Outside Event: Tell em' Who You Are: In Defense of Land and Family

Talk, film screening feature personal story of U.S.-Mexico border wall

Description: To build a multi-billion dollar wall across hundreds of miles of the U.S.-Mexico border, the Department of Homeland Security is condemning hundreds of acres of privately owned land, much of it owned by Tejanos--U.S. citizens whose roots in the region run centuries deep. "Tell 'em Who You Are: In Defense of Land and Family" is a documentary film rooted in the journey of a native daughter to the embattled borderlands of South Texas, to recover memory of the Tejano-owned land that will be lost to the border wall. The film combines a personal narrative with investigative journalism to connect the wall construction with an age-old Tejano struggle to defend a unique identity and be seen as truly Texan. Director Michelle Garcia will discuss the project and show clips from the film, which is in development. Garcia, a 1996 graduate of the journalism program of the university, is a producer with Independent Sources, a television program about New York's ethnic media that airs on City University of New York television.

Time: Monday, Febraury 2^nd. 7-9 p.m.

Location: Thompson Conference Center auditorium (TCC 1.110)

Admission: Free and open to the public

URL: http://communication.utexas.edu/current/programs/srfellows/DEV75_006878.html

King Corn

Since I took GRG 319 - Geography of Latin America - last semester and my professor explained that corn was a mutation of a Mesoamerican domesticate called teosinte and could not survive naturally without human intervention, I have been interested, at least superficially, in the role of corn in the human diet and ways to avoid its consumption. I had been wanting to see King Corn since its release in 2007, and I'm glad we screened it in this class.

I thought the film had some really impressive cinematography for a subject as humble as good, ol' American corn. The stop-motion sequences were particularly brilliant, and the original music provided just the right amount of depth without being overbearing. To be honest, I thought the two main characters were interesting, and their film techniques were definitely so, but otherwise boring. Their shared family history was a nice coincidence but didn't do much to support the overall agenda or narrative of the documentary.

I found the film very informative and educational - it was great to learn so many bittersweet things about corn, its production and distribution, and the role of maize in our diet. I saw on the film's website that the filmmakers tried to avoid eating any corn for a full month, and though I haven't read up on how well they did, I imagine it was incredibly difficult.

But what I got most out of this film is the motivation to use stop-motion. Seriously...Fisher-Price toys bringing down the corn industry? Awesome.

Screening Comments

I really enjoyed Sound and Fury. I felt like the topic was very original, and showed both sides of deaf culture with and without a cochlear implant. I was very surprised that both families were dealing with similar issues at the same time, and it was interesting to see how each family went about deciding what was best for them.

The footage was ok, but not great. I think better cameras or technical aspects could have made this doc a lot better. I also did not really like the voice overs. I'm not sure that subtitles would have worked, but everybody signed with so much body language, and I feel the voice overs took away from that. Also I read about this doc on imdb before I saw it, and it said that when the little girl who wanted the cochlear implant was asked who she identifies more with deaf people or hearing people? She signs Grandma and Grandpa, but the voice over says deaf people. I believed everything in this doc, but I don't know sign language, so I think the arguments between the relatives would be a lot more insightful if you knew sign language. Overall the doc was still really good. Good topic that not a lot of people know about, and interesting subjects.

Sound and Fury comments

Clearly this documentary was a very well thought out and planned piece. Aronson was not trying to convince or coax the viewer into siding with one side or the other. The equal focus on families and people representing both sides of the argument helped reinforce that. The storyline reinforces reality by not having a solid conclusive ending as to whether it truly is ethical or unethical to use cochlear implants. The issue has not ended and the viewers are left to make a value judgment for themselves. According to the "Director's Take" on the PBS website, Aronson understood and created this documentary as the "climax of the 250-year-old battle between deaf people who lip read and speak and those who sign." I think it would have added to the tensions between the hearing vs. the deaf world by explaining that deaf people have already struggled with tensions between people who lip read and people who sign.

From a technical standpoint, my initial impression was that the documentary was not very well produced since the footage was not the most aesthetically pleasing I've seen. I haven't had too much experience with documentary so I half expected cinematic qualities from the documentary. I realized walking away after viewing the film that despite its seemingly unimpressive cinematic qualities, it really drove the issue and story home. The director chose to use a dub rather than subtitles in order to keep the documentary consistent and interesting. I think since it was very well executed, this worked in his favor. This is especially the case since most of the films viewers are of the "hearing world". The shots and timing of the cuts were also well executed. When the father was very angry, there was an uncomfortably long shot focused on his facial reactions and gestures. Though a dub was used, the visual track provided reinforcement for the words dubbed in the audio track. When interviewing a deaf person, they chose to record an audio track of the few sounds they made and mix it into the audio voice over track. This helped portray the emotions of the interviewee and also provide authenticity to the vocal dub. The mix of real live footage and interview footage was also carefully planned. I remember a particular scene when the mother siding against cochlear implants felt attacked by her mother-in-law. The scene was immediately followed by an interview where she expressed her feelings to her husband. All in all, its easy to pick out areas where it seems like the piece was unprofessional. When all factors are considered, and the overall effects and message of the documentary are considered, Aronson did a successful job in his attempt to educate people like myself of the realities facing the deaf culture.

Jesse Koay

Sound and Fury Opinion

I really liked this film a lot, even though I left feeling very sad. It's hard to judge this family's actions because I am not part of the strong sense of family that is created through deaf culture. I understand how important it must be for these people to be around others who understand their struggles. The part that killed me though, was when Heather and Nita were talking near the end and Nita says "well you said you didn't want the implant" and Heather says "wait, you said I shouldn't get it." It's also hard for me to agree with their decision when Heather's father himself said that he relied on people at work and wouldn't be able to climb the ladder any further. But like I said, I suppose I can't really judge. Maybe Heather will someday get the implant anyway.

As far as the filming goes, I thought that the story was pretty well put together. I was expecting the family to change their minds and get the implant for Heather because they revealed so early on that they were not going to get it for her. I really liked the way they set up Heather's father's interview...I thought the lighting was really pretty. I also liked the inclusion of the sister-in-law who had deaf parents. That poor woman! "You're a lousy daughter" ( I think she said lousy...) But I thought it advanced the idea that just because you aren't deaf, it doesn't mean you can't be a part of the culture...

1st screening

paragraph#1
i found the documentary informative and moving at times. i didn't think it was extraordinary.
paragraph#2
i thought the voice overs were distracting from the reality of this deaf culture's language, sign. i was disappointed there were no attempts at putting the viewer through a deaf experience of seeing and not hearing. i liked the characters and it seemed as if they were very comfortable speaking their minds in front of the filmmaker(s) and rolling camera. however, i wasn't particularly moved by any of the camerawork.

Sound and Fury

I really enjoyed the film. I am not familiar with deaf culture so it was great to get different perspectives on it. It was interesting to see how the people who are deaf are portrayed. I do not know how else I would have them communicate other than silently signing or having voice overs but it was something that stuck out to me. Although it is exactly the words that they were signing, it makes a huge difference in how it is spoken, therefore, I feel that the film makers had to be very careful about how they portrayed each character with their voice overs.

I also noticed the difference in communication between people who are deaf and the hearing. I feel that you could get a good sense of the speaking's emotions through how they said something. In contrast, I feel that when you watched someone sign, there is a lot of emotion portrayed in their movements and facial expressions. When someone is angry, you hear them yelling but when someone signs, you see more quick and forceful signing. It was very interesting in how the documentary portrayed a different type of communication. (i.e. close up shots of people's hands signing while hearing others yell in the background). All in all, i feel the documentary is successful because it blends elements like sound and visual to explain two different worlds; the speaking and the deaf.

Vi

Sound and Fury comments

How many people in this class understood any of the words I said in that clip? Probably few or none.

As a student taking American Sign Language here at UT I found this documentary quite truthful in trying to portray the sides of the story. I feel that it was more biased towards the hearing culture in the way that the Deaf were portrayed in the film. But that could just be because of the natural way the Deaf portrayed themselves in the film outside of the filmmaker's choices.

Deaf culture and community are some of the most important parts of Deaf people's lives; they do not view deafness as a disability, but rather something that empowers them. It was interesting to hear some people laughing at the Deaf people in the documentary, but the community is so close knit it is only natural for them to react in the way that they did. They are a sizable minority in the US and trying to remove their deafness is like European settlers trying to change the Native Americans culture long ago.

I enjoyed seeing the problems and resolution of both sides and the decisions each family made. The crew captured the emotions of the moment and that helped make the film genuine. I'd be interested to see what happened further with the Deaf family after they moved and how the cochlear implanted baby developed language and identity.

From Ellen: CHANGE THE WORLD THROUGH FILM!

THE CHALLENGE

THE CHALLENGE Create a short film that tells the untold story of an American philanthropic foundation and one of its good works in this country.

All RTF students are eligible to submit work to the competition. One of the $10,000 scholarships is *guaranteed* to an RTF student. Consider developing a class project around a qualifying film, animation, etc. that you can submit to the competition.

- - -

Your film should show: By whom the foundation was founded and why.

How the foundation's good work is permanently improving the lives of individuals, communities, or worthy causes in America.

How the foundation's good work is inspiring its beneficiaries to pay it forward ...to help others the way they themselves were helped.

- - -

Your film can be comedic or dramatic, scripted or documentary-style, live-action or animated. You're limited only by your imagination!

THE REWARDS Twelve $10,000 Scholarships Forty $500 Honorable Mentions Winning films will premiere on a premium Web TV mega-portal!

THE PROCESS

http://philanthropy.tv/Step%201.html Yes! I'd like to participate. http://philanthropy.tv/Step%202.html I'd like help picking a foundation and a good work.

http://philanthropy.tv/Step%203.html I have the idea for my film. http://philanthropy.tv/Step%204.html I'm done! Here's my film.

THE DEADLINES

Approved film outline: March 15, 2009*

*This is a rolling deadline and your instructor may have a shorter deadline for outline approval Submit film: May 30, 2009

IMPORTANT NOTES
1. You are required to make your video as part of a course requirement
2. The prizes cannot be shared by a group of students working together – each prize can only be awarded to one person
3. Recipients must use the awards for tuition OR for expenses associated with course=related productive work in 09-10
4. You must plan to be enrolled as a continuing RTF student in Fall 2009
5. You must acquaint yourself with the technical requirements for submission and the strict requirements about obtaining releases mandated by the Filmanthropy Project Sponsors (see below)

Go to www.philantrhopy.tv for the OFFICIAL RULES HANDBOOKIt contains everything you need for the competition: rules and regulations, on-camera releases, music licenses, and much more. For any questions about this competition, please contact Cara Jones at story2@philanthropy.tvBeyond Charity, Philanthropy ... Beyond Film, Filmanthropy.

Sound and Fury : PLEASE READ

Hello Students,

Please visit these websites and read about Sound and Fury:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/soundandfury/film/bio.html

http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/reviews/Sound-and-Fury

Please blog about the film before next class. You should read all the blogs that are posted before yours so you don't repeat information.

Your blog entries should be 1-2 paragraphs and comment on the form (structure, style, cinematography, editing etc), content (storyline) and any background information you gather from your own research. Comment as a filmMAKER, not just as a reviewer/critic.

See you next week!

Ellen

Me too!

I'm excited - my girlfriend gave me an awesome idea for a doc. Can't wait to discuss them in class.

Yay, I hope this semester's class is as fun as last semester. Already have a few documentary ideas in mind and looking into feasibility.

Hello, Class

The class blog has been set up. Hurry up and say something here!

Ying