"A Checkpoint in Claremont:" a Collaborative Video

 

      I decided to work with the Day Laborers again, or as I call them, "the guys," to keep up the exploratory concept (for me) of collaborative film.  What I think I ended up with looks a little more like Teatro Callejero or Teatro Campesino except on video, which I am still OK with.  I have been catching up on Revolutionary Film History in Latin America and in reading have realized that when women filmmakers joined the scene so to speak, that they made mostly video rather than "film" and that they used it to interrogate gender and gender roles rather than (public) politics.  In working with the guys, we discuss gender from time to time, such as when someone stereotypes based on gender, makes a gendered remark or insult, or refers to women as anything other than women.  However, because the issues they face on the day to day are less about gender than about race, color and nationality, we made a video that was more pressing to them.  I did become interested in A Man, When He is a Man, a 1982 film by Chilean filmmaker Valeria Sarmiento while reading up on women in the male-centered Revolutionary Film movement in Latin America.  The film is a documentary on "macho" culture in Costa Rica though it is meant to be read as referring to Latin America in general.  The idea of interviewing men and capturing the machismo intrigued me, but when I thought about the guys, I just couldn't imagine making a film about them that would expose their biases.  It made me realize that I: 1.) Idealize the guys for being such hard workers and 2.) can't imagine truly collaborating on a video centering on a subject that is foreign to most of them.  I realize that in a post about a film not about gender I have spoken a lot about it, but I think it is because I am already brainstorming for my next project which will have gendered aspects.  And since I will be working with a new group in a gender context (a gender and video project) then the subject can easily be collaborative.

   What the video is centered on is the issue of DUI/Sobriety/Drivers License checkpoints.  Checkpoints are a relatively new police practice.  Since the 1979 case of Delaware v. Prouse that decided that police cannot stop random vehicles for the sole reason of checking their licenses “there has been a proliferation in the use of sobriety checkpoints by state law enforcement authorities.”  (Francis)  The intended purpose of sobriety checkpoints is to “ reduce the number of drunk drivers on our highways and diminish the amount of pain, suffering and death that result from drunk driving.” (CHP)   The bulk of the arguments regarding checkpoints have been legally based, as some groups find them to be necessary to prevent drunk driving and are therefore are willing to infringe on the civil liberties of drivers.  Others however find them to be too invasive and unconstitutional.  The major issue that most people make regarding the legality of checkpoints is the fact that so many vehicles are impounded.  This relates to the 4th amendment’s “unreasonable searches and seizures” clause which states that the people have a right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. But because this amendment originally applied only to the federal government, the post Civil War 14th amendment of 1868 is also important because it made it applicable to the states.  The probable cause and warrant requirements for the 4th amendment have been subject to several exceptions carved out by the courts for the benefit of law enforcement.  The latest exception is the checkpoints based on the states interest in public safety.  (The border checkpoints exception was based on national security.)

   Checkpoints are one of the main issues that we organize around in the Inland Empire as in many other places.  We send text messages, facebook statuses and make phone calls when we know of a checkpoint location.  We hold vigils, go to city council meetings, hold and post signs warning drivers of checkpoints coming up.  But as much as I have researched checkpoints and try to spread the word, there are just never enough "Know Your Rights" trainings.  The corner might have some of the same guys for decades, but at the same time there are new guys coming in and out every day, man of which have no idea what to do in situations like checkpoints or any kind of police run-in.  Though I am not a lawyer, I know that we have the right not to incriminate ourselves, which is why I emphasize that in the film through the fictional phone advocate in the beginning (played by the famous Undocumented, Unafraid, Queer and Unashamed DREAMer Julio Salgado) and in the end with the inter-title that yells at the audience.  The video, though made with jornaleros in mind, is hopefully just a beginning.  The guys have already been talking about the next videos and what we should do when I get back from Central America and I am excited to make a film based on some of their experiences.

    I originally planned to make this project for my independent study with Jose, the super brilliant jornalero from Una Mirada a Los Invisibles and Machete Discussion, but after making plans, sharing revolutionary film manifestos and films with him and brainstorming together, his phone got turned off and I was on my own again.  It was a great reminder that this video/my independent study class is by no means the priority of a worker nor an easy luxury to be a part of.  So I ended up going a little backwards because my idea was to have horizontal decision making and idea creating, but I ended up where I was before with “Una Mirada” (not that that is bad!).  This meant recruiting guys who were interested, explaining everything, and making decisions together during the filming.  The guys, Pancho in particular, had a lot of ideas that I used.  For example, Pancho wanted to be a drunk driver which worked out as I could show that he could pick his car up the next morning while unlicensed drivers had to wait 30 days.  Pancho also had the idea of the actors faces being shown at the end with their “names.”  We all ad-libbed the whole time, though there were many times that one of us had an idea for a line and we would re-take the encounter.  For example, my brother jumped in to be an additional police officer midway through the filming and I think it worked out very well that way since though it was funny having JuanLoco be the officer, we needed someone less likeable.  Though we ad-libbed, I knew I wanted to use inter-titles a’la La Hora de Los Hornos.  I wanted to try the completely anti-neutral, pro-action route, though I couldn’t bring myself to go as far as using cut up B roll footage with voiceover. 

    I also knew I wanted the video to obviously be a video.  This was with Hungry Cinema  and Imperfect Cinema in mind in terms of cost and accessibility.  The video looked low budget because it was.  Also, I think that the video came off as fun because we had a lot of fun, but also serious for those who are affected by laws like 287g and vulnerable to expensive court hearings and impounds, jail time, and deportation.  The video is already getting some play with the anti-checkpoint crowd and has raised demand for a more activist oriented video that is less for what unlicensed drivers should do and more about how allies can organize and protest checkpoint policies.  This will be a whole new kind of video as it will have a different audience, but it is equally as important.  I showed the video to the guys twice already while doing our weekly computer classes and it sparked some conversation along with a lot of laughs at each other.  They seemed to enjoy watching the video and seeing that most of the cast was themselves or their compas from the “cachetero” and made they guys who weren’t in that video ask about the next one.  So though I am incredibly excited about this video and so happy with the way it came out, I am equally excited about what is going to come next.

    One thing that I need to work on which revolutionary (or New Latin American Cinema) filmmakers discussed, is the aspect of distribution.  Of course things have greatly changed because of the ease of using Youtube to distribute digitally, but if I were to truly be involved in distribution then I would organize screenings for more than just my internet network and the guys.  That is one project I need to work on.  I think that when I get back to the US then it would be great to show a few of the films back-to-back since they are short.  For now, I am thinking about how to lean as much as possible on Jorge Sanjines’s ideas about collaborative film while keeping in mind that revolutionary cinema is a male-centric genre for my next video project in Guatemala City.

Works Cited

“Sobriety Check Points.” California Highway Patrol. 11 Nov. 2008.  17 Dec. 2008 <http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/dui-en.html>.

Francis, Eustace T. “Legal Development: Combating the Drunk Driver Menace: Conditioning the use of Public Highways on consent to Sobriety Checkpoint Seizures - the Constitutionality of a Model Consent Seizure Statute.” Albany Law Review 59.599 (1995).

The 10th Annual Day Labor Soccer Tournament

After sitting home and hiding out from the rain for several days I decided to stop being a bum and to use the footage from the 10th Annual Day Labor Cup to make something more upbeat and fully bilingual.  I hope that the jornaleros, activists, organizers, students, and hopefully soccer fans find it meaningful.  So far I have already been asked by a soccer documentarian if he can use some of my footage. I hope that means that the event will be mentioned in his film. 




In other news today I had a meeting with an transnational feminist violence-prevention non-profit I work with about doing a series of activist filmmaking and theory workshops/classes in Guatemala this summer and making a few short films.  Everything seems to be a go.  I have already begun searching for and downloading academic articles in Spanish and choosing trusty English texts to be translated.  Thinking beyond next semester sounds easy now but I know I'll be hating life when all my classes and projects and my job start up again a few weeks.

A movie for the movement, not for the class

In my Visual Research Methods class we were given assignments to create movies.  For the activists in the class (and there were a lot of us!) we came upon some issues of audience and purpose.  Before this class I was experimenting in making movies for "the movement"; basically capturing actions and activism of different movements I am involved in: the student movement, the immigrant's rights movement, the undocumented student movement, the feminist movement, the queer rights movement,  the anti-racist movement, the worker's rights movement, the media justice movement, the global health movement and every combination and connecting movements.  But in making films for this class I was to make films based in the film and media theory we were learning and my audience was my professor and my classmates.  Things I was doing such as putting up video clips with my "voice" coming across as text between clips asserted myself as the voice of authority, and putting music to the images is a manipulative tool to incite emotions.  I needed to push myself to create self-reflexive films as well as to think about the ethical consequences of revealing people's full names, legal statuses, and locations.  At one point I had to make an ethnography and I was challenged to do so without doing it on a group that necessarily trusted me.  This pushed me to think about what should be done in terms of relationship building before filming people.  However, my work for class still differs from my work for the movement.  I would not place text on video or photographs for a class project, but I would for an educational video.

This brings me to what I am posting here: Eddie, an organizer for the a local day labor organizing center asked me to make a film of this years actions that the Day Laborers have been involved with to show at a recent event.  The funny thing is that afterward everyone was asking me to please put it on the internet.  Many of these people were part of or associated with the people who were considerably "concerned" over my video "Una Mirada a los Invisibles" being on the internet for fear of inciting Minute Men backlash.  I was wary and decided against it.  My video was then shown on Pitzer College's campus (and I was notified about 10 minutes in advance) at one of their weekly Day Laborer/student "Encuentros" and the next thing I know I am being asked to please put it on the internet so that the organizing center can put it on their website.  I finally decided to do it.  Since its on the internet I thought I might as well share it on my blog for all to see, so here it is:

The 10th Annual Day Labor Cup: An Ethnography

>

Day Laborers & Futbol, an ethnography


Our assignment was to make an ethnographic film. We employ long takes and traditional observational methods such as using diagetic sound, not using voiceover or dubbing for the translation, and not using music in order to allow the viewer to make their own assumptions about the event. We are also of the school however which does not believe that observational footage can ever be 100% objective and are aware that the choices we made in the filming and editing processes were loaded. We discuss our assumptions and ideas of what the film means within the film in order to show that we were both just observing "to see what would happen" and editing based on what we took away from the experience.


Filming posed to be a huge challenge. I remember last Spring semester the documentarian who made "The Garden" about South Central Farm gave a documentary workshop at Pitzer College. This is before I ever picked up a video camera and was looking for some sage advice.  What I found instead was perplexing.  The filmmaker said that it is imperative that you not be involved in the community/activism that you are filming basically so that you can more shamelessly film what was really going on without feeling responsible for portraying the community/movement in a negative light.  He advocated catching them when they don't want you to, this being something you would not do if you were from within.  I remember feeling uncomfortable with this idea, as the only reason I wanted to film was to document what awesome actions are always taking place, many of which I am involved with.  The reason I am telling this long story is because I found it difficult to film something that I am involved with not because I wanted to be shameless, but because I literally wanted to be involved and not glued to my camera, viewing the event with the kino-eye when I preferred to use my actual eyes.  


Another challenge, which I discuss in the film was the fact that we were unsure while we were there of how we would be framing the film and whether we would use interview or not, so we attempted to interview some players.  However, most of the players I only knew superficially or not at all.  Luckily my friend that teaches ESL with me and worked the last 2 tournaments was there and was very helpful in acting as the anthropologist who had a pre-existing rapport with the men.  Even still, the camera in all of its daunting power, or maybe it was just me in all my whiteness, or I suppose it could be the two of us together, turned many of the guys off from speaking with us about the tournament.  When Sam would say for example, "hey, let's interview that guy," I grew sheepish.  This brings me back to the filmmaker for "The Garden" who told me to be shameless.  I just couldn't do it.  However, by the end of the long day, we actually did have a good amount of footage of the games, the ceremony and a lot of interviews, including of ourselves.  


The experience of being at a Day Labor Tournament was loaded down with camera equipment (however light in physicality) and I was torn between my activist self who just wanted to talk without the invasiveness of the camera, and my graduate school ethnography self who wanted to document the event and share it with my classmates.  I am finishing up a promotional film for the corner I work at which includes much of the footage we didn't use here and it makes me feel good to do that.  It is also great practice in thinking about audience.  For example, this film has English subtitles and the film I am making for the corner has Spanish ones and this film has long takes and no music and the other film has short clips and music overlaid.  As much as our group went back and forth about what our thesis was and how the film should be framed, once Sam and I did the final edits the first thing I said was "high five!"  I think in a typical ethnography there would not be a discussion afterward, but we felt that discussing our experience of the event would help to illustrate the "encounter/clash" between us the filmmakers/graduate students and them the participants/day laborers much like an accompanying article would.  


I have to say, and I am completely biased, that the scene where they are swearing in, is my favorite scene in the film.  However, though I am not sure it quite translated onto film, one of my favorite moments in person was the moment of silence.  I both felt the pain of the group and parts of the crowd as well as their discomfort of being quiet so long.  i think the discomfort of the long take of silence translates but I don't think the pain does.  


Being at the tournament and witnessing the ceremony provided a view of how community is promoted by the organizers by creating a space for critical thinking, education, communication, camaraderie, and affinity amongst the familiar backdrop of soccer.  Throughout the discussions within the group of what the film is about, we always centered around community: soccer and community, politics and community, the day laborers as a community, and the event as a unifier.  Though the ideas are for the audience to interpret, I think through our editing and discussion that at the very least we were attempting to show that the soccer tournament was establishing and maintaining community and unifying people with affinities.  


I really enjoyed working with more people, it took off a lot of the pressure of doing all the filming, translating, brainstorming, and editing by myself but it was also difficult with such a large group to manage time.  I think that if I were to make another film with a group it would optimally be with one other person.  This was an excellent exercise in recognizing all the various elements in filmmaking such as sound (which admittedly, we could have used some help with) and light (what to do on a gloomy, rainy day? I have no idea, but now I know to find out).


The experience of the event and the filmmaking was positive overall as I came away with a lot of new thoughts in my head.  I also came away having learned a lot from the players, my colleagues, the readings on ethnography, and from the practice of being there and experiencing the event and the people.  I think in this particular video, since it is completely in English (though I am prepared to do it again with Spanish subtitles - when I have time!) the film was made for the benefit of ourselves the filmmakers and for our self-education and for the education of our peers.  What they learn however, is up to them.

A discussion on the film "Machete"

On Machete (Rodriguez, 2010)

When my best friend asked if I'd seen Machete yet, I didn't really think twice.  She loves gore and action, so a Rodriguez film is right up her ally.  I replied, "no, haven't seen it..why?"  She then proceeded to explain that the film's main character is a day laborer and that they basically fight anti-immigrant people who I gathered were based on the Minute Men.  She also said that Michelle Rodriguez was in it and super hot and revolutionary.  I was floored.  A movie that actually portrayed day laborers?  And not as some joke?  I had to see it.  After watching it once in the theatre with a friend in the immigrant's rights/AB540 movement, and having the best experience in a theatre I had in a while (i.e. sudden urges to yell at the screen, laugh inappropriately loudly, and exchange knowing glances with said friend) I knew I wanted to write a blog about it.  But I hesitated because I wanted to get input from at least one day laborer.  Finally, one night it just perfectly worked out-my brother and his friend, also both  immigrant's rights activists, stopped by to hang out and I asked them if they had seen the film.  They had my same reaction, not knowing the film's premise, thus being disinterested.  Once I told them they had me look up showtimes immediately and we found a screening at the Drive-In Theatre in Montclair.  I suggested we bring Jose and the next thing I knew we were all sharing popcorn on a blanket in front of the big screen.  The experience differed for Jose partially because At times I had to translate dialogue, but generally the film is so exaggerated and action-filled that it was obvious what was happening.  Other than that, watching the three of them watch the film was super enjoyable because the movie depicts some cool shit.  For example:

1. A badass, impossible to kill, quasi-mythical character who is a day laborer

2. Said character is played by Danny Trejo, a former drug addict and convict who became a film and television actor, but usually as the villain and never the lead role

3. The film revolves around corrupt, anti-immigrant politicians (um, hello Joe Arpaio..) and "border vigilantes" (hello minute men) basically waging a civil war against undocumented people

4. The leader of the "revolution" on the side of the immigrants is a woman!  Michelle Rodriguez plays Shé, a female homage to Che Guevara, but in a cool, mythicized, taco truck vending, border crossing assisting kind of way

5. The film portrayed hilarious tropes and stereotypes that only people who live in states which border Mexico could understand.  Pachucas, low riders, hydrolics, paleteros, minute men, day laborers, taco trucks, "homies," and loads of culturally Catholic paraphenalia littered the screen as what felt like inside jokes for those of us that got them

6. Cheech Marin was in the movie!  After Born in East LA (Marin, 1987), Cheech's film that parodied the high occurrences of deportation of Mexican-American US citizens at the time and ended in an all out charge of the border, he has been high on my list of cool media makers.  

7. The existence of a "network" of workers, documented and undocumented, who all communicated and supported one another.

 But the movie was also super exploitative.  It began as a hilarious fake preview between Rodriguez's and Tarantino's Grindhouse (2007) double feature, Planet Terror and Deathproof, respectively.  It was meant to complement the nouveau-"B" movies  and be a spoof of 70's exploitation films.  But because it received such positive feedback (partially because of the preview's mention of Arizona, which was the center of controversy over SB1070 at the time) Rodriguez made it feature length.  Some problematic (And yes, I know that the over-exaggeration is meant to be a joke, but parody still perpetuates what it is parodying) features of the film were:

1. The sexualization and sexual exploitation of ALL the women in the film.  The white women, the nurses, the ICE agent, and Shé were all treated as sexual objects by the camera angles, the characters, and their secondary character statuses to the roles of the men.  And this might seem obvious, but huge breasts, tiny waists, big butts, flawless skin, and long flowing hair describes every female character. 

2. The extreme and graphic violence.  Did you watch it? I'll give you a hint: intestine.

3. "The revolution" ended after the minute men/network battle

4. Lindsay Lohan.  I don't care what role she played, this movie was too badass to let her be a part of it

5. Machete's lack of politicization. Sleeping with an ICE agent? Ew.

6. The cringeworthy scene where Jessica Alba's character  Sartana gives a speech to the day laborers and says "we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us!"  This is messed up for many reasons. a) Ms. Alba has made comments in the past that she doesn't know why everyone refers to her as Latina b) This is the first time she has played a Latina role c) Her character is an ICE agent.  When did she become part of the "us" that the border crossed?  d) She is not cool enough to say that classic immigrants rights tagline 

e) The scene seems out of place-Luz/Shé is the revolutionary,  Sartana is not even close

And something I'm ambivalent about: Steven Seagal as a Mexican drug lord.  Feeling weird about the brownface and Seagal's Spanish, but then liking the dying scene.  So funny.

The conversation I filmed was the second segment as my brother, his friend, Jose, and I had a good talk in the car on the way home and then my friend came and I taped round 2.  There was a lot to say, but I chose 5 minutes of some of my favorite critiques from the over-an-hour worth of footage I captured.  

As a positive addendum to my critique of the body sizes of the female characters, I would like to share some re-imaginings of Shé  and  Sartana by a talented Long Beach artist named Julio Salgado from a series he calls "Chubby Girl Art" in which he makes famous women "chubby." 

Luz/ Shé 

Sartana

  I hope you like the discussion and please, if you haven't seen Machete, watch it and comment!