Allyson Hallman: La Vie Est Belle

I, too, am posting this wayyyy late.

     Nonetheless, I really liked La Vie Est Belle. As Molly pointed out, we as North Americans are so conditioned to believe that every single African country is full of people who are starving and afflicted with various diseases that we think won't affect us here (even though it's entirely possible). I personally knew that couldn't be true and that it's a stereotype that has been drilled into my head by the media, but it's still hard to overcome that stereotype and not have that thought pass through your head when you hear the name of an African country.
     This movie does a really good job, in my opinion, of dismantling that myth and showing that African people can definitely be happy. They might not have the first world luxuries that we're accustomed to, but their happiness is just as fulfilling, in a different way. I love that they make the music they love with whatever they have, during the scene where they're shining people's shoes in the streets to fight for a living. I love that this movie is full of the same theme of love that is overwhelmingly prevalent in Hollywood films, showing that although these people live in an entirely different culture, they too experience some of the same problems and some of the same desires because we're all just human.
     Likewise, this film shows that just because we have "North American privilege" doesn't mean that we can't experience the problems the African people do because, again, we're all just human. We too could have to fight for a living cleaning houses and shining people's shoes and acting as a chauffeur for a rich couple with no kids. We're not invincible, and I like to think that I didn't think that before watching this movie, although I know I did to some degree. But this movie really helped me understand that our North American view of African cultures and people is incomplete and skewed.

Death and the Maiden_ C. Collins

After reading Death and the Maiden as well as watching the Polanski adaptation it became very apparent that the text was much more willing to stay ambiguous unlike the film. One reason for the lack of ambiguity is due to what type of person is viewing the film, as well as what type of person would be reading the text version, the reason for each format also serves a purpose. The idea of functionality of film vs. text also can be discussed when comparing the film and text version of The Reluctant Fundamentalist. Films seem to all follow a formula (this is talking about Hollywood style films) that 1. you can't completely hate the main character, and 2. the film shouldn't crush the viewer's spirit in the end. Both text versions vary from the film guidelines in some way. The text Death and the Maiden encounters great ambiguity in the end, there is no relief for the reader. The reader does not know if the female protagonist truly found the person who did wrong to her.  The film however makes it so there is almost no doubt that Paulina was going to enact her revenge on a man who raped and tortured her. In the play, if Paulina is wrong then she is a crazed woman who just destroyed the life on an innocent-- which seems to be too much for a film watcher to handle. The Reluctant Fundamentalist  also varies greatly from text to film due to the constructs that most films seem abide by. If the film followed the text completly, the male protagonist would be utterly hated by most people. If the film followed the text completely, people may have even left the theatre before the film was over, due to disgust over the manipulation of Erica by Changez. The text also leaves the ending very ambigious, the film however sees no reason to do so since most watchers are not used to such ambiguity at the end of a film.

La Vie Est Belle (Super late...)

First off, I apologize that this post is so late!

From what I remember of La Vie Est Belle, the overarching message of the film is that there is always a silver lining. The film reminded me of the type of Western film that children would like- it had almost a Disney-esque plot in that there were clearly defined issues that needed to be resolved and that all were tied together at the end (a happy end, I might add) in a neat little package. What's different about La Vie Est Belle is that takes place in an area that many of us would associate with sadness, poverty, death and disease. By creating a film that encourages the decidedly African audience that "life is rosy", I think Mwese is trying to uplift the people that watch the film. 

The fact that the film is rich with African culture makes me agree with  Manthia Diawara's opinion that the film was purposefully incorporating African working-class culture into cinema. I really enjoyed how authentic the film felt and it really helped me to put myself in the situation of the citizens of the village in which the film takes place. It helped me realize that not everyone who is living in Africa in our generation is starving or dying of disease. As Americans, we are conditioned to believe Africa to be a place of desolation and despair when really the opposite is the truth. As is the reality in the United States, there are people throughout the country (or continent, in Africa's case) that are living full, happy lives and unfortunately, there are people who are less forunate as well. I know from seeing commericals on TV and from hearing about celebrities who make mission trips to Africa that I began to believe that everyone in Africa was unhappy and was desperate for Americans (or other well off countries) to come to their aid. From watching Life Is Rosy, I can see that, while Africa is not nearly as wealthy as the U.S., that does not mean that African people cannot be happy. The people in the village, including Kourou, are generally happy. They are aware that they are not the wealthiest people in the world, and as such, they are able to be truly appreciative of everything they have. I think that's a really great outlook to have on life. As Americans, many of us take so many things for granted- having food to eat, a bed to sleep in, and even having clean water to drink. We feel entitled to a lot of things, and we often do not feel appreciative of what we do have. I think if we were able to recognize how well off we are, we would all live happier, fuller lives. 

Death and The Maiden - Jamie Hughes

                 Out of all the movies we have watched thus far, I would have to say this one is my favorite. I enjoyed the satire and unpredictability of the plot. I felt the actors did a good job of keeping their character and sold the film to me. I also believe I enjoyed this film the most because it was the closest representation to Western film that we have seen in class. The film was produced with a large budget and followed many standard film protocols and angles, unlike many of the low budget documentaries we have watched. Not to say one is better than the other, but they do produce two separate types of feelings when being watched.

                The main difference I noticed between the play write and the film was the ending. I was a bit disappointed when the film decided it was necessary to prove Miranda guilty on screen to wrap up everything up. Unfortunately many movies do this in our culture because if the ending is left hanging, they are deemed as bad by people stating “What a horrible ending!” and “I can’t believe they just left us hanging like that!” The majority of people who watch films like to go through the whole story, including the ending, and when the end is not clear there is a feeling of anger or resentment towards the film. I feel that Polanski tried to avoid this negativity by adding in an ending, but this did take away from the impact of the story. By having the ending open ended like in the play, it creates a sense of pins and needles, trying to figure out what happened and who was actual crazy and who was right? Leaving the viewer with so many questions and not sure what to do next, to me, is a sign of a great work of art, distilling passion and curiosity in its viewers. 

Heather's thoughts on "Death and the Maiden"

            There were many similarities between the play and the film adaptation of Death and the Maiden. The play was open ended; the reader did not know what happened to any of the characters- if Roberto was guilty and Paulina was right all along. With the film, Polanski directed it so that the viewer did not leave asking many questions about the ending. For instance, in the play, Paulina and Gerardo go to the concert and Paulina “sees” Roberto, “He could be real or he could be an illusion in Paulina’s head” (67). In the film, we know that Roberto is at the orchestra because both Paulina and Gerardo look up and stare at Roberto.

            I enjoyed the play more than the film adaptation. I love endings that are pretty open and where the reader can decide how he or she wants the piece to end. With this film and The Reluctant Fundamentalist, the endings and many of the scenes are changed or simply removed. This is because sometimes scenes from books just do not come across right in a film form, and films are obviously, well, usually time restricted. Also, the director is free to put his or her interpretation of a piece into the film, and no one has the same analysis for anything.

Polansky and the Maiden

After having read Ariel Dorfman’s play and then watching the film adaptation, I must say I think the play was far more impactful.  The point of the play was to show the cycle of tyrannical violence that often happens when the oppressed come into power and how easy it is to become a tyrant.  What also made the play far more moving was its ability to never resolve if Dr. Miranda was guilty, if Gerardo was ineffective or if Paulina was striking out in blind vengeance. 

                While the acting was very well done in the film I was disturbed by the choice to make everything so deliberate and final.  Paulina destroys Miranda’s car establishing that there is no hint of escape.  Gerardo strikes Miranda instead of remaining distant as the Law is distant.  And finally, the audience views what seems to be an honest confession from Miranda while they Paulina say that people like him are often given alibis.  The audience was practically fed Polansky’s interpretation of the play.  In the end though I suppose that is what would make the film far less controversial.  It is what Polansky himself took away from Dorfman’s work. It is not a visual recording of Dorfman’s work.

Life and Debt

I was really shocked by everything that occurred in the documentary. However, and this may make me sound bad, but my knowledge of what goes on behind resort walls hasn’t hindered my desire to go visit these beautiful places. I am sure that this does not just happen in Jamaica, which is pretty sad to think about. As tourists, we are going to get away from the stress of working to pay off the things we have in our lives. I guess the reason I am not dissuaded to go to these poverty-ridden places is because I know that the US if full of poverty. I am not exactly sure of the percentage, but I know that a great number of people in America are well below the poverty line.

Yet, how many tourists come to America? To New York, to Philly, to any of our big cities? Unlike in these resorts, in America, just walking around in center city Philadelphia you see the homeless huddled on street corners. Visit Love Park and a homeless man will ask for money to take your photo for you with your camera, and by this point, he is actually pretty good at taking them too. Our poverty is not hidden. As college students, we will all (unless those who are very well off) be in debt, if we are not already. We are in debt to banks, loan distributors, our own parents. We are owned by the capitalist society in which we live to constantly spend money on the things we think we need, on top of the products we actually do need.