Film Critique: National Geographic 2010 All Roads Film Festival

Critique

Film: Reel Injun (Directors: Neil Diamond, Catherine Bainbridge, and Jeremiah Hayes)

The documentary that I went to see at the National Geographic 2010 All Roads Film Festival was Neil Diamond’s Reel Injun.  Reel Injun is a documentary that informs its audience about how Native Americans were and are represented in Hollywood films.  Diamond, a Canadian First Nation Cree himself, takes his audience on a journey from 50 years back, looking at various western films that were made, and the images of Native Americans that were displayed to the country.  Included in the documentary were comedic happens to serious revolts, all pointed towards the notion of how wrongly portrayed the Native Americans (or Indians) were in Hollywood film all throughout history.

Before I saw the documentary, I honestly didn’t have much knowledge about Native Americans.  My knowledge about them came from all the stereotypes that came from film and stories told to me when I was little.  All I knew was that these people were:

• These people were here in America first.
• Everyone belonged to a different tribe, from war-like tribes to hunter-gatherers.
• They were forced on reservations.
• They wore clothes with feathers and different colors with facepaint-like decorations.
• They had a “war-scream.” (The ‘olololololololololololololo’ thing.)
• All the tribes had a stone-faced chief.
• Primitive.

What I expected to see was just that.  All the stereotypes that I learned, I expected to see and then be told that these were actually the wrong portrayals.  That’s what I expected.  I wanted to know who these people really were.  How do they live?  What do they look like?  Why were they portrayed like the stereotypes?  What is wrong about the stereotypes?  Who really are these people?  These were all questions I had walking into the theater to view the film.  Stereotypes, although they are wrong and improper, they hold a bit of truth to them.  It was because people saw a certain quality that rang true for a lot of one group of people that these images were born.  For example, there is a stereotype that “Asians are good at math.”  Although this is obviously false, it is true that Asian countries are superior in mathematics and other subjects than other countries.  Because their education is ahead, it’s no surprise that they are, in fact, a bit smarter than kids in countries such as the United States.  Thus, the stereotype that “Asians are good at math” or “Asians are smart” is born.  Not all Asians kids fit this images, of course, but it is not entirely false.  Therefore, I wanted to see how the other Native Americans are like, not the stereotypical ones.

Reel Injun focuses its attention on the Native Americans that lie under the surface painted by images created by Hollywood.  Diamond takes us on a journey across the North American continent from Canada to Hollywood, stopping at various landmarks on the way.  He visits the Black Hills of South Dakota and the deserts of Monumental Valley, looking over the same scenery that John Wayne did in his famous western films.  Diamond also interviews many fellow Native Americans, such as comedian Charlie Hill, and even filmmaker Clint Eastwood.  In his “rez car”, a broken down car that all Native Americans supposedly drive (according to stereotypes), Diamond doesn’t just focus on Hollywood, but also takes us through actual historical events that shaped the images of Native Americans.  The documentary is a pleasure to not just the eye and the ear, but also the mind as well.

There were effects used throughout the film, but not a lot.  There were never any unnecessary visual and audio effects that were used.  Sound effects were only used when necessary, such as a zing when something funny was said (I think), and there weren’t much visual special effects.  Interviewees were sometimes shown in grayscale, but nothing major and special.  There of course were effects used in the classical films that were shown, but it was never used during the interviews.  Aside from the classic films that were at times grainy and worn out (as they should be), the rest of the images were sharp and of high definition.  The filming of the documentary itself composed of various shots.  Most were close-up of faces of interviewees, but there were sometimes middle, long, and wide, establishing shots.  Chiefs and subjects were sometimes shot from a low angle, providing a powerful image and a feeling that “this person/object is important.”

The interviews themselves were fun to listen to.  The things they said all rang with passion for this subject.  Some people, such as poets, were very articulate and familiar with the portrayals, and others, such as comedians, made us laugh with their sarcastic comments.  What I learned through these interviews is that the Native Americans never were these stereotypical people that I expected them to be.  They look exactly like ordinary people, working ordinary jobs and living ordinary lives.  It is true that there were tribal Indians in the past, but once civilization became the norm and cities began to dominate the land, they adapted to become normal people.  They did still have traditional festivals, but they were like all the rest of us.  Those who weren’t regular were similar to hippies, which still broke the stereotypes that formed in the past.  I did expect the film to break the stereotypes that I had, but I didn’t expect to this extent.

The parts that I liked most were the interviews.  The opinions that were expressed really gave me and idea of the “real Injun.”  Comedians made me laugh, and poets made me think.  These words spoken in the interviews really showed how wrongly Hollywood was portraying these people.  They were no longer primitive beings, but intellectual, normal humans able to communicate and mingle with the rest of us.  They are able to melt into society, and be modernized themselves, but at the same time remain traditional with their festivals and rituals.  Everyone knows their own history, and hold loyal to it, which is what I come to respect.  These people, although they were ridiculed in films and killed for no reason, they held their head high and endured the pain.  Diamond showed a scene in a movie where the Indian was speaking some native language to an American, but what he was really saying were insults to the man.  Of course the American didn’t know what in the world the Indian was saying, so he never realized how insulted he was.  In this way, the Native Americans kept their head up, enduring the pain in their own way, and kept surviving despite all the discrimination that was pointed towards them.

There were several unfortunate aspects of the documentary, but they all share a similar line.  What I wished for the film was: if the film was longer, there could have been so much more stuff. The film really could have been longer.  I wished it covered more movies, more countries, and more interviews.  I wanted to see more important landmarks and I wanted to learn more about the real Native American.  Of course money was an issue and time was also another, but that was the only unfortunate aspect of this documentary that I can think of.  I would definitely recommend this documentary to my friends and family.  They should, and in fact everyone should, take the time to watch this documentary and discover who and what just is the “real Injun.”

Photo Critique: Fotoweek DC

Critique

Exhibition – Simply Beautiful: Photographs from National Geographic

“Selected from National Geographic’s archive, these photographs are based off the new National Geographic book, Simply Beautiful Photographs and make us ponder what creates beauty in a photograph.  Often one of these elements, such as light or palette, will stand out, adding a distinctive note.  How photographers compose and image can open our eyes to a multitude of beauties, things we could not have seen before the advent of a frozen moment in time.  Photographs give us visual proof that the world is grander than we imagined, that there is beauty, often overlooked, in nearly everything.”

That was the description of the exhibit on the Fotoweek DC website.  And as the description described, the photographs that I saw at the exhibit were: simply beautiful.  All the photos in the exhibit showed a sense of beauty.  In every photograph, whether it be artificial or natural, there was a simplicity to it.  Each picture was very simple in every way, and yet was able to fully show its potential in delivering a beautiful photograph.  Just like the title, they were “simply beautiful” in all its meanings.

The natural pictures (meaning the pictures of nature and living beings) were one “type” of picture.  They involved various colors and textures, and everything was “in sync.”  Even if a human being was in a picture of a forest, he looked completely natural in that environment.  Some nature photos were absolutely stunning.  A picture of a mountain and its reflection seemed as if there were two worlds due to such clarity in the reflection.  The framing of the picture had the reflection dominating more of the photograph, and it in fact made me wonder if the world was turned upside down, meaning the reflection’s clarity made me doubt that the world above the water was really real.

Another nature picture was of a little boy bending down from a rock to drink water from a river.  This photo particularly caught my attention for its serenity despite all the elements in the picture.  There were leafs everywhere (since it was in an untamed forest) and plants and nature dominated the picture.  Yet the boy seemed completely natural in that environment, and the green of the forest subdued the boy’s bright orange skin.  Although nature dominated the picture, the boy was in the center, giving him full attention while complementing it with the life of nature.  All the colors, textures, elements were in sync with each other to present a beautiful, yet strangely natural picture.

There was also another nature photograph of light coming through fog of a forest’s aerial view.  It may not have been aerial, but you were able to see from the top of the trees in the forest.  Either way, this picture was beautiful because of how it simply looked.  The light that escaped through the fog illuminated the tops of the trees, and casted shadows onto the fog of that tree’s color.  Meaning, the red tree casted a red shadow onto the fog because of the bright, early-morning sunlight.  Honestly, it seemed almost unreal because it looked like a painting of nature.  From a glance, it was as if God had taken the colors of the trees with his hand, and smeared it all in one direction onto the fog.  The appreciation of beauty that comes from how unnatural nature can be can be seen clearly in the photograph.

Then there was the artificial photographs.  These involved man-made buildings and architecture, but they did not lose in terms of beauty when it was compared to its natural counterparts.  One picture had a night scene of New York City engulfed in fog.  The scene was “painted” light purple, and although the fog was taking over the city, the skyscrapers stood tall and eerily lit up the world with its lights.  It gave off a strange and wonderful fantastical feeling.  It showed fantasy mixed in with mystery, and your mind wanders into its streets wondering what would happen in this situation when you stare at this picture.

Another artificial photograph was of a underground canal with holes in the roof.  Through these holes, light from the outside came beaming through, illuminating the canal.  I really liked this picture because of one thing: it gave form to something that we normally cannot see.  Here in this picture, we can see light take form.  We can look at this picture and point out “that is light.”  In normal life, we can just point randomly and say that “there is light here,” but we can never in this way see it take a certain form.  In the picture, we can see it actually take form as a beam that enters the canal, and lights up the world around it.  And yet the contrast of darkness of the underground and brightness of the light makes the beam of light completely noticeable.

There were other photos that incorporated both natural and artificial elements.  One photo had a monkey running across the field of grass in front of a Mayan pyramid.  The ruins in the photo have completely become a part of nature, despite being artificially made.  The nature elements of the photo — the monkey, the trees, the vines — all dance around the ruins without even a bit of uncertainty.  Nature is acting natural, and it shows us accepting an artificial building as part of its own.  It’s a scene of two completely opposites coming to terms with each other to create one coherent picture.

Another that incorporated both was a picture of the milky way over the maoi Easter Island head sculptures.  All the stars in the universe seems to have gathered to take this one picture, and the night sky is a spectacle that cannot be easily replicated.  The milky way features different colors and the stars are of different sizes, adding variation that rids boredom.  However, the maoi are simply looking out in a different direction, as if to not care.  The light cast on the sculptures puts emphasis on the white parts that represent their eyes, and these eye are looking out in a different direction, as if telling the audience that this scenery is nothing new to them.  Here, in this photo, the natural and artificial become one, with each being used to one another’s existence.  The angle and framing of the photo also makes it look as if the sky and ground has merged together, bringing more togetherness to the heads and the starry night.  Ironically, removing these statues would seem to make the photo even more unnatural.

The photography in the exhibition showcased beauty when, at least to me, when it is most beautiful.  It uses simplicity to emphasize how beauty can be found in basically anything that we see if we choose to see it.  Each photo is a still picture, and yet it seems that the objects in the picture could at any moment start moving as if there was no one watching.  Yet at the same time, nature seems to be posing for the camera.  Water seems to stop its movement to allow the perfect reflection photo to take place.  It’s as if nature is telling us to realize that there is something beautiful, so go look for it, because we will easily find it even in the simplest things.  This gallery shows us how far we can go with photography, and how much beauty we can capture within a single frame.  The photos in this gallery emphasize how anything can not only be beautiful, but also anything can be simply beautiful.