Movie Night at the OACC

A monthly film screening featuring selections and introductions by invited speakers. Organized by Jackie Im and hosted by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center.

May 22: Ten

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening Ten ( ده) by Iranian filmmaker Abbas Kiarostrami. The film follows a nameless woman (Mania Akbari) who, over the course of several days, converses with a variety of people in her car. Her conversations with, among others, her sister, a bride, a prostitute, a woman on her way to prayer, and her young son subtly explore gender issues in Iran. Filmed with untrained actors and using dashboard cameras, Ten was nominated for the Palme D’Or at the 2002 Cannes Film Festival. New York Times film critic A.O. Scott states,

These diffuse, inconclusive exchanges feel true to the random texture of daily life, and they allow the film’s theme to develop slowly and organically within the boundaries of its formal artifice, so that by the end you feel that the lives of the characters, and the complicated society they inhabit, have been illuminated. 

The film will be introduced by Zina Al-Shukri. Al-Shukri was born in 1978 in Baghdad, Iraq. She currently lives in Oakland and works in San Francisco, California. Al-Shukri is an emerging artist whose exhibition history includes Adobe Books, San Francisco, Patricia Sweetow Gallery, San Francisco, Jak Hanley Gallery, San Francisco, and Pulliam Deffenbach Gallery, Portland, OR. She received a BA from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock in 2006 and an MFA from the California College of the Arts in 2009. 

(In lieu of an available trailer, here is a short clip from the film.)

Ten
2002
89 minutes

7pm Tuesday
May 22, 2012

Visit this event on Facebook!

$5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im. 

Brandon Drew Holmes “Outro-duces” Perfect Blue

Perfect Blue - An “Outro-duction”

By Brandon Drew Holmes

“A startling, powerful film. If Alfred Hitchcock partnered with Walt Disney, they’d make a picture like this”.        

 -Roger Corman   

This quote by Roger Corman can be taken as a very blunt comparison of Satoshi Kon’s work to these two greats; it couldn’t be a better pairing. What Satoshi Kon has in common with these two film greats is a complete dedication to his medium, subject matter and viewers.  Their ability to tell a good story was key to their success, but also their intention to challenge the medium and the viewer.  

Satoshi Kon (1963-2010) is known for his films, Tokyo Godfathers, Paprika and Millennium Actress, but it is his first film that has earned him cult status: Perfect Blue (1997). This was his first effort as director. Kon had worked as animator and layout artist on other films as well as having produced his own manga. This project presented Kon with an opportunity to write, illustrate and direct a film to be based on the novel of the same name by Yoshikazu Takeuchi. Kon worked with Sadayuki Murai to develop a similar but unique story for his animated version, encouraging input from the author at all points. Keeping the central elements of idol, horror and obsession, the animated version of Perfect Blue became social commentary on the current state of Japanese entertainment as well the beginning of Kon’s venture into the blending of reality and dreams.

In his book, Black, The Reality Effect: Film Culture and the Graphic Imperative, film critic Joel Black, raises the question as to whether dreams are different from reality in the fantasy world of animation. He asks, “Are dreams (or nightmares) just dreams or are they as real as anything else in the film/ Is it possible to dream in animation, and if not, how is it possible to ever wake up?”

This question is interesting for me because I think cartoons/animation are nothing but dreams. Isn’t a dream merely fantasy, and isn’t fantasy simply an extension of our dreams desires/questions, and isn’t animation just that – fantasy? Isn’t animation a way we have made it possible to bring fantasies to into the realm of the visible? What makes the events of Perfect Blue confuse us is that we subconsciously acknowledge that this is a dream from the get go. It is the constant prodding of the reality or fact of the story that throws us off leaving us exposed and unguarded for the fantasy of the story. From the opening scene of the faux Power Rangers live on stage to the filming of Mima’s television character being raped in an all too real manner, we are constantly being reminded that somewhere in here there is reality and this reality is far more harrowing that the fiction being presented.

One particular way that Kon has structured his film as a hole for us to fall into is by highlighting the moments after the dream sequences. Instead of utilizing what he refers to as “totally boring” techniques (i.e., wavy lines, switches to sepia tones, swirls on the screen, close-ups of a character’s eye or dissolves), Kon presents an emphasized reality upon his characters reawakening. Kon claims that viewers are “to used to being treated kindly” and wants to make us work for our entertainment, not being children laying in bed as mommy reads us a story or watching Tom and Jerry’s chase to an obvious demise. By putting the focus on Mima’s snap back to “reality” we are not given a moment to register for ourselves whether what we just saw was real or not, Mima or not. This approach isn’t so much as a trick as it is the result of good planning.

There is one particular scene I cannot decide whether is depicting fact or fiction, Mima or Rumi, good or bad: the gruesome murder of the photographer. The editing of this scene flashes images of Mima’s photo shoot, reminding you that in the world’s eyes, Me-mania’s eyes, Mima’s eyes (and as we find out at the end Rumi’s as well) he has just reason to be added to the list of attacked. Mima has emotional/psychological motivation to commit this crime. This is true of the writer who is murdered, but in that instance she is still naive and refuses to acknowledge her feelings, her frustrations. 

Is this a case of split personality? Or is Mima a complete victim. Is she healthy and whole in her thoughts or have these events opened up some hidden issues? Are these issues growing on their own without Rumi’s instigation? Could all of these be simultaneously true? Take into consideration the reveal at the end that escalates our confusion as to Mima’s true state of mind. What we see is a startling unattractive and wrought Rumi sloppily chasing after her victim, but what Mima sees is her repressed self, the ironically “good” part of her, who is joyously skipping nonchalantly after her. Is it possible that both these reads are correct. Maybe Mima is so far gone that she must not only out run the dangers of reality, but also those of fantasy as well  But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this fairy-like virtual Mima is not what Mima is seeing, but what Rumi is imagining of herself. Maybe Mima is seeing Rumi, sweaty and fatigued, eyes filled with rage, but what Rumi is feeling (and we in turn are seeing) is her angelic personification of Mima.

I use to feel underwhelmed by the ending until I reconsidered Mima’s statement to the nurse, “I wouldn’t be where I am today without her”. In two respects Mima owes everything to Rumi; her career yes, but also her awakening and subsequent claiming of herself. Kon has stated that this film’s message, if anything, is about “finding oneself”.  Miwa gives a smile and wink, meant for us. Is this a gift from her for staying with her till the end?  Is she hinting to us in our reality, that what we just saw may not be real or that our real may not be reality?  That this movie might actually be a movie and she an actual actor?  Is it a nod to her triumph? I think Mima’s “smile” was a bit of a play on the nurses gossiping, the first women doing so in a film full of intrigue and rumor. But I also think it solidifies the key themes of the film: Mima’s pursuit of her identity, and also her pursuit of a belief in her identity. The smile and the line are a perfect example of breaking the “fourth wall.” At this point, the audience may still have some nagging doubts about Mima’s sanity and whether what they are seeing is or isn’t part of her fantasy. The scene is resolved by her taking off her sunglasses, looking at the audience (through a mirror – the use of numerous reflective surfaces in the film was intentional on Kon’s part to attempt to make Mima’s life in the film feel like that of one of a television show) and reassuring us that she is there and that she is ok.

To discuss and clarify Perfect Blue and its characters without discussing the confusion centered on its title would be negligent. It has been noted that the title is as confusing as the plot. For a possible explanation I am going to pull from Darren Aronofsky’s Black Swan. Aronofsky claims Perfect Blue was not an inspiration for his film, though is total bullshit. There is a blaring similarity between the plots of the two films, and Aronofsky was more than aware of Perfect Blue, having purchased the rights to it so that he could film, frame for frame, the scene of Mima in the bath for a sequence in Requiem for a Dream. In a scene in Black Swan, the main character Nina Sayers is being tucked in by her mother (who is listed in the credits as ‘The Queen’) comforts her by saying “Everything will be better in the morning. It always is”. This is in direct relation to Perfect Blue and it’s final scene where on a beautiful day Mima exits Rumi’s hospital to a perfect blue sky. A perfect, beautiful day, not because of the weather, but because of the mindset that she has achieved: she feels as if she can conquer anything. She is thrilled to experience the world. We want to get out and live life and enjoy ourselves, to have this “perfect” moment.  Which is also Nina Sayers’ last statement before she passes away, “I felt it. Perfect. It was perfect.”

 ________________________

Brandon Drew Holmes introduced Perfect Blue at the Oakland Asian Cultural Center on April 17, 2012.

April 17: Perfect Blue

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening Perfect Blue (パーフェクトブル, Pāfekuto Burū) by Japanese filmmaker Satoshi Kon. The film tells the story of Mima Kirigoe, a member of a pop group called CHAM!, who decides to pursue a career as an actress. The sudden career change sparks dissatisfaction from her fans, most of all from her stalker Me-Mania. As Mima’s career progresses, her grip on reality loosens and Mima can’t distinguish real life from fantasy. A landmark Anime film, Perfect Blue has been hailed by filmmaker Roger Corman and described the film as:

A startling and powerful film. If Alfred Hitchcock partnered with Walt Disney they’d make a picture like this.

The film will be accompanied by a closing statement by Brandon Drew Holmes. The only son of Baskerville Holmes and Mia Vaughn, Brandon Drew Holmes is “a man of bold statements” whose curatorial practice focuses on revealing and playing in the area of aporia and purposeful misuse . Taking part in a handful of projects, Holmes aim so far has been to produce a collaboration of sorts with the artist, in which to investigate not just the object itself, but the location and manner in which we present it, as well as the root of the effort.

Perfect Blue
1997
80 minutes

7pm Tuesday
April 17, 2012

Visit this event on Facebook!

$5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im. 

March 20: Tears of the Black Tiger

  

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening Tears of the Black Tiger (ฟ้าทะลายโจร Fa Thalai Chon) by Thai filmmaker Wisit Sasanatieng. The film tells the story of Dum (Chartchai Ngamsan), a poor boy who falls in love at first sight with the wealthy Rumpoey (Stella Malucchi). Their Shakespearean romance is met with parental disapproval and a band of rampaging bandits led by the villainous Mahesuan (Supakorn Kitsuwon).  This stylized film pays homage to Thai action films, Westerns and romantic melodramas of the 1950s and 1960s and was selected for the 2001 Cannes Film Festival. New York Times critic A.O. Scott noted that, 

There may be crazier movies than “Tears of the Black Tiger,” Wisit Sasanatieng’s Thai cowboy melodrama of betrayal and forbidden love, but I can’t think of one that is quite so mad about its own craziness. What is most startling is not Mr. Sasanatieng’s compulsive, fetishistic assembly of bits and pieces of the movie past; this kind of pastiche has, over the past decade and a half, gone from novelty to cliché. The source of the movie’s seductive appeal lies less in its vivid fakery — the mock vintage-Technicolor hues, the musical and visual quotations, the miasma of camp hanging in the air — than in its disarming sincerity.

The film will be introduced by Post Brothers. Post Brothers is a critical enterprise that includes Matthew Post, a curator and writer currently working from an elevator in Oakland. Post Brothers has recently developed projects at COCO Kustverein, Proyectos Monclova, Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, the San Francisco Antique and Design Mall, Queen’s Nails Projects, and the CCA Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts. Post Brothers’ essays and articles have been published in SpikeKaleidoscopeMoussePazmakerArtSlantCurating NowWoo, and Snowball as well as numerous artist publications and exhibition catalogues.


Tears of the Black Tiger
2000
110 minutes

7pm Tuesday
March 20, 2012

Visit this event on Facebook!

$5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im. 

Aaron Harbour Introduces The Sword of Doom

The Sword of Doom – An Introduction

By Aaron Harbour

Introduction to an introduction

All narrative – and in our case here, film – has at its core some manner of conflict. These can range from interpersonal conflicts between groups due to some differences that appear to be irreconcilable beyond a zero-sum hashing out, to an internal struggle following one person as they navigate a fork in their road.

The reasons behind the propensity for film to show violence are three-fold. First, the violent act or scene is a way for the slow, subtle, and nebulous struggles making up a life to be externalized, visualized, and examined. This latching of physical exchange to psychological conflict can present a resolution with one party’s defeat or victory; it is telling that the victor’s cause often literally pierces the opponent. Second, images of violence are inherently entertaining – the danger represented, though certainly of no direct physical danger to the viewer, stirs deep-seated empathetic fear and emotion. Audience reactions (chills, pit-of-the stomach distemper, flinching) are curious examples of a break in the fourth wall. Third, violent imagery gives rise to some of the most aesthetically attractive scenes in film. Being as the viewer has little to no point of reference for a sword fight or an alien invasion the director is freed from the constraints of expectation or truth-value, thus visual manifestations of violence can explore the creative, the purely mannerist possibilities of cinema. These facets of the viewer’s relationship to pictorialized violence, the presentational, empathetic, and aesthetic are dependable filmic tropes employed in an infinite variety of narrative situations and in as many stylistic manners.


An example of uses of violence and a diversion from the film at hand

In Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction, violence occurs as a series of drawn out, tension-building exercises in style featuring individuals at the top of their game. A lengthy scene in which a hired gun and the woman he is charged with entertaining and guarding turns ugly with an overdose leading to a violent cure. But even this sequence, ending with a huge hypodermic needle to the heart is thrilling, with the final violent plunge a relief. This contrasts with Tarantino’s next film Jackie Brown. Here the violence is quick, ugly, and performed in a mix of desperation and off-handedness by the main circle of characters whose power and influence, rooted in unspoken youthful exploits perhaps mirroring those of the characters of Pulp Fiction, is fading. Robert De Niro’s character is recently out of prison, and having served his time tight-lipped, finds himself under the employ of an old friend and fellow criminal who has done well for himself in the intervening years. But the years have drained some of the color from each of their flowers, De Niro’s criminal skill set reduced by irresponsibility and impotence. Just prior to murdering him for some manner of bungling, Samuel L Jackson’s character says to him ‘Shit, your ass used to be beautiful’, which is as much an indictment of his own waning power. The murder that follows feels rather like stepping on a tack; a simple and efficient performance of a task versus a relief of exciting tension in a standoffs in Pulp Fiction, or the half-melee half-chess game of bullet ballet in a John Woo film. Violence is a substance forming the vital presented form of conflict, and/or can be the backbone upon which a film is built with painfully irrelevant exposition filling the gaps between action scenes. 


‘The Best’

In the classic western narrative, the hero of the film is gifted with the fastest draw and the best aim, and we are impressed by his utility when he uses this skill set to dispense the bad guys, often in bulk. The initial sequence in Sergio Leone’s wonder filled Once Upon a Time in the West presents what the viewer, trained by previous films, are to suppose are three tough hired killers, waiting for a train and in turn their prey. When the train comes and goes, leaving behind it our mysterious hero, the clever exchange of words outlines his impossibly confident nature.  He asks if they brought him a horse and the leader of the gang replies they are shy one horse. To which our hero retorts, ‘you brought two too many.’ They are promptly dispatched, we are impressed, and a tone is set in which we know he is ‘the best’.

This being ‘the best’ can be a curse like in Shane, in which the titular former gunslinger can’t escape his past and settle down, being drawn into heroism by a sort of violent spectre which perhaps cares little if what is killed is for some manner of good or bad, just as long as killing continues. Shane rides away, despite cries from a child who has latched onto him: “Shane… Shane… Come back!” Because of the implied inevitability of a repetition of this episode. The film A History of Violence features a neat revision of this plot but leads our hero into darker territory. Having unleashed his abilities, his ‘the best’-ness, the result of his actions, both outside of his family and the intersection of his violent nature with his family and wife (sex is violence, a la Jane’s Addiction), what is left behind in the final shot is a pensive image in which the future is far from given. ‘The Best’ is more often driven into action dispassionately, dolling out his murderous skills to those in need, riding away before receiving a proper thank you from the community he’s freed of the grip of evil. In any of these cases, characters of this type leave behind a heap of corpses, we the viewer are content to bury them en masse; however challenged socially the lead character he granted the viewers’ trust in coming out of the trials before him victorious, He is a hero; whether vengeful as in Once Upon a Time in the West or seemingly begrudgingly ensnared to action in Fist Full of Dollars, the result of all the death is good.


Okamoto

To understand Sword of Doom, Kihachi Okamoto’s 19th film, it seems key to me to watch it with an awareness of its use of violence and violence makers, both in its dependence on archetypical characters and situations and in its subversion of these. His previous chanbara (violent, period films featuring samurai) Samurai Assassin stared Toshirô Mifune as a skilled individual outcast from society but certainly morally good. In Sword of Doom we are presented another ‘the best’ among other archetypes. There are unfaithful women, a gifted student, a teacher whose skill we expect to be incredible should he be tested (softly underplayed by Mifune), warring factions of various shades of good or bad, political intrigue et al. Much of this goes is as it would be in any samurai film. But into this archetypical world steps Ryunosuke Tsukue, played with irascible furor by Tatsuya Nakadai. Without home, without origin story, Ryunosuke is perhaps ‘the best’, but his motivations are hard, perhaps impossible to ascertain. Okamoto creates a character that can embody a presentation of the violent very different from the previously discussed films. Violence is beautiful in this film because the film itself is quite attractive, mirroring in precision the swordplay integral to its world. But to what end is the film heading? Intended as the first of a trilogy based on a serial story filmed many times before and since, we are left at the end with a difficult proposition.

It might make sense to align Ryunosuke with Javier Bardem’s character in No Country for Old Men, and in that film Tommy Lee Jones’s character gives a fairly perfect description of what Okamoto might be saying in Sword of Doom. There was this boy I sent to the ‘lectric chair at Huntsville Hill here a while back. My arrest and my testimony. He killt a fourteen-year-old girl. Papers said it was a crime of passion but he told me there wasn’t any passion to it. Told me that he’d been planning to kill somebody for about as long as he could remember. Said that if they turned him out he’d do it again. Said he knew he was going to hell. “Be there in about fifteen minutes”. I don’t know what to make of that. I sure don’t. The crime you see now, it’s hard to even take its measure. It’s not that I’m afraid of it. I always knew you had to be willing to die to even do this job. But, I don’t want to push my chips forward and go out and meet something I don’t understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He’d have to say, “O.K., I’ll be part of this world.” 

 ________________________

Aaron Harbour introduced The Sword of Doom at the Oakland Asian Cultural Center on February 21, 2012.

February 21: The Sword of Doom

  

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening The Sword of Doom (大菩薩峠 Dai-bosatsu tōge) by Japanese filmmaker Kihachi Okamoto. The film stars Tatsuya Nakadai and Toshiro Mifune in a story of a wandering samurai, surrounded by - and the cause of - a maelstrom of violence. “The sword is the soul. An evil sword is an evil sword.” In his 1967 review of the film, New York Times critic Howard Thompson called The Sword of Doom “a stark, meshed and well-made film, not for the squeamish.” Film critic and cultural historian Geoffrey O’Brien wrote, in his notes for the Criterion Collection release of the film:

Kihachi Okamoto’s The Sword of Doom is likely to strike the innocent viewer as an exercise in absurdist violence, tracking the career of a nihilistic swordsman from his gratuitous murder of a defenseless old man to his final descent into what looks like a rehearsal for global annihilation, as, in a kind of ecstasy, he slaughters a seemingly endless army of attackers both real and phantasmal. The extreme but stylized violence of Okamoto’s film epitomizes a style of Japanese filmmaking that profoundly influenced such directors as Sam Peckinpah and Sergio Leone, and it would be easy - and not entirely inaccurate - to read the film in the light of the cynical antiheroic trends that surfaced in genre films all over the world in the 1960s and surmise that it represented the same kind of break with heroic tradition as, say, spaghetti Westerns.   

The film will be introduced by curator and cultural producer Aaron Harbour. Based in Oakland, CA, Harbour received some modicum of education at the San Francisco Art Institute. He curates shows at MacArthur B Arthur in Oakland. He runs an art critique blog on Facebook as Curiously Direct and write occasional long-form reviews for Artcards. He has performed his music and/or DJed at various venues throughout the Bay Area such as the Berkeley Art Museum, Mighty, Club 6, LiPo Lounge, and Southern Exposure.  


Sword of doom - Kihachi Okamoto - Trailer by k-chan

The Sword of Doom
1966
119 minutes

7pm Tuesday
February 21, 2012

Visit the event page on Facebook!

$5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im. 

Anthony Discenza Introduces House

How Seven Beauties Were Eaten! The Strange History of an Even Stranger House

We have Steven Spielberg and a killer shark to thank, albeit highly indirectly, for the indescribable experience of House (Hausu, as it is known in Japan). Following the massive success of the movie Jaws, the Japanese film industry, which had been in something of the doldrums throughout the 1970’s, decided that they needed to create their own equivalent to Spielberg’s blockbuster. In 1977, the esteemed Toho production company solicited a script from Nobuhiko Obayashi – at the time a young, experimental filmmaker lately turned successful commercial director. Obayashi had started out, along with many of his impoverished cinephile friends, in the late 1950’s, making very short experimental films. Heavily influenced by the French New Wave, Obayashi was a co-founder of the experimental cinema collective Film Indepéndent. Unlike his friends, however, when Obayashi was approached by advertising firms to make commercials for them, he gladly went along, seeing the format of the commercial as, in its own way, just another kind of film. Additionally, because commercials at the time often had very large budgets, working on them allowed Obayashi opportunities to experiment creatively, what would have been impossible for him in any other contexts. Over a period of just a few years, Obayashi shot over 200 commercials, many featuring big stars from the West like Kirk Douglas and Charles Bronson, and established a name for himself as one of the most sought-after commercial directors.

When Toho approached him about a script, Obayashi decided to turn to his then 10-years-old daughter, Chigumi, for a consultation. He was interested in finding out what sort of things a child would be most interested in seeing in a movie. He took a number of the ideas generated from conversations with his daughter – the main one was about a house that eats young girls – and turned them over to a screenwriter friend, Chiho Katsura, to prepare a script. Obayashi gave Katsura free rein to do whatever he wanted with the material, instructing him only to try to incorporate the ideas suggested by Chigumi. The resulting script for House was in some ways a relatively straightforward ghost story about a house haunted by the vengeful and embittered spirit of a woman whose lover had disappeared in the war, and seven unsuspecting young schoolgirls who show up for a visit. There are many traditional elements – the demonic aunt in the film is essentially a bakemono, a vengeful, shape-shifting entity straight out of Japanese folklore, who also appears as the fluffy but malevolent ghost-cat, or Kaibyo. But the logic of the story had been filtered through the fractured prism of a child’s sensibility. 

Toho green-lighted the script remarkably quickly – to Obayashi’s surprise, the executives loved it. But, they told Obayashi, the film unfortunately could never be made. Every director they had shown the script to refused to work on it. Why don’t you let me direct it, Obayashi asked. Impossible, Toho said, you are not an employee of Toho.

What followed was perhaps an unprecedented media blitz, all engineered single-handedly by Obayashi. He took the highly unusual step of publishing Katsura’s script, which was well received by the public. The script was subsequently released as a manga, also to great success. Meanwhile, Obayashi continually discussed the film with the press as if its production was an established fact; he cast the main actresses and made sure they received plenty of attention in print media. An album of the non-existent film’s soundtrack was released. Over a period of two years, public demand for the film version of House grew and grew, until finally Toho had no choice but to capitulate. Obayashi was brought on to direct on what would be his first feature-length film.

A deep devotee of cinema, a student of the works of everyone from Kurosawa and Ozu to Truffaut and Godard, Obayashi wanted to make a film that was radically different from anything that was being made in Japan (or perhaps anywhere) at the time. He was not particularly interested in making a Jaws, or anything like an outright horror film at all – at the time, horror movies didn’t really exist as a distinct genre in Japanese cinema anyway. Rather, Obayashi conceived House as an example of what he describes as the “ghost-fantasy” genre of Japanese film. But Obayashi wanted to approach this genre through the prism of childhood, to embody a reality that represented the way a small child experiences the world. Obayashi saw filmmaking as ultimately a very complicated form of play, and he wanted the logic of play to drive not only the finished film, but also its very production. Drawing upon his extensive experience as a commercial director, pushed experimentation in every aspect of the film’s making, creating such an infectious atmosphere of playfulness on the set that eventually even those most stolid of Toho’s lighting and camera men began to enjoy themselves. Obayashi created no storyboards for the film, instead working completely out of his own head, arriving on the set each day with a grab bag of new ideas.

In House, Obayashi continually reveals, and revels in, the inherent artifice of cinema, continually, in almost every frame of the film, pushing it to its fullest extreme. There is not the slightest attempt at realism; rather, through his relentless exposing of filmic artifice, Obayashi creates an entirely new reality. The film is a kind of delirious catalog of the history of special effects – there is hardly a single scene that does not employ some form of animation or in-camera trick – but Obayashi continually exposes all of these as effects; his goal, he says, was for all the special effects in the film to look as fake as possible. There is plenty of gore in House, but it is a strangely innocent gore, a child’s drawing version of violence, full of disjointed, cartoonish imagery that literally explodes off the screen in a shower of jagged animated sparks. The film rockets along at a breakneck, ADD pace, full of rapid, disjunctive editing and abrupt shifts in visual style that are at first utterly disorienting, but which make perfect sense if one attempts to take on the mindset of a restless, very excitable child.

But what is in some ways most remarkable about House, looking back, is how amazingly successful it was. For all its seemingly radical experimentation, the film was in fact a huge hit in Japan – mainly with the very audience Obayashi had been inspired to make for it, children under the age of 15, who lined up around the block to see it – something that hadn’t really happened before in Japanese culture. And while the mainstream press of the day unsurprisingly dismissed the film as an inchoate mess, a certain older guard of Japanese film critics saw something in Obayashi’s film that spoke directly to the nature of filmmaking itself. With House, Obayashi expanded the possibilities of the medium, and in doing so, established a permanent name for himself in Japanese cinema. In 2009, with over 40 films as a director, Obayashi was awarded the Badge of the Order of the Rising Sun.

 ________________________

Anthony Discenza introduced House at the Oakland Asian Cultural Center on January 24, 2012.

January 24: House

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening House (ハウス Hausu) by Japanese filmmaker Nobuhiko Obayashi. The film follows a schoolgirl nicknamed Gorgeous (Kimiko Ikegami) as she and her six classmates travel to her ailing aunt’s country home. There they are confronted by numerous unexplainable events as the girls, one by one, disappear. New York Times film critic Manohla Dargis described House as a “haunted-house freakout.” Critic Chuck Stephens called the film, “Japanese pop culture at its most delightfully unhinged extreme,” expanding that to:

[A] midnight movie about nubility and dismemberment marketed to a matinee audience of adolescents and “office ladies,” a predigital maelstrom of cinekinetic visual ingenuity produced during one of the most tepid seasons in late twentieth-century Japanese filmmaking, a modern masterpiece of le cinéma du WTF?!, originally released on the bottom half of a double bill with a treacly teen-idol romance called Pure Hearts in Mud and sporting a tagline that exhorted viewers to witness “How Seven Beauties Were Eaten!” 

The film will be introduced by artist Anthony Discenza. Discenza was born in New Jersey in 1967 and currently resides in Oakland, CA. He received his undergraduate degree in at Wesleyan University in 1990 and an MFA at the California College of the Arts in 2000. Over the past decade, Discenza’s work has focused on the ubiquitous presence of mainstream media in contemporary life. Working in a range media including text, audio, print, video, and outdoor signage, Discenza extracts and subverts material taken from commercial film, television, and the Internet, introducing disruptions and collisions into the otherwise uninterrupted flow of information surrounding us. In addition to his solo work, since 1994 Discenza has been one-half of the collaborative entity HalfLifers, along with longtime friend and fellow artist Torsten Z. Burns. HalfLifers fuses humor with a low-fi, improvisational approach to engage narratives of control and crisis embedded in technological culture. Discenza’s solo and collaborative works have been presented at numerous national and international venues, including the Whitney Museum of American Art, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, The Getty Center, and the Australian Center for the Moving Image in Melbourne. He has screened work in The New York Video Festival, CinemaTexas, The Ann Arbor Film Festival, The Thaw Festival of Film, Video and Digital Media, Stuttgart Filmwinter, and the Impakt Festival in Utrecht. Discenza currently works as a Senior Lecturer at the California College of the Arts. He is represented by Catherine Clark Gallery in San Francisco and the Video Databank of Chicago.

House
1977
88 minutes

7pm Tuesday
January 24, 2012

$5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Visit this event on Facebook!

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im. 

Xiaoyu Weng Introduces Summer Palace

Summer Palace - An Introduction 

I do not believe that the sky is blue,

I do not believe that thunder has echo,

I do not believe that dreams are false,

I do not believe that death defies retribution.

                                                                                -        Bei Dao

Whether there is freedom and love or not, in death everyone is equal. I hope that death is not your end. You adored the light, so you will never fear the darkness.

                                                                                - Anonymous 

Summer Palace is a film about youth, love, sex, liberation, and self-questioning. In 1988, Yu Hong leaves her hometown on the boarder of China and North Korea to enroll in college in Beijing. On the train heading over to Beijing, Yu’s smile indicates her optimistic imagination towards a new life – hope of leaving her current mediocre situation behind. The heady college life is depicted with a series of 2-minute consecutive and fast-paced scenes of hectic campus crowds, studying in libraries, drinking and smoking in dorms, poetry readings, music playing, and dancing in the hallways. The background music is Lo Ta-yu’s “Youth Movement” with lyrics like, “my youth will not be called again once it is gone.” Yu’s new life unfolds as she crazily falls in love with her fellow student Zhou Wei. Full of emotional and sexual upheavals, their relationship is intense, contradictory, unstable and even schizophrenic, reflecting Yu’s emotional state as a confused young girl. She wants to live in the most intense way as indicated in her dairy, “if it was not to investigate my life in a kind of idealism, the monotone of everyday would create the unbearable anguish in me.” Twisted love and rebellious sex seem to be the answer. However, again in her own voice she admits, “there is no way out. There only exists fantasy. Fantasy, a deathful thing.” The relationship ends with the student movements and democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square and its violent suppression by the Chinese government. 

Summer Palace however goes far beyond a controversial love story with intense sex scenes or the cliché of a hybrid of sex and politics. It is a narrative with loose-ended story lines mirroring the trajectory of a generation - the director Lou Ye’s generation. In 1989, Lou was a senior year student studying at the Beijing Film Academy and a witness and participant of the democratic movement. He is among one of the most important figures of the Sixth Generation filmmakers, who made their debut during the early 1990s when the entire nation was still in the aftermath of the trauma and was engulfed by the societal-wide depression. Alongside directors Zhuang Yuan (Mama [1990]), Wang Xiaoshui (The Days [1993]), Wu Wengguang (Bumming in Beijing: The Last Dreamers [1990]), Lou Ye made his first feature film, Weekend Lover in 1993. These films are considered the beginning of the independent film movement in China.  Like his peers, Lou has a reputation of using a realistic approach to depict ordinary people and their everyday life stories – their longings for individual expression and a basic need for human rights. Though Weekend Lover was not released until 2 years after its completion because of government censorship due to issues of sexuality, gender and obsession, these concepts have continued to be explored in Lou’s films. His second feature, Suzhou River, which brought him fame by winning the Tiger Award at the 1999 International Film Festival in Rotterdam, was again banned. The “illegal” screening at the 2006 Cannes Film Festival of Summer Palace without acquiring approval from the Chinese State Administration of Radio, Film and Television resulted in a five-year ban from making films for both Lou and his producer Nai An. 

Expectations of the movie’s political commentary on the Tiananmen Square Protests, also known as the Six Four Incident, led to criticism on Lou’s depiction as being too allusive and overly cautious. However the metaphors and implications of the generation’s desire for liberation and freedom, the hidden fear towards utopia, the uncertainty in an idealized future, and the repressed cultural and political atmosphere are consistent throughout the entire first half of the movie. This is shown in details such as a random conversation in a bar in which a female student scoffs that though protecting the working class and farmers is the most honored thing, what about the intellectuals? Or the lines in Yu Hong’s dairy indicating that idealism is deathful, which seems to be a dark prediction for the fate of the student movement; or when the school officials catch Zhou Wei and Li Ti’s affair by entering their dorm room without notice. Lou’s political standpoint fluidly unfolds and smoothly penetrates the narrative. 

To summarize the important events of a tumultuous decade, perhaps is never Lou’s intention. Instead, as pointed out by film critic A. O. Scott, Lou “distills the inner confusion — the swirl of moods, whims and needs — that is the lived and living essence of history.” Archive materials and documentation of monumental events that happened in the subsequent decade are juxtaposed with the lives evolving around the four main characters. Another series of consecutive images: the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the implementation of the Open Up Policy in China in 1992, and the return of Hong Kong in 1997, are woven into Yu Hong’s transitions from city to city, and Li Ti and Zhou Wei’s relocation from Beijing to Berlin. The background music this time is “Don’t Break My Heart” by Black Panther, the most radical Chinese rock band at the time. The lyrics state, “waiting alone, enduring silently, joyance always appears in my dream.” The choice of soundtrack is another area for important social commentary. Both Lo Ta-yu and Black Panther’s music are socially and politically critical and they were both revolutionary cultural icons among the students of the time.

Towards the end of the film, the story lines increasingly drift apart, with seemingly disjointed episodes such as an abortion and a suicide. Linear or symbolic analyzation becomes inapplicable and seems worthless.  The vague ending further adds a level of absurdity to the stories. This absurdity is precisely what characterizes this generation’s life paths. While time is seemly moving forward, the dimension of it broadens horizontally infused with the everlasting searching for the meaning of life. Any attempt to control the outcome of life is futile.  

________________________

Xiaoyu Weng introduced Summer Palace at the Oakland Asian Cultural Center on December 20, 2011.

December 20: Summer Palace

Join us for Movie Night at the OACC!

This month we will be screening Summer Lives (颐和园) by Chinese filmmaker Lou Ye. The film depicts the life of a young student, Yu Hong (Lei Hao) who leaves her small hometown to attend a university. There she meets a fellow student (Xiaodong Guo) and begins a tumultuous romantic relationship under the backdrop of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. The film follows their lives and relationship through the 1990s and into the 2000s. In his New York Times review of the film, A.O. Scott wrote:

Neither the later disaffection nor the earlier ardor feels in the least bit melodramatic or overstated. And in spite of its 2-hour-20-minute length, “Summer Palace” moves with the swiftness and syncopation of a pop song. Like Jean-Luc Godard in the 1960s, Mr. Lou favors breathless tracking shots and snappy jump cuts, and like Mr. Godard’s, his camera is magnetized by female beauty. But Ms. Lei, a tough and uninhibited actress, is not simply the object of the film’s gaze; Yu Hong’s resilience and vulnerability are the film’s emotional core, and its feverish rhythms follow the chaotic pattern of her desires.

 The film will be introduced by Xiaoyu Weng, an independent curator and writer based in San Francisco. She has organized exhibitions and events for venues in the Bay Area, including the Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts, Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, the Asian Art Museum, the Kadist Foundation and Queens Nails Projects. She has been awarded a residency by the Gwangju Biennale Foundation in South Korea. She is the winner of the Artforum Critical Writing Award in 2011. Her writings have appeared in Artforum, Contemporary Art and Investment, Art World Journal, and Gallery. Weng also directs the Asian Contemporary Arts Consortium in San Francisco and manages the Asian collection and programs for the Kadist Foundation. 

  

Summer Palace
2006
140 minutes

7pm Tuesday
December 20, 2011

 $5 suggested donation, no one is turned away due to lack of funds. 

Oakland Asian Cultural Center
388 Ninth Street, Suite 290 (btwn. Franklin and Webster Street)
Oakland, CA 94607

Visit this event on Facebook

Movie Night at the OACC is sponsored by the Oakland Asian Cultural Center. For more information about the OACC, please visit www.oacc.cc

Movie Night at the OACC is a monthly screening night organized by Jackie Im.