Halfway
So, continuing with the film festival. Usually, you get a looot of bad, weird movies, and a few very good ones. One of these very good ones is "Half Nelson" - and I have nooo idea why the movie is called Helf Nelson, so if anyone can enlighten me, I would appreciate it.
The movie tells the story of a teacher in a public school. He is also the coach of the girl's basketball team. He is also on cocaine and crack. He is a very nice guy - a good teacher, worried with his students - but he is an addict.
It is really great. Simple, but not simple at all, and I just love that. It is a small stor
y, but it is a very good one. It doesn't impose you with morals, it doesn't say that he is a bad guy, it doesn't set him as a bad example. It shows his struggle between his job, his students, his life - and his love of drugs. Because at one point, things start to get mixed up. It is impossible to keep different aspects of his life away from each other, locked in little safe boxes that only open at his will. He spends half of the movie trying to explain to the students how 
opposing forces run the universe and form history, and in the end, he has to face the opposing forces that act on him and make a decision, something that will decide his future, or at least resolve his present.
The movie has no opening date in Brazil, so maybe it won't even be out in the cinemas after the festival. If you can, go see it. It won't change your life - and it never promises so. And that lack of pretension is one of the best things about it. And Ryan Goslin, of course!
beijos
Sao Paulo International Film Festival
Hey
This is just a warning post, that a looot of my posts in the next week or so will be about movies. We are now in the middle of the Sao Paulo International Film Festival, and I haven't seen a third of the
movies I would like to have seen - seems everything is conspiring against me this week. But anyway, this will just meant as a kind of warning and to comment 2 short films I saw yesterday: "Happiness" and "I want to be a Pilot".
"Happiness" is about an old lady that sees a box of happiness for sale. I should also mention that there are white shiny and pointy shoes in the movie (if you know me, yoú'll get the reference. If not, nevermind, it's not that important). And "I want to be a Pilot" is a sad, sad poem read by an african boy, while he walks around in the destroyed place he lives in. It was sad, but somehow it didn't touch people th
e way it supposed to do. I don't if it was because the approach to the subject was as it usually is, or simply because the subject doesn't matter to us anymore. Not that it doesn't matter, it's still a sad and tragic thing, but maybe after seeing it too much we are just immune to it. And that was also what made the movie sadder for me - the fact that I used to be more affected by things like that.
That's all for the shorts. Now, be ready for the rest...
beijos
The one who stands alone
Hey!So, tonight, I went to yet another play. I had read a review of this one and it was very good, so I thought I'd give it a try, even though it was far, faaar away. The play is called "An enemy of the people", and was written by Henrik I
bsen, a norwegian writer, in 1882. It is the story of a doctor- amazingly enough, for those who lived in Finland, the doctor's name is Stockmann!! But ok, not the point. The doctor finds that the thermal baths, for which the city is widely known for and a that play a big part of the its economical survival, are infected and have to be closed down for repairs. At first, he has the press on his side (represented by 2 journalists and the financer of the newspaper that claims to be the voice of the people). Having the press, to him, means having the power. But, as the journalist in the play says, "we, journalists, a
ren't worth anything". And the press changes sides when they find out how much that information will cost to the city and its people. Their obligation to the truth - which they fiercily claim in the beginning of the play - is soon forgotten, when they decide that their obligation to themselves and their own benefit is worth more than simply the truth. And like this, he goes from being the savior of the people to being the enemy of the people, and his voice is completely shut out by the government and the press. I have been going to a lot of plays, and I have been writing about all of them, so I had thought not to write about this one (and I won't write anything about the actors or anything like that, although they were indeed very good). But I just can't not write. The play is so honest, and so true, and even though it was written in 1882, the depiction of politics is still valid today, in Norway, in Brazil, wherever. Sometimes, you would just hear people laughing out loud in the audience, because they identified the lines just spoken with the speaches we hear everyday. "We are the voice of the people", they all claim.
In the end (yes, I am telling the end of the play, if you don't wanna know, go away), the doctor is almost expelled from the city, his very few supporters lose their jobs, for defending the truth. For defending that every majority is stupid, and the situation we are in is because of this stupid majority rule. Majorities don't think, he says, they don't know, they don't see. They just follow, and think of their own interests, usually in the short term. And after all this, he still believes. He doesn't bend, he doesn't give in to the stupidity of the majority or the betrail of the press. His last words in the play are "I have to say this in a very low voice, because most people still must discover this for themselves. The strongest man is the one who stands alone". If this sentence alone doesn't justify the existence of this post, I can't.that's it, loves. beijos
painting by Pedro Charters, "multidão 2".
Literary Journalism
Hey
Continuing my cultural ramblings on this lovely blog... now, a book. Hiroshima, by John Hersey. The book was originally an article for the New Yorker - like many of the writings of the "new journalism" period. In fact, this particular article was published not in chapters, as it usually was the case, but it was published entirely in one edition of the magazine - which meant that none of the normal sections was published in that edition, just Hersey's text. And it was not only a historical edition, but one of the fastest selling numbers of the New Yorker.
Obviously, it tells the story of Hiroshima, and the atomic bomb that destroyed it. Most importantly, it tells the story of 6 people who survived the bomb, and how they - and the rest of the city - returned to their lives, having to rebuild them from scratch. He made the story of the bomb and it's effects human, giving the reader faces to go with the story, which is one of the things that made it so special.
The book is interesting not only because of the story of those particular 6 people, but because they reflect the japanese society and it´s values. How accepting they were, how they moved on and, well, lived. Theydidn't complain, moan, or drown in self pity. They just got up and went on.
I am quite fond of literary journalism, so I am maybe a bit biased on this post. Still, with all my knowledge and wisdom, I will recommend this one, concluding with a quote from the author himself, that obviously knows better than me: "Journalism allows its readers to witness history; fiction gives its readers an opportunity to live it".
beijos
My Kingdom for a Horse.....
Hey So, after this lovely 4 day holiday in Brazil, I think I can say I am a person with more culture. Or, at least, a person who is trying to be more cultured, and enjoy the possibilities the city offers.
I went with my cousin to see 2 plays, 2 different productions of Shakespeare's Richard III. A rich version, performed in a noble part of the city, with actors from Globo (the big, mean TV network that practically controlls the country) and a director that is our version of David Letterman, plus 100 kgs; and a poor version, performed in a small place near the decadent city center, and with not so known actors or director. And, for one of the first times, money did not buy happiness. The poor play was amazing. the actors were scary good (especially Richard the III) and the limitations caused by lack of money were overcome with creative effective solutions. The rich version of the play was so much worse!!! The lead actor was very good, a bit exxagerated at times, but very good. The rest of the actors were bad, but what killed the play was the text. The text, Shakespeare's text, was so simple, so stripped of it's virtues! The person who adapted it for the play tried to make it so much more simple that it lost all it's qualities. I think he tried to make it that simple so that it would be more popular, so that the audience would understand it more easily. Like a Shakespeare fro dummies book. 
In my most honest opinion, there is no point in that. Richard the III is so interesting because of all the mean things he says and does, and because of how complex his plots are. It is so amusing to see how he makes his way to power, fooling - and killing - everyone that stands in his way. It's a bit mean of me, and a bit prejudiced, but I believe in it: Shakespeare is not for everyone, it's complicated, complex, and its beauty lies just in that complexity. I don't think by simpliflying the text to reach the masses you actually do a good service. You mask the fact that they are not getting it, you kill the text's meaning when you kill it's subtle ironies, twists. To sum it up, I think it's meaningless, and basically a lie. But that's just me.
beijos
Anna Politkovskaya
Hey So, these are old news, but I just saw it now and I think it's too important not to be mentioned.
I only have the fondest memories of Russia. My experience there was great; beautiful, helped and disturbed by the snow - my first snow - that insisted on falling over us, wetting my shoes, my socks, my skin and my thoughts. The museums, the history there just seems to surround you everywhere you are. My experience with the Russians wasn't great, I must admit, and the misery of the most of the people - poor to the bone, sad enough to make you just want to sit and admire their pain. But I am digressing.
Anna Politkovskaya, a Russian journalist, known for her criticism of the situatio
n in Chechnya, was murdered last week. She was shot in front of her apartment last Saturday (or in her elevator, depending on the report you read). Her editors have called her murder an attempt on press freedom, which it certainly is. But it's not the only point to be made here. She was about to publish another article about the abuses against human rights in Chechnya, the ever troublesome region for Russia. She had already been a fierce critic of Putin's policies for years. The same Putin kept quiet for 3 long days after her death, angering the rest of the press. The article was published after all - even unfinished - but it doesn't change the fact that she was killed for facing a system that didn't wasn't to be questioned. It still does not change the fact that her courage, even thought it might have helped the world, ended up being her doom. Society was helped - but she is still dead. And I feel sorry not just because she was a journalist - but because it's hard to be hit in face with the fact that our world is still so bad, so uncheangeable and so old that it punishes people for their bravery.
(untitled)
Round one
Finally, a good fight!
Our beloved president decided that, after the tragedy - in his view, of course - of last Sunday, he would attend the debates before the second round of the elections. It was established that one of the causes he didn't win the election in the first round as he predicted was because the people saw his absence on the debates as a lack of respect and cowardice. So, he lost some of the votes and he is now trying to make up for it, and has announced that he'll attend all the debates. Tonight was the first one.
Well, first off, I have to mention how much his attitude has changed this past week. He now takes back half of what he had said before, trying to explain some of the things he said, trying to make nice with not only the people, but also with the press he claimed was persecu
ting him.
Now, to the debate itself. Niiiiice! They came very close to having a fight, and were, of course, helped by the journalists in the audience, thriving for blood. In my biased view of the discussion, the opponent won. Because at one point, the president was just short of answers. And the metaphors, oh good Gooood, the metaphors kill me! In explaining how he didn't know about the corruption, and the buying of the document (look a few posts down, please), he said 'well, when you are home in the kitchen, do you know what your son is doing in the living room?' Oh well, now, that is a good explanation! And it went on and on like that, until he had no more answers and just started teasing the other guy 'calm doooown, you don't have to get all nervous about it.... it doesn't suit you'. Doesn't suit what, the guy's complexion? Anyway, to be fair, the president had his moments. but my declared vote did not change, and was a bit reinforced by what I saw in the debate. there are still 2 more to come. Let's wait and see... maybe next time, there's blood and tears.
ps: sorry about all the comments on the elections, doesn't really concern some of you, but it's kind of important, you know? I'll try to restrain myself...
beijos
We must get out (a cold heart)
I was in my car the other day, and I was waiting for the traffic to move. It wasn't a street particulary full, but it always gives you a bit of trouble in the end. It's close to Paulista, it's always full of cars, and it's not in a bad area of the city.
After a few seconds of halt, a guy came up to my car. he was young, maybe 16, 17, and he was quite tall. I, of course, half panicked. I am always a little jumpy in the car, especially when alone, or at night, when the car stops... well, you get the picture. I am jumpy in the car. So, naturally, when the guy approached, and I saw the he wanted to clean my windshield (we have a looot of people trying to do that, only they don't really ask you if you want to have it cleaned, and they in fact just make it dirtier most of the time) I said "no, no, no, no", and I moved the car a bit to the side, as much as I could. But he still touched my car with the filthy cloth wrapped around a thing to clean the windshield.
Eventually, the guy went away, and I was left with my paranoid thoughts ranging from "am I too prejudiced?" to "what if the mark he left on the windshield is a sign for the robber in the next light?" - yes, we have that to! they tape something to your car, and the next guy robs you.
And then, I actually looked at the winsdshield. I don't know if it was the way I moved the car, if it was a mere accident or if it was the guy's intention to do it like that. And you know what I saw? Undeniably, perfectly drawn right there, in front of my eyes, on a traffic jam on a random street, on an idle tuesday afternoon?
A heart.
image:"Psychodrama" ... Edward Hopper
Around the corner
I was waiting for a more final result, but it seems that 99,84% of the votes is all they are gonna analyze tonight. Thank you God, thank you whoever did this, thank you for who leaked the pictures (I'll get to that in a minute), thank you a thousand times. The little joys we have in life.
I said (and HE said) he was gonna win in the first round? WROOONG!!!! Sometimes I hate being wrong. This was definitely not one of those times. Plain and simple: 48,60% of the votes is not enough to win an election in the first round.
A lot of corrupt people got elected in spite of being corrupt, including our former president that was taken out of office because he was stealing money. Ridiculous no? A lot of people who shouldn't even be allowed to represent the people, but anyway, I won't even go there now.
Now, explanation for the money: this money that you see here was found with two people that are connected to the president's party and/or the president himself, while trying to buy a document (
a fake one, kind of made on demand) that would incriminate one of the main candidates of the other big party, the one that poses most opposition on him. He tried to incriminate the guy that now is the governor of São Paulo, in an attempt to d
estabilize the whole party. But it back fired. The people were arrested, more of his close friends had to be "pushed aside" from his party and his campaign.. a mess, to sum it up. And the pictures of the money were being held until the end of the elections by the wrong people, so they wouldn't be a bad spot on the president's "clean slate" (very, very ironic. more than I can express in simple writing). And then, like magic, 2 days before the elections, they sort of appeared. The power of the press in a bitch, no? I don't know what will happen now. But do you know how children get hopeful with a little treat? That's me right now. Just around the corner, hidden behind the piles of money... maybe there's some hope?
So, continuing with the film festival. Usually, you get a looot of bad, weird movies, and a few very good ones. One of these very good ones is "Half Nelson" - and I have nooo idea why the movie is called Helf Nelson, so if anyone can enlighten me, I would appreciate it.
y, but it is a very good one. It doesn't impose you with morals, it doesn't say that he is a bad guy, it doesn't set him as a bad example. It shows his struggle between his job, his students, his life - and his love of drugs. Because at one point, things start to get mixed up. It is impossible to keep different aspects of his life away from each other, locked in little safe boxes that only open at his will. He spends half of the movie trying to explain to the students how 
opposing forces run the universe and form history, and in the end, he has to face the opposing forces that act on him and make a decision, something that will decide his future, or at least resolve his present.
