What the hell has happened to you? You are among the most critical thinkers I know. Your movie festival writing is so happy, I think you need to cut back on your prozac. What is going on down there?

So, right off the bat, I know that even my friends don’t read my policies page.

More to the point, I think making art is hard as hell. I don’t want to spend my time tearing work apart, when I can be bringing my readers stuff I think is great. That doesn’t mean I can’t be critical of works that I love, but I haven’t been digging in for analysis for SILVERDOCS, since I’ve been mostly posting quick bits. I’ll have some more analytical writing following the festival, as the panels and fellow festival-goers typically give me lots to think about.

And to the particular writer of that question, I note that you know what I do if I want to rant, rave, criticize and attack–I write about politics.

Did I mention he is alive and well and living in Paris, where he runs a radical bookstore? Capitalism may be trying to eat Che, but I doubt they will be able to swallow Lucio anytime soon. Viva Lucio!  Viva La Revolución!

The panel looked primarily at “serious games”–computer games that are designed to promote political, social or behavioral change, or to serve a function that goes beyond play alone.

Suzanne Seggerman opened the session, and introduced her organization, which promotes the use of games for social issues and social change. She pointed out that games are a young medium. They are still evolving and growing–maturing as a form. Gaming, said Seggerman, is where film was in the 60s and 70s: beginning to be studied in the academy, shown in museums, getting foundation interest.

Seggerman made the interesting point that unlike films, you have agency in games. So how you tell a story in a game has to account for that difference.

While Sharon Sloane previewed her company’s technology–the Virtual Experience Immersive Learning Simulations–which seem to be like old-style games: a set of decision tree scenarios, with video segments. While there is likely more to it than that, you couldn’t tell from the demo.

Wendy Levy talked about BAVC’s ability to bring together mediamakers, technologists, and storytellers for developing new tools and approaches–and to serve as an incubator for innovation with independent producers. She then showed a brief machinima, generated in Second Life. It seemed like it was the first exposure to machinima for several members of the audience, and she. seemed surprised by the machinima Then showed a brief machima–oops technical problems–ok, then did the piece. The piece was nice–all second life

Ken Ellis stepped in to briefly introduce Edutopia–which has a site, a magazine, and a research agenda. He showed a brief sample work. They have over 150 docs available on their site.

In my opinion, Nonny De La Pena’s project was both the most innovative and interesting. She created an interactive Gitmo experience in Second Life, where visitors get bound, hooded, transported, caged, etc. It seemed like a brilliant way to inform and change people’s perspective on what is going on inside Camp X-Ray.

Then Trisha Creekmore demonstrated one of Discovery.com’s projects–the game Shark Runners, built by AreaCode– which is a social game where you do shark research and gather info, get funding, etc. Creekmore noted that the challenge to her was how to make an interesting game that is fun, will keep people coming back and also help them learn something.

In the Q&A that followed, a number of interesting ideas arose:

Sloane observed that games must bring a perspective shift to bring change. The game must be personal enough to open people up, to lower their defenses while providing better tools, information, and behaviors. To be successful, you “must capture brain space and heart space at the same time.”

De La Pena spoke about the idea of “spatial narrative”: when you move into a virtual space, how do you get people to follow you? How do you build that narrative? Do we show you video? Take control of the avatar? How do you marry image and story?

Creekmore reminded us of the iron rule of gamers: the users totally hack what the designers plan. With her Sharkrunners game, players created their own HQ, gave their own awards, etc. She emphasized that this is something to be expected and embraced (Her best quote? “I like the unpredictable.”)

Respondent David Johnson set out an interesting framework for thinking about gaming. He said there are four considerations: the culture of play, the money of play, the storytelling of play, and the ethics of play.

Johnson said if you take a tool and play with it, you get a toy. So, that also works in reverse–we learn from play. Start as play, then toys may become tools (or, if playing with tools, new uses arise).

The money of play is a really big force–the push for faster, more powerful tech raises the bar for entry into making games.

Yet, Johnson noted, it is still about telling a story. The new tech engages people at a whole new level–simulation as the most powerful communication tool ever. (All games, he argued, are storytelling platforms. Chess itself is a teaching tool to teach war.)

And then, finally, gamemakers need to consider the ethics of what you create. Once you select some aspect, you are leaving something out–every choice limits, and so, in a sense, every choice speaks of intent.

Johnson’s closing point really seemed to reiterate what many of the panelists have already grasped. It is time for storytellers to embrace the gaming platform and its power to make visual worlds, use it to craft stories, and then to let people play with it.

Filmmaker Sascha Paladino has created a delight of a film as he joins his brother Fleck on a trip to Africa to explore the roots of the banjo. ((I had a chance to hear the two speak at length earlier in the day about the process of making the film, and hopefully I will get a chance to write up those comments soon.)) Their multi-country trip brings Fleck together with many talented musicians and remarkable collaborations result. The energy of the musicians is infectious, the music joyous to behold, and Paladino gives you the experience of being right in the mix.

Following the screening, the audience got an opportunity to hear Fleck play, joined by Cheick Hamala Diabaté, a terrific n’goni player and star in his own right (see photo below). For the second night in a row, SILVERDOCS hits it out of the park. ((Look! A sports analogy! How did that happen? Answer: it’s a baseball analogy. Even I know from baseball.))

UPDATE: I had to leave after about 45 minutes due to a scheduling conflict, but was really impressed by what I saw and I look forward to seeing the final version. Not only was the rough cut remarkably coherent (remember, collaborative collective!), but it was quite moving. In addition, the energy and passion of the filmmakers themselves is enough to get me to go see everything they do. I am filled with regret that I wasn’t there for the discussion following the screening.

And judging from Chevolution, that will be one long line of people.

Alberto Korda’s photos of Che (and perhaps even more widely known, the stencil/pop art images of Che by artist Jim Fitzpatrick ) are among the most memorable and ubiquitous images of the twentieth century. Chevolution gives us a look at who Che was, what he means to different people, and the complicated history of the use of Korda’s images by artists, activists, politics, and commerce. Even if you are familiar with the life of Che, the story of his image (and the questions the film asks about the meaning of its use) will give you plenty to think about.

* * *

As always, the disclaimer applies: This is a festival to which I have a substantial connection. I have volunteered for the past two years and sat on this year’s Selection Committee. I wrote for the festival catalog and will likely be introducing some of the filmmakers and subjects at the festival. Feel free to adjust for my bias. My blog reportage and opinions, however, do not represent the views of AFI or the SILVERDOCS festival, the Selection Committee, or of any of their staff. No one should construe anything expressed on this site as being endorsed or supported by AFI, SILVERDOCS or anybody other than me.

Herzog’s questions lead to cinematic meditations on human extinction, on community and isolation, and on the wonders of the natural world–all with images that amaze, amuse, and inform. Simply stunning, this film is work from a master filmmaker and was a privilege to watch.

* * *

As always, the disclaimer applies: This is a festival to which I have a substantial connection. I have volunteered for the past two years and sat on this year’s Selection Committee. I wrote for the festival catalog and will likely be introducing some of the filmmakers and subjects at the festival. Feel free to adjust for my bias. My blog reportage and opinions, however, do not represent the views of AFI or the SILVERDOCS festival, the Selection Committee, or of any of their staff. No one should construe anything expressed on this site as being endorsed or supported by AFI, SILVERDOCS or anybody other than me.

Anna Broinowski’s terrific film, Forbidden Lie$, looks at Khouri’s story, and attempts to untangle the many threads–fact, fiction, con, hoax, art–that surround Khouri, her book, and her detractors. Khouri is a strong presence in the film, and her interactions with the filmmaker raise new questions, spin new stories and result in a trip to Jordan where Khouri attempts to prove her veracity.

Khouri is mesmerizing, but is it the passion of an activist or the seduction of a con artist that draws us in? A running poll on the film’s website shows that opinions continue to differ. Wander into the tangled web and make up your own mind!

* * *

As always, the disclaimer applies: This is a festival to which I have a substantial connection. I have volunteered for the past two years and sat on this year’s Selection Committee. I wrote for the festival catalog and will likely be introducing some of the filmmakers and subjects at the festival. Feel free to adjust for my bias. My blog reportage and opinions, however, do not represent the views of AFI or the SILVERDOCS festival, the Selection Committee, or of any of their staff. No one should construe anything expressed on this site as being endorsed or supported by AFI, SILVERDOCS or anybody other than me.

Filmmaker Geoffrey Smith follows British neurosurgeon Henry Marsh as he travels to Ukraine to work with his friend and colleague Igor Kurilets. The state of medicine in Ukraine is, like much of the country’s infrastructure, severely deficient. Marsh brings expertise and equipment to assist Kurilets in serving patients, many of whom have had inadequate or no treatment.

The soulful Dr. Marsh brings a gravity all his own to the film. His own demons never far from his elbow, Marsh works to exhaustion, often seeing patients whose lives could have been saved if only they were able to receive treatment earlier. While the stories of patients are gripping, it is the relationships Marsh forms with Kurilets, his patients, and the patients’ families that will stay with you. An excellent soundtrack by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is just a sweet, sweet bonus.

Screening twice at SILVERDOCS, both the director and Dr. Marsh will be available for Q&A after the shows. Though I have seen the film twice, I look forward to hearing the two men talk about the film.

* * *

As always, the disclaimer applies: This is a festival to which I have a substantial connection. I have volunteered for the past two years and sat on this year’s Selection Committee. I wrote for the festival catalog and will likely be introducing some of the filmmakers and subjects at the festival. Feel free to adjust for my bias. My blog reportage and opinions, however, do not represent the views of AFI or the SILVERDOCS festival, the Selection Committee, or of any of their staff. No one should construe anything expressed on this site as being endorsed or supported by AFI, SILVERDOCS or anybody other than me.