• DOCUMEMTAR IES •

Film, TV and the nuclear a~ocaly~se Peter Watkins On Media

Earlier this year on the last leg ofa world-wide fund-raising tour on behalf on his global A Film For Peace: The Nuclear War Film, British expatriate documentarian Peter Watkins was interviewed by Cinema Canada editor Connie Tadros. The interview, originally slatedfor the CBe, was n ever aired, possibly for reasons that the sub­ stance of the interview itselfmake clear. Since the BBC banned Watkins' The War Game in the mid-60s, Watkins began to reflect upon the role of the communications media in contemporary society. The me­ dia, Watkins maintains, are the electronic equivalent of nuclear weapons, causing social fragmen­ tation and linguistic terror on a scale as devastating to the human­ community as would be the actual use of nuclear weaponry. Indeed, Watkins sees a profound relation­ ship between the development of television and the atomic bomb. Only a wide-ranging public debate and a deeply critical questioning of the role of media today can, he says, hope to begin to redress the mass depoliticization that the me­ dia have brought about. Watkins' critique of media, published here in a slightly editedform, is a contri­ bution to that debate. Its publication coincides with the seminar on filmmaking ethics that will be held during the Festival of Festivals. Related to that discus­ sion of the ethical issues faced by filmmakers in the nuclear age, Toronto filmmakers Laura Sky and Cathy Culkin raise some ofthe diffi­ cult questions the.v feelfilmmakers should address. And Peter Wintonick ellplains the Canadian involvement in Watkins' A Film For Peace on which shooting begins this month. Watkins has already begun work on the European portions of the film, and is currently shooting in the U.S.S.R. The following interview is, he says, "historic" - it is the last in­ terview he will give until A Film For Peace: The Nuclear War Film is completed, sometime next year.

October 1984 - Cinema Canada/19- • • From the many interviews that I've been One of the major problems that is done it in bits and pieces here or there doing, especially in this last year, with happening in society now, is that so but unfortunately it has circulated the radio and particularly with the many people are expressing despair, for around within an academic environ­ press, there is so much that is left out or e xample. You know that. This is not Illent ilnd has never fed out into the reduced. -I've done so many interviews news to you, it's not news to anyone social process. Semiology, for example, with newspapers, including newspapers liste ning to this, if any of this stuff goes beems to be a comple te blind alley in Scandinavia about four-fifths of the out on the air, that millions of people are which has diverted enormous amounts time, and I've noticed that they re move expressing frustration and hopelessness of intellectual ene rgy in the last two anv comments on the m edia. I could talk at the threat of nuclear war and what decades, unfortunately. about the nuclear arms race - tha t' s thev beli eve to be the ine vitabilitv of So, these are the things that need permitted . But the moment vou come to nu ~ lear war, a nd their lack of funciion­ to be done but one of the great problems the role of the media, w hat you sa\' is ing, their lack of ability to respond to it. is that w e, in the profeSS ion, Conti­ just rem oved . But wha t we a re picking up is a bl'O ader nually make use of the stuff automa­ There is, finally, rather late, but a grovv­ sense of he lplessness now. How can w e tically assuming that it has to be there ing public conscience, there's no doubt believe the fact that p eople don't com­ Why s hould w e make that assumption about it, th at people are becoming municate with each othe r so muc h a nymore ? The n w e should perhaps aware that this extraordinary (medial now ? The fact that th e re is so muc h automatically assume that nuclear process we have been taking p art in has electronic interve ntion that p eople liter­ w eapons have to be there because thev got a lot of problems attendant to it. And ally do not sp eak to e ach other so much are there, r mean vou could say the sam~ I really am dismayed that this debate­ . anymore. When we rece ive information, thing about child~e n climbing chimneys there isn't really a debate ye t. more of a so-called information, one should al to sweep them ; you could use the same consciousness - wasn't really strong 10 ways put quotes around 'information' logic about cancer, or about any kind of years ago. I think it is because the everv time it's used on this tape; now phe nomenon. Thi~ seems to me the structural systems tha t the media re­ ever~ time w e receive so-called infor­ height of despair; we are allowing our­ present, and that it uses, are so reinfor­ mation, w e us ually don't receive it in selves to be impressed by technology, human communication with someone cing and perpetuating and are all part of soning. I mean, it's not even reasoning. impressed by glitter, by fast-moving a centr alized social structure which is else we can look at. To ch eck the p e rson Therefore one really has to say to one­ ima ges ; we are allOWing ourselves,to be out, whe the r we trust the person or not suppressing people now in all societies, self: is it being done deliberately now, dominated by visual overload. We are at all, to check out the human creden­ especially Western society. And the this maintenance of the myth of objec­ handing over so much of ourselves to tials so that w e can the n look back at the media's structures are simply another tivity? We could really go into this a bit. the stuff that w e work with, to the stuff person and say: 'Jus t a minute, you said overlay of grids on the consciousness of The way I've been looking at this is all that w e use for ego-gratification, for just now that 23 5,000 people w ere s u f­ people: just another mesh over the top, so personal and I've been greatly attacked creative self-fulfillment. We have cross­ And I think that why the debate is begin­ for doing this. But it's useful, valid evi­ fering from this or that, I didn't quite ed over a kind of invisible blurrv line ning very, very la te is a sign of the catch that fi gure .. what is your reference some\-v here .. . dence, I' ll give you an exahlple. For point, can you tell me more about it? efficacy of these systems tha t ar e simp ly instance ; one of the reasons why m\' Jt's reallv very dangerous to put the Say it again etc. etc.' And this kind of fragmenting and alienating, confusing work has been continually attacked, problem in these simplified terms. But I mode of functioning w hich is basic to and disorientating. Our profession - ve ry often attacked by the profession, is see the media as being very much over w hat w e are, or a t lea st w e w ere, basic let's make absolutely no mis take about beca use it is supposed to be manipula­ us, domin ating us like the kind of globe it - our profession has become more to the human species ; [ mean, w e are tive : the reason given for banning The that Atla s is holding and what we need and more defensive, self-defensive, - not yet quite electronic neutrons al­ War Game was that the film was subjec­ to do is to take it from over us and to nobody could deny this, whatever other though it's something becoming open take it down to a lateral position in tive propaganda or that kind of thing. point there is controversy on - and it' s for debate now .. . We seem to be very which w e can use it for the purposes of But our profession will never switch its probably the last profession on the face case to itself ; never, will never discuss much by-passing the most fundamental entertainme nt, for creative fulfillment, of this earth which absolutely refuses to the way it is manipulative. r mean, until way of communicating with one another. for communication, all those things. but The fa ct that we communicate with allow any kind of interior dialogue or w e are prepared to understand that all with a totally different relationship than criticism or debate, let alone, God for­ communication, whatever the inten­ each other in all these somewhat ques­ at present. The relationship we have at bid, contact with the public that could tion, good or bad, machiavellian or be­ tionable ways, does not automatically the moment with the mass media is one m ean that they are necessary or good or open up this secretive masonic order neficient, is actually clinically mani­ of total and absolute subserviance, with which we guard the dissemination that they should not be challanged. One pulative, we haven't understood any­ generally speaking. Be it as a producer, of information .. . of the most unfortunate things about thing. It is manipulative in itself and as a maker or creator, we are subservient I'm talking about everything which society today is that w e accept things to it when we allow ourselves to be, and especially when based in a society where communicates with the public, espe­ which we are automaticallv used to there is a point-blank refusal to discuss certainly the people who receive it are cially the audio-visual form. I would doing. It's a kind of bI'eakdown at the subserviant to it. Now we have to change the mode of manipulation, to inculcate never separate film from television - edges of criticism which is extremely that basic relationship, to have media as a a kind of sense of urgency and learning there's absolutely no way one can and awareness and de-construction separate the Hollywood cinema of today, into the social process, from education for example, from the trauma of the to community life, into the very process te levision for they are two slightly diffe­ of being. How can we be when w e are rent w ays of impounding upon the pu­ no t in charge of the ways w e are or blic. I think that the cinema is probably w e're not in some ways in charge of the the most se rious now because it remains wav w e receive information ? How can this dark room of totally dogmatic ex­ w e ~ be in any total se nse ? Of course w e perience. At least for television you can't be. But it's that kind of awareness could say there's a kindofbreak-upwith that w e have got to deve lop in the 20th d o m estic input and all tha t kind of stuff. century nov\', But there are other proble ms w ith tele­ If I speak often as if the media w e re vision. T he structures of tele visio n are one voice, one p e rson. one inte ntion, I duplicated by and are re-duplica ting do tha t deliberately because the resis­ the str u ctures of newspapers a nd so on. tance in our p rofession is so horrendous. Eve rything is involved h e re, a ll form s of We all know this. We are playing a media. kind of triple lie. We know something Soc ie t" op erates o n so many levels but w e pretend it isn't there, the n we go no\\', you know; it's really very, very on doing it. And I think in o rder to draw disturbing psychological thinking that's a tte ntio n to the impact of the media, I happening on massive levels n ow . How think it's necessary to clarity the mono­ the media, how anyone, anyone who • Auteur at work : Watkins directing The War Game (1965) poly hold that it has now, the monopoly has worked w ith audio-visual commu­ hold that it has on the consciousness. Of alarming. All I'm talking about is to nications so-called, can claim that this is useful working tool but not to rely on it, course there is the individual journalist, e ncourage the sense of challenge and just some thing w h ich f10ats across to not to to have it totally dominate all the re are individual filmmakers, there criticism in the receiving of information the public for them to do what they like modes of action, whole areas of polities, are occasionally individual ne wspapers so that w e b ecome aware of the mani­ with, as if there's n ot any kind ofimpact. all aI'eas of political thinking, as it does. but even that begs the second question: as if there's no cause-and-effect, is such pulative, centralizing d e-politicizing It's to totally reverse that or change that that most of uS don't want to deal with impact of the m edia on our lives, de­ an ignorant, naive and stupid line of rea- relationship. You'd never get rid of it, the means that we are using. The media sensitizing impact particularly, and that and actually there is no real reason why are manipulative, and will be manipula­ w e have to start dealing with that on the one should, probably; but it's to allow it tive until, as I keep trying to stress, we community level, on a people-to-people to go into the public court, into the court Award-winning documentarian Peter open society up to a broad-ranging chal­ level. on a national le vel, on an educa­ of inquiry, in the court of conscious WatkIns is theauthorofThe WarGame, lenge as to the entire role of the media tionallevel, by discussing, byanalyz·ing, realization and our profeSSion is se­ Culloden, Punishment Park and other and the structural means of manipula­ by de-structuring. There is so much riously betraying itself by refusing to do works. Interview conducted by Connie tion u.sed which we regard as our pro­ work that can be done and it could be that. You know that, you know that as Tadros and edited by Michael Dorland. fessional language. started today, or tomorrow. People have well as I and anybody who's listening in

20/Cinema Canada - October 1984 • • the studio knows that as well. We have tion, anything that's been written that I with passion according to the press, a become like a species of surgeons ; we have seen in the last year (except for one long, long time ago. I never speak clear­ rush into the operating theatre with or two articles which come from people ly, I never speak vividly, and I don't say garden shears and we start cutting up who are directly quoting the film, one of that I necessarily speak like this, I'm just bits of the body and it's as though the the support group people who has going to two vocabulary lines. A couple person on the table is saying: 'One written an article or something like that), of examples of how I speak from a minute, now, what are you up to ?', and that is, all the normal professional re­ Montreal paper: according to this, I'm we say : 'Sorry - to give the media sponse to this film right across the middle-aged and somewhat embittered response to the surgeon - sorry, I'm a board, to this nuclear war film, has men­ and I speak wearily and this is repeated professional, I know exactly what I'm tioned that this is something that has 40 times across the country. There is no doing, you just lie down; I don't need never been done before. I don't say that statement about the nature of the film, you to tell me what I have to do and so in egotistical terms, but in political or that this is an extraordinary break­ on.' Which is what the media say conti­ terms, in terms of clarifying the chal­ through for something like this. nually when these points are raised at lenge to the system which this film, and The n we have another article from all : there is such a thing as objectivity, particularly the people's process around Portland, Oregon. This is interesting be­ we are just professionally serving the it really represents. And not one single cause again ihis is very representative : public, so shut up: comment that I have heard, either on you may think this is unique, it isn't - and Now, what the hell is happening ? I the audio-visual media or in written I could rustle up more clippings from mean, honest to God, even Dr. Goebbels, journalism, has talked about the mean­ the lavatory where ( usually keep these you know, one could question his politiCS ing of the film in these terms. I am never things. This one is iconoclastic but the but certainly the guy was at least honest. cited as speaking - I mean, maybe I vocabulary is extraordinary. I'm always He was honest. He said: 'You know, don't, but I'm just comparing two voca­ referred in this country either as dange­ what I'm doing here is a very effective bulary lines, okay - I never speak force­ rous or a maverick - all the time, I way of raising support for the Third fully, I never speak firmly, I never speak promise you, I'm not exaggerating. Now Reich' and he had an incredible state­ with courage ; I think onc~ I've spoken this article was about my comments on ment about going into the inner recesses of the mind and the heart and he under­ stood quite well wha.t he did. He under­ stood it from day one and he did it. And my God, it worked. Now, the difference Filmmaking in the nuclear age: an open letter to the community between Dr. Goebbels and those who run the CBC, the BBC or Radio Thailand Recently, it has come to our attention of pornography in relation -to the success of The Day After, is "Do we or anywhere else you want, is that, that a well-respected Toronto film­ criteria outlined. want to support a process whereby because of all the so-called sophistication maker has accepted a sponsored film There are some people who have audiences learn to be entertained by and complexity of modern life, political for Litton Systems. He will be pro.­ decided that they will not work on the simulated deaths of most of the forces, economic interest, a whole ducing and directing a marketing pornography. Why wouldn't we work world's population and pre-enacted mish-mash of stuff, we are not dealing film that will include the technology on pornography ? agony of the' survivors' ?" with it with the same honesty, though that Litton has used to create the • Even though we need to make a Cruise Missile Guidance System. Al­ living, we would find it intolerable to the actual basic social phenomena are 4) Do pro-nuclear films make people precisely the same. And I'd really love to though there are many in the film derive an income from something think hear from any professional, anyone who community who would attempt to that so contradicted our value sys­ a) That it is acceptable and ' even is listening to this broadcast who could convince him not to make this film, tems. commendable to derive profit from write to 'me or telephone me or send me others would defend 11is f.reedorrrnf • Because we think that there would the production of nuclear-weapons ? a tape and can clinically define for me speech and expression and explain be sOllH; ~hing destructive commu­ b) That it is possible to survive an the ' difference between their function this freedom in the name of diversity nicated. Destructiveness and crea­ unsurvivable war? and the function of Dr. Goebbels. I and pluralism in our society. tivity are incompatible. c) That nuclear weapons aren't that ·would really love to hear from them. The issues that have been raised in • We don't want to support this as a bad after all and have just become a our discussions with others working ' form of entertainment. normal part of our economic lives ? The point is that there are a lot of in the film industry have caused us to • What pornography makes people 5) Can work that promotes the arms questions and I think this is the best way pose samCe very fundamental· ques­ think about women is unacceptable race and a reign of nuclear terror be to put it. If I look back over the time that tions about our WOl·k. to us. I've been trying to deal with this stuff, assessed as a valuable contribution The primary question for film and • This work is counter-productive both the challenge towards the media to the communities in which we live television producers, directors and to respectful sexual relationships in and work ? that I've been developing particularly techniciaits is : Why have we chosen our soCiety. since i974, when I started a lot of public Where do each of us draw the . to do the work that we do ? We began to ask ourselves the speaking on this point, about 10 y:ears line? What will or won't we do in '. Each of us could identifywith one same questions in relation to the ago, ifI look at the resistance and.at t~e order to achieve economic security .·ormore of these possible answers: production of films that support the outright hostility by my professIOn In and have creative opportunities? • we need to make a living. nuclear industry. dealing with this, which has undoub­ When does our freedom to earn a • we have something to communi­ There seemed to be consensus that tedly played a very major role in the living become the freedom to be cate and we want to communicate the production of those films made a subsequent suppression of most of ~y bought off? effectively and creatively. numb'er of us uncomfortable. Yet work, there is absolutely no questIOn At what point does our freedom to • we want to entertain. some people felt that, even though about that. And also, parallel to that, work and express ourselves creatively • we w~nt to make people think. this was so, "they had to make a there has been a fair, I would not like to intertere with the quality of other • we get satisfaction from being living." Others thought that "they'd peoples lives ? say systematic, but there have ~een .' productive and feeling our work is rather sell shoes." fairly concentrated attempts (agam a As our children develop, we can valuable. People from both of these groups difficult word) but a fairly concentrated see that they often complain that Among the criteria . by which we agreed, "We live in a free world. Isn't series, I'm trying to put this delicately, they want the freedom to do what­ choose the projects we want to work it great that there's room for so many series of moves which you could see ever they want. It takes time to lea(in on. and those we. reject, One coulq different opinions?" quite clearly, to disman~le ,?y, .not my that this freedom is tied to accepting state, on the positive side, that a We have the good fortune to live in reputation be€ause I don t thmk I~ those a degree of social responsibility _ project: a society where . we all ostensibly terms, but to dismantle any kmd of and this responsibility is a reasonable • provides us with an income and!or have the freedom to say what we credibility. And that's been a.bsolutely boundary to that freedom In a society the project Will be profitable. want to say and to choose what we consistent. Now I'm going to give you a that sanctifies the individuality of the • is something valuable to be com­ wish to work on. The question that couple of examples, and these are jour­ artist, it is often hard to remember municated and the project challenges we have is: nalistic examples. And you could relate our creativity. that we are members of a community these directly to the audio-visual section and that we have some responsibility • will entertain its audience. Does this freedom support an of our curious profession. Now, an article abdication of responsibility ? and accountability within that society. • will make people think. Are we free to make films that Those of us who work.in the media appeared when I last ~ame he~e which • will provide valuable and produc­ was a wire-service artIcle and It I went tive work. support, just,ify or rationalize have such incredible power over the all over the country so this appeared in But at times our own economic nuclear destrnction ? hearts and minds of our audie-nces 40 papers across the country. And ac­ Using our original criteria, we that we must take special care with neceSl!itymakes it difficuluo m~e ~ tually both of the articles that I'U quote decision based on the content or might ask ourselves the following the responsibility of our individual from were, I think, of reasonably good questions: choices. quality o~ a project. Whether weare intent. This is what makes it even more freelance or work in staff positions, 1) Can we tolerate making a Iivil!g Just as we have the freedom to say complex. Both these articles, one was a we .all face­ who have seen the film, are fully pre­ UJ rely under attack now. This is not an Q) of clinical example of the machinery at pared to discuss The Day After, not on Z obsession of mine. We are talking about .. work, the machinery of dismantling the level of whether it's a good or a bad o credibility, for example, which is why I a major social phenomenon, and the film which is to some degree irrelevent "0 1:. have basically decided to stop doing any fact that our profession does not want to at the moment. It's how it has been per­ 0. further interviews now, so this is going come to terms with it does not alter the ceived as an act of television and, at that And one of the very interesting and to be an historic one, because this is the fact that it's there. Would you use the level, people are starting to focus on it, I disturbing questions revolves around last one I'm going to do for a long, long words obsessive on Elizabeth Fry who think, correctly, as a very, very worrying the difficulties we have had raising time. Certainly 'till I finish this film. brought prison reform to England in the phenomenon in putting world War III money for the film. If you or I wanted to There is no point in doing any more. You 1860's? Florence Nightingale? Would and all that implies into the language of do an extremely corrupt piece of porno­ simply end up repeating the same thing you say middle-aged, weary, embittered, Hollywood television soap opera. Peo­ graphy, historical pornography or literal to a profession which is totally uninte­ frustrated, obsessive, monomaniac, ple are quite clearly able to perceive the pornography; and you or I went to the rested in listening, totally and absolu­ paranoid - wtmld those be the words social and political problems of doing major Hollywood studios, the CBC odf tely .. . It's not just uninterested, it's re­ used there ? that and in terms of being totally a n ticl i­ you went to the BBCor to French televi­ sisting listening. This profession of ours I am very sensitive about vocabulary matic, minimizing the impact of the sion, we would raise the money within is dying on its feet. It's causing social now and I think we need to become nuclear war, depoliticizing.. . I mean, two -days. And raise an enormous harm. Who can doubt the role of the even more sensitive to it. It' s been very you can talk to people about this now amount; it would be possible to raise mass media in depoliticizing the public? very interesting to note the uses of and they are registering this directly. I millions : I mean, The Day After cost Who could doubt that when we are words. It's a fantastic kind of inverse think this awareness is breaking through seven million dollars ... It's been very talking about the reactions of millions of McCarthyism that is being set up here despite television's massive efforts to interesting that this film which is dealing people to the seeming inevitability of now. I think actually I would have present. itself as more and more cosme­ with, I think, a fairly serious worldwide nuclear was, and that they feel they preferred to live in the 1950's than now tic. I think television is actually destroy­ issue, whether the world disintegrates, cannot do anything about it? What because I think I could have handled a ing itself. It's become so irrelevent to has aroused such antipathy to dealing social commentator of any intelligence McCarthy tribunal so much more easily people's needs, to the needs of the com­ with the subject. With the exception of would doubt the impact of the mass than my profession; at least it was munity, the needs of individuals; it the National Film Board who are helping media in that phenomenon? honest. McCarthy was honest. These are seems so fragmenting, an experience of us, and may be helping us further, and Both media and nuclear weapons are extremely reactionary, dishonest peo­ the absurd. the Mexican Film Institute, with the interrelated and although in fact I get ple who are having high impact on the Many people will discuss this but the exception of those two organizations, accused of overly concentrating on the public, who are running our profession problem is that the very methodology every other television or cultural organi­ nuclear arms race, which is an unfair now. I'm very frightened of these peo­ that television uses is almost a kind of zation that we've approached has simply accusiltion, I'm actually just as concerned pie ; they are dangerous, - the white, kinetic, fragmenting energy, which un­ not wanted to help us at all. about growing militarization in general liberal class, generally speaking domi­ doubtedly has some very, very disturb­ But even if a Santa Claus figure came and I think that this question of the nantly but not exclusively male. They ing, attractive qualities to it. You see, along and had some money, I would media is paramount. If we have a social are having an enormously adverse poli­ here we're into something which is a take that like a shot, without any inhibi­ phenomenon, let's call it that, which is tical effect, certainly on Western society, very dangerous area, an area of great tion, because we would be able to use really impacting on our ways of think~ and the sooner that we start to take danger, as posed by the media through that money to print the film in the end, ing. of feeling and receiving, isn't that courage and develop some humility in films such as Flashdaflce, Officer and to make the various multi-lingual ver­ one of the more urgent things to be our profession .. . We don't have a god­ Gentleman, films of this genre which sions of the f~lm that are necessary. But dealing with? And the more that you like mandate to create and shape infor­ are being spewed out from Hollywood that would 111 no way inhibit or dis­ deal with this profession and find that mation from an elite, from an obscure recently. They contain very recognizable, courage th~ public fund-raising that they simply close ranks, that they don't minOlity addressing the majority. Where modular forms of structure. You could would contmue and Would nee d to 22/Cinema Canada - October 1984 • DOC U M E NT A R I E 5 • Cinematic Odyssey: the making of Watkins's A Film For Peace

by Peter Wiittonick

A Film For Peace: The Nuclear War thoughts and feelings of representa­ In Canada and elsewhere, research ~heatre Parminou, who have been Film is a film unique' to cinematic tive families in 'each country and is being collected concerning the deating quasi-improvisational, social history. It is uniq\le in that never point to examples of positive actions effects of a nuclear war on Canada action and progressive theatre for before has such a film been cre.ated that people !Ire. taking around the (Nuclear Winter) on targets and nearly a decade across Quebec. Their on such a scale in the decentralized world to disentangle themselves (and fallout patterns and on nuclear emer­ system of working is much like that of way that it is bei~g done. (No, we're ourselvees) from the nuclear morai;lS gency measures. The Canadian sup­ A Film For Peace; it involves much not talking about Heaven's Gate,) into which we are sinking. port group is also cOJ;lsideriJ;lg collaboration, research, non-hierar- I The film itself started out in Peter The support has grown slowly. It Canada's role in the nuclear weapons chical decision-making, and public W atkins~ . mind essentially as an was once thought that peace groups and fuel cycles, its connections inter­ involvement in the creation of the updated version of his Academy­ would rush to support the film, given nationally and ways in which Canada works themselves on a continuous, Award winning and powerful the incredible use they've made of might responsibly take the lead in self-renewing basis. This group has nuclear document The War Game The War Game in the last two de­ disarmament matters before the developed plays on feminism, dis­ 11965). Two yearsa~, Watkins in­ cades, but most of these groups, with hawks,wbears and other national armament, and many other subjects tended to re-model the factual, the exception of those of Sweden, animals take us down into the valley and are currently launching a work stylistic and thematic groundwork of Australia and the West German of nuclear maga-death. about Alternatives. It is the aim of the his e~l'lier film t'o.portyay the effects Green Party are "fighting" t.heir own In Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto and fihn to examine this group and th!3ir of a 'nuclear attack Qn England. With battles and have precious little capital Halifax there are active support way of working as examples of how a little development money from to finance the production of the groups attempting to raise $40,000. we, as creators of media, might be ·Central TV, be.began to investigate education tool that A Film For Peace They are currently approaching able to work in honest and respon­ the i.:iVil defence measures of hun­ will be. Although letters of support peace groups, organizing benefits, sibly ethical fashions. dred$oftowns and villages in England and words of encouragement have and looking for sympathetic grant­ This and other ideas of military­ but met with much resistance from been received from many "visible" making institutions, corporations, economic conversion (where indus­ media and political authorities. At and. famous people internationally, networks and foundations. They tries with military contracts convert that time he decided to broaden the {such as Harry Belafonte, Dustin wish they were more successful-the to socially useful production)' peace rUm's sC()pe in or!1er to make it more Hoffman, Bibi .Anderson, and Ed major part of the money raised until education programs, and groups truly illternatfunatand universal. He Broadbent, among others) as well all now has corne from all parts of working in international develop- emb8rkedon an ~ysseywhich would labour and union leaders, bishops Canada in small donations. Although . ment·are just a few. examples af sub­ ;<: ~~$C bim around the' world five times and other religious figures, mayors the National Film Board of Canada, ject matter which has been inves- searohingfo!" the.means of producing and other public officials as well as through the good graces of both its tigated. ' . ·this.;newel' < visi.on- searching for representatives of many develop­ English and French production units, The response from the Canadian, Y,;'~PJipWt tram groups and individuals. ment and social justice groups, the · have offered;to assist the Canadian filmmaking community and the ,';;h' The premise of this newer vision is major force and energy which has production shoot and post-produc­ public at large has been eQcoura~ng. that fictwnal recreations of the images had the greatest impact and will tion services, the Canadian support. Benefits have been staged at the of tuWtear was have already eaten enable the fihp to actually get pro­ group still needs funds to enable it to Canadian' Film Institute in Ottawa, into the public psyche and debilitated duced has from corne the contribu­ carry out its contribution to the film The Royal Ontario Museum in Ta­ . our win to act j that ,a nuclear war has tion of thousands of "invisible" and to help support the shooting in ronto, the Conservatoir'e d'art cine­ f~~eady been fought (Hiroshima and people who've bought the buttons, other less affluent countries. matographique and Cinematheque that the time . Was fast who've made the. charitable dona­ quebecoise in Montreal, and with the :<.\N4gaSaiti); The major sections of the Cana­ approaching ~hen images of em­ tions, who've attended and organized Atlantic FillDmakers Co·op and dian part of A Film For Peace will w~rment, . blueprints for positive fUm screenings, retrospectives, art Dalhousie University in Halifax. With consist ofapproximateJy8~10 minutes and·life.enhahcmg. examples auctions, punk-rock concerts, peace­ much important support from various of simple animation to illustrate the \ihould supplant the tired, tried and feasts, seminars, recitals, marathons, individuals, the Canadian support conceptual planes of the film, to UntrlIe imageS of fillIl8 like The Day theatrical performances, and discus- group is still looking for help from provide much-needed humour and ,.-.After. There was the necessity, then, _ sions and meetings in order that this . anyone and everyone interested in to pose the central questions that the to create useful films, useful art, film be made. These people, along the project. The expressioQ of sup­ rest of the film will attempt to answer useful media. with the more than 300 who are port from Peter Katadotis, Daniel and clarify. Animators and graphic Watkins sent letters to 100 of the working on the various film crews, Pinard, Franyois Macerola and, artists such as Jane and Joan Chul" world's major televi~ion networks organizing groups and research indeed, all of the technical and chill, Richard Slye and Derek Lamb and fihn finance systems seeking teams, are the main reasons that this support staff at the National Film will help create these segments and a support forthe newfihn. Most ignored film can be differentiated from all Board has been most heartening, and team is now being formed for others him, Or rejected the idea outright. others that have come before it makes the NFB one of the few institu­ who may be interested, who will Their response tended to reinforce The process is the film. Its decen­ tions to endorse the film, along with work with camera time being donated Watkin's belief that increasingly cen­ tralized, consultative, global nature, the Australian and Mexican Film by the NFB and the CBC, tralized, stratified, and bureaucra­ its self-initiated, auto-(ieterministic Institutes. tized media mirrored and, in many thrusts are all exemplary qualities Beyond the statistical, glObal, Animators, graphic artists, those ways, supported the same tendencies which have, until this time, remained factual, graphic and narrative infor­ with fundraising and organizational in society as a whole, . tendencies alien from the standard processes of mation which will visualize and abilities, those with funds to charitably .. toward the fragmentization of infor­ corporate cinema, elitist fihnmaking, bring to light the Canadian aspect of donate, those with technical exper­ mation, toward the cutting off of truly and mass media in general. Learning the film, there will also be people-on­ tise, those with research skills, those democratic, personal, human impact about this collective group process the-street interviews that will pose progressive, far-sighted institutions on the systems which are surrounding has transformed a lot of the people questions about what people know and foundations in the community - and governing us. working on the project, and about what's going on in the world you're all needed to help produce A around them, and why they don't , The fUsing ofthe basic philosophic broadened many horizons through Film For Peace. know what they should know. In premises of the film a methodology an increase in personal and public So the next time someone comes to keeping with the self-reflective and (a process pC creation) has become knowledge gained through the re­ up to you and tries to sell you a button self-critical nature of A Film For the mast important aspect oiA Film search, through diSCUSSion, and that says "Support Peter Watkins: A Peace these person-on-the-street For·Peace.Watkins has travelled the through thoughtful and analytical Film For Peace : The Nuclear War interviews will be exposed as being world meetingsu:eport ~ups in the investigation of the mechaniSll1s of Fihn : Appuyons Peter Watkins" prime examples of what traditional countries where 'the film js ,now mass media, information and film reach deep down into that soul of a .;produCti(m. networks think is cinema verite but moth-eaten bill-fold or cheque book . bemg shot.!These include Australia, what is reaUy a kind of false cinema c Norway, France; ' Gel'lniUlY, Tbe seem diffuse it is; in fact, very practical Box 1195 world-bits of information. U,S.S.R. and. .AfriC8.} These groups, and very' personally rewarding Station La Cite One possible suggestion . for tbe ()on~&tiilg of ac.tWists,81mmakers (altbough . not financially rewarding MontreaL Quebec H2.W 2P4 and '<()J'(ijnaryooncerned citizens, as it is all done on a volunteer basis). Canadian content ofA Film For Peace ' haW,failJf!d. mO~}ltdtJntunucb of the The work is sbared by many, ideas has been brought forward by the r&sm\t.::h,' generated 'public support flow across ·. physical, ~cbological, Montreal Support Group. This in­ Peter Wintonick is Canadian coordina­ and.d~&ubject matterrorthe international and even self-imposed volves working with a theatrical col- tor and the editor of Watkins' A Film . lective in Victoriaville, Quebec, called fllJn:w~i9bwill '8ive voice to the boundaries. Everyone participates. For Peace: The Nuclear War FUm. • • continue. If somebody came and gave as if, in our profession, we learnt a series context of the nuclear weapons they are us all the budget of the film, then the of lessons, you know, in the first day of trying to protest. They always focus on process of the film would continue journalism - whatever you do, constantly the immediate thing and this is just a anyway, but the process of the_ film is personalize this; these examples I've way at personalizing, it's a way of de­ not just fund-raising. The process of the read here are an indication of that. flecting away from the issue. We are not film is an enormous amount of discus­ Somebody sa~d to me the other day, that very issue-oriented in our profession, sion about the issues that are involved. th~ (Cruise missile protest) women at we are very personality-oriented be­ Here in Montreal, for example, we should Greenham Common have been quite cause it's seen as an escape mechanism be looking at the arms race in Montreal astute actually, in never having a media somehow ... it's control really. If you got and one of the things that the people spokesperson, never, never. And it must the personal tapped, if you've got a who are supporting the film will be be quite frustrating and irritating for the central hook on their characteristics, doing is a lot of research, which will media who like to select out someone as you are ready to dismember them when­ mean that they will be confronting them­ a spokesperson, to move them up in ever you want and not deal with the selves and things happening in their order to dismantle their credibility, the issue. I think that these are examples of own community - things many of them Green movement is a classic example of the many things we do unconsciously in probably only perhaps vaguely know this. The women in Greenham Common our profession because we were taught about- that is a process of growth, that's have been quite astute, they have deli­ that early, or they come with the terri­ a process in itself. I mean the media berately diffused it so that the media tory, they come with the structures. should be encouraged in this kind of has to speak to whoever happens to be My feelings about the media have thing every day. Instead, the media there and this has been rather effective been developping since the mid-'60s takes upon itself to encapsulate this because even the media have had to pay and the fact that I use myself as an growth process or to reject it. That is a certain amount of grudging respect ; example should be seen on all kinds how the media have become totally, they've had to deal with a more diffuse, of levels as self-reflective self-criticism, absolutely anti-process, a totally hierpr­ more genuine level that they have not as an irony of opposing contradictions, chi cal political machine. And this film is been able to personalize. for those are the levels on which I trying to combat that process and to" Nuclear weapons or the repression of approach that. There is not a simplified declare it. When this film comes out going to need to really go into social and the '60s in Punishment Park which is response to what I am trying really to next year, a synthesis of some' of the politicaL struggle now because people obviously a metaphor for the violence in get people to reflect about objectivity. things that we are discussing will be are starting pick up the relationship our society, these ate not things of my I'll just give one example : when I do presented in the film and around the between the arms-race and the Third obsession or m y creation. They are ac­ commentaries or when I did them in film, so fund-raising is, at the moment, a World, for example. I think, in a perverse tual clinical social phenomena just as some earlier films, I would switch bet­ very necessary yet only a partial pur­ way, if we can get rid of nuclear weapons the role of the media is a clinical social ween the seemingly omnipresent, object­ pose of the process. But, as I must in time they will have adversely clarified phe nomenon. Now, the fact that we are ive overview to a highly subjective emphasize all the time, we must de­ the small size of this planet for the first having a lot of difficulties in dealing statement with very, very slight changes emphasize the film. We are very much time. with them does not alter the fait that in tone, if at all, but the same voice. Now, hooked on the product in our profession, I did not invent the nuclear weapon, I they are there. these things, the meaning of this, have and that's what the film is dealing with. did not invent pain, I did not invent the And the issue of the nuclear arms never. been discussed ; I don't think Whether the television organizations political repression of the '60s ; I don't race, and especially its relationship to there's been one discussion about the will carry it or not, or cinema chains will even have the imagination to deal with the media, is something which is not to meaning of my work - one by an Ameri­ show it or not, I honestly say it's futile that stuff. We have an extraordinary cut­ be deflected by seeking answers about can historian came out once - about the for me to speculate on that. What I do the-messenger's-head-off syndrome in my personality or what makes me work meaning of m y work in laying down a think will happen is that it will be seen our society, don't we really ? Off with as an artist or not or whatever, because challenge to a whole concept of truth in and discussed and we are going to try the head of the messenger who brings it takes us away from the issue. And if I documentary. The fact that there hasn't and structure the film quite delibera­ the news of the defeat because we don't can just use this example again, of the doesn't alter the fact that it's been there, tely so that any kind of ego representa­ want to hear the stuff. It's really de­ women at Greenham Common, how there staring us in the face. And quite a tion by the film is down to a minimum. pressing, when talking with journalists many articles have there been and they few people havE'apicked up on this but, The people will be talking about what and people from television, that they never, never talk about or they seldom in my profession, they've been very sup­ the various families are talking about. seldom actually talk about the issue. It ever talk about what it is the women are pressive about dealing with this. Jean­ They are discussing the information always comes back to personalizing, it's doing there, why they are there or the Luc Godard, yes - there's been a com­ from the film, not whether it's well­ plete acknowledgement of Godard's made or not, or that kind of nonsense. I work, I'm not going to go into what - but hope it will have a positive effect, I think in my case there hasn't been. Is Godard people will use the film to encourage Peter Walkins: AFilmography going to explain something which has various structural analyses of the way been openly acknowledged in his work we are receiving information, for exam­ The Weh (1956) for two decades now ? So, I just gave that ple. That's a role I hope the film will commentary example in order to show fulfill, in schools and public meetings The Field of Red (1958) how I've been trying to throw inquiry on and church halls and the kind of arena Diary of an Unknown Soldier (1959) . all the authoritarian concepts of our that The War Game has worked in for all form and the concept of what is a docu­ The Forgotten Faces (1961 ) these years. I'm quite certain that that mentary. There is clinically no such will happen with this film and that a Dust Fever (1962.) thing as a documentary. This word very, very wide debate will result - Culloden (19641 'doc umentary' is a totally a~tificial con­ that's what I hope will ha~pen. British Writers' Guild Award. cept. Whe re it comes from, I don't know, . Judging from the response of people from the days of John Grierson, but it's helping us to organize the research and The War Game (1965) totally and absolutely artificial, it's very the activities, a lot of p eople are really American Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature. manipulative. Documentaries are a very anxious. When I talk about the media British Film Academy Award. . manipulative form. The fact that you are needing to break out of its frame, people American Council of Churches Award. giving something which appears to be want to break out offrames now a nd are Privilege 119661 objective to a certain authoritarian, well­ becoming more conscious that the media Venice Film Festival Award. regulated, clearly photographed stance are imposing those frames ; that the Award at Cannes Film Festival shared with Antonioni's BLOW-UP. which is the image of documentary, media is, in a sense, structurally con­ makes it extremely dangerous. Can we ditioning us by its language system to The Gladiators (1968) Trieste Science Fiction Award. say that the documentary of the '3(fs is accept more and mare rigid social struc­ any less dangerous as a documentary . tures. It is one structural process le ad­ Punishment Park 11970) than the work of. Grierson or the televi­ ing to another, reinforcing another, and New York Film Festival. sion evening news on the CBC which is I believe that p eople are beginning to Best Director Award at Atlanta Film Festival. highly dangerous ? I have been trying realize that. There's one perverse benefit State of the Union (Video, 1971 ) to question that process by. throwing that the nuclea r arms race has brought confusion, if you see what I mean, 'by Edvard Munch (1975 ) this poor battered pla net, and that's crossing over from activism to de-con­ clarifying th e issue for p eople - there's The Seventies People (1975 ) struction, by showing that you can simu­ no question about th a t. It's the great late documentary. I can make a docu­ tragedy of our species that it's taken us The Trap (1975 1 Pri,'( Futura Award in Bronze. mentary look more real than a docu­ to get to this pitch to start looking at mentary. these things, but people are looking at Eveningland (1980) . And that's a complete coax, of course, them now and I'm cautiously quite opti­ August Strindberg 0982-1 but the meaning of that has never been mistic actually about the near future. In preparation. properly tak~n up. And I think that, in But I think that we are going to go to the suppressIOn. of The W.ar Game, the another period which will make t\:Ie '60s A Film For Peace: The Nuclear War Film BBC spotted, what. this stuff \ vas a f ter- look very cosmetic because we are Shooting. there s no questIOn about that.

24/Cinema Canada - October 1984 • •

II II II . 11 '''--'ANAVISIDN II II J CANADAL

MONTREAL TORONTO VANCOUVER

Good luck to all the participants in the Ninth Annual -Festival of Festivals Toronto International Film Festival- 7984

WE'VE GOT IT ALL and the people

Montreal: Administration and equipment (514) 487-5010 2120, Boul. Decarie, H4A 3)3 Studio and Lighting • 2020 Northcliffe Avenue, H4A 3 K5

Toronto: 793 Pharmacy Avenue, M1 L 3K3 (416) 752-7670

Vancouver: 43 West, 6th Avenue, V5Y 1 K2 (604) 873-3901

October 1984 - Cinema Canada/25