Interview with the director of The Trotsky [Archive]

View Full Version : Interview with the director of The Trotsky

KurtFF8

28th January 2012, 16:04

This is an interview with the director of The Trotsky I did for the Left Film Review (http://www.leftfilmreview.net)

http://leftfilmreview.net/2012/01/27/left-film-review-exclusive-interview-with-the-director-of-the-trotsky/

3aXufkG3EJk

Thirsty Crow

29th January 2012, 14:00

Oh to hell with youtube (malfunctioning speakers).
Have you got a transcription or something?

Aleenik

29th January 2012, 22:47

Thanks for that.:) I wanna see The Trotsky now. I've heard of it before, but never really looked into the movie until after watching your interview. Hopefully the local video stores have it.

Sir Comradical

30th January 2012, 01:47

Stupid film. I downloaded and deleted it pretty quickly.

Ozymandias

30th January 2012, 02:29

Stupid film. I downloaded and deleted it pretty quickly.

I don't think anyone could argue the contrary, but it's satisfying in a politically carnal fashion.

6/10 --Average. It's a perfectly average film. No brilliant acting, yet not so terrible as to distract the viewer. Typical, manufactured script. Typical, manufactured obstacles.

Had it not been for the political twist, nothing would have separated this film from anyone of the dozens upon dozens of profit-driven bogus Hollywood degradations of art.

In fact I had submitted a review of the film on IMDB a couple months ago.

Prometeo liberado

30th January 2012, 04:49

Sir Comradical

30th January 2012, 06:43

I don't think anyone could argue the contrary, but it's satisfying in a politically carnal fashion.

6/10 --Average. It's a perfectly average film. No brilliant acting, yet not so terrible as to distract the viewer. Typical, manufactured script. Typical, manufactured obstacles.

Had it not been for the political twist, nothing would have separated this film from anyone of the dozens upon dozens of profit-driven bogus Hollywood degradations of art.

In fact I had submitted a review of the film on IMDB a couple months ago.

Link me up, comrade.

Ozymandias

30th January 2012, 07:28

Link me up, comrade.

Anyone can submit a review to IMDB, mine wasn't really very significant ...just a couple paragraphs. The one titled "A light watch for the socially incline"

imdb(.)com/title/tt1295072/reviews

Winkers Fons

30th January 2012, 09:21

It wasn't that bad. I at least sat through the whole thing and even chuckled at times.

GiantMonkeyMan

30th January 2012, 15:19

I think shitty highschool comedies are something of a 'guilty' pleasure of mine. I went through a phase of watching loads of South Korean highschool films. There's some weird shit being regurgitated by film industries around the world. The Trotsky is far better than some of the crap I've seen.

Winkers Fons

31st January 2012, 09:07

KurtFF8

31st January 2012, 17:45

I found that if you take it as a little comedy for 20 something college kids who think it's cool to hear the name Trotsky in a movie, then...well....Nevermind it does suck. Can we do a thread on the ideological undertones of Zoolander or Ghostbusters even.:thumbup1:

Are you one of those "movies are just movies" people? (Which is quite a silly position for anti-capitalists/materialists to have)

GiantMonkeyMan

31st January 2012, 20:41

Are you one of those "movies are just movies" people? (Which is quite a silly position for anti-capitalists/materialists to have)

Zizek talks about a person being able to have 'two minds' when watching cinema that allows them to experience the desired responses of the creator as well as the ability to devise alternative meaning. I also ascribe to the concept of 'death of the author' where we can enjoy film for reasons other than those intended by the producer. I think people who think that watching Third Cinema or obscure political documentaries making them better socialists are often more 'silly' than someone with a 'movies are just movies' mindset.

When we, as a socialist and objective audience, watch a film like The Trotsky we can identify problematic discourses within the film such as the sympathetic representation of the police, the naive allegory of revolution being equated to the formation of a students' union and the shite constructed relationship between the protagonist and his love interest (to name but a few). However by understanding this nature of the film, we can also understand how the producers of the film wanted to create a simple high-school comedy that attempts to deal with some serious issues. The terribly put together relationship becomes funny because of its ridiculous construction and not in spite of it.

Socialism isn't a lifestyle choice where you can simply boycott Hollywood to prove your hatred of capitalism. The idea is to seize control of the means of production and cinema is as much an industry as car manufacturing. It is our job as socialists to educate the consumers of film, the working class, about the problematic nature of capitalist film, the contradictions within and the subtle bourgeoise propaganda, lest we become dictators of culture by telling them that enjoying one thing is 'wrong' while enjoying another thing is 'revolutionary'.

workersadvocate

31st January 2012, 21:22

KurtFF8

31st January 2012, 22:30

Zizek talks about a person being able to have 'two minds' when watching cinema that allows them to experience the desired responses of the creator as well as the ability to devise alternative meaning. I also ascribe to the concept of 'death of the author' where we can enjoy film for reasons other than those intended by the producer. I think people who think that watching Third Cinema or obscure political documentaries making them better socialists are often more 'silly' than someone with a 'movies are just movies' mindset.

I wasn't aware that people thought that watching obscure or political documentaries made them "better socialists" and I certainly hope that wasn't directed at me.

When we, as a socialist and objective audience, watch a film like The Trotsky we can identify problematic discourses within the film such as the sympathetic representation of the police, the naive allegory of revolution being equated to the formation of a students' union and the shite constructed relationship between the protagonist and his love interest (to name but a few). However by understanding this nature of the film, we can also understand how the producers of the film wanted to create a simple high-school comedy that attempts to deal with some serious issues. The terribly put together relationship becomes funny because of its ridiculous construction and not in spite of it.

Socialism isn't a lifestyle choice where you can simply boycott Hollywood to prove your hatred of capitalism. The idea is to seize control of the means of production and cinema is as much an industry as car manufacturing. It is our job as socialists to educate the consumers of film, the working class, about the problematic nature of capitalist film, the contradictions within and the subtle bourgeoise propaganda, lest we become dictators of culture by telling them that enjoying one thing is 'wrong' while enjoying another thing is 'revolutionary'.

Indeed, I completely agree with this and don't see how it is different from what I've said in the past.

blake 3:17

31st January 2012, 22:58

It was fun. As a 30something Trotskyist I found it very amusing. It's light and fun.

The comments on Kubrick are interesting.

I wasn't aware that people thought that watching obscure or political documentaries made them "better socialists" and I certainly hope that wasn't directed at me.

Don't sweat it. Good interview!

GiantMonkeyMan

1st February 2012, 11:41

I wasn't aware that people thought that watching obscure or political documentaries made them "better socialists" and I certainly hope that wasn't directed at me.

I've met many people who've watched a Godard film and think that gives them the nuanced film knowledge to criticise mainstream film without actually having any understanding of Godard let alone mainstream cinema. I was channeling my annoyance at them and I wasn't intentionally directing anything at you. However, if it came across that way, I'm sorry.

Indeed, I completely agree with this and don't see how it is different from what I've said in the past.

I believe that it's not 'silly' to watch a film and enjoy it without having to apply marxist theory, or any other kind of film theory, in order to find every problematic point. Your post implied otherwise.

KurtFF8

1st February 2012, 15:04

I've met many people who've watched a Godard film and think that gives them the nuanced film knowledge to criticise mainstream film without actually having any understanding of Godard let alone mainstream cinema. I was channeling my annoyance at them and I wasn't intentionally directing anything at you. However, if it came across that way, I'm sorry.

Agreed, but this kind of pretentiousness is unavoidable at many levels of theory and culture

I believe that it's not 'silly' to watch a film and enjoy it without having to apply marxist theory, or any other kind of film theory, in order to find every problematic point. Your post implied otherwise.

Perhaps it did seem as if I was implying this but I didn't mean for it to. While I of course agree that sometimes you just want to enjoy a film for what it is: I would imagine we could agree that those films are part of the broader culture we live in, part of an industry, etc. I believe you already pointed this out of course so I doubt we disagree on this point.

Cultural criticism does serve an important function in society, but so does sitting back and enjoying a good film for what it is.

daft punk

16th February 2012, 13:21

KurtFF8

16th February 2012, 20:34

2.48. Director talks about how Trotsky played a vital part in the revolution and was later erased from history.

Interviewer changes subject!

Classic. :laugh::laugh:

20 minutes later, still no discussion of Trotsky. No more discussion of the film.

Apparently it is a good film, but this interview only discusses it for about 30 seconds.

Yes I know how all things must revolve around Trotsky for you, but this was an interview about film and politics more broadly. Also, as per how interviews go, the Director was done with that subject and clearly ready for a new question.

I know you would only be satisfied if the entire thing were devoted to Leon Trotsky himself, but there are other things in the world.

blake 3:17

16th February 2012, 20:48

but this was an interview about film and politics more broadly.

I thought the discussion of Kubrick/Altman was the most interesting part. Again thanks for the good work!

Prometeo liberado

16th February 2012, 22:04

Are you one of those "movies are just movies" people? (Which is quite a silly position for anti-capitalists/materialists to have)
I have no idea what that means. I was just making fun of the fact that because this movie has the name Trotsky in it then a higher standard has to be met, ergo Zoolander. Ghostbusters if you really want to take it to an even lower comedic level.

daft punk

24th February 2012, 19:19

Yes I know how all things must revolve around Trotsky for you,

Er, the film is called the Trotsky, about a high school teenager called Leon Bronstein who believes he is the reincarnation of Trotsky.

No fucking relevance of course.

but this was an interview about film and politics more broadly. Also, as per how interviews go, the Director was done with that subject and clearly ready for a new question.

Yes, I'm sure that after a ten year process making a film called the Trotsky he was worn out after talking about Trotsky for 58 seconds.

I know you would only be satisfied if the entire thing were devoted to Leon Trotsky himself, but there are other things in the world.

Yeah, like films that arent called the Trotsky.

This was a film called Trotsky, based obviously on Trotsky, and the film maker was clearly fascinated by him. He mentions how weird it was that Trotsky was eliminated from history, pauses for a sec, and you completely change the subject. One minute in Trotsky in a 22 minute interview on a film about Trotsky, sorta.

You didn't even go over the plot let alone Trotsky's life.

Sorry but it was embarrassing and a waste of a good opportunity to talk politics.

Omsk

24th February 2012, 19:30

Yes,he should have used the interview to recruits Trotsykites and invite people to the CWI!

Long live TROTSKYYYYYYYYYYYY!!

Lisboa

24th February 2012, 20:13

Just met the leftfilmreview.net, and I found interesting movies there, but where can I find them for download? Such as "Guerrilla Girl". I searched it in every torrent site in Earth and couldn't find it.

daft punk

25th February 2012, 10:14

Yes,he should have used the interview to recruits Trotsykites and invite people to the CWI!

Long live TROTSKYYYYYYYYYYYY!!

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/9916

Omsk

25th February 2012, 21:17

Trotttskkyy was so great!!Too bad he was an huge failure.:(

blake 3:17

26th February 2012, 08:13

The Odessa Steps sequence is brilliant.

daft punk

4th March 2012, 15:30

Trotttskkyy was so great!!Too bad he was an huge failure.:(

"All practical work in connection with the organization of the uprising was done under the immediate direction of Comrade Trotsky, the president of the Petrograd Soviet. It can be stated with certainty that the Party is indebted primarily and principally to Comrade Trotsky for the rapid going over of the garrison to the side of the Soviet and the efficient manner in which the work of the Military-Revolutionary Committee was organized. The principal assistants of Comrade Trotsky were Comrades Antonov and Podvoisky."
Telegram to V.I. Lenin - Marxists Internet Archive (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1918/11/06.htm)

J.V. Stalin
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1918/11/06.htm

KurtFF8

4th March 2012, 16:40

Trotttskkyy was so great!!Too bad he was an huge failure.:(

I have to go with daft here, the idea that Trotsky was a "failure" really depends on what you mean. In terms of the Russian Revolution, he obviously played an important role in making that a success. In terms of winning the internal battle within the Party against Stalin, obviously that was less successful.

Philosopher Jay

6th March 2012, 05:32

I just saw the Trotsky and the interview with Jacob Tierney. I was deeply impressed by the movie. It subverted the high school coming of age movie in amazing ways. The interview was also impressive. Tierney is incredibly class conscious and understands the multifarious ways that Hollywood falsifies reality.

The film is complex. It is a statement that we must follow history and the past and the people who made revolutions in the past and at the same time we cannot follow that past because it is the past and the past is always romanticized and glamorized by the present.

Hopefully Tierney will get a chance to make more thoughtful pro-socialist movies.

pluckedflowers

6th March 2012, 06:14

Philosopher Jay

6th March 2012, 15:05

Hi pluckedflowers,

I thought this was intentional and important. Bronstein was deluded in believing that he was Trotsky reincarnated. He looked for people and events to validate this delusion. What he was doing was as mad as the crazy young Christians who think they're Jesus reincarnated. At the same time, he was actually having an affect on the students and the world around him, partly because of his delusion, but also because he was accurately describing the conditions of oppression that the students lived under.

Bronstein was like some Marxists today who see the world from the prospective of 1849 or 1917. They live in a fantasy world. Those times have come and gone. On the other hand, many conditions do structurally match 1849 and 1917 and understanding them can help us significantly in knowing how we can make things better in 2012.

As a whole, I would agree the movie was of average quality. Any movie in which Ayn Rand gets called a fascist wins some points by default. There were also a few chuckles to be had. However, I was somewhat uncomfortable that they left the kid with his Trotsky reincarnation delusion in the end. Sure, it's cute. But it also seems to send the message that his convictions and perseverance are tied to a basic disconnect with reality.

KurtFF8

6th March 2012, 16:08

As a whole, I would agree the movie was of average quality. Any movie in which Ayn Rand gets called a fascist wins some points by default. There were also a few chuckles to be had. However, I was somewhat uncomfortable that they left the kid with his Trotsky reincarnation delusion in the end. Sure, it's cute. But it also seems to send the message that his convictions and perseverance are tied to a basic disconnect with reality.

I actually touched on this in my review of the film. I personally think that the reincarnation aspect didn't get in the way with the social justice message being promoted and that as the film progressed it eventually took a bit of a back seat to the student's struggle.