As promised, here it is: the video clip that accompanies the legal discussion of the previous posts; a 3-minute clip from the two-hour show, “The Buzz” produced by ABS-CBN Channel 2 last Sunday, April 11, 2010, used here non-commercially for academic purposes. Hope it’s useful!
Category: Film paintings photos
Thank you to “The Buzz” show for the interview! (and the good shots — in real life, the blog admin looks like a sea hag; ABS-CBN always manages to give the human form of this face)
This portion (see photo, still of an ABS-CBN video used here non-commercially, for academic purposes) was shot in Rocs Coffesshop in U.P. Diliman, Bahay ng Alumni; Rocs is the quieter, cozier, “fully cold” (full aircon) of the coffeeshops in U.P. that allow a full TV crew inside for interviews — thank you to Rocs for the wide windows facing the afternoon sun, with cream-colored paper blinds filtering the sunlight — natural daylight, good acoustics.
For those who were not able to see the segment, this blog will try to upload a teeny-weeny snippet for review and academic purposes.
On the TV production: the entire produced segment in “The Buzz” (ABS-CBN) is a 5- to 6- minute sequence composed of interviews of the subject (the talent, singer-actress Karyll), a video expert, etc., and presenting the side of the tabloid, and other parties involved, for an all-around discussion. Half of the segment was devoted to an investigative angle showing that there really was no “nip slip” or no full breast exposure; that, according to the independent video expert consulted by “The Buzz” whom they went to after the interview with me in Rocs, the photo of Karyll had been photoshopped; and second, the talent was wearing taped breast cover. Therefore, some parts of the discussion in the previous blog post (below) on breast exposure may not be applicable because, based on the investigation, the photo was manipulated. At the time of their interview with me, i did not know the image was photoshopped, the producers had a statement from the talent that she was wearing taped breast cover, so they independently investigated/ verified whether or not the photo had been photoshopped. The producers went to an independent video expert to establish the nature of the photo. Then, they interviewed Atty. Nery Colmenares (Hi, Nery!) after they saw the video expert. [i’m glad Atty. Nery Colmenares gave an interview, so my friends in the progressive movements cannot rib me! some friends tease me whenever i give TV inerviews]
Manipulating or “photoshopping” a photo to change its content, information, and meaning opens a whole lot of discussion on other legal and ethical issues.
Then, the segment had about 2 minutes on statements of the parties (the talent and her equally famous mom on twitter), then 2 minutes on legal discussion. Wait lang po for a short (2-minute) snippet video for academic discussion, i’ll post it in a while, promise!
10-minute video- excerpt of the 3-hour film “The Passion of the Christ” directed by Mel Gibson, 2004, uploaded here non-commercially, for review purposes
Review: Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ
By Victoria Lindrea , BBC News Online, 27 Feb. 2004
In http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3489946.stm
“The anti-Semitic charges laid at the door of Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ threaten to distort a powerful and challenging piece of cinema.
“Gibson’s depiction of the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus Christ is, as the director has maintained, firmly based on the gospels of the New Testament.
“Granted, the story is given cinematic flourishes – a wholly realistic depiction of the crucifixion in the original languages Latin and Aramaic would be unwatchable, not to say uncommercial.
“The film was originally planned without subtitles – but such ambiguity would only have obscured the courage and sacrifice singled out by Gibson’s adaptation.
“It opens in the garden of Gethsemane where Jesus of Nazareth is struggling to accept that his ultimate sacrifice of death is looming.
“The battle of good and evil is laid bare. In the shadows lurks Satan, an androgynous, hollow-eyed demon, snakes slithering at his feet.
“Throughout the film we will return to him, lurking amid the baying crowds. It leaves us in no doubt as to the hellfire and damnation that faces those non-believers.
<code
“The fate of Judas Iscariot is one of the many areas where Gibson adds colour to the story of Christ’s final hours, but not necessarily truth.
“The handing over of the 30 silver pieces is pure theatre – but nothing compared with the demonic street children who later hound the traitor to his death amid a sea of flies and maggots.
“Still, were it not for dramatic back stories like those of Judas, and the merest sprinkling of humour, The Passion might prove too relentless in its brutality.
“From the moment Jesus is seized by the temple guards, we are immersed in a world of bloody violence. Violence that is initiated by the Jewish high priests.
“These Jewish leaders stand condemned in Gibson’s film. We are given no clues to their motivation, only their desire for bloodletting.
“But the Pharisees’ ignorance is tempered by other enlightened Jewish characters peppered throughout Gibson’s film, who show support and sympathy to Jesus in his final hours.
“And let us not forget that Jesus himself – the man who preached love and forgiveness in the face of his own violent death, was himself Jewish.
“Gibson hopes his story will inspire “tolerance, love and forgiveness”
“Elsewhere, characterisation is thin too. King Herod and his followers are drawn in camp, pantomime terms and the Roman soldiers are portrayed as vicious, bone-headed thugs.
“Of all those who judge Jesus, only Pontius Pilate and his wife Claudia show compassion or reason.
“As to the violence itself, it is appropriately excruciating. Gibson offers moments of relief with flashbacks to Jesus’ earlier life.
“The moments are aptly chosen to show his capacity for love, yet also demonstrates how arrogant – how dangerous – his self-belief must have appeared.
“Above all, the film’s power derives from the visceral depiction of Christ’s suffering. Gibson has used modern film-making technology to fashion a film that is at once a work of art and a study of mankind.” Review by By Victoria Lindrea , BBC News Online, 27 Feb. 2004
