follow their paths.

There are opportunities for making money from these journeys - at every step of the journey, through each of transit countries and finally in the destination country, some monetary transaction occurs. The persons who organize and help the journeys are called agents or guides by the emigrants and "human traffickers" by the destination countries. They may be linked to organised crime networks. They are known to be ruthless, exploitative and brutal. At the same time, they need to ensure that at least some emigrants reach the destination, otherwise the word of their non-reliability spreads and they lose business.

The emigrants, usually from lower strata, who do not have the qualifications or the resources to become legal emigrants or student-emigrants, need significant amounts of money for these journeys.

Despotic regimes, wars and conflicts also force large numbers of persons to leave their homes and thus increase the pressure on illegal emigration. "The Defector" follows one such journey.

The film

"The defector" follows a small group of persons from North Korea during their journey in China. From north of China, they travel to Xian, accompanied by their guide Mr. Dragon. Then they travel from Xian to Kunming. Finally, they are taken over by another guide who takes them through parts of Laos to northern Thailand, where they can come out as refugees. After spending a few months in Thailand, they enter South Korea, their destination country.

The film focuses on the stories of three persons - the guide, Mr. Dragon and two North Korean women - Sook Ja and Yong Hee.

Mr. Dragon, with a past in North Korean army, had crossed into China more than 10 years ago and is guide/trafficker for other North Koreans. Sook Ja wants to escape from the repressive regime in North Korea and to find her sister, who had escaped seven years earlier and then disappeared. Yong Hee, sold as an illegal bride to a Chinese farmer more than 10 years earlier, wants to escape from the illegal life.

A small part of the film is about Mr. Heo, a north Korean refugee in Canada and his efforts to help other north Korean refugees.

Comments

The film has been shot with hidden cameras and you never see the full faces of any persons escaping from North Korea. Most of the film is about the journey in China - from the north to Kunming. It shares some details about how to escape the control systems in China, but most such information that can be used to trace specific persons or the escape routes is not there. As spectators you are quickly drawn into the stories of the three main protagonists of the film and you can feel their fear and tension, wondering if they are going to make or will get caught and sent back to face prisons and torture in North Korea?

The film has some scenes from north Korea about the general poverty but the stories of the three protagonists are not so much about poverty as they are about repression in the country and their search for better life opportunities.

Talking about the making of the film, Ann Shin had written:

One of the North Koreans not chosen by Dragon was Kyung-shil, a pretty young woman wearing a sparkly sweater and black high heels. She had defected several years ago and ended up in the hands of traffickers in China. Now she worked as a call girl and sent money to her family back in North Korea. Estimates are that eight out of 10 North Korean women found in China are trafficked and sold to men as brides, or sold into the sex industry. (The one-child policy in China had created a demand for North Korean women.)

I wondered if Sook-ja’s older sister had been trafficked.

Dragon told Kyung-shil and the others that he would come back for them on his next trip. For now, he, Sook-ja and my camera crew had a long journey ahead of us where we would travel and film covertly.

We journeyed day and night on buses and trains, jumping off at certain times to avoid inspectors. Dragon knew the schedules like clockwork and we all grew to trust him implicitly. Making documentaries is a leap of faith; That faith is built on the trust a filmmaker establishes with his or her subjects. It’s remarkable how quickly trust builds when lives are at stake.

The most heart-wrenching part of the journey was when the defectors were only miles away from freedom. Trekking through the Laotian jungle, having evaded police patrols and crossed two mountains, Sook-ja suddenly broke down in tears. The realization had just struck her: she was utterly alone. She could see now that her elderly mother would never be able to make this physically demanding journey. The whole purpose of her trek was to reunite her family, but she hadn’t found her sister, and she would never see her mother again.

“I want to erase my name,” she wept. “I want to forget the memory of being born and growing up.”

The journeys of the emigrants are all about loss and alienation - dreaming of better futures and losing families and friends, fearing for families and friends, and living clandestine lives in alien lands where they are just a commodity for sale and exploitation. The nightmares do not end even when they reach the lands of their dreams - in South Korea, they need to go through a process to ensure that they are not north Korean spies. The fear for their family and friends left in north Korea never ends and making a new life is tough, because prejudices run deep.

Personally I found Dragon to be the most interesting character in the film - for the law in China and Laos, he is a "human trafficker" - exploiting the escapees for earning money, but he sees himself as a human rights fighter, helping his country-persons to find a new life and risking his own life. "I am brutal" he agrees, "but it is the only way to save their lives and my life."

In the new globalized world, the rich are welcome every where, money and goods can move freely across borders but not other human beings. Thus people from the south, try to cross the Mexican-USA border, while immigrants to West Europe face dangerous journeys across eastern Europe and Mediterranean sea.

Each of them follows a dream but most of those who survive, live lives of exploitation and discrimination, holding on desperately to life, willing to settle for a precarious security, hoping for better lives for their children. "The defectors" gives you a glimpse into their lives.

***

God loves Uganda! Unfortunately.

The documentary film “God loves Uganda” by director Roger Ross Williams is about American christian groups who feel that they have a special mission for Uganda and about the impact of their work on different aspects of human rights in the African country. The film provides a glimpse into one of the forces that has shaped large parts of humanity in the last five hundred years – the force of cultural colonization.

“God loves Uganda” is part of the international documentary film festival called Mondovisioni, that will be held at Kinodromo cinema in Bologna (Italy) in January-April 2014.

Introduction

About five hundred years ago, the colonization era saw Europeans spreading out towards American, African and Asian lands. Exploiting the natural resources of the conquered lands was the most important goal of this colonization. It also resulted in actions that shaped millions of lives, including the decimation of indigenous populations and the slave trade. The conquering armies were accompanied by missionaries, who were supposed to take the word of “the only true God” to the heathen "to civilise them".

Thus colonization took cultural ideas from the old world and established their hegemony in the conquered lands. After the end of the second world war, as the colonies became free countries, they usually carried the legacies of the colonial rules in their national constitutions and laws. It has been difficult to shake off those colonial legacies. For example, even today, the laws made by the British in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, continue to be the laws of independent India, including the infamous art. 377 of the Indian penal code that classifies homosexual relationships as a criminal offence.

The ideas of “the only true religion”, “the only true God”, “the only true prophet” and “the only true God’s book” are common to many religions but have been especially true for certain Christian and Muslim groups. Therefore, saving the souls of those who do not know about or believe in "the true God", has motivated many persons to dedicate their lives in spreading the word of God among the “non-believers”, including to persons of their own religions but who had slightly different beliefs.

“God loves Uganda” is about an evangelical American group who believe that all the answers of life are in the Bible. They have identified Uganda as the "God's land". About 84% of the population of Uganda is Christian, while another 12% is Muslim.

Film

Groups of American young men and women are influenced by charismatic church leaders like Lou Engle and Rev. Jo Anna Watson, to spend parts of their lives in spreading the words of love, brotherhood, peace and the true teachings of Bible to Uganda. “One million missionaries, one billion converts and one trillion dollars of funds” is the dream goal of one of the groups’ leaders from a church based on an ecstatic trance kind of religious ceremonies.

The American evangelicals have opened their centres in Uganda where they recruit and train young Ugandans to spread their ideas among others. The Ugandan acolytes are accompanied by the young missionaries from America. They are relentless and aggressive, standing on street sides and shouting to people about the dangers of sinning and the urgency of coming to the path of the true religion.

Persons like Rev. Kapya Kaoma and bishop Christopher Senyonjo, from Anglican church and traditional Ugandan church explain how the conservative ideas promoted by the American groups have taken hold among the general population, politicians and leaders of Uganda. These ideas touch on subjects like abstinence, adultery, use of condoms, abortions and homosexuality.

The film focuses especially on the conservative evangelical ideas about homosexuality and how those ideas have influenced the parliament debate in Uganda and resulted in the approval of a new national law that foresees a death penalty for homosexuals. At the same time, it has stoked growing intolerance in the public opinion towards gay, lesbian and transgender persons.

A sequence of the film shows a public meeting where evangelical pastor Martin Ssempa, through graphic images explains that homosexuality is all about licking assholes and eating shit, and thus needs to be punished by death. “The world, the U.N., all the countries have been taken over homosexuals. They will come and make your sons and daughters become perverts and homosexuals. Only we can stop them, it is our duty to stop them”, he thunders in the meeting.

Another episode of the film shows the funeral of a GLBT rights activist, during which the pastor criticises and asks the friends and companions of the activist, to give up being gay and lesbian, followed by attacks of goons on the persons who do not agree with his sermon.

Comments

The film is a frightening look at how good intentions, firm beliefs in God, peace and love, can become instruments of madness, murder and intolerance. That persons promoting and condoning these things are no scary zombies but rather next-door kind of clean-cut American and Ugandan young men and women, makes it even more frightening.

The American evangelical missionaries have actively collaborated with making of this film – they are very open in sharing their ideas and their activities. They are convinced that what they are doing is good and are willing to share everything about it. Their certainties in their religious beliefs makes any kind of dialogue and questioning difficult if not impossible. The strategy of American evangelical conservatives is to start by working with orphanages, schools and education system - by influencing and converting young people to their way of thinking.

The world knows much more about the impact of Wahabi ideas on the promotion of a fundamentalist and traditional view of Islam in different parts of the world. Similar knowledge about impact of conservative evangelical groups is much less, though their role in promoting American wars around the world and the American government's resistance to use of condoms and family planning measures (especially under the Bush administration) have been talked about. "God loves Uganda" shows that they are not very different from their Wahabi brothers.

I had read about the strong views against homosexuality in countries like Uganda and Malawi, but I had imagined that these were due to “traditional African beliefs”! “God loves Uganda” shows that there is nothing "traditional African" about them - ideas of conservative evangelicals from USA have played an active role in arriving at this kind of public opinion and the intolerant laws.

Conclusions

“God loves Uganda” is a close look at how the desire of "helping others", promoted by persons with strong beliefs and lot of money, can influence and change a society's beliefs, and reinforce certain kind of ideas.

Wahabi islamists and evangelicals like IHOP (International house of prayer, Kansas, USA) are not the only ones who want to mould the world to their ideas. Other hardliners including conservative groups among Jews, Buddhist, Hindus and Sikhs, have been inspired by them and have similar ambitions, though usually their activities are focused in their own countries.

How these conservative religious views and processes are shaping our world and what kind of world will be there tomorrow? What role is played by the new technologies in the globalized world in spreading of such views? In the war between the ideas embodied in the United Nations’ declaration of human rights and the ideas of conservative religious groups, which ideas will dominate humanity in the coming decades? The film left me troubled, pondering on such questions.

***