Columbia College Chicago students having tech problems can now log in to the new online FAQ and help system. In order to assist students with tech problems through the year, the F&V department has launched a Web based Help Desk.
The site has FAQ’s (Frequently Asked Questions) and users can request specific help in the following areas:
Audio: Production and Post Production questions
Camera: Bolex and JVC questions
Computer: Hardware, Software and Storage
Final Cut: Editing, Input and Output
Staff are in place the system is tested and working. The site operates out of the MIP Lab and is actively monitored during lab hours.
Please set up an account for yourself. You must use your Columbia email account on the system.
Suggestions for FAQ topics should be sent to Dennis Keeling, dkeeling@colum.edu
You can also reach the help site via email at: fvhelp@colum.edu
How fitting is it that during a week of premieres for Michael Moore’s new film, Capitalism: A Love Story, the “group of twenty” nations (G20), which together account for about 85 percent of the world’s economy, were in Pittsburgh to revitalize global free market policies and even renew the people of the world’s faith in capitalism?
Just as Michael Moore was about to begin his premiere in Chicago, in Pittsburgh thousands of students (effectively or ineffectively) were acting upon what they think and feel about capitalism and were being criminalized and suppressed by a security presence that was effectively imposing martial law on the city of Pittsburgh so that the G20 summit could happen without a din going on in the background.
At the premiere in Chicago, about 50-100 people from the general public were allowed in to the premiere. Another couple hundred seats were for press, local politicians, union workers, and workers from the Republic Windows factory, which had staged a sit-in in December 2008 when the workers found out the factory they worked in would be shut down and they would not be getting owed vacation and severance pay.
The screening was an event. Moore came before the audience to introduce the film saying he was honored to be here. He would be going on Bill Maher’s show, and afterward, a Q&A would take place.
In two hours, Moore along with his great crew and archival team weaved a tableau that connected a series of events and personal stories which had occurred in the past few years.
A montage of bank robberies with Iggy Pop singing a rendition of “Louie, Louie” opens the movie. A masterfully edited sequence comparing America and the history of Rome before its empire fell takes place followed. Then, Americans are seen being “robbed” by banks or having their homes foreclosed on.
Moore’s new favorite fact to tell news pundits is heard: A foreclosure happens once every 7.5 seconds. Rep. Marcy Kaptur is featured in the film advocating for open rebellion as she says from the House floor to Americans, “don’t leave your home” unless the bank foreclosing on you can physically produce your mortgage.
A harrowing portion of the film provides Americans a glimpse into the dark side of capitalism through “dead peasant policies,” a practice that involves businesses or corporations taking out life insurance policies on people who they think will die and make them money. The practice symbolizes all that it is evil about capitalism.
Moore said of “dead peasant policies” during the Q&A that this is “how corporations see you.” They think it is in their best interest to not give you health insurance and rig the system through unsafe conditions in the workplace. Then, you will die sooner and will make them money.
A horrific story involving young people is included in the film. Moore details how two Pennsylvania judges were charged with taking millions of dollars in kickbacks to send teenagers to two privately run youth detention centers. He chooses to go beyond calling this corruption and calls it a symptom of capitalism, a result of a system that legitimizes greed.
In the latter part of the movie, Congress is shown doing the bidding of Sec. of Treasury Henry Paulson. The majority of Congress members are afraid of voting “no”, of being responsible for an economic meltdown that could cost them their re-election. Like in October 2002 when they were afraid to vote against the Iraq war for fear of being labeled a supporter of Saddam, they allow what Rep. Marcy Kaptur agrees is a “financial coup d’état.”
Archival footage of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that Moore explained was “conveniently lost and buried” appears toward the end of the film. As he was dying, FDR asked that someone film him speaking about a Second Bill of Rights.
For Moore and crew working on the film, it was intensely emotional every time they watched the footage because it made one wonder what the last 65 years would have been like if Americans had seen this. And, the archival team uncovered the footage by refusing to believe the Roosevelt Library when the library told them the footage didn’t exist.
The film is an intensely personal one for Moore. Going back to the production of Roger & Me (1989), Moore goes into the trials and horrors that his hometown Flint, Michigan experienced and how Flint has been for the past twenty years. Moore tries to get a meeting with the men in charge of running GM so he can offer some advice that could significantly turn business around. He is not allowed to go near the building entrance.
The faith Moore had as a child in Judeo-Christian teachings and interviews with priests add an extra element of intensity. News clips show how Americans have been duped into having faith in capitalism, faith that directly contradicts what many believe religiously.
Moore’s magnum opus comes to an end with a sequence of Obama riling up citizens for “hope and change.” Shots of individuals taking on the recession, shots of people refusing to let capitalism take away basic needs that are necessary for survival, and shots of workers championing democracy in the workplace end the film on a high note.
The idea of democracy in the workplace was emboldened by the presence of the Republic Windows workers whose story was featured in the film. Moore and his crew were the only media allowed in to the factory during the sit-in. It is evident that the workers trusted Moore as an ally who would give voice to their values and a few of the workers choose to thank him personally during the Q&A.
The audience participating in the Q&A showed signs of increasing skepticism for Obama. Chicago might be “Obamaland,” but the engaged working class of Chicago knew even more clearly after seeing Moore’s film that Obama has been conducting policy for the richest 1% at the expense of the poor, working, and middle classes of America.
Moore indicated that he found the appointment of Timothy Geithner to Secretary of Treasury and the naming of Larry Summers as an adviser to be very unsettling. Instead of being properly critical of Obama, he chose to apply twisted logic to the situation and argue that big banks hire bank robbers to help them prevent banks from being robbed and so, perhaps, Obama hired Geithner, Summers, and others closely linked to the banking industry so they could tell him how to prevent Americans from being robbed again.
It doesn’t quite make sense how willing Moore is to contend that we should continue to hope Obama does something that would sharply contrast his history as a senator, presidential candidate, and as a president so far. What does make sense, however, is how Moore explains that Obama has been out there alone with little support from the Left in America.
Moore tells the audience there is no crying in politics. Americans have to get busy themselves and cannot leave this up to a Michael Moore or Barack Obama. He asks the audience to organize around the movie and bring groups and unions to the film that will open in more than 1,000 theatres.
Capitalism: A Love Story has the potential to tap into the anger boiling beneath the surface, anger that has manifested itself on the right but has unfortunately been stifled and stymied by progressives, liberals, activist organizations, and even unions.
A film student stood up during the Q&A to ask what advice he would give film students. Moore told film students in the audience “beg, borrow, and steal” and “shoot, shoot, shoot.” He says “make films from your heart.”
He added, “Don’t make what you think will look good. Make something you would like to go see on a Friday night.”
Finally, he told film students, “Think about the 1 million who want to see your movie, not the other 299 million in America” that won’t. Focus on mobilizing that audience to see your film and you’ll be successful.
Directed by: Rollin Binzer Length: 1 hour 32 minutes Development to Distribution: 3 years Shot on: Sony PDWF800
I wish I had good things to say about The Providence Effect. It’s so rare to see a doc that tackles the subject of education in America head-on, especially one that purports to hold answers to the system’s many woes. The private school the film focuses on, Providence St. Mel’s in Chicago’s beleaguered West Side neighborhood of East Garfield Park, fully lives up to the hype too. Beyond boasting a 100% college acceptance rate for graduating seniors, the communal aura of commitment to education that permeates the teachers, students, and parents is palpable. Then these same dedicated individuals transferred their teaching model in an attempt to recreate this wild success in the newly minted public Charter school Providence Englewood, thereby potentially shedding light on a winning strategy for public education at large. Considering this solid premise, how does The Providence Effect manage to so thoroughly fail?
It doesn’t help that the doc can’t hide its lack of inspiration in terms of its craftsmanship. Nothing about this film takes any risks whatsoever, never budging from the worn-in formula of show and tell. The film does a good job balancing time between all the various students and teachers and the major “subjects”, but there is really only one character. Only the school’s founder Paul Adams III is fleshed out enough for us to see what ultimately motivates him. Too bad his and every other interview is composed entirely of fielding softball questions. Even when the various subjects do grow animated during an interview, the static Mid-CU framing and banal, even lifeless soundtrack work to dull the effect.
The strongest and most cohesive point of the doc is that Providence St. Mels owes its success to the culture of hard work, commitment, and mutual accountability that has and continues to dominate the mindset of everyone that steps into that building. I believe this is a valuable lesson; I’m confident that such a holistic attitude will play a central role in the winning strategy for education reform, whatever that ends up being. Perhaps achieving and sustaining this culture “isn’t rocket science” at Providence St. Mels, but the film fails to show how their day to day strategies trump their public school counterparts that are in many cases equivalent if not identical. In 92 minutes the film manages to dole out precious few specifics concerning the Providence “effect”, but makes ample time for self-congratulatory pats on the back. Generalizations and warm, fuzzy platitudes fly left and right while the doc struggles to pin down what this school does so differently. “We have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to violence… and gang-related activity” the principle at one point remarks, but then never goes any deeper. So are we to believe that all of the other schools that struggle with violence have a “three-strike” policy? Is there really a High School out there that doesn’t emphasize discipline or dedication to studiousness?
Unfortunately this documentary has even graver problems to answer for beyond the limp inspiration and infomercial approach to penetrating the subject matter. The Providence Effect feels like the interlude between two other films that actually matter, the fluff that gives your brain a rest before diving back in. One the one end, the explanation for how Providence St. Mels was transformed by Paul Adams III from subpar to superstar is relegated in the film to his gloss-over explanation that essentially amounts to “Veni, Vidi, Vici”. How was he able to turn it around in “one or two” brief years? That sounds like the making of a great documentary, but apparently it wasn’t really worth diving into.
On the other end is the question of the success of Providence Englewood Charter School. Remarkably, this is never shown in any kind of thorough manner. If the conceit of the film amounts to the belief that Paul Adams III and Co. are on to something that everyone should take a hint from, isn’t the entire point then to gauge the possibility that their model could be successfully duplicated? How can the film be silent on these details and still maintain what, in this light, is the arrogant disposition of “it’s not rocket science”? What does it really matter to public education reformers if a private school in a rundown neighborhood excels, especially when it isn’t tethered to local property tax revenue?
Perhaps this huge gap in the film is simply a product of the very recent arrival of Providence Englewood Charter School, and it’s just too early to tell if it can achieve the same outstanding success of its forerunner. But then why not wait to make the doc until it is clear either way? As is, the resulting feeling upon seeing the credits roll is worse than that of the garden variety, lazily shaped doc: the entire thing just feels like a waste of time.