The most successful documentaries claiming to represent socio-historical experiences successfully convince us that what we're seeing on the screen really happened. How do they do this? What kind of evidence do they use to persuade us to accept them as truthful and accurate? Why do we believe the evidence?
Please watch Jehane Noujaim's 2013 documentary The Square on Netflix Instant and let me know what you did and/or didn't like about it. What primary kinds of evidence did the director include? Did you believe the evidence was accurate and truthful? Why?
I promise I won't do this again, but for this week I really want you to watch another film as well: Ms. Noujaim's 2004 documentary Control Room on Netflix Instant - a film which offers an even more powerful attempt to engage with questions surrounding evidence. Control Room looks at the way the American-led invasion of Iraq was represented by al-Jazeera, the Qatar-based satellite channel which recently began broadcasting programs in the US. The war itself serves as the underlying context of the documentary, but the real subject of the film is the media battle that was fought alongside the military conflict.
Control Room makes us think about the way the news media handle information, how evidence is used by media producers, and what consequences their choices may have. It asks us to to compare factual information presented by the Arab news channel with material gathered by Western TV. Watching the film, we realize that "evidence" of the same event can have significantly different meanings when seen from dissimilar sides of the political spectrum.
Noujaim's documentary, too, involves an effort to gather and present evidence, and it, too, uses that evidence to support a particular point of view, a more positive opinion of al-Jazeera than Western audiences might have expected in 2004.
I look forward to reading how you sort this film out - what you liked, what you didn't like, and what it meant to you. In general, I encourage you to write whatever you want about The Square and Control Room, just be sure to discuss the concept of evidence and how it impacted your feelings about these two pieces of work.
And please remember: your in-depth, inspired comments need to appear on this blog (and cut and pasted into the assignment on Moodle) by no later than 9am on Tuesday morning.
Happy watching and writing!
First off I want to say that your assignment of The Square should have come with a warning. I sat down with my roommate to watch it last night and we cried most of the duration.
ReplyDeleteLooking past the emotional wreck this movie put me in, I’d like to say this was the best documentary I have ever seen. From the camera resolution to each and every one of their stories, it had me engaged and wanting to know what happened next.
It was heartbreaking to see the danger and violence that was happening in Egypt and know that I had no idea it was happening. I had general knowledge about Arab Spring but I had never seen the true impacts it was having on the people there.
Like you told us to do, I read the Netflix comments after I watched. It was sickening to me to see people say they wish the doc was more narrated or that they wish the movie makers had helped them choose a side. If you don’t side with the revolutionaries after seeing this movie, I don’t understand what movie you were watching. It was clear that these people just want to live in a better more democratic country.
After watching The Square, my roommate and I sat up talking about how we with we could do something better with our lives. We are both going into theatre and this documentary had pushed us as far as to make us question our majors. A documentary that makes you want to drop everything and change the world is very powerful.
Control Room on the other hand, was less aesthetically pleasing but the message was clear. We, as Americans, don’t know nearly as much as we think about other countries’ problems. Seeing the start of the Iraq/American War from the Iraqi’s point of view was strange and unnerving. I was really young when this war was but I always had thought they wanted our help.
The focus of the film being on the T.V. broadcast of Al Jazeera, was a relatable and a clever approach to the opposing side of the war.
Both films focussed a lot on the opinions of the people in them, there was no all encompassing truth but the intent of how the movies were supposed to make you feel was clear.
As for the presence of evidence in both films, I don’t think we need any evidence or “proof” to see the horrible truth of the disparity in these two countries. As an American in the technology age, I am more skeptical towards things that aren’t backed by facts and truth, but I don’t that was the point of these films. We aren’t supposed to decide who’s right and who’s wrong in these wars, we are supposed to see the impact the wars had on the people.
The Square (second time trying to post about this here, so hopefully it doesn't delete again...):
ReplyDeleteThe director included lots of live footage of the actual events. It definitely seemed that this was all shot during the actual events in Egypt, which made it seem very real and very truthful. You could see the real emotion on people's faces in the moment and they got dialog/interviews from people either during the protests/activities or directly after. They steered away from reenactments, which kept things factual. felt very inclined to think that things were edited to a minimum, which really made everything seem very REAL. Sure, they favor the film to the opinion that the Egyptian Regime is raping people of their basic human rights, but it's an opinion that is based on facts and evidence that is shown throughout the film. You see people get beaten by the police, you see their injuries, you see the real live emotion on people's faces. A part that really stuck out to me was when you got to see the citizens crying tears of joy at their "dictator" stepping down. That was a beautiful moment and showed how passionate they were about it, even though their fight was not finished. There wasn't any moment where I felt that I was being deceived or taken advantage of.
I’ve never been a strong follower of politics for two reasons: lack of information and the headache. I overall have a poor mentality when anything political is discussed or rather “argued”. When The Square began I had to give myself a moment to digest that this wasn’t going to be an easy watch, and more so that I would have to really get the gears in my head turning to follow along seeing as I had no prior knowledge of the subject.
ReplyDeleteFor someone coming in blind to this topic, I was able to follow along with ease. Not only did the documentary keep us in the action as it was unravelling, but it was able to be presented in a manner that was streamline. It’s hard to say the evidence wasn’t real when we were literally “in” the action with all who experienced it. This documentary wasn’t on a “he said she said” base, but rather the “interviews” were first hand. We saw the reactions as they experienced the emotions and information for the first time. I never felt lost or confused about what was being shown except for a few times when my subtitles were jumpy, but I think that was just Netflix’s fault. Usually subtitles take me out of a documentary, but I didn’t feel like I was missing a lot by having to read them. Rather, I felt more apart of the lives and culture, being taken in for a ride and journey about something I would never have the opportunity to experience. I think that’s what a good documentary does.
The Square was able to change how I view documentaries and cultures as a whole. As humans we all have these common needs, and common goals no matter our background, and this documentary was a good reminder of just that.
Control Room brought me to different realizations while presenting the information in the same fashion as The Square. I was young when everything followed after 9/11, and I feel like even now still being young, I hear other people’s opinions about what’s going on in the world before I am able to grasp the information for myself. Everyone’s versions become skewed and bias from whatever source they hear it from. Control Room made me realize how much control the media has over us. This is something I already knew, but to see it played out right before you definitely brings new light.
DeleteI don’t believe either side was right, but what was revealed more than anything to me was how misinformed our soldiers seemed to be. Whether what they were saying was true or not, they believed in what they were doing/saying a thousand percent. Does that make a good solider? Sure. Does that aid in solving problems? Probably not. In other terms, this documentary made me see first hand how much America seemed to be sweeping under the rug, but I don’t think our soldiers understood that. Do I think the director set it up to be this way? Not really. Facts are facts. The press conference can’t be skewed by a director.
It’s hard to think that if we didn’t have media how much information would be lost, but also how much information is already lost or put into some funnel for television. We might never get the facts straight for anyone anywhere because it’s all catered for a specific viewer. I wonder how we could change this. These documentaries were more than thought provoking, as I’m still sitting here trying to wrap my mind around them.
As a patriotic american, The Control Room was hard to watch. After the attacks of 9/11, America undeniably wanted revenge. However, what is hard for us to grasp, even now after the conflict and bloodshed, just how much innocent blood was shed. The media is always fueled with propaganda. We know that, but when we turned on the TV to hear about the Iraq war we only wanted to hear one thing; that WE were winning. This documentary reveals what we know was true but never wanted to really admit. American soldiers were just as responsible if not more so for the hate and violence happening to that country.
ReplyDeleteI thought the al-Jazerra’s most helpful news broadcast was the one that was so disturbing to us. Seeing American soldiers, our guys, the “good guys” laid across the battlefield bloodied and bludgeoned. Seeing these images, ones that our news channels never showed, make us sick to our stomachs. And yet, the Iraqi people, many of them children, were murdered like this everyday yet some how, although disturbing, those images were submersible to us, simply because it wasn’t our guys.
This documentary while very unsettling, was a true eye opener in painting the whole picture of what really happened during the war. Using real footage and interviews, the documentary presented legitimate evidence to “the other side”, while still paying the United States’ reason-for- conflict respect. All in all, I both hated and appreciated this documentary, because in truth, while the truth is hard to hear, it is also necessary.
The Square, oh my goodness. Speaking of hard to watch documentaries, this one may take the cake so far. Watching the story we never got, hearing from those who lived in it, seeing the outrage, the violence, the disbelief. How many times would these people stand up and fight without results? Beautifully shot and surprisingly inspirational this doc gave the truth to its best ability. It captured the pain, from both sides. Seeing and hearing real people’s stories, seeing the direct correlations between what happened at the square and how it effected the protestor’s lives and the well being of the country, was truly awe inspiring.
It’s maddening that freedom is such a intangible statement, and while easily definable, can mean so many different things to some many different people. In The Square, Ahmed comments, “The Rich don’t fight, they already have their freedom,” and that quote could reveal why it is so hard for us as americans to view docs like this and the Control Room, when it’s not happening to us, or if it’s something we don’t want to hear, the truth is something we avoid at all costs.
“Eventually we’ll have to find a solution that doesn’t include bombing people into submission,” one of al-Jazerra’s reporters commented. After viewing these two docs, it is all the more intriguing and unsettling to think that puzzle is one we have yet to work out.
The first documentary I watched was The Square. I found it amazing with all the real footage. It gave me a very real feeling of being there. It was kind of crazy to see what people went through to fight for their beliefs and freedom. One thing that drove me nuts about the documentary was the amount of it that was subtitled, only reason for that is it makes it hard for me to focus on what is going on while reading. However hearing everything everyone went though and their never ending determination to stand up for what they believed in was amazing and very inspirational. This documentary as well as Control Room can open ones eyes I feel to understanding what it is like outside of the United States. I notice that sometimes I find my self trapped inside of this country not really aware of what life is like outside out of here. As far as control room goes I watched it in my culture race and media course last semester. That documentary blew my mind on how media can effect people. Media has a way of making people believe everything they see almost like a lawyer convinces a jury someone is guilty. I liked the documentary as a whole as far as how things are portrayed about our country irritates me but then again sort of makes me wonder what our country makes us believe about other countries that may not be true. Its crazy how much is filtered out about a war keeping people unaware of their surroundings and not understanding the situation. Both documentaries were great with the footage that was used making it very real.
ReplyDeleteThe Control Room:
ReplyDeleteI felt disgusted watching this film. I felt disgusted when watching The Square, but I feel disgusted with my own country and people when watching the Control Room. I was too young to understand what was going on when we first invaded Iraq, but I remember thinking that what we were doing was good. I thought we were helping the good people of Iraq and punishing the bad. This film is something that I think everybody needs to see so that it can be relevant in the future if we ever get ourselves into this sort of situation again. It needs to be understood that the media controls us, we don’t control the media. The media gets to decide what it’s going to show us and it can brainwash us into believing what it desires. This film does a good job at showing both sides of the story through the eyes of the media. They provide a lot of footage that I’m not used to seeing, like wounded soldiers and gore. The American media is often very censored and filtered, but it seems that the Iraq media is very open, which makes Iraq’s media seem very truthful.
My first thought when I turned on The Square was, "Oh great, a political documentary that requires I read subtitles." I typically wouldn't add a documentary like this to my queue, but having had to watch it for class forced me to give it a shot. It took awhile for me to get into it, but once I was able to focus on the individual stories and complete tragedy of the subject matter, I connected on a very emotional level.
ReplyDeleteIt always shocks me when I watch a film like this because at the time, I barely knew what was going on in Egypt. I was vaguely familiar with their revolution, but other than that, knew nothing more. The Square allows the audience to experience the events first-hand, bringing them into the revolution itself. This is done not only with the use of actual footage, but by intertwining that with personal stories that really make the event relatable. It shows a realness that wouldn't be captured otherwise. It also helps that most of the interviewing isn't in the format of "talking heads," but is done while following around the main subjects and getting involved in their personal lives and stories.
The use of news clips and found footage is very effective as well, because it shows both how the media portrayed the revolution and how the revolutionaries saw it. This makes it very honest in my opinion, because the violence, hurt and unity you see isn't staged. I also respect that there weren't reenactments in this film (not that there really could be, considering the drastic size of the historical event).
Overall I found the film to be extremely heartbreaking but filled with truth. It does a wonderful job at showcasing the controversial happenings of such a large, important revolution in recent Egyptian history, and gives large masses the opportunity to educate themselves more on it.
After watching The Square I was a bit shaken up. The use of actual footage from the events that took place was so powerful. Seeing the teargassing of citizens and the vehicular massacre of protestors made me realize the magnitude of what could happen and what is actually happening when the news tells us unrest is happening in other countries. But this documentary also reassured something that I already knew, U.S news and media outlets will almost never be unbiased or objective when it comes to covering stories about their allies. There are so many moments in The Square that shows this so perfectly.
ReplyDeleteThe first is when the secret police attack the protesters in the square, they know that this event will not be covered on news stations. Second, when the teargassing starts a young woman grabs one of the canisters and it reads made in the USA. Then during a meeting led by Khalid, he tells everyone that if they know of someone with camera or they have one themselves to bring it to the protests. He says “we must film everything to show the truth” and another from Ahmed “the media made people hate us”. I remember seeing bits of coverage on the news about this years ago, and I remember thinking “wow these folks are a bit unruly” and after watching this documentary, I understand now that I was never given much information about the people who were living through the madness everyday, nor did I completely understand why they were fighting for a new regime.I also didn't know that the USA was providing weapons that resulted in the injury and deaths of so many Egyptian people.
When I started watching this doc, I couldn’t help but to think how much this reminds me of the events happening now in Ferguson. During the first week of the protests the citizens were made to appear violent, when the truth is that a majority of those involved were engaging in peaceful protests, and the community itself highly discouraged the acts of violence and looting. These peaceful protesters were unjustifiably met with riot gear, tear gas, and rubber bullets. In my opinion, there has not been sufficient media coverage during those days, and even now a month and a half after the initial protests, the community is still protesting and I have not seen or heard a much about it on any major news station. Just like with Egypt and Palestine, we must rely on the internet and social media platforms, especially twitter, to get the closest version to the truth. Again Ahmed hit the nail on the head, “We must film everything to show the truth”.
After watching The Square and the Control Room, it is so clear to me that it is very hard for the news to be unbiased, and that even if the content is meant to be unbiased one side will make it take an obvious side or it will be made to be seen pro or anti whatever movement they need it to be, in order to persuade their viewers into sharing their ideals.
I’ve been trained to look for both sides. My father reads all of Bill O’Reilly’s books and once gave me a copy of Sarah Palin: Going Rouge to “leave on the couch where [my] mom can see it”, while my mom doesn’t give a duck, she just doesn’t want to have to justify her political views to her ex-husband through a fourteen year old. I get my news from Jon Stewart and NPR. For me if a documentary is presenting me with “facts” I expect to see an argument from multiple sides.
ReplyDeleteIn The Control Room Hassan Ibrahim says “The United States is going to stop the United States. I have absolute confidence in the United States constitution. I have absolute confidence in the American people,” when he is asked what to do. Do we/did we have access to the Al Jazeera channel? Could we have seen it from their side if we tried? Did anyone want to see another side? Would/could we have done anything? I think Jehane Noujaim does a great job in being objective in this film, she presents both channels, both sides and gives us a good character for both sides. The presence of the American soldier who is in charge of strategic communications seems to be a good guy, he is out there making friends with the journalists and seems to be pretty open and honest about what is happening around them, without losing his loyalty to the U.S. military. Hassan Ibrahim is also trying to sort out both sides, he does have an advantage because he is both American and Egyptian. I looked him up, he went to my school in Arizona. And then you have the reporter for the Al Jazeera channel who is somewhere in the middle, saying he would take a job at Fox, he is going to send his kids to the states to study, but at the same time wanting to report and show what is happening in his home. I think this is the thing I appreciate the most about the film, and why I consider the information given to me by it to be factual.
In the square Ahmed Hassan says “If people are being fooled about what is really happening here we must film everything and show them the truth. As long as there is a camera the revolution will continue,” while this could be said to be his point of view, biased and so on, I think he shows an honest belief in the reality of the situation. If we could just show what is happening to us, than there will be no deception. We are trained to be skeptical of things that claim to be real, unbiased, or question what we believe to be true, but yet we rarely question the deeper issues of mainstream media’s power to pick and choose what to show us and how to light an issue. Around the 25:00 mark they are sad to see that footage of the army dismantling the sit-in is not being shown on CNN or the BBC. Why not? Probably too busy with the royal wedding of William and Kate. I had to look that up, I was not one of those glued to the TV, if only because I had no TV.
I trust what is being presented to me in The Square also, because again, they show two sides. Magdy and Ahmad start out as friends, very good friends with a common goal to take down the regime. Once they do this is becomes a more complicated issue of who takes power. Magdy, being a member of the brotherhood eventually has to choose between it and “the people”. There are many people and many opinions of the brotherhood presented in this film. Ultimately we are left feeling for the people, at least I was because they seem to have the least bias, they (or at least Ahmed) are trying to see the situation from multiple angles, whereas the brotherhood sees only from their own.
In the documentary, “The Square,” the setting starts in 2011, in Cairo, Egypt. “The Square” is directed by Jehane Noujaim, and starts with an image capturing buildings at night. Thus, the scene was switched to where all around Egypt, the electricity is not working. Then a character used a match in order to light a candle and a helpful sight. I dislike that I have to read the subtitles just to focus on what the meaning of the story is. Simply because it is difficult to focus on subtitles while watching visual scenes, “The Square” lost my interest.
ReplyDeleteAhmed Hassan, the narrator, tells a story about how Egypt was once living in dignity, but failed. Before the revolution, he lived from one job to the next. He started working when he was eight-years-old. In the fifth grade, he used to pay his school tuition by selling lemons on the street. At the time, Mubarak was the head of the regime that forced people to live 30 years under emergency law. From the knowledgable information about the injustice of Egypt, the documentary affected me emotionally, because the people in Egypt were being mistreated. Ahmed explains how the regime is against innocent people. In one scene, a cop slaps a citizen while another uses a razor on the same person. I really disliked the scene because while citizens were being harmed, they had no right to retaliate. No one had the confidence to speak about the wrongdoings of the police.
Where Ahmed was walking in the streets at daytime seeing many people wanting to end the injustice of Egypt grabbed my interest. After I was watching how one person cannot fight against a immoral authority figures, I gained a sense of relief to see the citizens unite. Because the police had guns, most of the citizens ran away from the problem. The documentary captured the realism of innocent citizens being injured and killed because they had their own lives separate to how the government felt. From the action of the violence, it is if the important scenes were never edited.
ReplyDeleteI like where the camera captured the people running away from the gunfire by scattering in buildings and made close-up shots in the scene. People were bleeding and doctors were worrying as the battle lasted for days. Although some citizen through rocks at the police from a far distance, still, the problem of injustice remained. I felt that for some, the citizens gathering to sing Arabic songs was an attempt of rejoicing. The violence showed the suffering that the mistreated people were undergoing.
The crowd continued to protest after the military told them how there would be justice. It was sad that the people had to continue fighting, but majority of them did not lose hope. The people in Egypt wanted cameras to expose the evil ways of the police and Army. As said by Ahmed, the Army was determined to divide the citizens, but the people cooperated with one another. There was a live crowd reaction and various people had a chance to speak about the emotional and political problems in Egypt. People did not want the military to be above the law and the people felt like they kept secrets about robbing government money. The Muslim Brotherhood eventually won the race for presidency. After all of the fighting, I was more satisfied with the ending of the documentary. In the ending, the people protested their freedom, but still expected the military to retaliate. They were chanting that, “Muslim’s and Christians are in one hand,” which represented their form of moral unity.
ReplyDeleteDirected by Jahane Noujaim, in the documentary, “The Control Room,” it is about gaining access to Al Jazeera journalist. The movie begins with pleasing music and a scene with unidentified characters playing with dominos. I like the scene because it makes me want to see more of what is happening. Thus, letters appear on the screen saying that the United States and Iraq are at war. George Bush then appears on television saying that Saddam Hussein is without power. I disagree with the scene because Saddam was still in power rather the United States people wanted to believe it or not. Saddam was a clever person willing to kill his own race to survive. An Arab admits that Saddam was guilty of invading Kuwait, but now he is not. Arabs believe that Saddam is there hero.
ReplyDeleteWhat was eye-catching was the explosives shown throughout the documentary. The footage of the explosive interested me because i felt that instead of hearing about attacks, I can visually see and hear the attacks. Thus, when the dead bodies were being shown, it added depression. I did not like seeing the Arabs being harmed because all of them were not guilty of trying to harm Americans. I enjoyed the footage of when an Arab leader said that his group gave locations in Mosul, Baghdad, and Busra to the authorities in Washington and Pentagon. The footage expressed reality and the intelligence of the Arabs plans. It is as if though Iraq were acting like they had nothing to hide, but the United States believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It is argued by other people that the United States Army just wanted to take Iraq’s oil and gain control of the land.
Jehane Noujaim is truly an inspiration to me, it makes me so happy to see a woman diving into these situations and letting us see them first hand. Sex aside, these are two fantastic documentaries. In The Square and in Control Room, when talking to people she generally was closer to them which not only made some part of me like them more, it also made me feel like I was there. There were a few times in Control Room where she would be listening in on a conversation between an American representative and a reporter from Al Jazeera and she would be farther away from the American, I honestly don't think that was to make the American man seem...bad but rather she wasn't participating in their conversation, she was just observing. She did a fantastic job at staying an observer. You never once hear her talk, in either movie. In Control Room she tells the story from the Iraqi point of view, most of her interviews were with Al Jazeera people BUT she never failed to show what the western tvs were saying and showing. Also, I don't know who her audience was, I assume anyone who's interested, but I think it's safe to say that most people already know the American side. It wasn't biased, she never said this side is smarter or better than this side she just showed what was going on from a point of view that most haven't heard. The Square was beautifully shot. I understand that editing and phrasing of words when interviewing people, etc. can adjust the "truth" behind a story. But I honestly can not see....how someone could question the honesty shown in this documentary. One could argue having a camera around could draw certain emotions from people that wouldn't be there otherwise but this was a revolution! Everyone was trying to document this. I'm excited to further discuss the ways the truth could be manipulated in this doc specifically because, maybe I'm just naive but nothing about this doc said fake to me.
ReplyDeleteThe Square, as critics have told us, is a beautifully shot film and is a remarkable story. The entire time watching it, I kept on wondering if perhaps a documentary like this would have been made if the technology had been around for our country's revolution against the British, what would it have looked like?
ReplyDeleteI think what amazed me the most was how the revolutionaries had worked so hard to get their leader to step down from his thirty-year reign only to have the military to do nothing to change the state in which their country was in. They then decide to take to the streets to try to make a change again, only to have the Muslim Brotherhood piggy back on their revolution, saying that the Brotherhood was there from the beginning spearheading the whole thing and make special deals with the military, then pull out early to leave the real revolutionaries out on the streets without support and be brutally hurt and killed. Things worsened as the Brotherhood began to increase their political power so back to the streets for these revolutionaries, documenting everything to show the brutal way in which they were treated.
The resolve of these people is astounding and truly inspiring. It is heartbreaking that all that the people wanted was true freedom and they continued to hit roadblock after roadblock. I truly hope that they can eventually get the freedom that they obviously want before all of them have the tragic end that seems inevitable.
With the Control Room, I have had the not so great pleasure of living through both recent Gulf wars, so this documentary brought up a lot of the emotions from these times. As we have seen in the World Wars, every side has their ways of spinning the war, but I do think that America had quite a unique way of spinning our version of the last Gulf war with Saddam that was quite revolting.
I personally had wished there had been more of the other side reporting during the war so that we here in America could have had a more complete view of what was actually happening. Although I don’t agree with the all of brutal and grotesque things that the Al Jazeera network shows, I do think that they were correct in asking the questions that they did, being the opposition voice that they were against the United States, and this documentary was a balanced approach in showing how they were trying to be that voice.
This was extraordinary to me to be able to glimpse into what happened behind the scenes during the war with the US trying to make Al Jazeera report what the US wanted them to report. Perhaps it isn’t journalistic integrity on behalf of Al Jazeera to have shown the brutal pictures of the slain civilians, but they sure were standing up for what was right as there was no known evidence for weapons of mass destruction, which in the end proved to be no reason for the US to be there any way.
Jehane Noujaim’s documentary the Square contributes to my growing skepticism about presented truth, especially when compared to her other documentary, Control Room. I thoroughly enjoyed watching both, even though I did became somewhat confused about what Noujaim was trying to say about the truth in media. Does she want the whole truth, like in Control Room? Or just enough to sway the public, like in the Square?
ReplyDeleteThe Square was beautifully shot and edited effectively to be sold to the audience as a tool to raise awareness and support for the secular protesters in Egypt. I really enjoyed her uses of juxtaposition. One example was when Mubarak was giving his “fatherly” address, and it was being shown alongside scenes of “his sons of Egypt” being oppressed and beaten in the streets during a peaceful protest. To be honest, during the first half of the movie, I got caught up in their truth, and started believing that all of it was subjective. I began the movie with an open mind because I have only heard about the Egypt protests in passing; I had no clue about the specifics. She also made her truth very persuasive by including evidence from the internet: Youtube clips of military brutality, Facebook photos of victims’ before and after photos, news clips that included interviews of the subjects. As part of Generation Y, we become less dependent on figures of authority and more on evidence, and Noujaim definitely takes advantage of that. Both her and the subjects emphasized greatly on the need to record on iPhones and DSLRs, always have proof to show to the world outside of Tahrir Square. She also made the subjects in this film easier to sympathize with with the showing off of their art, music, unwavering solidarity; and with how much in common this protest had with the Occupy Wall Street protests during the same year.
But I realized that the film wasn’t entirely subjective when interview clips with the Egyptian military started popping up. They threatened the Egyptian people with bullets, even as they were saying that the protesters were peaceful. I was thinking, “Wow, what assholes! I can’t believe people say things like that.” before I caught myself and realized that the filmmaker cut and edited them. They also negatively portrayed the Brotherhood of Muslims, even though they both want the regime to end. Reading this article http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/01/17/the-dangerously-one-sided-politics-of-oscar-nominated-documentary-the-square/ helped clarify the side of the Brotherhood and point out some of the problems with the film being used as a political tool against the government. Then it got me wondering, how different would this documentary be if it was documented by a non-Egyptian? Not as compelling. Although Jehane Noujaim was not seen among Ahmen, Aida, Magdy, Khalid, and Ramy in the film (or even heard), she was a very prominent subject in this documentary.
Out of the two, I enjoyed watching Control Room more. It was a mind-jolting experience, to have the “truth” you believed in for almost ten years suddenly change in 88 minutes. (I mean, I’ve always hated George Bush, but now I hate the guy even more.) The film also documented the need to know the whole truth, not just one side.
DeleteIt put into perspective the huge part patriotism has in the American identity. Many Americans after the events of September 11th signed up for war against the perpetrators, and took it upon themselves to hate every single Arab for the sake of “homeland security.” I myself have felt the brunt of American patriotism just through the fact that I am Japanese, that, although I wasn’t even alive during 1941, I was responsible for the bombing of Pearl Harbor, another attack on U.S. soil. There is a sign on one of the walls of a building I pass by on my way home that rubs that in: “December 7th, 1941 and September 11th, 2001: Never forget.” Those feelings made it easier for me to sympathize with the Al Jazeera and the bitterness that the Muslims were feeling, and harder for me to excuse the actions of the U.S. military.
The military used excuses like, “bringing freedom to the people of Iraq” and “protecting ourselves from the ‘potential’ threat of weapons of mass destruction that Hussein ‘supposedly has,’” to justify invading into Muslim countries. The journalists at Al Jazeera pointed out that the American politicians only seek to control their oil supply, and push the blame not to specific terrorist groups, but to the whole race. What felt really sad was the interviews the Al Jazeera conducted with the American POWs. When they were asked why were they killing innocent Iraqis, they said blankly, “We were just following orders.” I have friends in the military, and I can’t help but be pessimistic about the U.S. military, how they’re brainwashing my friends into becoming mindless pawns for corporate America.
I enjoyed both the interview of Joanne Tucker, who said, “Can anyone be objective?”, “Objectivity is a mirage”, and “War is never clean,” and the character of Josh Rushing, who was able to truthfully say that he was indeed more affected by the dead Americans than the dead Arabs, that he was upset about that fact. It emphasizes the critical need for equal world news, like the news source Think Progress, to not report biased news and promote censorship, but to help the world realize the human costs of war.
It’s hard for me to write about this film and not give a summary of what happened or what everything represents. Ultimately this is chaotic, INTENSE, inspirational film that follows likeable and lovable people. Ahmed is the perfect protagonist of this film. I can’t imagine the film with out him. He is so excited for the change and the progress his country is making and he will never stop fighting. I remember hearing about this revolution but that’s really it. I didn’t know the full backstory and the regime that was in power. This film opened my eyes to the Egyptian world. This is a doc that I will recommend to anyone. I saw heroes in the film. They didn’t have superpowers or anything. They just had a voice. When millions of people join and form a unified voice I am truly pleased and inspired to have witnessed something so compelling. This film is honest and uplifting I have nothing bad to say about it and I like that fact.
ReplyDeleteI remember when this revolution started and I followed it very closely through social media and the news. It was an inspiring moment in human history and I believe the film captures this with utmost sincerity. The film is a document of what happened and it will probably be shown for years to come.
ReplyDeleteThe film uses many symbols and characters to establish a truth hidden within all the chaos and misinformation. The square is a symbol and a character. The murals are symbols and characters. And these are just as deep as the people being represented in the film itself. Through these characters the film looks for truth and displays it with vigor and strength. Yes, the film is its own opinion but it leaves enough room for the audience to come to its own conclusions.
The ultimate truth trying to be conveyed within this piece is that of unification through the cry of freedom. People from all walks of life in Egypt came together because of the brutality and lies within the secret police. Actions speak more then words ever can, and the actions of the military and the secret police spoke to the truth of suffering among the people.
People from around the world saw these images being captured by cameras. People with cameras were being targeted because they exposed the horrific tactics and lies the military was involved in. People supporting the military, morsi, and mumbarak are inconsistent in language and action. On the other hand, the protesters being represented in the film are consistent in action and speech. This is why I think the film is accurate in the truth it is trying to convey. The information may or may not be 100% factual, but the actions captured do not lie. The blood that was spilled is not a lie. It is real. The pain is real. The suffering is real. The people are real. And this is what makes this film so compelling in revealing these basic human truths.
The film does not hold back in showing the brutality involved in the military tactics. The realization of human suffering in this situation comes to life. Human rights are being violated. The audience is shown the horrific truth throughout the world and an outrage is felt by all people around the world. Suffering, frustration, fear, and anger can be felt and reverberated through the core of human emotion. This is the unifying factor. We know violations of human freedom are unjust and we can feel it. This is why the audience can become convinced of the truth being displayed within this film. It is something we can all relate to.
Secrets are lies and the truth is revealed by exposing these secrets. The film is conscience of this and exposes these lies for what they really are.
I love this film with a passion because I can feel the passion within the people being represented in it. These people inspire me as well as the filmmaker. It is most definitely a certain perspective of the truth, but it is a perspective that speaks to myself. These are the conclusions that I draw, but like the film I hope people draw their own conclusions from it. As Magdy says, "You have a brain, think for yourself."
Both of these films made me realize that we may never know the full truth because everyone has their own version of the truth and will tell their version. I really appreciated the authenticity in both The Control Room and The Square because it was raw. It was showing a perspective we otherwise may not have seen. It exposed us to the hidden truths that are covered up by the media. The media lacks ethics because they omit the truth. They will show what appeals to the audience and what will boost ratings instead of what is important.
ReplyDeleteWhile watching these films and seeing the protests I thought back about the Ferguson ordeal and how the media tried to twist and turn the situation to better appeal to the audience and make for a more exciting story. It's a shame I was relying more on social media for truth that a nationwide broadcast.
What I loved most about these films is that they were raw. They showed what the media was too scared to show; the truth. They showed the real cost of war and the real effects it has. I found myself tearing up during Control Room because I'm seeing little children covered in blood and a news reporter losing his life and bombs blowing up city after city. It's senseless and yet American media praised these images saying "Yay, we won," but at what cost?
Seeing the fear and bruises and blood and death and hearing the gruesome stories of torture in The Square had me sick. Seeing what people on the other side of the world go through, while I'm complaining about having to go to work at 5am had me disgusted at myself because there is just so much going on out there and probably even more that I don't know about because it's not being reported.
These films just have me a whole new perspective on the world and the media and a quote that just keeps repeating in my head is from The Control Room, "Eventually there has to be a solution that doesn't involve bombing people into submission.
I think The Square and Control Room are two documentaries that convince us that what we are seeing on the screen successfully represent some truths behind experiences we hear about through different media outlets, and I noticed a lot of similarities amongst the two.
ReplyDeleteBoth movies layed heavy reference upon how government, politics, and military presence influenced the depicted messages. Both also encompassed news footage and images of different dictators and militant forces in their country. ...that appeared to be real. Not too mention, both movies felt the media, politicians, and tactical forces were too invasive and non-representative of the true views, thoughts, and values of the inhabitants of said land.
Alongside some of the similarities between The Square and Control Room were certain distinctions. In the Square, it was clear the people felt persons of power were taking a strong-arm approach and not really representing their needs, wants, and values...whereas the interviews depicted on Control Room show political and tactical forces swearing on a stack of holy books that they are strictly moving in the best interest of the people, while obscuring media exposure. The Square also used the media to their advantage, whereas, The Control room almost condemns the U.S media and general U.S. presence to hell. I find it further intriguing how the subjects of The Square felt they needed to be governed by a strong leader willing to properly represent them as a people, whereas, the Control Room subjects felt that no matter what was wrong in their country, political and militia forces were messing things up and invading their common practices.
To sum things up, I feel that both of these movies worked. The moods and tones were heavily influenced by the depictions of injured inhabitants and damaged condititions of the land. They both seemed to confirm and dispel some common press release allegations from both eras of war and revolution and weighed heavy insight into the past and present effects on colonialism. And the final most intriguing things about both movies: one being how in the end there was a sense of harmonious but not so harmonious mission completion....and the most awesome of all....both movies tie into each other by centering the attention of different rallies and congregations at "The Square!"
I thoroughly enjoyed this week’s viewings of both The Square and Control Room, and I was elated when I discovered that the director of such exceptional works was a woman, as this is a rarity in the filmmaking industry. Now, I will be the first to admit that the entire process behind politics and matters of that nature both exhausts and overwhelms me, which is precisely why I stay the hell away from stuff like this. Ironically enough, however, I do find myself enjoying many politically driven documentaries because they kind of do all the hard work for you. They sort through all the distorted debates, rambling news anchors, and visceral footage, and present you with the bits that matter (at least to them). This was definitely the case with Control Room, as I have very little recollection with the war in Iraq, and even less recollection of the controversy that surrounded Al Jazeera. And despite the contentious nature of such a topic, I appreciated that the filmmakers made a conscious effort to treat the subject matter with as much respect and fairness as humanly possible. That’s not to say that they were completely unbiased in their coverage, as someone within Al Jazeera hints at the notion of objectivity as a “mirage”, which I find fascinating in and of itself. But, all in all, it was an enjoyable, thought provoking and informative watch.
ReplyDeleteWhat I truly appreciated about watching Noujaim’s work, more specifically with The Square, was that she goes above and beyond presenting the facts of the political issue at hand, and brings a personalized narrative approach to the revolution in Egypt by centering on three distinct characters, and the ways in which this movement directly impacts their respective humanity amidst all of the chaos. Ahmed, from the moment we are introduced to him on screen, is the guiding spirit of the film for me. Everything about his essence oozes with a youthful vitality and tenacity that sort of drives the urgency behind the film. Khalid and Magdy (Khalid being the sensible and credible activist, and Magdy being the good natured, morally conflicted family man) both provide a sense of balance for Ahmed’s lively forcefulness, which aids Nourjain in bringing a sense of permanence to an otherwise engulfing topic. She does such an impeccable job at harmonizing the trying experiences of these three memorable people, that even as you watch from your T.V. or computer millions of miles away, you lose sight of the fact that there is an entirely different world going on around them.
I, myself, was consumed to the point where, as I watched these events unfold for these characters I didn’t concern myself with finding a universal sense of “Truth” within the film. Rather, I accepted the premise that Noujaim was presenting us with smaller truths within the greater scheme of society that prove to hold a greater moral bearing on the viewing public than “cold hard facts”. People don’t respond to facts. They respond to life experience. Who cares what political party was the greater of the two evils, or who blamed who for what. The point of this film was to expose the truths of these three individuals as they suffered them, and that’s good enough for me.
I really thought that the director did a tremendous job in capturing all of the emotions that were being thrown around while these these acts of violence and demonstrations were actually taking place. I am of course referring to Jehane Noujaim’s film, “The Square”. It gave me an impression of the extreme closeness that these relatively common people shared almost everyday during this time of activism versus suppression, as well as the oppression-filled years leading up to the initial protests, generally known as being part of the “Arab Spring” which began in 2011. I enjoyed the fact that the film did not include a narrator that would make the documentary seem past tense. Instead the director kept a sense of the present the made me feel like I was watching all of these events unfold right in front of me, just like the filmmakers experienced while filming. The cinematography was quite stunning at times and had some beautiful imagery, but at times was very shaky and ultimately personal because I felt like I could have been holding the camera and that makes it so much more horrifying. The film follows a group of people who lead very different lives from one another and portrays a common bond between them which is basically freedom from oppressive dictatorships and the establishment of a democratic Egypt. This brings them together but eventually tears them apart because of political differences or possibly death. I believed the storytelling was, for the most part, objective enough to remain a good example of proper journalism. However, it is probably very difficult to keep your emotions completely in check as filmmakers, especially when innocent people are being shot with live rounds and flattened by military vehicles. “Control Room” was a lot less creative in terms of stunning imagery but instead delivered each interview as on objective example of whatever topic was being discussed. Sometimes it did seem like the director may have been a little more keen on the Al Jazeera network rather than the western based news networks, but was not expressed to a certain point which would begin pushing the boundaries of the truth. I really liked the fact that in both films the director chose to interview both opposing sides which helped get everybody’s opinion of what was occurring and leaves it up to the viewer to decide who is more right and who is not making any sense.
ReplyDeleteTo me, ideas of evidence in The Square stood out largely in terms of point of view. Our trust in media dealing with heated political topics primarily stems from who is administering the story. For example, Michael Moore creates films with a strong vocal bias as a director that, while unquestionably true to his “choir,” often jeopardizes the faith of less politicized viewers/folks who disagree with his ideals.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in The Square, the voice, though still strongly political, is that of the film's characters. While this point of view is, arguably, no more or less inherently “true” than Michael Moore's, we have more faith in its honesty. The characters' beliefs are taken not as a definitive voice of authority in the narrative, but as personal opinions. While the film seeks to educate, the point of the film is not specifically to relay facts about a revolution, but rather to illuminate the personal goals and challenges of the people involved in it. It is through them that we can glimpse into what it was like on the ground during this struggle.
The characters themselves, however, are passionate about the belief that the camera is the only real form of truth – that is to say, we can only really believe that something happened if we have visual evidence to prove it. With media overlooking much of their fight, the characters sought to capture and digitally share as much of the violence as possible to raise awareness and persuade citizens of the necessity of their intents (“As long as there is a camera, the revolution will continue”). Images of the trampled, beaten, and killed illustrate the power of this theory.
While we cannot ever fully “trust” what we see on screen, due to its heavily manipulated nature, the visual “evidence” in The Square documents more than a social uprising, it zeroes in on the personal moments and convictions that fueled this revolution.
Cody Gene Sumner
ReplyDeleteI think this was such a weird subject matter to follow. Not because there wasn’t a story there but because of the way it was told. The way the gangsters presented themselves made it hard to believe all the things they did. They talked about their crimes so openly and freely. They and other government officials openly spoke about how corrupt the government is there.
The reenactments were troubling at times. They didn’t seem comical, but there was lightness to them even though they were reenacting treacherous acts. The neighbor of the longhaired guy was a really great actor. He really made me stop and wonder if the reenactments were real at some points. It was really crazy to me how they were talking about all the bad things they used to do and have now seemed to change but they were still muscling people for money. The small business owners were giving money to help fund corrupt government acts from what I interpreted.
It’s hard for me to believe the purpose of this film followed its original shape. I feel the production helped to shift the focus and purpose of the film. I was unaware of all the killings in general but I feel like they never really give off the feel of an organization that killed over a million people. The story was very disjointed to me. I enjoyed the connection to them having used to hustle outside the movie theatre and now they are making a movie but I didn’t understand the purpose of the film they were making.
I think that The Square was one of the more powerful documentaries I’ve seen. You feel like you are there in the square with them. It was emotionally taxing but very powerful. Not for one second while viewing this did I question if what I was being showed actually happened. It felt so truthful the whole time I was watching it.
ReplyDeleteNoujaim was able to do this by filming in real time. It wasn’t recreated or a filming someone recanting the stories after the fact. But the film was from the event in the middle of the square.
Viewing this you feel that you have an objective view of the events. Even though that isn’t true because it’s one side of the story from the inside of the movement but it still feels objective.
You watch people get hurt, you watch the military march in, you watch the person filming and the people we’ve been getting to know through the film run for their lives. You feel the excitement and joy in the square with the leader stepped down.
We see bad things happening to the protestor so we feel for them it’s persuasive. However it is only one side of the truth. We don’t see the people that disagree with the protesters. We also don’t see if there are any protestors doing things that are prompting the military to move in. We’re there protestors we couldn’t see being violent? We have no way to know from this film.
That being said I still thought this film was very successful but shouldn’t be confused with and objective full truth on the matter.
I think that Control Room does a great job with showing both sides. It exposes the bias of both sides of the war without taking a stance on either side. It feel less as an attempt to persuade you and more of an attempt to show you what is happening. It shows you that neither side is showing the full truth to the viewer and lets you develop your own thoughts on the matter.
I thought the perfect summary of this film was when an american journalist was filming someone who works for al-Jazeera the american journalist asked if she thought that the al-Jazeera journalist could be objective. She responded with a question and asked if any american journalist could truly be objective.
You realize that although both news stations may be presenting evidence and actually events, the things they leave out change the evidence immensely.
Both films, Control Room and The Square, were fascinating to me. Not just because of the footage they got, but because of how much new information was presented to me that I did not know. Saying that, the only reason why I have never seen this footage and this new information was because I was never shown it on the news, which is where most people, including myself, get most of their information on current events from. Control Room did a solid job on showing how biased and one sided news programs can be. I think the most powerful idea both films conveyed to me was that cameras are just as deadly as guns. As Jim Morrison once stated, “whoever controls the media controls the mind.” This could not be truer, especially after watching these films. I think one quote from Control Room directly relates to the other film when Samir Khader stated something along the lines of “If history has shown anything, it’s that humans have very short memories.” This quote ties with the fact that, in The Square, the protagonists in the film passionately resist military rule only to accept it with open arms two years later when Morsi is driven out. The concept of evidence, however, was challenging for me. Since these are both documentaries about major political issues, I cannot have complete and total faith in these films. Many documentaries, just like the news, can lean to one side and be biased. Saying that, I’m sure many interviews or scenes were not shown in these documentaries on purpose, which is a violation of evidence. No matter what country you’re in, the news, the films, and any other media is going to be, on different levels, biased and show only what they want to show to the public. Like I stated at the beginning, though, both films were wonderfully done and captivated me.
ReplyDelete