Throughout the past year, many of the most successful films have seemed especially concerned, each in its own way, with justice. Spielbergās Lincoln is, of course, an obvious exampleāthe masterful telling of how slavery was abolished. But at the movies, justice can also be served retroactively in a show of flamboyant ultraviolence, as in Tarantinoās revenge fantasy (which, to be fair, has been his thing for a while) Django Unchained. Others, such as Ben Affleckās Argo and Kathryn Bigelowās Zero Dark Thirty, concerned themselves with brave individuals whose actions might otherwise have been overlooked by history.
When I made a yearly pilgrimage to the Santa Barbara International Film Festivalāwhere, incidentally, Day-Lewis, Affleck, and Tarantino received awardsāthis trend seemed to continue. I realized, on the journey home, that the weekendās strongest films seemed also to orient themselves around social justice, historical illumination, or some combination of the two. Here are a few to look out for.
Angels in Exile
Filmmaker Billy Raftery took a surfing trip to South Africa and came back with a raw, character-driven portrait of Durbanās street children.
Angels in Exile, which saw its world premiere on Friday, Jan. 25, is about as crushingly honest as a documentary gets. Narrated by South Africa native Charlize Theron, Angels follows homeless teenagers Zuleika and Ariel to adulthood, andāat least where the film concludesāstability.
The film depicts a street culture in which rape, drug abuse, and violence are everyday occurrences. And so the hardest thing for a Westerner to understand may be that kids like Ariel and Zuleika seem to prefer the street to their family homes, where, in so many cases, they have been regularly subjected to physical, mental, or sexual abuse. On the street, in contrast, there can be found a twisted kind of independence and camaraderieāand, of course, no shortage of glue, which homeless children are depicted huffing out of plastic bottles, eyes glazed.
We are introduced to this gutter of the worldālocated, with cruel irony, in a place of overwhelming natural splendorāthrough the outspoken Zuleika, then 12 years old. A horrific childhood, in which Zuleika was raped by her father and infected with HIV, is not at first apparent in her cheerful, confident attitude. Yet as the camera follows her to her sisterās home, we begin to understand more of her history.
The filmās stark depictions of human misery, captured over a period of eight years, stand in contrast to its director, a friendly, youthful surfer whom I met following the filmās premiere.
Ā āShe was the most interesting girl that I had come across, in terms of just her charisma, how confident she was in just approaching me, you know, like, āHey white boy, what are you doing here?āā Raftery said of Zuleika. āNormally the girls are very standoffish, because when they see anybody thatās white or a foreigner ⦠they instantly think theyāll be targets of sexual abuse or something like that, so they kind of categorize outsiders in that way. So for her to be so brazen and just come up, I was like, āThis is incredible.āā
Running parallel to Zuleikaās story is that of Ariel, a boy from an Indian family who has taken to the streets to flee an abusive uncle.
āHe was my first buddy,ā Raftery said, ābecause he spoke fluent English, as an Indian kid, and hung out with all these Zulu kids ⦠and that eventually led me to Zuleika.ā
After his father suffered a stroke, Ariel explains, the man was no longer able to protect him from his violent uncle, so he left. These days, Ariel wants to get off the street but is now powerfully addicted to glue, a substance he seems to both crave and deeply resent. When a social worker offers to take him to a rehab clinic, Ariel rides with him all the way to the front door, then changes his mind, saying the clinic is too close to the city, and he knows heāll just run away and go back to using glue.
The viewerās frustration at these childrenās seeming unwillingness to āhelp themselvesā only grows throughout the film, and we begin to experience some of what social workers must experience every day: a surge of hope-against-hope as these children earnestly express the desire to change their lives, followed swiftly by crushing disappointment as we watch them return to the street, turning, in Arielās case, to running drugs, and in Zuleikaās, to prostitution as well.
Tom and Mandi Hewitt, social workers and co-founders of the advocacy group Umthombo Street Children, help reach out to these children, granting filmmaker Raftery far more access than he might have otherwise had. Mandi, a former street kid herself, constantly entreats a stubborn Zuleika to stay at her sisterās, which proves even more difficult when Zuleikaās sister, JT, is less than welcoming.
Mandi, too, has a story. She takes the viewer on a tour of her former home, located among municipal garbage dumps, her familyās source of food when she was a child.
Rafteryās documentary, however, is much more than the pity-mongering it could easily have been, placing serious emphasis on the problems that lead to child homelessness in the first place: poverty, abusive homes, parents lost to AIDS. It also clearly shows how current tactics enforced by city policeānamely, the violent and routine rounding up of Durbanās unsightly homeless and depositing them out in the countrysideāsimply arenāt working.
In the Shadow (Ve Stinu)
From its opening scene, director David OndrĆcekās In the Shadow is quintessential noir. Itās bleak. Itās gray. Detectives turn trench coat collars up against the pouring rain before slinking into dark alleys and disappearing from sight, save for the moody glow of a lone cigarette.
But for all its ā50s noir stylishness, for which we also have Polish cinematographer Adam Sikora to thank, OndrĆcekās stellar crime film feels remarkably contemporary, with all of the iconography and yet none of the naĆÆvetĆ© (read: cheesiness) of the great classics of the genre.
Set in Prague in 1953, In the Shadow follows Captain Hakl (played by Ivan Trojan), an honest police detective investigating a jewelry store hiest. In the hands of a corrupt secret police, however, this rather mundane crime is turned into a political scandal.
Hakl is taken off the case and is replaced by an East German police specialist, Major Zenke (Sebastian Koch). Zenke and his officers determine that the jewels were stolen by Jews to finance āZionist terrorism,ā yet Haklās instincts tell him otherwise. He begins his own clandestine investigation and follows a trail that leads him into the heart of government corruption.
In the Shadow, which was the Czech Republicās official Oscar entry for Best Foreign Language Film, draws historical inspiration from the Stalin-instigated show trials of the era, aimed at purging ādisloyalā members of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, particularly Jews. On screen, this dark historical setting, combined with the backdrop of gorgeous yet gloomy-looking Prague, generates an atmosphere of general uncertainty and dread.
Trojan, known for his work in the theater as well as on screen, delivers a mature and wonderfully layered performance. Lean and wary-eyed, Hekl appears the hardened criminologist, stoic in the face of the violence and death his work involves. His obsession with his work, and his inability to share much of the details, makes him occasionally seem cold and aloof toward his wife, Jitka (Sona NorisovĆ”). (With his young son, however, Hekl is tender and attentive, as if trying to build around him a safer world than the one he himself inhabits.) In perhaps a deliberately oblique touch, Hekl spends his nights while heās on the case sleeping in a livingroom armchair, āso I donāt wake you up.ā Until much later in the film, itās hard to tell whether this is an expression of marital disatisfaction or, indeed, simply a courtesy from a husband working odd hours.
The seeds of uncertainty are nonetheless planted, and when Zenke moves into the same apartment building as the Hekl family, tension steadily builds. A scene in the laundry room between Jitka and her husbandās East German rival carries undertones of forbidden desire, of nervous possibility, yet somehow without ever leaving the realm of acceptible interaction. Nevertheless, when a neighbor enters the room, the two instantly appear guilty.
Koch, who was brilliant in the Oscar-winning German drama The Lives of Others (incidentally, also a secret-police movie), brings a measure of warmth and humanity to a role that seems to exist in a kind of moral gray area. Zenke himself isnāt a villian. His orders come from above, and he initially protests. But ultimately, in his silence, he is complicit in the killing of innocentsāand not only those heās implicated in the jewel theft turned act of Zionist terrorism. This thing isnāt going to end well.
How to Survive a Plague
Iāll try not to spend too much ink raving about David Franceās smart, powerful, and incredibly human documentary, as itās already come and gone in our area (the film played at the Palm for about a minute). But for those who didnāt get a chance to see the Oscar-nominated How to Survive a Plague, an intimate look into the work of AIDS activist groups Act Up and TAG (Treatment Action Group), listen up.
How to Survive a Plague takes the viewer into Greenwich Village at the height of the AIDS epidemic, when it was still much maligned as a āgayā disease, to the point where even hospitals turned away the dying. In the ā80s, long before the drugs had been discovered to help people live with AIDS, a community of the infected banded together to educate themselves, support one another, and to demonstrate against the political, social, medical, and religious forces weilding immense power over their lives and their futures.
Whatās wonderful about the film, among many things, is its refreshing honesty, showing the foibles and quirks of the people involved in the AIDS activist movement just as readily as its greatest triumphs. In fact, itās these touches of humanity, of bravado, of sporadic ridiculousness (as when an activist dressed as Jesus, participating in a demonstration against the Catholic Church following the Popeās condemnation of condoms, explains heās āJC here, with Fire and Brimstone News,ā while in the background a giant, blown-up condom is carried aloft). The individuals of the early AIDS community are depicted as the artistic, irreverant, vibrant beings they were, and watching their membersā slow decline into death feels maddening and wrong.
The life of now-deceased activist Bob Rafsky, who got into a shouting match with then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton (and was on the receiving end of Clintonās now-infamous āI feel your painā quote) is illuminated through archival footage of Rafskyās life as a father and a tireless fighter.
At 120 minuties, How to Survive a Plague is incredidibly comprehensive yet never dull. Whatās more, you can stream it on Netflix now, so thereās no reason not to check it out.
No
What with its archival footage, grainy ā80s aesthetic, and unblinking wide shots, director Pablo Larrainās look at Chile under Augusto Pinochet feels very much like a documentary. Starring Mexican actor Gael GarcĆa Bernal (of The Motorcycle Diaries and The Science of Sleep), No follows advertising creative RenĆ© Saavedra, who is leading the campaign to defeat Pinochet in Chileās 1988 referendum, in which voters determined whether the dictator should extend his rule by another eight years. A 1980 referendum had, rather mysteriously, won by a landslide, thus approving a new constitution that legalized Pinochetās 17-year rule.
Many members of the ānoā campaign want to emphasize grave realities, such as the governmentās killing and torture of political opponents, hoping to frighten the population into voting āno.ā But RenĆ©āwho is first seen pitching a TV commercial featuring a rock star crooning lustily about a soda brand to his ecstatic, rapturous fansācan see that graphic images and frightening statistics donāt sell. The Chilean people donāt want to be traumatized anymore, he argues, they want to be happy. So, at a time when the use of advertising language in a political campaign must still have seemed risky, or just plain ridiculous, RenĆ© designs a campaign that is funny, irreverent, hip, and, most of all, deliriously happy. The kind of transcendent happiness known to soccer fans whose team has won the World Cup. People celebrating in the streets. Dancers. Families eating in the sunshine. Saucy women singing no mi gusta, no with oh-no-he-didnāt swagger. Overnight, the ānoā campaign became a kind of irreverent, sexy brand, and the word itself a cry of confidence and empowerment.
Even within the campaign, this happiness tactic, with its giddy rainbow logo, is criticized as foolish and silly. The tall, fair, beautiful people in the ads are criticized for not representing the majority of Chileans. And yet the approach seems to give a repressed people newfound hope and energy, and they begin adopting the campaignās anthemic, slow-clap-ready chorus Chile, la alegria ya viene (Chile, happiness is coming).
No is the first Chilean film to be nominated for an Oscar, and it isnāt hard to see why. Lorrainās documentary style, the filmās dry wit, the ā80s propaganda clips made funnier through not having aged very well (and even funnier in their awkward English translations)āitās all pure gold. But what really grounds the film is GarcĆa Bernalās turn as the brave and stubbornly optimistic RenĆ©. GarcĆa Bernal projects just the right kind of naĆÆvetĆ©, a kind of non-jaded belief in oneās cause and in the goodness of people. We are also witness to the more personal narrative of RenĆ©ās family life, of his young son Simón (Pascal Montero) and his estranged wife VĆ©ronica (Antonia Zegers), with whom he is clearly still very much in love. When the family is threatened as a result of RenĆ©ās involvement in the ānoā campaign, he appears shaken but still determined. Ironically, upon the filmās final victoryāwhich I assume is no spoilerāas the streets swarm with celebrants waving the flags his campaign designed and chanting the slogans he wrote, a realistic incarnation of his idyllic commercials, RenĆ©ās face only registers a kind of blank, unfeeling disbelief. He walks through the streets, face eventually softening into an expression of relief, a gradual decompression. Only as they begin to melt away do we see the layers of fear and uncertainty within the man who sold the country happiness.
Anna Weltner is arts editor for New Times, the Sunās sister paper to the north. Contact her at aweltner@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Jan 24-31, 2013.

