Many thanks for the comment engine or whatever one is suppose to call these things. As for the “acting”, don’t be shy. Take credit, if the others get upset they can only sack you.

I agree about Pan’s Labyrinth. Spanish language cinema has many examples of movies that take you outside where we might be at, into other worlds. It is either a tendency that comes naturally when you begin to think in the language or a lack of the kind of the heavy duty commercial pressure that is all a part of the English speaking world’s film production.

Here we either call the outside money, which means that you get asked “Who is in it” and sod all else, or you make something where the crew is paid tea money and the producer and director get nothing from a years work as in the case of ‘Adam and Paul’ for instance.

I’ll certainly look into the comment thing. That’s very concerning and shouldn’t be happening. I just checked it and its happening alright. The comment goes through, but you get a fatal error first…anyway, I’ll get it fixed.

Hugh
But -and this is where the sentimental part might come in, I think- there are lots of magnificent films about love and freedom and personal relationships which are not diminished in the slightest by the fact that they don’t bother attempting to lay bare the contradictions of the capitalist state or whatever, but rather help to create a visual space in which one can imagine what life might be like without it.
While the film I thought of doesn’t exactly correspond to what you are saying it did remind me of a film with a political and personal theme, which used Spain as the setting, but which didn’t get caught up in ‘the earnest, programmatic, we-must-hold-true-to-our-convictions fashion’ that you mention.

Pan’s Labyrinth.

Hate it when that happens. I fear I must have been swayed by the comments accompanying the article on the film, in this case at least. Like this one here:

.ESTO ES LO QUE PASA POR DEJAR EN EL PODER A UNOS ROJOS DE MIERDA…SI ES QUE NO TENIAMOS QUE HABER DEJAO NINGUNO….CLARO DE PEQUEÑOS LOS DEJAS CRECER Y LUEGO PASA TODO ESTO…PACO VUELVE PACO..

Which, roughly translated, sez:

‘This is what happens when you allow fucking reds to stay in power…we shouldn’t have left a single one…when they’re little you let them grow up and then all this happens…Paco Come Back Paco’

The Paco in question being one F. Franco.

On the ‘expression of left-wing views’ in film however: I would like to make one point. I agree with what Kevan writes about the jaw-shattering humorlessness of many films that openly display categorically left wing sympathies or views.

Might I observe, however, that part of this might be because most cinematic production, for the purposes of entertainment, reflects the values of the society in which it originates, and, on the occasions when it intends to supply a critique of that society, it tends to do so whilst still very much under the influence of those values, which include the sales and marketing constraints film-makers encounter. So those films that express explicitly ‘left-wing’ perspectives (see Loach) tend to do so in a sort of earnest, programmatic, we-must-hold-true-to-our-convictions fashion.

But -and this is where the sentimental part might come in, I think- there are lots of magnificent films about love and freedom and personal relationships which are not diminished in the slightest by the fact that they don’t bother attempting to lay bare the contradictions of the capitalist state or whatever, but rather help to create a visual space in which one can imagine what life might be like without it.

I can’t think of any at the minute because it’s late, but I’m sure you film buffs might come up with some.

As for IAWL being sentimental, what is wrong with that? We all are. Not down the pub discussing the latest follies of Man U or Munster or even Wasps of course but when we alone with out heart of hearts we all are. And the movie made many people believe that there was hope, considering the time it was made. The Second World War had just ended. We baby boomers had just arrived on the scene and our Mums and Dads wanted to know that the kids would have a better future than the shit they had just been through.

The NYT article reads to me like a floater that an Indie producer comes out with when the distributor is about to Welch on his commitments. Part of the game. Not a funny game but part of the business. Very few films have guaranteed distribution, in terms of the number of prints, and this is a way to t jack up the numbers and hence the return and good luck to whoever is the producer.

Finally, Donagh, could you please resolve your actual status with WorldbyStorm and ensure that when a humble reader like myself spends a few moments writing a comment, after of course getting enraged, calming down, and finally typing it, that when I post it doesn’t come up as a fatal error. Well that’s what happened last night; and the time before when I tried to convince Michael Taft of the error of his ways.

Certain blogs of course do not have this problem, like Hugh Green’s. His allows me to attempt to point out where the bloke who made the cross came from with no problem. His problem is he mistakes anarchy for left wing views. (see the comment above) But then like myself, too much exposure to Rioja can easily do this unless you take up drinking Claret for a while. But maybe the study of Spain and the Spanish will do this to anybody.

Anyway assure Seanachie I was engaged by his article.

No wonder in the early 1950s Senator MacCarthy’s House Committee on Unamerican Activities cast an unsmiling suspecting glance towards Chaplin.
While having a scout around for stuff on Chaplin’s politics I found out about his 1947 film Monsieur Verdoux, which was originally written by Orson Welles. I wouldn’t mind seeing that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCUsWaXVlS8