Penal park

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Movie
German title Penal park
Original title Punishment Park
Country of production United States
original language English
Publishing year 1971
length 89 minutes
Age rating FSK 16 (DVD)
Rod
Director Peter Watkins
script Peter Watkins
production Susan Martin
music Paul Motian
camera Joan Churchill
cut Peter Watkins
Terry Hodel
occupation
  • Patrick Boland: Defendant
  • Kent Foreman: Defendant
  • Carmen Argenziano : Jay Kaufman
  • Luke Johnson: Defendant
  • Katherine Quittner: Nancy Smith
  • Scott Turner: Defendant
  • Stan Armsted: Charles Robbins
  • Mary Ellen Kleinhall: Allison Mitchner
  • Mark Keats: Mr. Hoeger, Chairman of the Tribunal
  • Gladys Golden: Mrs. Jergens
  • Sanford Golden: Senator Harris
  • George Gregory: Mr. Keagan
  • Norman Sinclair: Member of the Tribunal
  • Sigmund Rich: Professor Hazlett
  • Paul Rosenstein: Member of the Tribunal

Strafpark (Original: Punishment Park ) is an American science fiction film directed by Peter Watkins in 1971 . Thefeature film, stagedwith documentary stylistic devices, portrays a USA in the near future, in which political opponents are taken into custody as a preventive measure and given the choice of serving long prison sentences or taking part in a race against security forces in a “penal park”. The film was controversial when it was released and only evaluated in cinemas to a limited extent. Inretrospect,film historians positioned Strafpark as representatives of political cinema of the late 1960s and early 1970s alongside films such as Medium Cool , Ice and Zabriskie Point .

action

In the near future: The Vietnam War has escalated, South Korea's capital Seoul has been under fire, the Soviet Union is pulling submarines together in front of Cuba . As a “preventive measure” against possible future acts of sabotage, the US President enacts a series of emergency laws based on the McCarran Internal Security Act , including the internment of opponents of the war and political activists. These are grouped together and brought before tribunals for quick judgment, which are empowered to impose long-term prison sentences. The convicts were given the chance to compete in a race in a "penal park" instead of their prison sentence: the participants had to go without food and water within three days to an American flag set up in the desert 50 miles away, followed by the police and members of the National Guard . An amnesty is promised to those who achieve the goal within the given period .

Two camera teams from Great Britain and West Germany are given permission to film in a penal park in the southwest of the USA. While Group 638 is being questioned in a tribunal, Group 637 has already started its way. In the course of the filming (with commentary from the head of the British team) the viewer learns that the real purpose of the penal parks is to train security forces in dealing with violent demonstrators. After the promised supply of drinking water halfway through turned out to be a lie, there were repeated bloody clashes and lynchings between Group 637 and their persecutors. When the remaining members of the group reach their destination, they are already awaited by the police to be arrested: the promised amnesty was never an option. Out of anger, a man attacks the officers, who then knock him and his companions down in front of the camera. Meanwhile, the Tribunal has sentenced the accused from Group 638 to draconian prison terms. Given the choice, they too decide to go through the penal park.

background

production

In 1969, the Briton Peter Watkins stayed in the USA to shoot a trilogy about the American Revolutionary War , the American Civil War and the wars against Native Americans as part of the colonization of America for a subsidiary of the film production company Columbia Pictures . Since the project failed, Watkins planned to leave the United States again. However, in the face of the Kent State massacre , Watkins decided to stay. First he planned a documentary feature film about the Chicago Seven , supported by Susan Martin , the producer of the unrealized trilogy . It was during his encounters with young political activists in the course of the casting process , and after discovering the McCarran Internal Security Act, that Watkins came up with the idea for Strafpark .

As usual with Watkins, the cast consisted of amateur and unknown young actors. For example, some of the cops shown in the film were actually members of the police force or security guards, and although some of the accused were based on real-life role models (Charles Robbins on Bobby Seale or Nancy Jane Smith on Joan Baez ), the actors expressed their personal views in their impromptu dialogues. The members of the tribunal were played by representatives of conservative views, even if they did not share the sometimes ultra-right views of the committee. A detailed script existed for Strafpark , but Watkins soon decided to let the actors improvise to an even greater extent than in his previous films in order to capture the most spontaneous and authentic possible impression of their freely expressed points of view. He also refrained from rehearsals, even though some of the members of the tribunal performed with a given text.

Cinematographer Joan Churchill joined the team on the recommendation of the Dean of the University of California . The film was shot with an Éclair NPR 16 mm camera, and Churchill consulted camera veteran Haskell Wexler on its special equipment, such as an exclusively made shoulder tripod .

Penal Park was created within three weeks in August and September 1970 in El Mirage Lake in the Mojave Desert , California . Watkins and his co-editor Terry Hodel then edited the finished film from 58,000 feet (approx. 27 hours) of exposed film material. For the setting Watkins was able to win over the well-known jazz musician Paul Motian , whose recordings he partially alienated. The budget, including a blow-up from 16mm to 35mm film , was $ 95,000 .

Due to the extreme filming conditions in the desert and tensions within the team, an unplanned incident occurred: While filming a scene in which dissidents were shot at by national guardsmen, actors from the persecuted group threw stones at the guardsmen. These opened fire without prior instructions, whereupon two actors spontaneously dropped to the ground. Watkins, convinced that these had accidentally fallen victim to real cartridges, exclaimed in shock, “Cut! Cut! ”Before he saw the real situation. The scene was used in the film, along with Watkins' audible response.

Shortly after filming was over, one of the actors (Stan Armsted) was charged and convicted of assaulting a police officer and participating in a bomb attack, a circumstance Watkins pointed out in the credits of the film.

References in the film

McCarran Internal Security Act

The McCarran Internal Security Act, actually simply Internal Security Act or Emergency Detention Act, is part of the law of the United States and was enacted in 1950 on the initiative of the Democratic Senator Pat McCarran against the veto of the (also Democratic) President Harry S. Truman . The law, which was specifically designed to combat communism on American soil, allowed, among other things, the arrest and detention of persons who "have reasonable grounds to believe that they are engaged in espionage or sabotage, either alone or as part of a conspiracy with others". President Truman justified his veto, among other things, by stating that the law was a “danger to freedom of speech, press and assembly”. Congress approved the establishment of six detention camps, but they were not used for this purpose. In later years parts of the law were repealed, for example in September 1971 under the Non-Detention Act .

Hitler quote

Shortly before the end of the film, the public defender of the defendant reads out a quote about the need to enforce the security interests of the state. After the reading he added that these words did not come from the President of the United States, as one might assume, but from Adolf Hitler . As the authors Paul F. Boller Jr. and John George pointed out, this assignment is in error. The alleged Hitler speech was often quoted in the USA in the 1960s in connection with political events and was also used in the film Billy Jack (1971).

Film start

Strafpark ran in 1971 as part of the Cannes International Film Festival (out of competition), the Atlanta Film Festival, the San Francisco International Film Festival and the New York Film Festival . The film was briefly shown at Murray Hill Cinema, New York , and in San Francisco , but did not experience regular theatrical release or television broadcast in the United States. In Great Britain, Strafpark was first performed in London in February 1972 and distributed on 16mm copies . In October 1971 the film was shown at the Mannheim-Heidelberg International Film Festival . In 1980 the film started in the Federal Republic of Germany in an original subtitled version.

analysis

controversy

According to Watkins 'testimony, not only did the critics' judgment in the USA turn out to be "hostile" in many cases, the audience also reacted to screenings, in some cases with sharp rejection. For example, at a demonstration in a college, he was loudly accused of the pessimism of his future vision. Watkins described the penal parks shown as a metaphor for the social and political conditions in the USA, but also referred to the parallels to actual incidents such as racially motivated attacks by the police or massive foreign policy aggression in Southeast Asia . Watkins was concerned about the "complete denial" of these facts by the American media and the educational system there. At the same time, he emphasized that he did not see the film as anti-American : “The problem of [...] the suppression of drafts of alternative social models [is] not limited to the USA in the 1970s [...] but remains an urgent problem today, everywhere the world. ”In the press kit for the film, he formulated its timelessness:“ Strafpark will be played tomorrow, yesterday or five years in the future. ”

Another frequently encountered point of criticism, according to Watkins biographer Joseph A. Gomez, is the one-dimensionality of the figures. However, this is due, at least in part, to the extreme circumstances in which they find themselves (an interrogation situation or a hunt). "You can't expect too much depth when people yell at each other and throw clichéd political rhetoric at each other." The characters represented "a wide variety of intellectual positions". Regarding the accusation of “partiality” and “polemics”, Gomez said: “Here no characters or political standpoints are glorified, no alternatives are propagated, no superficial solutions are offered”. The heterogeneous composition of the defendants of militants , “semi-militants” (Watkins) and pacifists would stand in the way of this.

The lack of sympathetic identifying figures and the persistence of the grievances shown also served Scott MacDonald in the journal Film Criticism as an attempt to explain why Punishment Park was not accepted by the public, in contrast to successful political films such as The Untouchables and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington .

Subject

Even in Watkin's previous film Gladiatorerna (1968), a race for life and death is at the center of the plot. In Gladiatorerna , instead of waging war against each other, the representatives of the great powers each send a handful of soldiers to a defined area, where they have to put their lives on reaching a given destination. Here, too, the participants are observed by cameras, because the “peace game” shown is a media event with the highest ratings. The ambiguous role of the media is being discussed again in the Strafpark : after the brutal police attack on the last remaining candidates in the criminal park, there is a verbal argument between the head of the British camera team and the police officers. They counter the allegations made against them that the film team was only there out of monetary interests and never helped the injured. "Watkins takes a clear position against oppression, against brutalization [and] the lack of compassion in our society." (Joseph A. Gomez)

With Strafpark Watkins began to leave the traditional narrative forms of audiovisual media behind, which he later referred to as "monoform". In Strafpark , according to Watkins, a combination of realism and expressionism comes into play, which on the one hand still works with familiar cinematic structures, but breaks them up through the use of music and dialogues. Another ambiguity would be the documentary implementation of a fictional situation. This encountered quite a contradiction: No circumstance, indifferent as it is true, criticized Margaret Hinxman of the Sunday Telegraph , could excuse that it is possible "to depict something in the style of a fact that is not one hundred percent fact". In his Watkins biography, Gomez posed the rhetorical counter-question of whether a documentary actually represents the objective presentation of a fact, or whether the presence of a camera does not change the event. Watkins himself was very clear: "Every audiovisual act is an act of fiction."

As a further ambiguous aspect, which dissolves the rigid structures of the medium, Watkins named the change of the film team from soberly commenting, “godlike” (Watkins) observer to the protagonist who interfered in the event in the finale. "This disintegration of distanced viewing [...] gives the underlying ethical conflict of the film a truly provocative dimension [...] In retrospect, all the images in the film are given a problematic status instead of a status that is not questioned (due to the author's distance)." (George W. Brandt: British Television Drama )

Parallel discourses and aftermath

Since the early 2000s, in the face of facilities such as the Guantanamo prison camps , articles have repeatedly referred to the newfound relevance of Watkins' film. Film historians have not identified a film-historical aftermath of Strafpark . Instead, it was often cited in connection with Haskell Wexler's Medium Cool and Robert Kramer's Ice as a seldom-shown key work of politically radical film of the late 1960s and early 1970s. Medium Cool links its story to the unrest during the 1968 Democratic Congress in Chicago , Ice accompanies a group of underground fighters in a totalitarian America of the near future. Like Watkins, both films make use of the documentary film.

In A Critical Cinema: Interviews with Independent Filmmakers , Scott MacDonald counted Penalty Park alongside u. a. Jim McBride's David Holzman's diary (1967) for a series of films from the 1960s which the Cinéma Vérité documentary film school critically examined. Even Gary Giddins anchored Punishment Park in its construction, and called it, in addition to films by Vilgot Sjöman and Michelangelo Antonioni's Zabriskie Point , a reflection of its era, the "honest" than about Alice's Restaurant or Easy Rider , which he accused of sentimentality and romanticism.

Cinematographer Joan Churchill received follow-up offers for concert films or documentaries such as Soldier Girls because of her work on Strafpark ; producer Susan Martin later worked a. a. as editor of the controversial Vietnam documentary Hearts & Minds (1974). Watkins made no other film in the United States after Strafpark . His next film, Edvard Munch (1974), was made in Norway .

reception

Reviews

At the start of the film, Strafpark met with violent rejection, but it also received benevolent reviews.

The verdict in the USA was very mixed. Vincent Canby of the New York Times attacked the film sharply: “A film of such undisguised, misoriented self-assurance that you sit through the hysterical first ten minutes until you realize that you are basically living with a masochist's dream come true in New York Magazine , Judith Christ angrily stated that Watkins would be allowed to “ declare the US a completely fascist state” and spoke of an “offensive” film in which “no one expresses an original or positive thought” . Michael Kerbel from Village Voice was less bothered by the content than by the presentation: “It's not [Watkins'] perception of the dangers that can be objected to, but the way he presents them […] his films work like hysterical exploitation , not serious investigations. ”Nevertheless, he came to a positive conclusion:“ This film expresses exactly what is happening in this country. ”The review in the San Francisco Chronicle was positive:“ A charge of devastating effect, a drama that freezes you and a prediction that makes you shudder. Polemically, without question, but [...] Watkins has created a deeply disturbing film. "The US edition of Rolling Stone chose Punishment Park among the top ten films of the year.

In Watkins' homeland of Great Britain, The Sun polemicized : "Propagandist Peter Watkins drives helplessly in his hopeless train of thought." a. the Sunday Times and the Listener , acknowledged the serious concern or plausibility of the film, but saw the result weakened in its effect by the design. Also The Observer described the film as "hysterical and obsessed" but also as "well thought out" and concluded: "Every thinking person should look at it yourself." The Scotsman praised Punishment Park without limitation as "ruthless, uncompromising and brilliant" . In retrospect, even the right-wing tabloid Daily Mail came to the conclusion: “A few years ago we dismissed the film as the fantasy of a sick mind. Nowadays its documentary undertones are terribly real. "

Critics and film historians who specialize in the science fiction film genre also rated the film differently. While Alan Frank described it in the Science Fiction and Fantasy Film Handbook as "boring, shrill and almost invisible", the Aurum Film Encyclopedia praised the punishment park as the "most successful of Watkins' investigations of the present by means of reconstructions of the future [...] one alongside The War Game powerful and desperate, if occasionally confused, indictment against possible oppression in America. "

In Germany, the Catholic voices of the time judged : “ Punishment Park can be dismissed as a malicious utopia, but you can also very seriously call it a nightmare of today's America.” The lexicon of international films saw a “brilliantly staged mock reportage” and “ an attack against fascist tendencies in the USA - a factually exaggerated, but as a psychogram very convincing fable. ”In 2006, the time found the film“ fit well into common perceptual patterns: after all, since September 11th the thought that the Reality staged film fantasies and not the other way around. But at Punishment Park, the amazing similarity of the images smooths out the underlying differences. Above all, the film remains a historical document about the '68 revolt . "

Awards

  • Best Director Award to Peter Watkins at the Atlanta Film Festival, 1971

DVD / Blu-ray publications

Strafpark is available on DVD in the US and France and on DVD and Blu-ray Disc in the UK and Germany . For the German release in 2012, a German-language dubbed version of the film was produced for the first time .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d Intro by Peter Watkins to Strafpark on the American and British DVD releases, 2005.
  2. ↑ a b c Strafpark on Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 10, 2012.
  3. ↑ a b c d e f Joseph A. Gomez: Peter Watkins , Twayne Publishers, 1979; Excerpts from the booklet accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc published in 2012 .
  4. ↑ a b Bob Fisher: A Conversation With Joan Churchill, ASC on Motion.kodak.com, accessed on June 15, 2012. (Note: The interview contains, among other things, detailed errors in the budget and the theatrical release.)
  5. ↑ a b Original press kit for Punishment Park from 1971, printed in the book accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc released in 2012 .
  6. ↑ "[...] The detention of persons who there is reasonable ground to believe probably will commit or conspire with others to commit espionage or sabotage." - The McCarran Internal Security Act in full on Historycentral.com, accessed on June 11, 2012.
  7. ↑ Thesis paper The McCarran Internal Security Act, 1950-2005: Civil Liberties Versus National Security ( Memento of the original from February 28, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 312 kB), available on the Louisiana State University website, accessed June 11, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / etd.lsu.edu
  8. ^ "[...] greatest danger to freedom of speech, press, and assembly [...]" - wording of the Veto of the Internal Security Bill on Trumanlibrary.org, accessed on June 11, 2012.
  9. ^ Statement by President Richard Nixon on Signing the Non-Detention Act on The American Presidency Project, accessed June 17, 2012.
  10. ↑ Paul F. Boller Jr., John George: They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions, Oxford University Press, 1990, ISBN 978-0-19-506469-8 , pp. 45-46 .
  11. ^ Penalty Park on the San Francisco International Film Festival website, accessed June 14, 2012.
  12. ^ Penalty Park in the British Board of Film Classification
  13. ↑ a b Strafpark in the Lexicon of International FilmsTemplate: LdiF / Maintenance / Access used .
  14. ^ Ronald M. Hahn, Volker Jansen: Lexikon des Science Fiction Films, 5th edition, Wilhelm Heyne Verlag, Munich 1992, ISBN 3-453-00731-X , pp. 742-743.
  15. ^ "The problem [...] of the oppression of alternate visions of society [is] not confined to the United States in the 1970s;" [it remains] an acute problem today, all over the world. “- The Creative and Political meaning of Punishment Park , a Selfinterrogatory Dialogue , text written in 2005 by Peter Watkins in the book accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc published in 2012 .
  16. ↑ “There can be little depth in a shouting match in which both sides hurl clichéd political rhethoric at each other […] the characters in Punishment Park represent various intellectual positions […] there is no glorification of characters or their political positions, no advocating of alternatives, and no facile solutions. "- Joseph A. Gomez: Peter Watkins , Twayne Publishers, 1979
  17. ↑ "[...] unlike more popular political films such as All the President's Men and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Punishment Park fails to provide handsome heroes and heroines with whom members of the audience can comfortably identify. Further, Watkins refuses to resolve the painful events taking place so as to restore order before the audience leaves the theater. "- Scott MacDonald in Film Criticism, Edinboro (Pasadena), Spring 1979, quoted from Peter Watkins' website, accessed 12. June 2012.
  18. ↑ Watkins is clearly opposed to repression, to brutalization [...] to the lack of compassion in our society [...] - Joseph A. Gomez: Peter Watkins , Twayne Publishers, 1979
  19. ^ "[...] picture as fact in the style of fact what is not scrupulously fact." - Margaret Hinxman in the Sunday Telegraph of February 13, 1972, quoted from The Creative and Political meaning of Punishment Park , a Selfinterrogatory Dialogue , 2005 text by Peter Watkins in the book accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc released in 2012
  20. ↑ “Does documentary form really allow for the objective presentation of fact? Does the mere presence of the camera alter the event? ”- Joseph A. Gomez: Peter Watkins , Twayne Publishers, 1979
  21. ↑ “Every audiovisual act is an act of fiction.” - Intro by Peter Watkins to Strafpark on the American and British DVD releases, 2005.
  22. ↑ The Creative and Political meaning of Punishment Park , a Selfinterrogatory Dialogue , text written by Peter Watkins in 2005 in the book accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc published in 2012
  23. ↑ "This collapse of detachment is accomplished by the insertion of the complainant into the action, rendering the ethical dispute at the core of the film genuinely contentious because it achieves a provisional spatial articulation as the guardsmen virtually assault the camera crew. Retrospectively, all images in the film revert to a problematic status (rather than one of unquestioned authorial detachment), and legitimate dramatic tensions are set in play. "- George W. Brandt: British Television Drama, Cambridge University Press 1981, ISBN 978- 0-521-29384-6 , p. 232.
  24. ↑ a b Joseph A. Gomez: 2005 Postscript , printed in the booklet accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc published in 2012 .
  25. ↑ Review ( Memento of the original from September 13, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. by Matthew Leyland on BBC.co.uk July 2005, accessed June 17, 2012.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.bbc.co.uk
  26. ↑ Michael Hirschhorn: He Saw it Coming, article in Atlantic Monthly Vol. 302 No. 4, Washington, DC 2008, p. 52.
  27. ^ David Manning White, Richard Averson: The Celluloid Weapon: Social Comment in the American Film, Beacon Press 1972, ISBN 978-0-8070-6170-1 , p. 240.
  28. ^ A b Gary Giddins: Natural Selection: Gary Giddins on Comedy, Film, Music, and Books, Oxford University Press 2006, ISBN 978-0-19-536850-5 , p. 106.
  29. ^ Scott MacDonald: A Critical Cinema: Interviews with Independent Filmmakers, University of California Press 1998, p. 55.
  30. ↑ "[...] a movie of such blunt, wrong-headed sincerity that you're likely to sit through the first 10 hysterical minutes of it before realizing that it is, essentially, the wish-fulfilling dream of a masochist." - Review New York Times on October 12, 1971, accessed June 10, 2012.
  31. ↑ "[...] the most offensive of the recent festival films I have seen to date ... The British director ... undoubtedly doesn't realize ... that he is permitted to make and show here (a film) that declares the United States a totally fascist state ... His achievement, of course, is in making a 90-minute film in the course of which no one voices an original or positive thought. "- Review in New York Magazine on October 18, 1971 Retrieved from Books.google.de and from Peter Watkins' website on June 17, 2012.
  32. ↑ "It is not his perception of dangers but his way of presenting them that is objectionable ... His films work as hysterical exploitation instead of serious exploration ... the film expresses exactly what is happening in this country." - Review in the Village Voice of November 11, 1971, quoted from Peter Watkins' website , date verified from John K. McAskill: Reviews and Criticism of Vietnam War Theatrical and Television Dramas , PDF ( Memento of the original of April 3, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved June 10, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.lasalle.edu
  33. ^ "[...] a devastating indictment, a paralyzing drama and a chilling prognosis. It is unquestionably a polemic but I'm not at all sure that it is loaded ... Watkins has created a profoundly disturbing motion picture. "- Review in the San Francisco Chronicle, undated, quoted from Peter Watkins' website, accessed 10. June 2012.
  34. ↑ a b Quoted from Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 10, 2012.
  35. ^ "Propagandist Peter Watkins is left hopelessly adrift in his own hopeless mind." - Quoted from Peter Watkins' website, accessed on June 10, 2012.
  36. ↑ "This is a thoughtful and sincere film and any thinking person should go and see it. Its faults are exactly those which Watkins, in an open letter to the Press, denies. It is hysterical and obsessed […]. ”- Observer review, undated, cited from Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 10, 2012.
  37. ↑ “It's a stark, uncompromising, brilliant film.” - Review in The Scotsman, undated, quoted from Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 10, 2012.
  38. ↑ "A few years ago we might have dismissed the film as the figment of a crazed imagination. Today its documentary overtones are all too horribly real. ”- Review in the Daily Mail, undated, cited from Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 10, 2012.
  39. ↑ Alan Frank: The Science Fiction and Fantasy Film Handbook , quoted from Ronald M. Hahn, Volker Jansen: Lexikon des Science Fiction Films, 5th edition, Wilhelm Heyne Verlag, Munich 1992
  40. ↑ "With The War Game (1965), this is the most successful of Watkins' interrogations of the present through reconstructions of the future [...] the film is a powerful and despairing, if occasionally muddled, indictment of the possibilities of repression in America . "- Phil Hardy (Ed.): The Aurum Film Encyclopedia - Science Fiction, Aurum Press, London 1991, ISBN 978-1-85410-159-4 , p. 342.
  41. ↑ Voices of the Time: Catholic Monthly for Contemporary Spiritual Life, Volume 188, Herder, Freiburg 1971, p. 42.
  42. ↑ Guantánamo in Amerika , article by Christian Schaas dated March 30, 2006, accessed on June 10, 2012.
  43. ↑ Strafpark on Synchronkartei.de, accessed on June 12, 2012.

Remarks

  1. ↑ Because of its handiness and its comparatively low weight, the Éclair NPR, like the Arriflex from Arnold & Richter , was one of the models preferred for documentaries and independent films . See also the entry on the Éclair NPR on the Internet Encyclopedia of Cinematographers, accessed June 15, 2012.
  2. ↑ The quote in full: “The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might and the republic is in danger. Yes, danger from within and without. We need law and order or our nation cannot survive. "
  3. ↑ Not identical to the festival of the same name, launched in 1976. See overview ( memento of the original from November 4, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. of Atlanta , Georgia- related film historical events on Atlantamagazine.com, accessed June 17, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.atlantamagazine.com
  4. ↑ Watkins defined all common film techniques as monoform. For example, quick cuts, emotional use of music and other structuring and controlling means prevented the viewer from reflecting on his reaction (manipulated by the medium) and from interacting with the medium. - The Creative and Political meaning of Punishment Park , a Selfinterrogatory Dialogue , text written by Peter Watkins in 2005 in the booklet accompanying the British Blu-ray Disc released in 2012. See also Role of American MAVM, Hollywood and the Monoform ( Memento of the original dated 6 August 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. from Peter Watkins' website, accessed June 14, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / pwatkins.mnsi.net
  5. ↑ Although Strafpark was used as a comparison in reviews of titles such as Men like The Tigers , Isle of the Damned or Escape from Absolom because of the subject of the hunt down of prisoners, these films dispensed with any socio-political analysis in favor of action elements. See Kim Newman: Nightmare Movies: Horror on Screen Since the 1960s, Bloomsbury 2011, ISBN 978-1-4088-0503-9 , p. 108; Phil Hardy (Ed.): The Aurum Movie Encyclopedia - Science Fiction, (. 3rd ed), Aurum Press, London, 1995, ISBN 978-1-85410-382-6 , S. 379, S. 490. There have been isolated Punishment Park also used comparatively in reviews of documentary films such as Novemberverbrecher (1968) or Death of a President (2006). Cf. Klaus Arnold, Walter Hömberg, Susanne Kinnebrock (eds.): History journalism : Between information and staging, Lit Verlag, Berlin 2010, ISBN 978-3-643-10420-5 , p. 303; Roger Ebert's review of Death of a President , Chicago Sun-Times, September 12, 2006, accessed June 17, 2012.
This article was added to the list of articles worth reading on June 29, 2012 in this version .