Because it's not hard enough only to find and then daily validate our own identities in the face of society and chemical balances, the world has now become a constant and overpowering presence via social media. Though the 24 hour news culture is often decried, CNN and Al Jazeera have nothing on Twitter. My feed ceaselessly assaults me with news: death in Syria, rape in India, debt in Greece, idiotic political battles in America. Species are evolving, species are going extinct. Heat waves are killing, floods are drowning. I've never been completely certain of my self, my complete identity, and the determination of information from all places on all topics to challenge my thoughts and opinions incessantly forces a non-stop recalibration down to my bones.
But isn't it purifying to challenge your opinions? To constantly expand your viewpoint and knowledge? Couldn't this never-ending barrage be refining your stances down into some point of perfect catharsis? Perhaps a life devoted to ingesting Twitter is a more certain way to divide yourself down into nothingness than years of meditation. Nirvana, 140 characters at a time.
Or is it just a grown-up surrogate for cruel classmates and disappointed parents, second-guessing your every thought?
Of course, the derivation of all this and the challenges that leads to is, at most, only half of the issue. More importantly-- or at least more outwardly apparent-- is what you produce. Twitter and Facebook and every other social network turn each day of our lives into a global public speaking gig. How do you express yourself, how do you expose yourself? Did your follower count rise or fall today? Is that last snippet of consciousness you decided to broadcast going to get you fired, arrested, deported?
When am I me?
I speak for my company, I write for my company. No matter how often I type all opinions my own, I am always the same person that holds that position at that place, there is always that line between A and B. When am I allowed to speak, what am I allowed to say? Just how often am I okay to be me-- who ever that person may be today and tomorrow and the next day-- how much of what I feel and think can I to admit to?
If I am able to decide, even for a brief moment, where I stand on the ever-shifting ground beneath me, is that so much of a victory in a world where everything you ever communicate by keys can forever be used against you? No matter what your opinion, someone out there holds the polar opposite. Every opinion we hold is a crime somewhere.
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Friday, June 21, 2013
That'll Teach You - A Mostly Political Review of World War Z
There are a number of plot points revealed in this piece. If you wish to avoid any and all spoilers, please come back after you have seen the film.
The Thursday morning screening of World War Z in Doha was more crowded than any other I have been to, the early shows on the first day usually deserted save for me and my notebook. "Crowded," of course, meaning maybe 50 people, all told. Still, that's something.
This film has had a lot of chatter about it for a long time, mostly because the production was plagued with problems from the beginning through to its (delayed) release. Of course, the number of my fellow cinema-goers yesterday that pay any attention to film blogs is probably nil. At any rate, I went into the theater with well-tempered expectations.
As for the movie as a movie, it was pretty good. Anyway, better than I had expected based on everything I have read about the production. If you're interested in knowing more about what I thought of it on the surface, please check out my review via Doha Film Institute. This, however, is for everything else that has been percolating in my head about the film-- mostly, the politics.
Producer/Star (Starducer?) Brad Pitt has been very forthcoming on the fact that is isn't really a zombie film, but "a Trojan Horse for sociopolitical problems." So, of course, I was keeping a keen eye peeled (from between my fingers) to hidden-- or not so hidden-- meanings. As I was taking in this film in a cinema deep in the Middle East and as I am hyper-aware of possible cultural clashes, I admit that I winced when it was announced that Pitt's UN investigator character, Gerry, had to go to Jerusalem to find answers.
In Jerusalem, they built a wall. To keep out thePalestinians hordes of violent, soul-devoid creatures.
This is a serious wall. Hundreds of feet high. Gerry asks why they built it, as it was finished just in time for things to go globally pear-shaped, and the Israeli official he is there to visit tells him that they intercepted a communique from India of people fighting what translated to zombies. He explains that everyone insisted it had to be code for something, but "when 9 people think one thing, it is the job of the 10th to disagree." The 10th person figured zombies meant zombies, and they built a ginormous wall to keep them out.
But, as Gerry says with some surprise as he visits, they're letting people in. "The less zombies to fight," comes the answer. And they do let in Muslims as well as Hebrews-- in fact, they pray side by side. More than that, they sing and clap and cheer, overjoyed at being saved by this city that has become, it seems, the last bastion of safety and normalcy in the world. A young Muslim girl takes a microphone from someone with a smile and starts to sing over the PA system. Everyone joins in, despite race or religion, creating a beautiful scene of humanity coming together and an ever bigger racket, which, though Gerry seems to have completely forgotten as he stands in the midst of it chatting, attracts the zombies. The amplified noise turns the frantic but previously unfocused monsters outside towards a common target, and although they do not so much work together as crawl over each other to be the first to feast, gigantic, writhing columns of Zeke form against the outside of the wall, and only moments later the first tumbles over into the crowd below, quickly leading to the destruction of Jerusalem. On the last flight out, Gerry looks down with a heavy sigh at carnage raging below, the Dome of the Rock just moving out of the frame of the window.
So that'll teach you.
Some have called for World War Z to be boycotted because it shows Israel and Mossad in such a good light, but I don't know that it necessarily does that-- or, at least, any moreso than called for. Yes, as Gerry arrives the flag of Israel flaps proudly against a blue sky, backlit by the sun. The city is shown to be calm, peaceful, the opposite of everything else we've seen up until then. The image that this city is comparatively idyllic is called for. But why Israel? Why couldn't it have been, you know, anywhere else? I'd like to avoid dipping into the whole "Hollywood is run by Jews" tripe, and instead ask an honest question: Who is better at building big, concrete walls these days? The hysterical defenses Israel is known for would set them up better than anyone to erect gigantic barriers in a hurry.
Turkey, apparently, disagrees, and has changed all mentions of "Israel" to "Middle East" in the Arabic subtitles-- though it has been claimed that the subtitles came that way from the distributor. As I sadly can only recognize "no" and "Qatar" in Arabic, I cannot speak first hand as to whether that is the case here, but I haven't heard of anything that indicates so.
So what does it mean? Jerusalem does fall in the end, and specifically because of all that friendly singing together. It's a girl in a hijab that takes the microphone and amplifies that singing. Is the film trying to say that the Israelis are right to build a wall, and it would be best to simply keep to themselves and not try to help those left outside (as is presently the case)? Good fences make good neighbors!
Well, I've never been there, but I'm pretty sure Israelis sing, no matter what name they use for their god, and had even one of the IDF used that microphone (as would inevitably be the case) to give orders the zombies in this film are drawn to noise, no matter what its source.
The only cohort to survive the film with Gerry is an IDF soldier-- and a female one at that! She does, however, only survive (with a significant injury) because of his quick thinking and help. Her name is Segen ("just Segen" she says when asked if it is her first or last name). I did some research to find if there is some meaning behind that, but have come up mostly empty. The German word segen translates to blessing, benediction; but that is German and this is an Israeli, so let's not put too much faith into that. Israel is really just a stop in a big, globe-trotting adventure.
So I don't know, really. I love to find metaphors and deconstruct societal issues hidden in films, but this one is just too big and fast and complex to do so. Zombie films are often a Trojan Horse for societal issues, but Shaun of the Dead is far more straightforward in that respect.
What with the opening sequence going from happy, simple life to shots of talk shows and families ignoring each other for their phones, and then going to shots of animals tearing each other apart, one could say this is a message to keep things simple, to focus on each other instead of ourselves. One scientist says of the sickness "the airplanes were perfect delivery systems" so you could say this is a message against globalization. The thing with that, is that airplanes wouldn't be perfect delivery systems in this case, as the transformation takes you over 12 seconds after being infected. Airplanes are perfect delivery systems for illness in general, but one that immediately turns a person into a rabid monster would spread through an airplane and likely down it within minutes, so it is hard to even believe that all corners of the world would be reached so immediately. Errors in science really bother me in films.
A big budget creature film that did a good job as a creature film and as a completely undeniable message vector was District 9.
In the end, I'd rather enjoy World War Z for what it is-- a tense zombie film that yet manages not to be very gory.
The Thursday morning screening of World War Z in Doha was more crowded than any other I have been to, the early shows on the first day usually deserted save for me and my notebook. "Crowded," of course, meaning maybe 50 people, all told. Still, that's something.
This film has had a lot of chatter about it for a long time, mostly because the production was plagued with problems from the beginning through to its (delayed) release. Of course, the number of my fellow cinema-goers yesterday that pay any attention to film blogs is probably nil. At any rate, I went into the theater with well-tempered expectations.
As for the movie as a movie, it was pretty good. Anyway, better than I had expected based on everything I have read about the production. If you're interested in knowing more about what I thought of it on the surface, please check out my review via Doha Film Institute. This, however, is for everything else that has been percolating in my head about the film-- mostly, the politics.
Producer/Star (Starducer?) Brad Pitt has been very forthcoming on the fact that is isn't really a zombie film, but "a Trojan Horse for sociopolitical problems." So, of course, I was keeping a keen eye peeled (from between my fingers) to hidden-- or not so hidden-- meanings. As I was taking in this film in a cinema deep in the Middle East and as I am hyper-aware of possible cultural clashes, I admit that I winced when it was announced that Pitt's UN investigator character, Gerry, had to go to Jerusalem to find answers.
In Jerusalem, they built a wall. To keep out the
This is a serious wall. Hundreds of feet high. Gerry asks why they built it, as it was finished just in time for things to go globally pear-shaped, and the Israeli official he is there to visit tells him that they intercepted a communique from India of people fighting what translated to zombies. He explains that everyone insisted it had to be code for something, but "when 9 people think one thing, it is the job of the 10th to disagree." The 10th person figured zombies meant zombies, and they built a ginormous wall to keep them out.
But, as Gerry says with some surprise as he visits, they're letting people in. "The less zombies to fight," comes the answer. And they do let in Muslims as well as Hebrews-- in fact, they pray side by side. More than that, they sing and clap and cheer, overjoyed at being saved by this city that has become, it seems, the last bastion of safety and normalcy in the world. A young Muslim girl takes a microphone from someone with a smile and starts to sing over the PA system. Everyone joins in, despite race or religion, creating a beautiful scene of humanity coming together and an ever bigger racket, which, though Gerry seems to have completely forgotten as he stands in the midst of it chatting, attracts the zombies. The amplified noise turns the frantic but previously unfocused monsters outside towards a common target, and although they do not so much work together as crawl over each other to be the first to feast, gigantic, writhing columns of Zeke form against the outside of the wall, and only moments later the first tumbles over into the crowd below, quickly leading to the destruction of Jerusalem. On the last flight out, Gerry looks down with a heavy sigh at carnage raging below, the Dome of the Rock just moving out of the frame of the window.
So that'll teach you.
Some have called for World War Z to be boycotted because it shows Israel and Mossad in such a good light, but I don't know that it necessarily does that-- or, at least, any moreso than called for. Yes, as Gerry arrives the flag of Israel flaps proudly against a blue sky, backlit by the sun. The city is shown to be calm, peaceful, the opposite of everything else we've seen up until then. The image that this city is comparatively idyllic is called for. But why Israel? Why couldn't it have been, you know, anywhere else? I'd like to avoid dipping into the whole "Hollywood is run by Jews" tripe, and instead ask an honest question: Who is better at building big, concrete walls these days? The hysterical defenses Israel is known for would set them up better than anyone to erect gigantic barriers in a hurry.
Turkey, apparently, disagrees, and has changed all mentions of "Israel" to "Middle East" in the Arabic subtitles-- though it has been claimed that the subtitles came that way from the distributor. As I sadly can only recognize "no" and "Qatar" in Arabic, I cannot speak first hand as to whether that is the case here, but I haven't heard of anything that indicates so.
So what does it mean? Jerusalem does fall in the end, and specifically because of all that friendly singing together. It's a girl in a hijab that takes the microphone and amplifies that singing. Is the film trying to say that the Israelis are right to build a wall, and it would be best to simply keep to themselves and not try to help those left outside (as is presently the case)? Good fences make good neighbors!
Well, I've never been there, but I'm pretty sure Israelis sing, no matter what name they use for their god, and had even one of the IDF used that microphone (as would inevitably be the case) to give orders the zombies in this film are drawn to noise, no matter what its source.
The only cohort to survive the film with Gerry is an IDF soldier-- and a female one at that! She does, however, only survive (with a significant injury) because of his quick thinking and help. Her name is Segen ("just Segen" she says when asked if it is her first or last name). I did some research to find if there is some meaning behind that, but have come up mostly empty. The German word segen translates to blessing, benediction; but that is German and this is an Israeli, so let's not put too much faith into that. Israel is really just a stop in a big, globe-trotting adventure.
So I don't know, really. I love to find metaphors and deconstruct societal issues hidden in films, but this one is just too big and fast and complex to do so. Zombie films are often a Trojan Horse for societal issues, but Shaun of the Dead is far more straightforward in that respect.
What with the opening sequence going from happy, simple life to shots of talk shows and families ignoring each other for their phones, and then going to shots of animals tearing each other apart, one could say this is a message to keep things simple, to focus on each other instead of ourselves. One scientist says of the sickness "the airplanes were perfect delivery systems" so you could say this is a message against globalization. The thing with that, is that airplanes wouldn't be perfect delivery systems in this case, as the transformation takes you over 12 seconds after being infected. Airplanes are perfect delivery systems for illness in general, but one that immediately turns a person into a rabid monster would spread through an airplane and likely down it within minutes, so it is hard to even believe that all corners of the world would be reached so immediately. Errors in science really bother me in films.
A big budget creature film that did a good job as a creature film and as a completely undeniable message vector was District 9.
In the end, I'd rather enjoy World War Z for what it is-- a tense zombie film that yet manages not to be very gory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)