彙整

影片簡介

《鐵怒沿線–三谷》(下半部)

拍攝剪接:陳彥楷
製作:菜園村支援組、影行者
語言:廣東話
2011/香港/310分鐘/彩色/DV

放映時間及地點:
– 2011/12/26 (星期一)
時間: 晚上19:30
地點: 菜園新村
地址: 元朗八鄉錦上路菜園新村

注意:將放映下半部150分鐘,謝謝,
及日落之後村裡會比較冷,要多帶外套。

菜園新村規劃工作坊

未到最後,高婆婆仍在耕種、收割。


屋前的一片地,是吳婆婆一直耕種的地方

在爭取復耕牌的半年中,村民同時開始新村的規劃,要不要有馬路,誰住在誰旁邊,誰住在這誰住在那,村頭村尾,每間屋的設計,污水的處理,自有地、農地與公家地的比例等等等,一蓋集體討論決定。

同時政府宣佈村民十一月要離開。另一方面,因土地路權的問題,村民擔心即使買了地卻未能可以通往起屋而躊躇。時間逼切,這是團結的機會,亦有潰散的危機。踏入十一月,政府開始進場拆屋,開始了每日巡守、阻擋怪手,爭取先建後搬的日子……

交通
1.錦上路西鐵站:
的士(由錦上路元崗新村、大窩村牌坊路入,車費約$30)、
巴士(64K往大埔方向,八鄉路站下車,前行五分鐘由元崗新村、大窩村牌坊路入)、
綠色小巴(72往雷公田方向,元崗新村、大窩村下車),沿元崗新村、大窩村牌坊路入。
2.太和火車站:64K八鄉路站下車,沿元崗新村、大窩村牌坊路入。
3.元朗:64K八鄉路站下車,沿元崗新村、大窩村牌坊路入。
4.大欖隧道巴士站轉乘251M巴士於八鄉路站下車。

廣告

導演:Fernando E. Solanas, Octavio Getino 製作:Pino Solanas|西班牙語及中英文字幕|1968/阿根廷黑白/248分鐘

飢餓是不是暴力?貧窮是不是暴力?當人民處於權力結構底層,為人民而設的改革如何成為可能?阿根廷的歷史有幾多人了解?世上有多少人對拉丁美洲的了解,是多於美國主流傳媒?弱勢人民與濫權者,是否存在「和平共存」的可能性?

熔爐時刻是火紅的六十年代的產物是導演索拉納斯和傑提諾对當時阿根廷軍人政府拉丁美洲解放運動的回應也是一篇反商業電影(第一電影)和藝術電影(第二電影)的宣言。他們提出第三電影製作和評論的新路向(簡單的說以電影合行動改變社會以情理使觀眾由被動的消費者轉化成行動者)電影成功將理論行動形式內容為一体以創新的藝術形深入分析 暴力/武力和殖民主義,對當下的香港仍然富有意義電影拍成後在阿根廷不能公映但在國際影壇刞引起巨響被冠以革命電影、「戰鬥電影等名第三電影的會議論述専書至今不絕

一直以來這部經典只有在電影節中才可以看到去年出了DVD 我們才能安排它和你見面電影發 社會行動者(尤其是以紀錄片參與社會行動者)對「暴力有看法的人都不容錯過歡迎加入討論

延伸閱讀:電影完成后SolanasGetino 把片中的理論發表為文 “Towards a Third Cinema” (http://www.documentaryisneverneutral.com/words/camasgun.html)

Director: Fernando E. Solanas, Octavio Getino |Production: Pino Solanas|Spanish with English and Chinese Subtitles|1968 / Argentina / B&W / 248min

 

The Hour of the Furnaces is a product of the raging 60s. It was a response by directors Fernando E. Solanas and Octavio Getino to the Argentine military Junta and to the Latin American liberation movements. It is also a manifesto against commercial film (the First Cinema) and art film (the Second Cinema). The directors proposed the Third Cinema and new ways of making and critiquing films (In short, it integrates Film with Action to effect change in society; and to affect  audience with reason as well as emotion turning them  from passive consumers into active participants .) The film successfully blends theory, action, form and content into a brand-new art form, investigating the notions of ‘violence / armed force’ and (neo)colonialism, which are still relevant to Hong Kong today. The film was banned in Argentina. Yet it has attracted great attention in international film circle and washailed a classic of ‘revolutionary film’, ‘militant film’ and so on. There are continuous interests in the Third Cinema. Conferences, books, discourses and studies on the subject turn up from time to time since its inauguration.

 

Extended Reading: Solanas and Getino’s article “Towards a Third Cinema” (http://www.documentaryisneverneutral.com/words/camasgun.html)


導演:彼德.獲健士作品|製作:13 Production, La Sept Art, Musée d’orsay語言:法語/中文及英文字幕1999/法國/黑白/345分鐘





彼得.獲建士(Peter Watkins) 比誰都認真和關心社會,也一直致力創新影視 「藝術」。今古交錯是他的疏離手法之一,演員時而扮演公社中的角色,時而做回自己,暢談當下的心情和對角色的看法 ; 這邊廂,一群婦女在公社開會,話題慢慢轉向1999年的法國女性;那邊廂公社的男人談電視,談現代的媒體,談日本的衰落 ; 不同時空的話題,互相對照,迫切而貼身。 電影中和電影外的討論都是運動的一部分。片中扮演婦女同盟的人後來就組織起來把片中的議題帶到現實生活裡繼續爭取,社會行動巳走出銀幕進入生活。 這樣豐富的一部作品遠非幾百字可以言明,如何放映和用這部片已大有學問,還是留待觀眾自己去體會。

 

Director: Peter Watkins |Production: 13 Production, La Sept Art,
Musée d’orsay|French with English and Chinese Subtitles|1999 / France / B&W / 345 minutes

For more information: http://www.mnsi.net/~pwatkins/     http://www.rebond.org/

1.

‘Look! This is where we shot the last scene yesterday.’ Two actors show the camera (us) the set where La Commune was made. Please do not think you are watching a documentary of the film for the camera will soon become the journalist/ cameraman of the Commune TV, going about interviewing people. Yes, I mean TV! In the film, you will watch TV news in 1871! Do not mistake this film for a farce as Peter Watkins is more serious than anybody else and few can match his concern for the society. He is also an ardent inventor in film and television arts. Anachronism is just one of his alienating tactics. In this film, actors sometimes play the roles and sometimes play themselves to talk about their feelings at the moment and commend on the characters. When a group of Commune women shift their discussion of French women’s predicaments in 1871 to that of 1999, men in the commune are talking about TV, the modern media, and the decline of Japan. Issues of different times and places juxtapose, intersect, and reflect on each other pressing and close to home.

As a film artist and activist, Watkins challenges the director centered traditional undemocratic way of filmmaking that renders audience as passive recipients. Watkins meticulously designed and controlled the production of La Commune but he also demanded and gave plenty of room for active participations from the actors. The director provides the backbone and the framework while everybody involved fills in the flesh and blood. For example, the important components of the film —dialogues and discussions— are taken from real discussions among actors during rehearsals who were told to play out the characters they have meticulously researched as well as their real selves in present day France. This is democratic collective creation in a controlled manner. On the activist level, he laments the lost of commitment and idealism and explains on his website why he made this film: “. . . the idea of commitment to a struggle for a better world, and of the need for some form of collective social Utopia [Paris Commune] – which WE now need. . . “and review many of the issues raised in the Commune but still failed to be resolve today. Therefore, he alienates the audience but requires them and the actors to participate at the same time in discussing many of the issues. For this purpose, he left a lot of space and information for audience to discuss (He did not mention it but such practice reminds me of an Argentinean documentary, Hours of the Furnaces, where the film stopped screening midway and asked audience to start discussion). The discussions inside and outside the film are parts of a social action. People playing members of the Women’s Union in the Commune later actually formed a group to fight for the issues raised in the film. Thus social action steps out of the screen and into our real lives. La Commune is Watkins at his best and is exemplary of using filmmaking as social action. In Britain, only Ken Loach’s works can barely match the strong social and political sense of Watkins’ and Watkins has an edge over Peter Greenaway in setting his experimentations on solid social grounds. This short introduction can hardly do justice to such a rich film as how to show and use the film already require great wisdom. I better leave our clever audience to fathom its depths.

***

2.

Inside a giant warehouse in a working-class Parisian suburb, Peter Watkins assembles a cast of over 200 non-professional actors (though their amateur status is undetectable). Basing their work upon thorough historical research, they will attempt tore- create the events of March, 1871-the rise and fall of the Paris Commune.

La Commune (Paris, 1871) explores that famous, brief, romantic, and tragic period when poor and working-class Parisians rose up against the “bourgeois” French national government, which fled the capital and re-established itself in Versailles. As this complex historical drama unfolds, it is also “ covered” by two television news crews – one from “National TV Versailles” which broadcasts the official version of events, the other from “Commune TV,” giving voice to the rebellious Communards.

Mixing past and present, revolutionary in form as well as content, Watkins’s audacious masterpiece forces us to confront notions of a safe or objective reading of the past, and also to reflect, inevitably, upon the present. No one who meets the challenge of La Commune (Paris, 1871) will be unchanged by the experience.

 

 

製作﹕Alain Bertho and Samuel Luret|製作﹕Morgane Production and ARTE France| 語言﹕法語及中英文字幕|2010 / 法國 / 50分鐘

來自地上的頑石飛越催淚瓦斯瀰漫的空中,世上處處都滿溢著憤怒。為什麼被無視者、無權勢者,除了流淚,更不惜動用武力?希臘、丹麥、法國、德國、英國,甚至中國,都出現了激烈的抗爭。值得留意的是,大部份被主流傳媒稱為「暴動」的事件,發生的地點是第一世界的大城市。

如果我們願意稍為放棄一種對「憤怒」過份簡化的意見(即把憤怒只視為個人情緒不當運用),那麼,我們必須了解,當今世界的資本球化宏觀背景下,是什麼成為了被無視者憤怒的根源?

法國社會學者雅倫巴托(Alain Bertho)及哲學學者東尼內格里(Toni Negri)的分析,貫通著這些憤怒者的故事,指出了一個共通於極之不同的政治建制之下,為何同樣爆發反抗暴動,亦可讓我們認真地了解現今世代的危機及爆發中的憤怒。

Director:Samuel Luret |Writer:Alain Bertho | Production: Morgane Production and ARTE France|French with Chinese & English Subtitles|2010 / France / 50min

Everywhere on earth is filled up with rage. Why those being ignored and powerless resort not only to tears, but also to force? In Greece, Denmark, France, Germany, Britain, or even in China, vigorous protests are happening. It is worth noting that, these incidents, which are stigmatized by the mass media as ‘riots’, mostly happened in the cities of the First World.

In order not to make simplified judgment towards the word ‘rage’, that is, to take it as an improper vent of personal emotion, we ought to understand, with the influence of capitalized globalization, what has been the fountainhead of rage for those being ignored.

Associated with the analysis by French sociologist, Alain Bertho, and philosopher, Toni Negri, these angry stories has reflected the reason of the general outbreak of riots under different political regimes. It also allows us to have a deeper understanding on the crisis, as well as the outbursts of anger of this era.

共同創作:順寧道重建關注組、順寧道義工支援組|製作:影行者|語言:廣東話|2011/香港/140分鐘

一個居港權受害者兼單親媽媽,一個中港家庭低收入戶,一個中港家庭兼資深深水埗街坊兼小販--都是這個重建區的低收入租戶。20096月,市建局宣佈將順寧道69-83號劃為重建區,並即日進行人口凍結登記;然而亦在同日開始,13戶居住於此的租客卻陸續收到了小地產業主的迫遷令,市建局卻不肯承認該批租客的受影響租戶身份,拒絕依法對受影響租戶進行原區安置或者合理補償。

這邊廂地產剪水剪電上門叫罵,那邊廂市建局闊佬懶理。回頭看看這個平凡到不可再平凡的社區,沒有美景,唯一擁有的就是物價低廉、交通便利的十五分鐘生活圈。到底是什麼動力令毫無議價能力的板房租戶可以持續抗爭?似乎還是要在這個地方尋覓。


拍攝剪接:陳彥楷製作:菜園村支援組、影行者語言:廣東話2011/香港/310分鐘

菜園新村規劃工作坊

未到最後,高婆婆仍在耕種、收割。
屋前的一片地,是吳婆婆一直耕種的地方。

在爭取復耕牌的半年中,村民同時開始新村的規劃,要不要有馬路,誰住在誰旁邊,誰住在這誰住在那,村頭村尾,每間屋的設計,污水的處理,自有地、農地與公家地的比例等等等,一蓋集體討論決定。

同時政府宣佈村民十一月要離開。另一方面,因土地路權的問題,村民擔心即使買了地卻未能可以通往起屋而躊躇。時間逼切,這是團結的機會,亦有潰散的危機。踏入十一月,政府開始進場拆屋,開始了每日巡守、阻擋怪手,爭取先建後搬的日子……

注意:兩場放映將放映上半部-170分鐘,下半部放映時間及地點請留意網頁,謝謝。

放映時間

日期:12/11/2011
時間:19:30
地點:香港基督徒學會

日期:26/11/2011
時間:19:30
地點:菜園新村

製作:Information and Culture ExchangeTIWAFADWU、關注綜援檢討聯盟、 小小鳥打工互助熱線、廣東番禺打工族服務部、女工開枝散葉種藝團 – 婦女組、工人文學獎、居留權小學、半邊天公益、草媒行動、影行者等等|語言:英語、巴哈莎語、泰加隆語、普通話、廣東話及中文字幕|澳洲、中國、香港、加拿大、台灣/每個系列約110分鐘

一系列本土保衛空間的運動在香港近年沸沸騰騰,但一方面「本土」又成為了對「外來者」的抗拒論述之一。事實上,在全世界的大城市中,都不乏異鄉人,他們有的是難民,有的是流徏千里的打工者,有的是早已紥根卻又不被承認的〔異類本地人〕。

你,又可否試試暫時放下身段,看看同一個世界裡的,另一個世界?

自古以來,人都是往自己認為生活較好,較有生存機會的地區走。內地人往香港走,香港人往英美走,英美的鄉下人往英美的城市走,南美洲的向北美洲走……

上世紀初,不少華人被賣豬仔到歐美、南洋幫白人老闆打工,但被白人的勞工階層指為拖低薪酬;七十年代,香港經濟起飛,我們搶了美國工人的飯碗;但美國還是有許多中產階級有錢人,於是南美洲那些被美資公司搞到失去土地失去工作的窮人,便只好往美國、加拿大跑,去找工作啊--但是,美國的工人卻指責工作機會被他們搶走了,福利被他們搶走了……

諸如此類的故事,在歷史上、在世界各個角落都在發生。那麼我們,該怎樣理解,「移民」這種事?在這個移動的大歷史與大範圍裡,到底誰最得益?

我們請來了來自台灣、中國、加拿大、澳洲、香港的移民和移民工,或者相關的團體,十幾齣短短的影片,我們一起來了解這幅「世界性搵飯碗」地圖!

(今次電影節將所得之短片分成兩個系列)