For this week's post, please watch Steve Hoover's critically acclaimed documentary Blood Brother - available on iTunes and Amazon for $2,99, and on YouTube and elsewhere for $3.99. Let me know what you think, especially in terms of how successfully - or unsuccessfully - the film has been authored. In particular, explain as best you can what the director's approach to his story is, especially based of the information, or evidence, he chooses to include about his main subject Rocky Braat. Does this approach make the story being told more - and/or less - convincing? How? Why? Do you appreciate what Hoover's done aesthetically with the film or not? Is the main character Rocky just another self-absorbed, indulgent narcissist, or do you find the inclusion of his story to be the thing that makes the film more dramatically compelling?
Also, and before writing your response, please read this piece about the film by Tom Roston titled "Is a Filmmaker's Personal Life Relevant to a Film? Another Look at Blood Brother. Then read the article titled "Blood Brothers Director Responds to Questions about His Documentary's Openness" and let me know your opinion on the matter.
I look forward to seeing how you sort this film out - what you liked, what you didn't like, and what it meant to you. Write whatever you want, just be sure to address the concept of authority and how it impacted your feelings about this piece of work. And finally, be sure to comment about Roston's article, as well as Hoover's response. Whose side are you on?
I look forward to reading your in-depth, inspired comments about Blood Brother on this blog by no later than 5pm next Tuesday.
Brandon Gassel
ReplyDeleteThis film was incredible. It was authored very successfully. I loved how much Rocky care for the kids. The directors approach to the story is how his best friend Rocky decided to leave his whole entire life behind to live in India with these kids who had AIDS. I can't get this off of my mind but the fact that Rocky basically saved Surah's wife makes me love him even more. It showed that his love cured the kids illness. I am convinced that the story is true because it is very emotional and I even became attached to these kids who I never even met before. I love what Hoover has done aesthetically with the film, he shows that love cures all illness. Rockies inclusion in the story makes this very compelling and I think it's perfect for the film because it's someone I can relate to.
As for the article, I don't believe this is a secret Christianity propaganda, I think this is a genuine film and although there are probably times where their faith does come in to the film l,it's natural.
Trina Mulligan
ReplyDeleteThis documentary was crazy! “Blood Brother” was so engaging from the beginning that one of my roommates ended up sitting down and watching the entire film with me. This is a film that evokes one emotion and one emotion only: love. After watching “The Imposter” and “Winter On Fire”, I was on the lookout for subliminal or propaganda-like reasons for the filmmaker to create this film. For example, I realized that there must be some sort of bias to make Rocky appear saintly due to the fact that Hoover is best friends with him, yet I couldn’t find any.
I found the entire film to be what an ideal “documentary” should be, or at least what I consider it to be. The raw footage was extensive, beautiful, and heartbreaking. Hoover must have edited hours and hours of footage to capture Rocky’s life with the children and yet according to Rocky, India and the spirit of the children is not something you can simply capture with a camera.
After watching the film, I found myself going back and watching certain scenes again, like the slow motion portrait of Rocky and the children sprinting toward him and how he breaks down and cries after the death of Vemnidi. This film definitely emits inspiration to go out and DO something. It filled me with questions like, “why aren’t there more people like Rocky in the world?”, and, “what is love”.
I strongly disagree with the argument that this film was made with the intention of converting people to Christianity. The only time Hoover mentions God in his documentary is in the beginning during the story of Rocky praying for the kitten and when he similarly prays for Vemnidi as he rides to the hospital. It is definitely okay for Hoover to place these moments in the documentary because Rocky is indeed Christian and it’s just a further exploration of who he is as a person and what he believes in. I did not receive any indications that religion was being pushed onto myself as a viewer.
My roommate was so enveloped in the film that she looked up the update of Rocky’s life on Youtube and we were shocked to find that the building for children with AIDS and HIV in India was closed down. Rocky and Nimmy took as many children as possible with them and even took in a happy and healthy Surya. I think this film was genuine and I refuse to find fault with it other than people trying to turn it into Christian propaganda.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOkay. This film got out of me probably the most intense and ridiculous eyeroll I have ever felt.
ReplyDeleteTo be frank, I would not use the word ‘humble’ to describe any aspect of this film. While I do believe that Rocky’s intentions of helping people were and are genuine, the disconnect lies in the broadcasting of his altruism. He knew this was a film about his work in India. He knew that the entire point of this film was to show what a great man he is, and we see that in the entirety of his interviews. There is nothing humble about his demeanor. We get the feeling that he has just been waiting for someone to come along and show what good work he has done.
I don’t want to bash Rocky himself. I believe that him and all other people working in both the AIDS field and all other frightening areas that require help are doing incredible work. But the manner in which Steve Hoover went about telling his story felt a lot like a religious recruit film, while somehow rarely uttering words relevant to the Christian faith.
This is the kind of film most Christian youth groups would jerk off to (despite their disapproval of masturbation); which is fine because, yeah, he’s a good dude doing good things.
Aesthetically, I have the utmost respect for this film. It was beautiful in every shot. It had the feeling that Hoover had hours and hours of breathtaking footage that he had to wade through, and this is a major success. They did an incredible job of providing emotional imagery. The imagery/cinematography was the most successful to me because despite interviews with Rocky, it truly felt real. His love for these children and his work is immense.
The articles really helped me to verbalize my feelings about this film. I don’t completely buy the “Christian propaganda” bit because they did do an excellent job of trying to keep that unsaid as much as possible. If that’s in Rocky’s life, whatever. Because he is doing incredible things. Who cares what his own personal motive is. The lines I found most compelling when reading more online were the idea of “stealth evangelism” and the concept of a “white savior.” There was little characterization of anyone who wasn’t white until waaaaay too late in the film. It was so focused on Rocky and what HE was doing for these kids that somehow, for a second there, I forgot about the kids. That pissed me off.
I have a lot of beef with the authorship of this film. One part me thinks there is no way to make a doc about altruism without it being self-indulgent, then I remember there are films about Nelson Mandela and those of the like. It can be done, yes. But the other part of me feels like this started in the right place, but Rocky’s input (which Hoover obviously had no way of planning for) was ridiculous to me. All in all, I do see this documentary to be well made. I, myself, grappled with the hypocrisy of it all. It fights with itself to show selflessness in an extremely selfish way.
SORRY, but also not really.
ReplyDeleteOkay, for starters, I loved how Rocky was able to connect with the kids so well. I want to be a foster mom and I currently have a few friends in the foster system, so it reminded me of how hard it is for kids to survive without a stable to family. With this in mind, I thought that the film was successful in regards towards Rocky and the kids. There were moments where I questioned his authenticity and reliability because I did feel like he was a subject that was kind of hard to follow along. At the beginning when they talked about how his family was dysfunctional, it made a solid point as to why he wanted to be a father and have a family so badly. And I just fell in love with the whole idea of his broseph filming him traveling to India, falling in love with the place, and finding his passion through these kids. For me, it was easy to fall in love with Rocky’s overall presence throughout the film. The fact that he tried so hard for these kids, even when he got blamed for the young girl’s death, was just pure passion and inspiration. And like he could have ran away, back home, and just completely disregard India, but he didn’t. Like yea, there were times where he clearly wanted to say fuck it and just go back, but the fact that he actually stayed and took care of these kids in conditions that could have gotten him sick, that’s just love dude.
So I like agree with Hoover’s response. Like, why would Rocky go through all the trouble to save a Hindu man or to even be around those kids if it was just for the possibility of a faith change? I can see how Christianity could play a role in this, but it’s not like Rocky was like “dude, if you don’t like convert, then I’m not going to help you live,” like I feel like that is totally bogus to even think. The overall theme of this doc is love, and if someone wants to try to categorize that, they can’t. I think love in itself is a religion or at least a religious belief to follow. Rocky cared for all these dudes out of the purest love, not to throw some bull shit around about converting. He honestly just wanted these people to live because he clearly understands that value of life, love, and good vibes.
In Roston’s article, he views Rocky as the “white savior” type of character. I think this is fascinating because I never thought about that once when I was watching this film. I thought about a boy and his love for adventure, (especially in India) but it never phased me once that he could be some totally bogus dude who just wanted the attention and awe of the audience for playing Jesus. And like my thing is, like, why would he marry into the Indian culture and according to their beliefs if he is just trying to convert them? Like I know some missionaries are hard core Jesus freaks at times, but bro, like I don’t think anyone would go that far and pretend to like everything about the culture, beliefs, etc just to get some people to convert. And like, what if he actually is a missionary dude? That’s not even what this film is about. It’s literally about his life as he went to India. If they wanted it to be some sort of missionary film, they would have added idk like more Christian things or angelic voices in the background. Like I get that he prayed in the movie and shit, but I mean, come on, most people do that when they’re stressed or around death (any religion). If he’s a certain religion, I personally could not tell in the movie because I don’t think it was a primary topic that needed to be discussed.
1 of 2 //
ReplyDeleteI have many feelings about the film Blood Brother. The generic response I have to it is that it was an inspiring film that was shot very well and was very emotional. It was easily relatable, due to the urgency Westerners hold to want to help the less fortunate (of developing countries, usually). However, to me, the story line was very confusing from the beginning, and there were many holes in the train of the film.
Since the story is told from Steve Hoover’s point of view, I wanted to know the story behind his friendship with Rocky. Yeah, we receive the information that they are, in fact, best friends, but I would have liked to have seen more of the two enjoying each other’s presence. I think this was something that would be completely necessary, given the way he, as a director, chose to approach the story. This goes along with the idea of whether or not filmmakers should be present in their work; I wanted to see more of Steve and Rocky experiencing India together. Rocky claims that India had changed him, and so does Steve, but he was skeptical if it would be the best route for his friend. Steve’s approach is basically keeping the viewer very close by his side. What I mean by that, is that as we start watching this film, we are entering Steve’s world; He’s trying to figure out why Rocky is so impacted by his visits to India and the relationships he has made with the children and citizens. It makes sense that he would want to experience this for himself, now knowing that he is a member of the Christian church. I do think it would be necessary to see him appear in more of the scenes while he was there.
The information he includes about Rocky is pretty vague, however, you get a pretty good sense of who he is. Which is a very brave man, who, I think, is awesome for helping the children and getting to know them as well as he did. It was truly courageous for him to move to India, sacrifice all he had to live in equal conditions as his brothers and sisters, and marry someone all in such a short amount of time. It’s totally convincing…there are great people out there. Yeah, shocker. I know if I were to do something like that, it would change my life.
2 of 2 //
ReplyDeleteI think there’s a problem with that, though. I shouldn't have to WANT to do something like that, which is quite sad. It shouldn’t be such a far-out thing to help HUMANS. It shouldn’t be a matter of being a “savior”. Frankly, it shouldn’t be a thing at all, if you look at this whole story in terms of Human Rights. It shouldn’t take a documentary about one white man traveling to India for us to realize how much we should help one another, especially people who are indeed sick and in need of care. God forbid the people who live on the same earth get along…
In reference to the articles, I do think that the lack of information about the two men’s religious views would have helped me understand the story better. In fact, after I read them, I started developing great insights about the theme and story arc of the film. As one who was raised Catholic, I understand Rocky’s need for service, because of how much it’s encouraged to help the less fortunate. I think the authors of the articles made great points, and I agree with Monica about the most compelling lines were the ideas of “stealth evangelism” and the concept of a “white savior.” I disagree with the fact that they thought the film was “Christian propaganda”, though. I wouldn’t even have known anything about the religious aspect of the film if I had never seen those articles. Sure, I knew that some people thought of deeds like that as their sort of spiritual healing, which I think is definitely Rocky’s intention, but by no means did I feel antagonized by Christianity specifically. I don’t think he is self-absorbed and narcissistic…maybe just a tiny bit, but I think he’s pretty genuine for the most part.
Aesthetically, this was one of those documentaries that’s going to move you no matter what. Being someone who is really intrigued with Indian culture, it was awesome to get a sense of realism of the culture by learning about the people’s lives. Actually, one of the problems I had with the storytelling was that we really didn’t get to know many of the children very well, just a select few. And even then, we really don’t know much about their personalities. I know that may not have been Hoover’s intention, and that’s okay, I just think that’s one of the problematic elements of the film. The cinematography was great, and it captured much emotion. There were a couple shots in the beginning that were kind of confusing and unnecessary, but that’s just me being very picky.
Looking forward to speaking about Blood Brother.
Samantha Pritkin
ReplyDeleteI loved this doc, and I plan to watch it again and again! At first, I will say I was nervous that this would be another foreign film. I don't particularly dislike those films, but I find I really enjoy watching and engaging in stories, and it becomes more difficult when I have to sit and read subtitles the whole time. So after the beginning part, I was relieved it was in English, mostly.
I thought this film was very moving. I loved how it was artfully crafted to explore the life of one man, but how that one man impacted the lives of all, if not most of the children at a shelter in India. It reminded me of the big brother/big sister program here in the states, and he came to genuinely care for the kids, so much so that he did all he could to save them when he could. He didn’t want them to be lonely, or feel abandoned.
I thought it was very interesting that we heard the story of Rocky, but also his friend at times. His friend who went to visit and came to care for the kids in his own way after fearfully participating in the everyday life. The fear he expressed is something I think we would all feel under the circumstances; we would all feel afraid to interact and touch the kids. It was wonderful to have that anxiety be vocalized because it makes the situation, I think, more real to the rest of us.
I felt it was interesting that Rocky had no interest in having kids or getting married, but the more time he spent with those kids and in India, the more he realized maybe he is at an age where he is ready, and he opens himself up to the possibility. I think the whole documentary was a very intentional love story between human beings.
We all have a need to be loved and we all have our faults that we determine can make us unlovable or unworthy. But those kids are very sick and don’t seem to care about that. They just want to live the life they are given before their time runs out and they love wholeheartedly. The film included the kids showing Rocky picture albums of all the people who have visited them. Those people, even though they had gone, had left behind evidence, and those children cherish those moments. To me, this idea or them caring for people they know will probably never return was one of the most moving parts of the whole film. The idea, that no matter what these children go through, they still have hope for their lives, and love in their hearts that they are very willing to share with others. It is a message we all need to learn and especially in this society we live in now, love and compassion can go a long way in making the world a better place.
I am going to be honest, I was really not excited to watch this film. Anything with suffering children is hard for me to watch. I was not thrilled at the idea of watching kids in third world conditions die. However after about twenty minutes I was hooked. I fell in love with the kids just as Rocky had. I wanted to help them, I could not stand watching them bleed and suffer all with a smile on their faces. The children were always so positive and this really helped send a positive message thought the film.
ReplyDeleteI loved watching the different parts of the film showing Rocky, and how he grew up and how his lack of parents transferred into his parenting of these indian children with HIV. I was excited to see how much he cared for these children, buying them pizza, and toys. He lived in the same conditions, being completely selfless. The film really did an amazing job of breaking the stigma about HIV and that we should not be scared. It makes it seem a lot harder to contract the virus that I had previously known.
I have to say this is my favorite film we have watched so far in class. It really had a great message, as well as development. From Rocky’s childhood till him marrying an indian woman. I could not be happier to have learned about this subject, and really made me want to help.
I find it hard to believe this was propaganda for christianity. I can see this appealing to that crowd, but I did not see much of any evidence that would lead to that. Especially after seeing the traditional wedding ceremony, I find it hard to see any thing like that. Rocky himself would live with no AC or american toilet to make him feel more like a native. He did not want to be seen as a white savior or some kind of special person. I think it is unfair to assume these things, if he had the money and time to go help these people, then good for him. No one else did it, and author of the article sure wasn't there cleaning the wounds of the children daily.
Again, I went into this thinking that I wasn’t going to enjoy it, and then there I was, an hour and a half later, completely engrossed in the story filled with emotions.
ReplyDeleteI think that in terms of editing, it was a bit strange, but not so much that it took me out of it. The narration was great, because most of the time he was saying what I was thinking. I would have been super terrified when dealing with all of the children in the hospital and I also would have been taken aback by the kindness of Rocky, even if he did seem a little too angry or stressed towards the kids at times, but I suppose we can all get that way and I appreciated the realness of it. I think that the approach of starting from the beginning, of Steve’s involvement, was great, I really felt like we went on a journey with Rocky and Steve and all of the people from the village.
Aesthetically, I thought it flipped flopped from one style to another, specifically with the montage moments, but I wasn’t too bothered with it. I appreciate the creativeness, the experimentation, maybe it was meant to resemble Steve’s journey with Rocky, maybe I’m looking too much into it.
Honestly, I did think at times that Rocky was just doing all of this to potentially boost his ego, but then at other times I saw how he cried for other children and I just have no idea if it’s all real or not. I’m going to choose to think that it was because I want some sliver of faith in humanity and I don’t think you can fake the way that he looked at the children or how the children, obviously, felt so strongly about him.
Overall, I loved this documentary. I have loved all of these documentaries.
I am torn about the film. Aesthetically I enjoyed it. I think that the director captured the beauty of the relationship between Rocky and the kids perfectly. I liked the approach...it felt very personable. I was touched that Rocky decided to spend his life in India helping the kids. At the same time I found myself feeling uncomfortable with him being there. It was clear how happy Rocky was in India compared to the US. I wanted to feel like Rocky was being authentic but there was something keeping me from fully enjoying his “selfless” actions.
ReplyDeleteI agreed with a point that Roston made in his article: it would have been helpful to understand how Rocky stumbled upon the children. However, I disagreed with the idea that this film was intended as religious activism. I think the director did keep that information withheld because he did not want the film centered on religion and didn’t want people to be biased.
When I first sat down to watch the film I read the description on iTunes and thought there was no way i would make it through this film without being bored out of my mind. However the next thing I knew Rocky was getting married and i was tearing up a little bit. The relationship Rocky had with the children and the dedication he felt for them drew you into the film. Steve showed their relationship very clearly by putting in the long clips of the kids and Rocky playing, singing, and eating together. I feel that the film clearly portrayed their relationship. I truly believe now that Rocky is exactly who we saw on film, thanks to the raw film we saw of him taking care of the kids wounds, and the tears he shed and when he broke down. Then there are the religious claims about the film. There is no way this film is christian propaganda. There is no mention of jesus, converting, or god in the film. I believe Steve, the filmmaker, wanted to reach a broader audience than just the christian community. Someone may be a devout follower of a religion but not everything they make needs to be about it. I believe that Rocky and Steve both have true intentions.
ReplyDeleteMan, I started watching and thought to myself about how boring this was going to be. Everything was pretty happy in the beginning, so much so that I knew some major shit was going to go down. And even though I didn't love it, it slowly pulled me in, and the longer the film went on, the faster time flew. Then it got to Surya's time in the hospital and I had to look away. I'm not about that.
ReplyDeleteI definitely found the method of storytelling to be well structured, in the sense that there was sort of beginning, middle, and end, which made it feel more together by the end. Aesthetically, I thought the movie was effective in that it puts you into the position, not quite of Rocky, but of Steve. It gives the feelings that he must have felt as a visitor in India, being sort of on the outskirts of all the events revolving around Rocky and the kids. To me, that was the most interesting thing about this film, because it seems like a lot of filmmakers want to put you right up in everything, and I didn't really get that as much from this.
Overall, I enjoyed this film and how it shed light on HIV and people's inhibitions about it. I honestly thought this film would be boring. Coming from a Catholic school background, it looked like another film about some good white Christian going to a less developed country and helping the poor brown people like a good religious hero. What I got instead was an emotional and personal look at a person trying to help children that he loved. Race and religion didn't really play into it, or rather it didn't try to preach religion in any way. It was a story about humans looking out for one another, and Rocky's dedication to his kids. I liked how it felt as though I was right there; the cameramen were right in the middle of the action and it made me connect to the people I saw onscreen. As for the articles, I don't think they were trying to hide their religion, they were just trying o have the film relate to a wider audience than just Christians. Not all Christian media has to be propaganda.
ReplyDeleteWell, this is definitely and interesting discussion topic for me because I am actually an active member of the Chicago Church of Christ which is part of the International Churches of Christ as discussed in the PBS article.
ReplyDeleteI saw Blood Brother for the first time soon after it was released in 2013. My church set up a special screening for its members and visitors, and I along with many others loved the film and was greatly inspired. We all felt especially connected to the film knowing that a fellow disciple who is a part of the Greater Pittsburg Church of Christ—one of our many sister churches— is the director of the film. We are non-denominational Christians who look at each church as our fellow brothers and sisters having the same common doctrine and mission to spread love and live faithfully according to the Bible. We have a strong sense of unity and togetherness across our churches which span across nations all over the world, and it’s one of the greatest things I enjoy about being a part of this movement. For example, whenever I travel to a new place, I will contact the sister church in that area and find a disciple from that church to stay with who I have never met and don’t know anything about. Since the disciples of that church have all committed to living according to the Bible as a true Christian and are led by someone who has committed to the same thing, I, and any other disciple, can have total confidence in staying with these people and trusting them and they do the same for me. I have done this countless times in the past and continue to do so, and its pretty cool!
Overall, as an active member, it was very intriguing reading an article written about us and seeing the perspective of someone who isn’t part of our church but is trying to understand and decipher what we’re all about. There are a million and one things I can say in response to the article, so forgive me if I ramble.
I love the fact that Steve Hoover, being a devout Christian, made the documentary without directly referencing God, the Bible or Christianity. I strongly dislike “Christian films” that quote scripture, demonize non-Christians, and shove religious messages down peoples throats. Films like these are simply preaching to the choir and can often be judgmental, unrelatable, and preach incorrect doctrine— an instant turn off to people who may not have any religious affiliations. Steve, by intentionally leaving Christian and religious jargon out of the film, truly made the most Christian film of all. He displayed what true Christianity was by EXAMPLE and ACTS OF LOVE and not words, which is exactly 100% what Jesus came to Earth to do and exactly what he wanted his followers to do:
“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. -James 2:14-26
By doing this, he has made Blood Brother universally appealing so that EVERYONE would see a true example and disciple of Christ and be blown away by it. When people later on would discover these men are Christians, as most of us in this class are now discovering, the hope is that it would bring Christianity into the correct light in peoples minds and that they would see the religion as one of love, hope, giving, sacrifice, kindness and peace and not one of hate, exclusion and power as it’s so often portrayed by hypocritical and ingenuine followers.
The initial reaction that the author of the article and most people have to the documentary is exactly what the filmmakers wanted, and delving into the personal lives of the filmmakers and realizing the Christian motivation behind their deeds should in no way cause skepticism or doubt towards what they were doing. If it is, then it’s probably due to someones own negative bias toward Christianity as the author may have had a bit of. If the documentary showed the men baptizing people by force, forcing Biblical teachings on people in India, and serving the children on the condition that they “act as good Christians,” then we would have every right to be skeptical about their Christian influence. But did we see that? Not at all. We saw genuine and unconditional acts of sacrifice and love. (And of course, no human is perfect, so there could very well be some ill intent at some points in their behavior as any of us would have and as is human nature. Rocky may very well have some pride issues and at times likes to do things for the camera and his own glory, but I don’t know anyone who, out of self-absorption, would sacrifice and give THAT MUCH and still be doing it to this day all for the sake of his image.)
ReplyDeleteAn example of the authors negative bias toward Christianity is how he shows a big concern and fear of a church being too “evangelistic.” He states that “They think I, and probably you, are going to hell” which has no basis and is very judgmental of the church he’s talking about, not to mention a non-biblical way of thinking. If these Christians are truly acting like Christ, their strong desire to evangelize their friends and neighbors should be looked at as a great thing: people dedicated to spreading a message of love and hope to as many people as they can and showing it through example. In the churches mission statement, they say that “We practice a robust evangelistic outlook and use our personal bible study groups to introduce and train others in the lifestyle and mission of Jesus Christ.” To the author, this may seem like they’re on a mission to brainwash or convert people to strict rules when in fact, their intention is to train people to live as Steve and Rocky do, who both live as Jesus did. I know this for a fact since I have first hand experience being a part of the church that has this mission statement.
I know this was super long and I’ll cut myself off right here, but I’m passionate about this topic and would be happy to discuss it further.
I had to take a break from watching the film because I was literally bawling my eyes out to the point . The director did a great good job telling the story . I didn't think his background made the film less convincing if anything I felt that it helped establish Rocky’s character. In the beginning by establishing how much Rocky felt out of place at his home in America really helped the audience feel how much Rocky wanted to be back in India. He wasn't perfect by any means which Is what I like about the film , it made it more realistic. For instance when he told the kids to shut up , it wasn't very nice but it showed that Rocky is a human. This moment in the film doesn’t change the way Rocky felt about the children but just showed that like most humans , Rocky got annoyed. I really like that the director didn't try to make Rocky out to be a saint , which made the film more authentic. I really enjoyed watching the children play and just enjoy life despite the hardship they were facing . I appreciated the rawness of the film , it was an eye opener. The film was both intriguing and inspiring. The film has a message of faith and do diligence , which I found interesting . I kept thinking about it when it was over like man; I want to go out and do something inspiring. I agree that Hoover constructed the film in such a way that it can be perceived in different ways.I do not agree that the film is a christian propaganda film .The film doesn’t in anyway shape or form force it’s religious beliefs on its audience.
ReplyDeleteI loved Blood Brother. The film was successfully authored in my opinion. I thought that the directors approach was very simple in the sense that Rocky left his life in America to move to India in order to help children who had AIDS. I thought the film was compelling, raw, and inspiring. I wanted to be there helping!
ReplyDeleteFrom reading Roston’s article, I was also curious as to how he met the children in the first place. I am glad that religion didn’t end up being a big aspect to the film and it was rather focused on Rocky helping the children.
Blood Brother hit the mark in the feel-good tear jerker department. Surface-wise, this film was a winner for me. The wholesome shots of children playing in a field or tackling main character “Rocky anna” had me in the palm of Steve Hoover’s hand.
ReplyDeleteI was very pleased with how this film looked aesthetically. Slow motion captures, dolly shots pushing forwards/backwards, and (my favorite) the score- It absolutely added a nice touch to the film’s beginning. The artfulness of footage and editing seemed to disappear near the middle, but I’ll give Hoover the benefit of the doubt and assume that was so nobody would be distracted from the content itself.
I found this film to have, entirely, the best intentions possible. This goes for the filmmaker’s portrayal of Rocky, Rocky’s intentions of volunteering at the orphanage, and the film’s message. That being said- the allegations of Hoover or Braat’s supposed “proselytizing” don’t make a ton of sense to me. Tom Ronston’s article, though thought provoking, seemed pretty unsupported in my eyes. Attempting to snope out “brainwashing” undertone seems like such a reach to me. Even still- just how picky do you have to be to find a way to rip on a man who does work like this? Cleaning the oozing wounds of an HIV positive child without an ounce of fear doesn’t look too narcissistic to me.
The approach that Steve uses to document Rocky’s day to day life in India seems to leave no room for any possible personal flaws. Even the ones briefly mentioned (being a bad student in grade school, being impulsive/flaky, etc.) seem to be inserted in places where it makes him all the more likeable. This was clever, but I’m sure there were some characteristics of Rocky caught on camera that didn’t happen to make the cut. It’s as if Rocky is “too good” of a person. Maybe he has a porn addiction. Maybe he’s been charged with a DUI, or something. But would these hypothetical “exposé” type reveals really make a difference? To me, no. What I’m getting at: there’s some inauthentic tones with how saint-like Rocky is, but trying to dig up dirt on him in a film like this wouldn’t be memorable compared to the other things we’ve seen him do.
I was actually pretty excited to watch this documentary again, it was one of the first films that made me fall in love with documentary and gave me ideas of what I want to do in my career of making films. I watched it in one of my classes, junior year of high school and I remember I had to take notes during the entire film of anything I liked, disliked and even questions. I really had hoped I saved that document because I really wanted to see in comparison to what I perceive now seeing it again two years later (have no fear, I am still on the hunt). I remember how motivated I felt after the film to make a difference in someone’s life like Rocky did with those children. Seeing it again I have that same feeling heightened.
ReplyDeleteCinematography wise, it has a great authentic aesthetic that flows throughout, even the gruesome shots of the children sick, it is filmed beautifully. I especially love the beginning of the film with the opening credits, the little animation combined with the audio story from Rocky’s father, it sets up the entire film based on this story about how loving of a person Rocky is. You’re engaged throughout because of the matching points with the b-roll and voice over.
I think the most beautiful aspect of this film is the fact that these children do have HIV but that doesn't affect the love and compassion given to them by Rocky, which really makes it such a compelling documentary
I didn’t notice this the first time watching it, but I realized now that it’s not just a story focused on Rocky, or the children, It’s also a story of the director which I find really inspiring to any filmmaker. He not only made an incredibly moving film, but was moved in the process and had that documented which made it seem real. It also added a nice touch being that Rocky and Steve are best friends and went on this life changing journey together.
Reading the articles didn’t really change my opinions at all. Myself, not being very religious at all, I notice a lot when god or religion is brought up in film, I usually don’t care depending on the subject matter and this was one of those that I did not care about. I’m happy that Steve and Rocky both have a belief in their life, that’s great and has nothing to do with me, especially since me as a viewer I didn't feel any added on pressure for having opposite point of views. I didn't think that their beliefs influenced the children in a bad way either because in really hard situations like death, I understand that faith can help and be uplifting. At least in this film you did not see any pressure on the children for their ideals.
I had some mixed feelings but for the most part, I enjoyed the film. First off, I think it was pretty obvious that both men were Christian. I’m sure it was easier for me to pick up since I have a Christian background. This isn’t necessarily bad. Christians are still allowed to make documentaries, and they can make them about things other than God.
ReplyDeleteThem being Christian didn’t really hurt the film but, I don’t know, something did feel a little off to me and I couldn’t put my finger on it. Maybe because it seemed like Rocky needed to be needed and that could’ve been what was driving him? They do acknowledge the whole “White Savior” thing and I appreciate that they were trying to not use this film as some propaganda. Christianity is the center of their life so obviously that part of them is going to shine through, but I could tell they were trying to hold back from trying to convert people and shit.
I think Steve made this documentary because he loves his best friend and is proud of him. Rocky is a nice guy, I’m not arguing that. It’s definitely a little biased though, as any film someone makes about their best friend would be. Actually, I’ll give him more credit than that. He definitely tried to make it pretty objective. I appreciated his approach to it. The shots he got, those honest moments he captured, he really wanted to tell a story bigger than his best friend too.
The main thing that I think led me to have mixed feelings/ confusion over the film was how Rocky was just like uuhhh I don’t know what to do, time for India! I’m sure there’s a lot more that went into the decision. Like why India specifically? How did he get there if the orphanage wasn’t part of his original plan? Possibly the backstory on that had a lot to do with their church’s help so they left it out to keep it more secular.
Overall, we were taken through Rocky’s story from the perspective of Steve and it was a well-constructed journey. Yes they are Christian, but this isn’t propaganda. They aren’t pushing their religion on the children. They’re trying to do God’s work by just loving these kids the best was they can.
I found the film to be enjoyable, I was very interested with Rocky and how he was able to make such an incredible decision that will affect his whole life. Watching the children struggle was in interesting choice because I felt that it really put us in Rocky and Steve's frame of mind and see things from their perspectives. I struggled finding a real point to this story when I started it, was it about Rocky? or was it the kids? or was it AIDs? or maybe just the culture of India? but when I kept moving through it I realized that it was about all of that in an interesting blend that took us outside of the United States and what we're used to. I have had struggles but after seeing what these kids deal with every day, it really helps me to think that I don't have it as bad and that I can and should do more. This along with the other docs we have watched have all felt very genuine in how they have been able to capture these raw human emotions to show them to a larger audience and that is the biggest thing I have taken from documentaries as a whole from the start of this class. This doc wasn't more or less authentic than the others but what it did do the best was relate to everyone's desire to do what they believe is right.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe personal life of a film maker can definitely help shape a movie, and it can be used as a stylistic choice. I know for my own personal documentary I want a little bit of my personal beliefs in there because I has a strong inclination that those beliefs may be, at least in some way or another, a valid point of view to entertain. It is impossible to capture objective truths but sometimes subjective truths can say volumes on not that it is impossible to capture objective truths but sometimes subjective truths can say volumes on not only the director but the social dynamic in which the director comes from. This can be used to create a stark contrast, just like in this case where Rocky is in India, a culture that views everything from social life to existence in a completely different and organic fashion, juxtaposed what the western world views life and existence is about. I will say this, the Hindus have a very different perspective of life, I found Rocky’s experience to be very funny because I’ve been studying Hindu philosophy for a few years now, and his existential experiences, about life death and loss are really parallel. The Hindus don’t have many of the same issues westerners have when it comes to things such as loss of a loved one, or the constant change of life; The Hindus philosophy is essentially this: The ultimate reality, (Brahman) the god head, is asleep, and he dreams the dream that he is you, me and everyone else. But, the godhead is so lost in his own dream that he forgets that he is god, so when the Hindu one day wakes up and comes to the sudden realization that he or she is god, the Hindus gratefully say “great you’ve figured it out, now go on with your day.” Ultimately the Hindu knows what the western does not, and that is that life is ultimately a game you play, the Hindus view of existence is that the more time goes by the more it gets worse, and everything is in always a state of decay so you shouldn’t worry about growing old getting sick and dying because it’s all as natural birth and life. It was interesting to see how the western view represented by rocky was juxtaposed by the culture despite the tragedy of young children dying.
ReplyDeleteWarning: have tissues in close proximity when viewing this documentary.
ReplyDeleteI’m ruined. Everything hurts and I'm ruined. My soul literally hurt after watching this doc. I barely slept… ugh. I loved the topic of this documentary because it’s important and not talked about enough. I loved the children's stories and their bond to Rocky. Those relationships were so raw and beautiful. I loved the editing and how, as the viewer, felt as though I was there. Some parts were very difficult to watch. I turned the sound off a few times when the dad was crying over the death of his daughter. I liked how this doc wasn’t anything fancy. Nothing hard technically. I was moved by the day to day activities and struggles. However… I hated Rocky. Maybe hate is too strong a word, but I really really disliked him. I disliked him because I just didn’t care about him. That sounds mean but it’s true. From the get go, we hear him talking about how he’s lacking love and attention in his life. Sooo… he goes to India where he connects with a hostel for people with aids and is praised. He’s the center of attention. He’s the savior. He feels like he is. Or at least that’s how the filmmaker showed him. I’m kinda hating myself for writing this because I’m a very sympathetic person, but I just didn’t care. It feels as if he’s using them to feel good about himself. He is a huge narcissist and I thought this even before I read your description on what to add in our reviews. I also disliked him because he’s just maybe such a good person that he’s willing to give up his life to help these kids. I felt guilty, like i’m not doing enough or anything with my life. This film was beautiful and painful. Visually it was stunning and raw. I loved how we followed Steve through the process and story. The narration was simple, relatable and helpful. I don't even wanna talk about the religious aspects nor the marriage dealio because ew. That turned me off even more then I was before with Rocky's character. I'm so conflicted about this doc. I need a nap.
Ian Roozrokh
ReplyDeleteAny film that centers around children in need or at risk of anything will always make me feel more emotionally and ever more so tied more directly into the film. I don’t know whether or not that has to do with my history of watching movies and growing up with Disney starring younger adolescent protagonists, but it always, always makes my eyes swell, stomach turn, or heart beat even more so than other films without children acting as a lead role.
“Blood Brother” really hit home for me. I related to a lot of what I used to do working with children in need to Rocky. I immediately saw him as a hero. Someone who can sacrifice so much of their life to make others more significant is truly beautiful and inspiring. Throughout the film, I took more perspective on white privilege and how it can be used to help bettering a community in need. Watching such a selfless man preform to us what it seems like a daunting task, is breathtaking and overpowering.
The story is there and it’s in plain sight. Beautifully documented and told. Aesthetically beautiful and emotionally draining. All that was included into the film from learning about Rocky’s past to focusing on his living conditions to watch his relationships with the children was evenly and greatly paced and everything seemed to be believable.
Now bringing myself to the articles; the argument that’s more grey than a cloudy day. Relating this film to a religion and arguing that it’s used as a piece of propaganda is for one thing very selfish but on the other hand it’s very interesting and metaphorically makes sense. Yet, this can go for any film that shows a protagonist making good in the world. It also makes sense that if we were to relate and tie religion into the “underlying meaning” of this film, Christianity shouldn’t be the only religion used as metaphor. Most to all religions share the same empathetic feeling of happiness and what it means to do good; Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, the list can go on. By saything this film is used as a piece of propaganda can be respected only if it isn’t disrespected. The intent of the filmmakers was to make a movie about Rocky and the kids, and they did and that’s that.
Overall, I want to watch it again and again. I want to become more of a selfless person like Rocky. Maybe one day I’ll just move to India.
It took a while to get going for me, but in the end Blood Brother was a rewarding experience. I found myself relating a lot to Rocky and his search for a purpose. He was lost and tried to find himself and it resonated with me.
ReplyDeleteRocky's not a perfect person and he clearly wasn't completely happy in his life so his faults come off as more of an interesting part of the film and his journey than narcissism. The film also looked very good and made excellent use of location both urban and rural (and a blend of both, which makes modern India so interesting).
The director seemed to frame the story as more through the eyes of Rocky and his experiences and how he reacts emotionally to them, and I see nothing wrong with that as he is a central aspect of the story and an acquaintance of the filmmaker.
I see little way to interpret this movie as having some sort of religious message just because Rocky and Steve belonged to a congregation. What spirituality inspired them to go on this journey is of little consequence to the overall film. I don't believe a person would put themselves through this emotional trauma just to proselytize.
First I would just like to say Tom Roston is trying to connect the dots where there are no dots to be connected. I really hate when people look way too deep into things and there is an episode of South Park that firmly supports my feelings I would say. For those curious it’s episode 2 of season 14 titled “The Tale of Scrotie McBoogerballs”. I think the film is just the story of a man who has had little talk with his best friend over a long period of time and this said man going to see why his BEST friend is so deeply invested and in love with India. Moving on from that I think this film did it’s job in regard of documenting the story of an American man caring for children with aids in India. I think he shows enough of Rockys bad side and good side to have a balance of the two in the audience's head while the film is taking place. I feel the director could have easily left out Rocky's early childhood for the film still to have a good message about him. Doing so for me just made him more relatable to a person I know/knew growing up, only Rocky is doing a hell of a lot more with his time than what my guy is doing now. I think what the director showed definitely made the story more convincing. I feel like it help get my head around what Rocky's intentions were better than just watching it from Rocky goes to India this is what happened. The one thing I didn’t like about the film was pretty much just aesthetically, and that just boiled down to one part and that was when Surya was dying. I don’t mean to sound insensitive when I say this but, I get it the kid is covered in sores and is coughing up a lung, which I find gross, and I really don’t want to watch that. I know it isn’t suppose to be easy to watch and they do want you to feel as bad as Rocky did but I think the whole situation and building up of Surya’s character before was enough for that and they didn’t need to show every second of this kid dying. I definitely Think Rocky is a Narcissist, but even if he is does it really matter, as long as he is helping and bringing joy to the children? It’s not like he’s taking a selfie with the kids and saying #helpingoutthelessfortunate. He goes back there every day when he is in India and he is even giving up a better standard of living to let bugs crawl on him and rats urinate all over his stuff just to make these kids feel better.
ReplyDeleteI liked this movie. I feel like it may drag in parts and the director does seem to be holding back, but overall the story is interesting and Robin Braat is a very likeable human being.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Robin is a narcissist at all. I mean, he is a flawed person. He can appear ill-tempered from time to time, and that could be attributed to his chaotic past back in the States that is touched upon at the beginning of the film. However, to spend the rest of your life voluntarily in India solely to help and take care of disadvantaged children is very courageous and selfless. Most people would only help out from time to time or do it to feel good about themselves. Robin does it for the children themselves. Overall, I'd give this film a 9 out of 10.
-Sean McGann
Peiheng
ReplyDeleteIn the first half of the film, what I think of Rocky was just a good and nice man who was helping some Aid kids in India. However, I was getting a feeling of greatness from what Rocky was doing when the film moves on. The scene that Rocky was taking care of the child really touched me, he loves these children and really wants to help them. If that was me, I certainly being afraid to do it.
But the story of the first half of the film was a little being boring, and I feel like it may be better to use some character title to describe the character. Although some characters are not important, but the titles for the character can help me to figure out the relationship between characters.
I disagree with what Tom wrote in his blog. I don’t know why he wants to relate the film to the religion, but I actually believe what Steve said in his interview that he just wanted to make a film about his friend.
Zack Kearns
ReplyDeleteFirst off, the film was intense and for the most part very well crafted. Some criticisms I have are that some of the music cues and scenes that used music earlier in the film were a bit on-the-nose, and I felt they relied on the music a bit too much in the montage that depicts Rocky interacting with the children. I feel that relying so heavily on up-beat music to communicate his kind-heartedness was perhaps a bit lazy, but then again, not being involved in the production I don't know why they chose to do this. Maybe they simply didn't have enough coverage or usable audio? I'm not sure. The cinematography by John Pope was outstanding. I haven't done any research on him or the other camera operators but the images they managed to capture speak for themselves, despite the fact that it seems to have been shot on relatively low-end cameras, and with plenty of digital noise. I respect that aesthetics involving the amount of digital noise and format size of the cameras took the back seat in trade for access and mobility, which allowed the cameramen to capture so many beautiful and heart wrenching moments.
Some shots that are still sticking in my head: the shot where the black dog saunters away from the camera next to the blue cargo-container-like-object in the left of the frame (it reminded me of the imposing and intimidating nature of AIDS), the interview of Deepa and Latha, with the intense backlight (apparently from the sun) illuminating them, and the shots of the mourning of the man's daughter in the dark room (the filmmakers especially embraced the aesthetic of the image degradation while shooting in low light in this scene, which is a recurring theme in the film). There are more that I remember and many more I don't, but overall the camerawork and attention to lighting was a cut above the typical documentary of this caliber. That being said I'm conflicted on the weird oversaturated color grade.. I can see why the filmmakers did it. It reflects the color of the country of India and the children at the hospital, and adds to the audience's ability to empathize with Rocky's choice to stay in that country.
On to the authorship and approach; I did detect that Rocky was christian watching the film because of his references to God, but it was never apparent in the film itself that this was a main motivator for his trip. Honestly the fuss over not including the filmmaker's and Rocky's religious beliefs is a bit silly in my opinion. The film wasn't about Christianity, nor did it ever specifically endorse the particular children's home, which to me means the film did not have a Christian message, but rather a message that is aligned with the values that christians hold most dear. And here's a news flash - Those values are shared by every major world religion and humanitarian organization. So that aspect of the film does not bother me at all.
While the film was extremely compelling in its craft, and very emotional, I do wish filmmakers were making films from the perspective of the people entrenched in these situations. In regards to the question as to whether or not the film is a subtle form of colonialism, I would say in a way, yes. Intrinsically it is. A film made by an american christian is going to carry with it the messages associated with his or her views, just as any film made by anyone anywhere is promoting a certain world view. Is that bad? it depends. As we discussed earlier in the class, everything is propaganda for something.
As an afterthought, I couldn't help but reflect on all the shots of insects and animals throughout the film, and wonder if these images correlated to Hinduism and it's animist nature, or perhaps drew attention to christian mythology as well, i.e. the stoning of the snakes in the water hole. Who knows, maybe I'm just imagining things