criterionforum.org

I am really looking forward to this. Sadly I don't get HBO where I am so I will have to patiently await the DVD:

[quote]Agony of New Orleans, Through Spike Lee's Eyes

Article Tools Sponsored By
By FELICIA R. LEE
Published: August 3, 2006

NEW ORLEANS — From the beginning Spike Lee knew that Hurricane Katrina was a story he had to tell. Watching the first television images of floating bodies and of desperate people, mostly black, stranded on rooftops, he quickly realized he was witnessing a major historical moment. As those moments kept coming, he spent almost a year capturing the hurricane's sorrowful consequences for a four-hour documentary, “When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts,â€

I saw him speak at Savannah College of Art and Design and all he talked about was race and rave about katrina and it's politics. He didn't say one thing about film and when someone asked him about it Lee instantly poked fun at him and a small argument ensued. Even whenever a question was asked about something unrelated to race, Lee immediately related it as such. It was kind of annoying.

I'm looking forward to checking this out. Anyone who has seen Four Little Girls and/or Jim Brown: All American knows that he's quite an accomplished documentarian.

I really look forward to this documentary. I'm not holding my breath as to its partiality, but as I will I think tend to agree with Spike when it comes to Katrina it will be like watching a far better constructed, more inciteful, less exploitative, if of course not less opinionated, and interesting "Fahrenheit 9/11".

blindside8zao wrote:I saw him speak at Savannah College of Art and Design and all he talked about was race and rave about katrina and it's politics. He didn't say one thing about film and when someone asked him about it Lee instantly poked fun at him and a small argument ensued. Even whenever a question was asked about something unrelated to race, Lee immediately related it as such. It was kind of annoying.

As a resident of New Orleans -- one who lost pretty much everything in the hurricane -- I am quite certain that this film will be a load of old bollocks. Katrina wasn't about race so much as economics. Black or white, the SUV-less were screwed.

Before the storm, there were 100,000 people in Orleans Parish that relied solely on public transport. I was one of them. Luckily, I got a ride out of town with a friend, but I could just as easily have been left behind to die in the Superdome. I was left behind once before, in 2004, when Ivan narrowly missed the city.

New Orleans' transport infrastructure came to a grinding halt a full 72 hours prior to both Ivan and Katrina hitting. Officially, the airport was still open, but most every airline had pulled its scheduled flights. Same with Amtrak and Greyhound. Why? Because it wasn't economically viable to bring in empty planes, etc. to then put bums on seats in one direction i.e. out of town. Capitalism in effect.

Since Katrina, most of the aid money given directly (i.e. not paid out to hotels, or whatever) to private citizens has gone to middle-class homeowners too cheap to buy home insurance. The poorest people, those previously in rental accommodation, and who couldn't even afford insurance in the first place, have received little or nothing. As a result, 80% of the city is still a ghost town.

Katrina, like every other tropical storm and hurricane to ever hit the area, was a case of every man for himself. The only difference with Katrina was that this one hit the jackpot.

Kanye West was wrong about Bush: he doesn't hate black people, he hates poor people.

Unfortunately, the 10,000 free tickets to see Lee's film at the New Orleans Arena have already been distributed; I'd love to see it. S'funny, we don't have a decent art house cinema in the entire city, but give us a freebie and we're there!

Very well, put Steve - and with wit, too! Bonus points!

However, I personally would never go to a place that was below sea-level. I read a few oceanography books as a child and it is a field that greatly interests me still, so I have long been aware of the immense potential forces of the ocean. But people continue to live under such conditions, including modern housing being built along notoriously violent coastal seafronts. The elevation of New Orleans terrifies me:

www.mvn.usace.army.mil/pao/response/NGVD.asp

I find it insane that people live in such an area of the planet. Not safe!

I'm pretty sure Kanye said "...doesn't care about...", which is, as you suggest, too narrow. He doesn't care about anybody, at least not in any way that really matters.

It's not that he doesn't care. It's that he can't comprehend what it is to be poor and without means.

What is the opinion of people about the speed of the response? It does seem like this is a sort of thing that the Bush government uses a lot. From Iraq to Lebanon to New Orleans it seems like there is a kind of stalling tatic used to show contempt (especially where it is obvious something needs to be done). I don't know if it is also to try and get rid of some of the population as well due to the extra week, month, year etc it takes to do anything. Get rid of some of the poorer people to balance the books? I would agree that it is probably just as much about economics as race (since money and capitalism is of course amoral and colour blind to everything except green), but then would it be wrong to suggest that race does come into it in the sense that there would have been even more of an outcry against leaving people for days if a great proportion of people had been white, even if they were poor and white?

I guess that's what Spike Lee means by "politics, ethics, morals". How something can be politically expedient but completely wrong from a point of view of caring for people. Perhaps also that ethics and morals can be relative, especially if you're in the position to create them as the government of a country.

To answer Colin's question, one need only look at the earthquake that hit Pakistan in October 2005 (one month after Katrina). The American military was able to drop food, water, and medical supplies into some of the world's most inhospitable terrain within 48 hours of the quake happening. And yet they couldn't do the same thing on the I-10 -- one of America's major cross-country highways -- for, what was it, five days? Again, why? Because America has economic and political interests in Pakistan -- catching Bin Laden for one thing -- whereas the death of a couple of thousand poor people in Louisiana doesn't really further their agenda any.

Katrina brought out the best and the worst in humanity. There were incredible stories of bravery and selflessness, but there were also many, many instances of senseless brutality by the authorities. The contempt shown for the citizens of New Orleans by their own government in the immediate aftermath of the storm was disgusting. Black or white (yes, there were white people left behind), they were treated like criminals in their own hometown.

A friend of mine was an intensive care nurse at Charity Hospital (which cares for the poorest people in the city, those without medical insurance) during the hurricane. Every day, for five days, they were told to bring the patients -- many of whom were bedridden -- up to the roof of the hospital to be airlifted out (at gunpoint, mind you). On the fifth day, they were told "don't take them back downstairs, the helicopter is coming". They kept those people on the roof of the hospital, in 100-degree temperatures, for eight hours. They all died. As far as I know, that one didn't make the news.

I'm not saying there aren't racial problems in New Orleans -- there are, on both sides of the fence -- I just don't think Katrina is as wrapped up in them as some people would have us believe.

To answer Gordon's question ... well ... you're a smart cookie, I'm sure you know the answer already. Before the highway system was built in the early part of the 20th century, the Mississippi river was the lifeline of Middle America. Sitting at the mouth of that great river, New Orleans was one of the busiest ports in the world. (Much of the oil produced in the Gulf of Mexico still moves through New Orleans to this day.) The citizenry don't just disappear when economic conditions change; they adapt. My hometown of Manchester, England didn't shrivel up and die when the textile industry went tits up. We wore baggy pants and took ecstasy instead

NB. The ceiling of my girlfriend's house in Kenner, right outside of New Orleans, has just collapsed as I am writing this post. The insurance company has been delaying payment for nearly a year now -- more Katrina bullshit!

Anyway, yes ... people live in areas of risk for all manner of reasons. Just look at San Francisco. With the risk of earthquakes, tsunamis, and the like you'd have to be nuts to live there, wouldn't you? But it is such a beautiful city. And more than that, it is home to its millions of citizens. They have history there, family ties. (My own reasons for living in New Orleans are altogether more complicated, and beyond the scope of this discussion … maybe another time.)

It should be noted, however, that Katrina did not cause New Orleans to flood. The levees broke TWO DAYS LATER, as the result of poor design and construction. Millions of dollars have been poured into developing the city's levee system over the decades, much of which has ended up in the back pockets of crooked local politicians. And the corruption continues to this day. I could give you two good examples of how one particular local politician got extremely rich off the back of Katrina. That is the real scandal of the disaster, not race.

I'm off to clean up that fallen ceiling. Thanks for reading!

Gordon McMurphy wrote:I re-read Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn a few years ago which in addition to being exilerating stories, they are very educative of those days, but aside from these books, I don't really know that much about this period of American history.

The history of the United States makes more sense, I think, when you break it down by geographical region. It is so vast that before the age of modern communication -- the telegraph, the radio, MTV -- it proved difficult for even its own government to create any sense of national identity. The Civil War, of course, looms large in the American consciousness, but Simon Schama's latest tome, Rough Crossings, might be a more interesting place to start.

New Orleans has a fascinating history all of its own, passing backwards and forwards between the French and the Spanish, before Thomas Jefferson acquired it from Napoleon in what was the greatest real estate deal -- the Louisiana Purchase -- since the Dutch bought the island of Manhattan for a few baskets of beads.

By 1840, New Orleans was the third most populous city in the country; immediately prior to Katrina, it ranked 35th. The population continued to grow, but other cities grew quicker. (Another precept of modern economics -- unless something is growing at a prodigious rate it cannot be considered successful.)

Gordon McMurphy wrote:Ah, but the Jazz. Yes, staying there was worth it for the Jazz.

I have been a music writer for the last nine years, five of which I have spent covering the miniscule indie-rock scene here in New Orleans. Fuck the Neville Brothers, man. Quintron is where it is at!

The jazz scene is for tourists, away-from-home students, and the odd 50-something professorial-type sporting a tie-dye T-shirt and a grey ponytail. In all honesty, who else gives a shit? Traditional jazz is a dead horse that the New Orleans Tourist Board has been flogging since the early '60s. You'd be so disappointed if you could hear the derivative, toneless pap they are churning out nowadays.

We had a good R&B scene in the '60s and '70s, but that is pretty sad these days, also. One of the biggest names in town (I doubt anyone else has heard of him) is a Londoner called Jon Cleary. His day job is playing piano for Bonnie Raitt. Wow.

Other than that, we have a lot of jam bands, and a healthy (somewhat of an oxymoron, I know) goth scene.

Gordon McMurphy wrote:Does the insurance company sending a letter saying, "As you live under sea-level, due to being ignorant of the immense potential forces of the ocean, we regret to inform you that we will not be imbursing you with payment for damage of your property," with a picture of the elevation of New Orleans from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers department?

Actually, some 45% of the city lies above sea level. That elevation map is a bit misleading. The cross-section is from the edge of the French Quarter, through Gentilly, to UNO's Lakefront campus -- the lowest section west of the Industrial Canal. And the water levels are shown at their annual peaks, not their usual levels. It is also worth mentioning that the elevation of New Orleans wasn't always so low. The city has slowly subsided over the last 100 years or so due, mostly, to the haphazard levee system design. Obviously, the place isn't safe because it did in fact flood, but I'm just trying to put it into some sort of context here.

But where in America is safe these days? The North East has recently suffered some terrible flooding of its own. The West Coast is going to collapse into the Pacific any day now. Florida is hurricane central. You can't live in Tornado Alley, or the Dustbowl. No, according to the neo-Nazi vigilantes, Idaho and Montana are the places to be. But they're not safe anymore because of the neo-Nazi vigilantes.

The insurance company has finally acquiesced to replace the extension roof, including the joists. (I think my girlfriend threatened them with a lawsuit, or a Paddington Bear stare, or whatever.) Meanwhile, we have five buckets collecting a constant drip-drip-dripping in the back room.

To finish on a fun note, here are some nice pictures of my old neighbourhood, Broadmoor (talking of being nuts!), for you to enjoy.

Steve

Ste wrote: No, according to the neo-Nazi vigilantes, Idaho and Montana are the places to be. But they're not safe anymore because of the neo-Nazi vigilantes.

Whereabouts are the 'end of days' Christian evangelists based? They look like they might be worth avoiding as well.

colinr0380 wrote:

Ste wrote: No, according to the neo-Nazi vigilantes, Idaho and Montana are the places to be. But they're not safe anymore because of the neo-Nazi vigilantes.

Whereabouts are the 'end of days' Christian evangelists based? They look like they might be worth avoiding as well.

Judging by the number of books those Left Behind dudes have sold, I'd say they are pretty much everywhere. Best to stay in Chapel-en-le-Frith, I reckon, and be sure to draw the curtains and bolt the door while you're at it. The end of the world is nigh!

Chapel-en-le-Frith ... I haven't been there in years. Lloyd Cole is from there, isn't he? He lives in Massachusetts now.

It looks like he is! Sorry I've not got a great knowledge of music - but it's strange to think anyone famous comes from this part of the world.

Yes, it would take a pretty desperate terrorist to consider blowing themselves up in this tiny town! (Although I've heard people say it could leave the place looking better!)

Kim Newman writes an article for the horror magazine Shivers and about a year and a half ago devoted three consecutive columns to discussing the Left Behind series of films and their ilk. After investigating all those films he decided, for the sake of balance, to spend the next two columns reviewing pornographic films that used some horror iconography (strangely most of them fell into the sexy vampire category)!

I haven't read those Left Behind books or watched any of the films, but it does seem like they are like Stephen King novels - the disappearing plane passengers (and the rest of the world) could come from The Langoliers, the apocalyptic stuff from The Stand etc. Perhaps they are popular because of that sort of fantasy writing, and people don't really believe in them? Do they?

Sorry to take the discussion so drastically off topic!

colinr0380 wrote:I haven't read those Left Behind books or watched any of the films, but it does seem like they are like Stephen King novels - the disappearing plane passangers (and the rest of the world) could come from The Langoliers, the apocalyptic stuff from The Stand etc. Perhaps they are popular because of that sort of fantasy writing, and people don't really believe in them? Do they?

You bet your life they do! I know it's difficult to conceive of such obvious lunacy from a British perspective, but a huge number of people take this shit very, very seriously. And I'm not talking crazy old men wandering around town centres wearing sandwich boards, here. These are my colleagues, my neighbours, my friends. Okay, maybe not my friends, but certainly other rational people's friends.

Back on-topic, has anyone actually seen the Spike Lee film yet? I'm eager to hear what it contains.

a lengthy profile on Lee for New York magazine: http://www.newyorkmetro.com/movies/prof ... index.html

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:a lengthy profile on Lee for New York magazine: http://www.newyorkmetro.com/movies/prof ... index.html

That's a great read and I bought the magazine today for posterity's sake. For people more interested in the documentary than Spike (or his wife's background), here's the only mention of its merits:

To be fully affected by Lee's fictional films, you have be into his vision, his aesthetic, his Spikiness. To be fully affected by his documentaries, you really just need to have eyes. The four hours of When the Levees Broke fly by. It is an astounding piece of work. The full nightmare of Katrina becomes palpable and unavoidable in a way it hasn't yet in art.

Spike wrote:It looked like what I assume Hiroshima looked like after World War II. I just couldn't believe this was happening right now in America. It was one of those moments where you know someone will ask you years from now, 'Where were you when Katrina happened?

http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2006-08-15/

I suggest Spike Lee goes online and finds some Hiroshima pictures.

I sincerely doubt that anyone outside of Louisiana has asked or will ever ask anyone "where were you when Katrina happened?" Too funny, Spike! I don't even remember what month it happened in.

Barmy wrote:I sincerely doubt that anyone outside of Louisiana has asked or will ever ask anyone "where were you when Katrina happened?" Too funny, Spike! I don't even remember what month it happened in.

not everyone is a such a cold-hearted sonofabitch as you though

Ste wrote:Before the highway system was built in the early part of the 20th century, the Mississippi river was the lifeline of Middle America.

Not to be completely nit-picky or anything, but I believe the highway system didn't start construction until the 1950s under Eisenhower, which was undoubtably Eisenhower's greatest achievement IMHO.

Interested in this film, can't wait for it to air on HBO.

Roger_Thornhill wrote:

Ste wrote:Before the highway system was built in the early part of the 20th century, the Mississippi river was the lifeline of Middle America.

Not to be completely nit-picky or anything, but I believe the highway system didn't start construction until the 1950s under Eisenhower, which was undoubtably Eisenhower's greatest achievement IMHO.

Not to be completely nit-picky or anything, but the Interstate Highway System (I-10, I-12, etc.) was designed to supersede the old U.S. Highway System (51, 61, etc.), which had been in place since 1926. Even then, much work to improve existing routes had already been done by the American Association of State Highway Officials (formed in 1914), and the Federal-Aid Highway Acts of 1916 and 1921.

Planning for the new interstate system -- inspired by the German autobahn -- had been in place since the late 1930s.

Greatest achievement or not, what Eisenhower did by signing the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 was to bring in new legislation designed to address the ever-expanding volume of traffic, and to create new standards for construction, safety, etc.

Cheers,

Steve

The Guardian today...

Spike Lee turns cameras on New Orleans

· Hurricane Katrina film gets world premiere
· Hailed as most essential work of director's career

Oliver Burkeman in New York

Film director Spike Lee's long-awaited four-hour documentary about Hurricane Katrina was due to receive its world premiere last night, watched by 16,000 people who lived through the tragedy.
The first half of Lee's $2m (£1.05m) documentary, When the Levees Broke: a Requiem in Four Acts, was scheduled to be shown to a sell-out audience in the New Orleans Arena. The venue is next door to the Superdome, the sports complex where more than 15,000 people sought shelter during the hurricane last year.

"What we hope with this piece is that it brings attention back to New Orleans, back to the other gulf states that are still dealing and struggling with the ravages of Hurricane Katrina," the director, 49, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune newspaper. "A lot of Americans are saying, 'That was so last year. I'm on to the next thing. C'mon, you're killing us with this Katrina thing.' Well, I'm sorry. People are still struggling, and ... will be dealing with the aftermath for years."
The film's opening sequence begins by interspersing archive footage of parties and parades in New Orleans with pictures of debris and bodies floating in the floodwater. The rest is given over to the direct testimony of angry and devastated local residents, officials and some of the celebrities who came to the city to help, including the actor Sean Penn and the hip-hop artist Kanye West.

It will be shown on US television twice in the coming weeks, once in two parts, and once as a whole on August 29, the first anniversary of the night the storm hit land. By the end of the crisis, at least 1,836 people had died; thousands more remain displaced.

The economic aftermath continues: this week, in a judgment that could set a precedent for hundreds of insurance claims, a court ruled that an insurance firm offering payouts for wind damage was not required to pay for water damage, even when high winds were the cause.

Calling the movie "arguably the most essential work of [Lee's] 20-year career", Newsweek said audiences might be surprised that the director, who made his name with a series of feature films addressing racial politics, "views the tragedy as a national betrayal rooted in class, not skin colour. To him, what the victimised share most is that they had very little to begin with and were left with nothing."

But the Times-Picayune disagreed. "The tragic story of black New Orleans trapped in Katrina's path has found a supreme chronicler," its reviewer wrote. "But the flooded-out residents of [predominantly white neighbourhoods] Lakeview or Old Metairie who attend [the premiere] will spend all night sitting on a hard plastic chair and then wonder: Where am I in this?"

In interviews, and in the documentary, Lee refused to reject the belief, held by many black residents, that the government bombed the levees, flooding the poorest areas to spare the wealthiest ones, such as the French Quarter, which is the biggest draw for tourists. "We let people say what they think," he said, noting the government did destroy levees during the 1927 Great Flood of Mississippi. "We have people from the Lower Ninth Ward who swear on a stack of Bibles they heard explosions. We have scientists say that it wasn't explosions, that they heard water going through a levee."

He told CNN: "I don't put anything past the US government. I don't find it too far-fetched that they tried to displace all the black people out of New Orleans."

The main culprits to emerge from the documentary are the Army Corps of Engineers, for how they built the levees, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, for how it mishandled the crisis.

Local coverage from the New Orleans Times-Picayune -- including film review, and press conference footage -- can be found here.