(br) wrote: Activist films usually have a documentary feel, and at times, filmmakers manage to bring attention to audiences and/or people on a social issue by telling it through a fictionalized story. This is effective and smart. Holly is a story about a man, Patrick (Ron Livingston) who felt an urge to save an 12 year old virgin girl from the clutches of sex traffickers in cambodia. The emphasis in the movie was more about Patrick discovering Holly's life situation, and there was less attention on why Patrick (an American man) was in Cambodia in the first place. Even-though we know he plays poker to make a living, but we get more caught up with Holly's life story. It all started when one day Patrick's motorcycle brakes down, he ends up spending the night in a brothel. Holly happens to be in this Brothel, and they become friends. Holly was sold by her Vietnamese poor family to people who happened to force her into child prostitution. She attempts to escape several times, but over and over again, she is back into the same situation. Through out the film, there are obstacles that arise when Patrick tries to save Holly. She is no longer at the brothel where Patrick befriended her. They have decide to sell her. Patrick manages to find her after thinking she died, so they meet once again. He takes her away from the other brothel and brings her to Marie's (Virginie Ledoyen) institution. This institution is a place where children who are saved from children prostitution. They are nurtured, educated, and they try to situate the child with the normal, playful, and healthy activities. Holly escapes from the institution and runs into Patrick being arrested by the police. The film is open ended and Holly stares at the audience as to leave the burden on the audience. We ask ourselves in wonder. Will she go back to that safe institution? Will she end up in prostitution again? What will happen to her? The bigger question we are left with is: What happens to all the children in Holly's situation. The fictionalized story was intended to bring awareness to audiences, not entertainment. There was no intent to make a happy ending. There is no ending, because this problem (children sex trafficking) is a current social issue that yet needs to be taken seriously. Guy Moshe made some interesting choses for some of the scenes in Holly. It was a privilege to actually hear these choices for Mr. Moshe himself at a school lecture. One of the questions from a student was; why did he choose not to show sexual scenes, actual scenes showing the man rapping the children, and/or when the man went in the room with Holly. Moshe explained that even knowing such scenes would have brought more audience and more money, he was against it, and such scenes would have been contradicting to what he believed in. If his goal was to bring awareness to people about the social issue of Sex trafficking in Cambodia, showing it, would be very wrong. Another student asked him: What did you add the scene where Patrick comes back to the hotel late at night and drunk. He lays on the bed near Holly, and he just stares at her, then we see him in the shower. What was Patrick thinking? Some audiences thought that this scene was absurd, and they did not even like the fact that Patrick was "just thinking" of perhaps having sex with Holly. In an earlier scene, Holly asks Patrick to marry her and she tells him that she is in-love with him. Holly felt that she was a women, because of the fact that many men has slept with her, she did not see herself as an 12 year-old kid anymore, and because of Patrick's mutual, and genuine care for her, she thought that she was in-love with him. I see this as a motive for Patrick having that thought later on in the film, especially that he was drunk. Moshe wanted to portray Patrick as human and not a saint. A human being with sexual desires, and ugly thoughts, just as anyone would have thought, but the important matter is that Patrick did not carry out his thought. Moshe explained how challenging the making process of the film was, and that many obstacles came across while on set and when editing. The story was written by Guy Jacobson, who happened to be Moshe's friend. Jacobson asked Moshe to Direct the film, and it was a collaborative work produce by them both and a few other people. That being said, they may have been many differences in decision-making, which may have caused many conflict when working. I have learned so much from Guy Moshe's lecture, and found it to be very informative for my own future as a filmmaker.
(nl) wrote: Machete is intended as over-the-top entertainment, packing its runtime with so much chaos, brutality, silliness, and flatness that it doesn't end up being much fun.