FACETS MULTIMEDIA USING COMMIE PINKO LOGO to increase funding.
Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race
obscure movies from around the world. their video department has a
great diverse collection from all periods, places, etc.
so how morally degrading for facets to use the soviet mosfilm logo to
boost its membership?
yes, at facets there are now giant posters with the image of the ideal
prole man and woman carrying hammer and sickle,which served as the
trademark for mosfilm, the soviet film industry.
the ironies, the ironies.
just how and why does an institution known for promoting artistic
freedom use such evil symbol--quasifascist marxist imagery?
yes, artists have been known for leftwing sympathies but the greatest
asset to art is freedom from ideological meddling.
the soviet union imprisoned and killed countless artists and other
people of individuality and freedom.
the story of filmmakers under the soviet system is a sad one. the
greatest soviet filmmaker--tarkovsky--was harassed by soviet
authorities and died in exile.
eastern europeans know what it was like to live under the iron
curtain, what it was like to have socialism shoved down their throat.
i'm not denying soviet system didn't create great cinematic art. heck,
so did the nazis with leni riefenstahl. and i know the argument goes
that in america hollywood is a big monster too. but did hollywood
kill anyone? did hollywood send anyone to a forced labor camp?
overall, hollywood has been a haven for fleeing filmmakers from nazi
germany and communist countries.
it's one thing to oppose conservative poltics on art and society but
to go so far as to promote soviet symbolism is downright sick,
ignorant of history, insensitive to the victims of lenin, stalin, and
their heirs. it's an insult to people who were shot trying to climb
over the berlin wall. it's an insult to hungarian heroes who died in
the russian invasion of 56. it's an insult to the heroic czechs who
were crushed by russian tanks, whose promising cinema of the mid 60s
was buried and destroyed with soviet aggression.
i believe facets receives federal money and it's a damn shame that
this institution that enjoys freedom and patronage under capitalist
democracy is arrogantly and mischievously dallying with symbols of
hypocrisy, artistic censorship, propagandization of art, and what
susan sontag called 'fascism with a human face.'.
shame on facets. it's a great place, one of a kind in chicago and in
america but the politics of the left has been exposed as extreme,
hateful, amnesic, ugly, and downright disgusting.
while facets celebrates soviet symbolism, let us pray for the millions
murdered under lenin, tens of millions murdered under stalin and all
the artists--writers, filmmakers, painters, musicians--who were
harassed, imprisoned, tortured, and/or murdered.
madkevin
"Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race" <thegre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:205ad494.02040...@posting.google.com...
> facets multimedia is a great institution that has screened many great
> obscure movies from around the world. their video department has a
> great diverse collection from all periods, places, etc.
>
> so how morally degrading for facets to use the soviet mosfilm logo to
> boost its membership?
Gosh, Tony - d'you think the appropriation of the Soviet style image could be,
y'know, intentionally ironic?
Kevin "Speaking Of Tools..." Cogliano
Ed Stasiak
> i believe facets receives federal money
Why would they receive federal(my)money?
Are they connected with PBS in some way?
Robert Keser
I don't have the exact details, but Facets gets about 5% (around
$350,000) of its income from government grants and other public
donations. This includes subsidies to enable underprivileged children
to attend programs (including the Chicago International Children's Film
Festival), plus free admissions and waivers to people who can't afford
to attend otherwise. As far as I know, Facets has no connection at all
to PBS.
Facets also has produced the most complete catalogue of films and
videos available in the U.S. that deal with Human Rights issues.
Through Facets, the co-founder Milos Stehlik coordinated the petition
to defend Iranian filmmaker Tahmineh Milani, who recently faced
possible execution for a film depicting internal struggles in Iran that
followed the Islamic Revolution. Stehlik got the petition signed by
over a hundred filmmakers--including Boorman, Coppola, Guillermo
del Toro, Jonathan Demme, Faye Dunaway, Philip Kaufman, Richard
Leacock, Ang Lee, Spike Lee, Mike Leigh, Dusan Makavejev,
Chris Marker, Sean Penn, Paul Schrader, Barbet Schroeder,
Scorsese, and Soderbergh--and it was sent to Ayatollah Khamenei.
Tony is right that Facets is a great resource (that can be used by
people throughout the country), but he's being exceedingly silly to
inflate a trivial matter like a logo.
People interested can check out the resources and the very
knowledgeable film news roundup at: http://www.facets.org/
--Bob Keser
Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race
> to defend Iranian filmmaker Tahmineh Milani, who recently faced
> possible execution for a film depicting internal struggles in Iran that
> followed the Islamic Revolution. Stehlik got the petition signed by
> over a hundred filmmakers--including Boorman, Coppola, Guillermo
> del Toro, Jonathan Demme, Faye Dunaway, Philip Kaufman, Richard
> Leacock, Ang Lee, Spike Lee, Mike Leigh, Dusan Makavejev,
> Chris Marker, Sean Penn, Paul Schrader, Barbet Schroeder,
> Scorsese, and Soderbergh--and it was sent to Ayatollah Khamenei.
>
did facets ever petition for the human rights of an artist under
communist repression?
kinda selective, aren't they?
and would you say my beef with facets is trivial were they using giant
posters of nazi or italian fascist film industry logo?
you see, i'm fair. i decry art used for the purposes of propaganda. i
decry censorship and art being degraded into the tool of a police
state.
by the way, facets once came up with POLITICALLY CORRECT FILM
CATALOGUE. this simply goes against the whole spirit of art. their
lastest idiocy is not only childish but insulting to the millions who
suffered under soviet tyranny. and to promote artistic freedom by
celebrating the symbol of repressive soviet utopianism is downright
stupid.
Robert Keser
> did facets ever petition for the human rights of an artist under
> communist repression?
I don't know: ask Milos Stehlik. However, the Human Rights Film
catalogue certainly includes titles that criticize communist regimes, if
that's what you are looking for.
> kinda selective, aren't they?
That's a leap of judgment: do you have the facts to back it up?
> and would you say my beef with facets is trivial were they using giant
> posters of nazi or italian fascist film industry logo?
Tony, these are films and film studios we are talking about. UFA
under Nazi control made some memorable films, and so did the Soviet
companies, and so did the Italian fascists. Furthermore, this is history:
it's not like Mosfilm is Dreamworks!
> you see, i'm fair. i decry art used for the purposes of propaganda. i
> decry censorship and art being degraded into the tool of a police
> state.
If you decry censorship, why are you demanding that they censor
their poster art?
> by the way, facets once came up with POLITICALLY CORRECT FILM
> CATALOGUE. this simply goes against the whole spirit of art. their
> lastest idiocy is not only childish but insulting to the millions who
> suffered under soviet tyranny. and to promote artistic freedom by
> celebrating the symbol of repressive soviet utopianism is downright
> stupid.
But your statements are a rich example of political correctness. Every
word criticizes Facets for not paying obeisance to cold war correctness.
Perhaps you should leave such criticism to those survivors of the
"millions who suffered under soviet tyranny". We all have a right to
express our opinions, but theirs carries a lot more weight.
--Bob Keser
Ed Stasiak
> I don't have the exact details, but Facets gets about 5% (around
> $350,000) of its income from government grants and other public
> donations.
I went to their web site and they seem to be a private company selling
movies. Why the hell are they getting tax payer dollars?
Sure its nice that they help underprivileged children go to film
festivals but they should use their own money, or better yet hit
up Boorman, Coppola ect. for the cash!
Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race
i don't mind facets getting federal money. the great majority of
movies they show don't draw a huge crowd.
i've often seen movies there where maybe only two people showed up.
facets, however, never compromised with artistic integrity, always
showing new challenging movies or screening old forgotten gems,
inviting directors from around the world for lectures.
i'll bet facets loses money on many of their screeings as the movies
are chosen for their artistic merit rather than for profit potential.
but to use mosfilm logo--and in two gigantic posters--is just idiotic.
maybe facets is saying there should be greater federal funding for the
arts. well, maybe, but moslim wasn't just about federal funding of art
but about government ownership and control of the arts.
sometimes these leftists go too far.
still, i, like most cineastes, are forever indebted to facets for
showing us movies we would never have seen otherwise.
Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race
> > did facets ever petition for the human rights of an artist under
> > communist repression?
>
> I don't know: ask Milos Stehlik. However, the Human Rights Film
> catalogue certainly includes titles that criticize communist regimes, if
> that's what you are looking for.
no, i'm not talking about that catalogue. they had a catalogue out
several years ago called 'the politically correct film catalogue'.
>
> > kinda selective, aren't they?
>
> That's a leap of judgment: do you have the facts to back it up?
okay, if you say facets have voiced opposition against leftwing
oppression, i stand corrected and i'll take your word for it.
>
> > and would you say my beef with facets is trivial were they using giant
> > posters of nazi or italian fascist film industry logo?
>
> Tony, these are films and film studios we are talking about. UFA
> under Nazi control made some memorable films, and so did the Soviet
> companies, and so did the Italian fascists. Furthermore, this is history:
> it's not like Mosfilm is Dreamworks!
but how would you feel if a film society tried to increase membership
by displaying giant UFA posters? that's rather a silly way to spread
the idea that your organization stands for artistic freedom.
>
> > you see, i'm fair. i decry art used for the purposes of propaganda. i
> > decry censorship and art being degraded into the tool of a police
> > state.
>
> If you decry censorship, why are you demanding that they censor
> their poster art?
no, i do not demand. i reprimand but do not demand. i would never
call for the state to forcibly confisticate anything at facets. i
didn't even call for a boycott. i just voiced my personal opposition.
if others agree, fine, if not, fine too.
it's just that for me, soviet terror was one of the absolute horrors
in the history of mankind. leftists still have this silly view that
lenin was just misguided but ultimately well meaning goodguy and it's
stalin who loused it up. wrong! lenin started russia on the road of
totalitarianism and made stalin possible.
> But your statements are a rich example of political correctness. Every
> word criticizes Facets for not paying obeisance to cold war correctness.
wrong again. it's not a matter of cold war. it's a matter of moral
decency. i don't care if facets didn't care for reagan's policies in
the cold war. i don't care if facets screens soviet era movies and
defends their artistic merit--some of them anyway. but those ad
posters are offensive not because it's insensitive to certain ethnic
or poltical groups but because they proclaim the virtues of the
murderous communist proletarian dictatorship.
had they used a giant poster of a great eisenstein or tarkovsky movie,
or even an image from siberiade or some other russian film, i'd have
no objection. because that would have emphasized art overcoming
censorship and repression. but mosfilm logo? that is sick.
why? because films like siberiade and andrei rublev were the few bare
exceptions to the mosfilm rule of stalinist filmmaking where personal
art need not apply. had they used posters of an image from andrei
rublev, facets would have made a statement for the artist against
artistic control of the state.
but, okay, maybe due to the charged atmosphere of political
correctness where the left and minority groups have bitched about
everything, maybe i've fallen into this rut too.
but would you have no problem had facets used a still from birth of a
nation, a photo of d.w. griffith, or a still from triumph of the will
in its drive to increase membership?
just answer that one. and i think the 'progressive' community would
be up in arms and facets would relent and pull those down. i'm not
even going that far. i'm not trying to pull anything down but simply
trying to change the hearts of the sickos who decided--of all the
millions of things representing cinematic virtues--to go with the
mosfilm logo.
and images when taken out of context do matter. for example, if you
use an image of hitler from triumph of the will, it's kinda stupid to
say you're simply for the artistic merit of riefenstahl but not for
hitler.
and exactly what was facets trying to convey with the use of those
posters?
why mosfilm? you tell me. is commie hollywood simply better than
hollywood?
is mosfilm the ideal towards which facets is striving? is facets so
forgiving of the left that it's willing to embrace soviet symbolism?
will they set up busts of lenin in their video rental department next?
after all, vladimir did once say 'cinema is the most important
propaganda tool of the 20th century'. does that make him the louis b.
mayer of the left?
> Perhaps you should leave such criticism to those survivors of the
> "millions who suffered under soviet tyranny". We all have a right to
> express our opinions, but theirs carries a lot more weight.
>
they have bullets lodged in their skulls and are buried under the
siberian tundra. sometimes they send me messages and i'm a medium
through whom they speak.
Robert Keser
> > > did facets ever petition for the human rights of an artist under
> > > communist repression?
> >
> > I don't know: ask Milos Stehlik. However, the Human Rights Film
> > catalogue certainly includes titles that criticize communist regimes, if
> > that's what you are looking for.
>
> no, i'm not talking about that catalogue. they had a catalogue out
> several years ago called 'the politically correct film catalogue'.
So what?
> > > kinda selective, aren't they?
> >
> > That's a leap of judgment: do you have the facts to back it up?
>
> okay, if you say facets have voiced opposition against leftwing
> oppression, i stand corrected and i'll take your word for it.
I didn't say that. I'm not a historian of Facets. What I said was:
ask Milos Stehlik (because he should know).
> > > and would you say my beef with facets is trivial were they using giant
> > > posters of nazi or italian fascist film industry logo?
> >
> > Tony, these are films and film studios we are talking about. UFA
> > under Nazi control made some memorable films, and so did the Soviet
> > companies, and so did the Italian fascists. Furthermore, this is history:
> > it's not like Mosfilm is Dreamworks!
>
> but how would you feel if a film society tried to increase membership
> by displaying giant UFA posters? that's rather a silly way to spread
> the idea that your organization stands for artistic freedom.
A giant UFA poster wouldn't bother me in the slightest because it
would be a statement about *film*. I would not assume that it was
a recruitment poster for the Nazis.
What if Facets decided to use the MGM lion logo on a poster?
Would you leap to the conclusion that Facets is pro-feline and thus
guilty of disrespecting generations of faithful canines--including Lassie!--
who gave their lives for humanity? Sometimes a picture is just a picture.
> > > you see, i'm fair. i decry art used for the purposes of propaganda. i
> > > decry censorship and art being degraded into the tool of a police
> > > state.
> >
> > If you decry censorship, why are you demanding that they censor
> > their poster art?
>
> no, i do not demand. i reprimand but do not demand. i would never
> call for the state to forcibly confisticate anything at facets. i
> didn't even call for a boycott. i just voiced my personal opposition.
> if others agree, fine, if not, fine too.
That's good to hear.
> it's just that for me, soviet terror was one of the absolute horrors
> in the history of mankind. leftists still have this silly view that
> lenin was just misguided but ultimately well meaning goodguy and it's
> stalin who loused it up. wrong! lenin started russia on the road of
> totalitarianism and made stalin possible.
>
> > But your statements are a rich example of political correctness. Every
> > word criticizes Facets for not paying obeisance to cold war correctness.
>
> wrong again. it's not a matter of cold war. it's a matter of moral
> decency. i don't care if facets didn't care for reagan's policies in
> the cold war. i don't care if facets screens soviet era movies and
> defends their artistic merit--some of them anyway. but those ad
> posters are offensive not because it's insensitive to certain ethnic
> or poltical groups but because they proclaim the virtues of the
> murderous communist proletarian dictatorship.
I don't understand how they "proclaim the virtues" of anything except
film. Maybe one of us is overly concerned with symbols instead of the
reality that...well...a poster is just a poster. The context at Facets is
clearly one of film history, not of a political campaign or party
recruitment.
> had they used a giant poster of a great eisenstein or tarkovsky movie,
> or even an image from siberiade or some other russian film, i'd have
> no objection. because that would have emphasized art overcoming
> censorship and repression. but mosfilm logo? that is sick.
>
> why? because films like siberiade and andrei rublev were the few bare
> exceptions to the mosfilm rule of stalinist filmmaking where personal
> art need not apply. had they used posters of an image from andrei
> rublev, facets would have made a statement for the artist against
> artistic control of the state.
Facets shows Nestor Almendros's film criticizing Castro, but it also
shows I Am Cuba, which is both Soviet and <choke> Cuban, but
still manages to be one of the most excitingly made films I know.
Facets has both films; we call that freedom of speech in our country.
> but, okay, maybe due to the charged atmosphere of political
> correctness where the left and minority groups have bitched about
> everything, maybe i've fallen into this rut too.
It's more than a rut: it's a wall, a mental constraint, a trap.
> but would you have no problem had facets used a still from birth of a
> nation, a photo of d.w. griffith, or a still from triumph of the will
> in its drive to increase membership?
No problem with either one. Hell, they could put up a life-size photo
of Butterfly McQueen [whom I sat next to at a showing of Mildred
Pierce once] in full Mammy regalia, and it would seem pretty clear to
me that this was about the actress, and not a plea to bring back
plantation mammies!
> just answer that one. and i think the 'progressive' community would
> be up in arms and facets would relent and pull those down. i'm not
> even going that far. i'm not trying to pull anything down but simply
> trying to change the hearts of the sickos who decided--of all the
> millions of things representing cinematic virtues--to go with the
> mosfilm logo.
>
> and images when taken out of context do matter. for example, if you
> use an image of hitler from triumph of the will, it's kinda stupid to
> say you're simply for the artistic merit of riefenstahl but not for
> hitler.
Well, you're the one ripping it out of the Facets film context.
> and exactly what was facets trying to convey with the use of those
> posters?
Jeez, is this torture or what? I haven't even seen this blankety-blank
poster.
> why mosfilm? you tell me. is commie hollywood simply better than
> hollywood?
I haven't the slightest idea what this means...
> is mosfilm the ideal towards which facets is striving? is facets so
> forgiving of the left that it's willing to embrace soviet symbolism?
>
> will they set up busts of lenin in their video rental department next?
> after all, vladimir did once say 'cinema is the most important
> propaganda tool of the 20th century'. does that make him the louis b.
> mayer of the left?
Oh, yeah, busts of Lenin. You sure put your finger on the problem here.
> > Perhaps you should leave such criticism to those survivors of the
> > "millions who suffered under soviet tyranny". We all have a right to
> > express our opinions, but theirs carries a lot more weight.
> >
>
> they have bullets lodged in their skulls and are buried under the
> siberian tundra. sometimes they send me messages and i'm a medium
> through whom they speak.
Bzt! Bzt! Bzt! Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........
--Bob Keser
Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race
> > but how would you feel if a film society tried to increase membership
> > by displaying giant UFA posters? that's rather a silly way to spread
> > the idea that your organization stands for artistic freedom.
>
> A giant UFA poster wouldn't bother me in the slightest because it
> would be a statement about *film*. I would not assume that it was
> a recruitment poster for the Nazis.
>
you're a man of integrity. i can't bait you for hypocrisy.
Tim Pierce
thegre...@hotmail.com (Anthony Gaza Man an Ancient Race) writes:
>
> just how and why does an institution known for promoting artistic
> freedom use such evil symbol--quasifascist marxist imagery?
I'm pretty sure they did it because they knew it would piss you off,
Tony.