More stories

  • in

    A Film Tries to Make a Difference for Domestic Violence Survivors

    “And So I Stayed” examines how the courts treat women who kill their abusers. The movie played a role in one case that resulted in freedom after a conviction.In 2013, Tanisha Davis, a 26-year-old woman from Rochester, N.Y., was sentenced to 14 years in prison for killing her boyfriend, at whose hands she suffered, she said, nearly seven years of abuse, including choking, death threats and a beating on the night he died. The judge agreed that she was a victim of domestic violence but said her response did not merit leniency. “You handled the situation all wrong,” he told her. “You could have left.”In 2021, because of a new law that allows survivors of domestic violence more nuanced consideration in the courts, the same judge released Davis, thanks in part to a documentary that helped frame her case.It’s not uncommon for documentary projects to have an impact on legal proceedings, once they’ve found an audience and built public attention. But the film that helped Davis, “And So I Stayed,” was not yet released — it wasn’t even finished — when the filmmakers, Natalie Pattillo and Daniel A. Nelson, put together a short video for the court, describing her life.“You could see the strength of the ties she had to her family and the strength of the support she would have” if she were released, said Angela N. Ellis, one of her lawyers. The prosecutor and judge both mentioned watching the footage when they agreed, in March, to set her free.In her eight years in prison, Davis, 34, spoke to her son, now 15, every day. Now that she’s home, “I can just call him in the next room,” she said. “I can’t even explain that joy. I cry happy tears all the time.”For the filmmakers, it was an unexpectedly bright ending to an often heartbreaking and troubling film. “And So I Stayed,” which will have its premiere Saturday at the Brooklyn Film Festival (viewable online through June 13), is personal for Pattillo, who is a survivor herself and whose sister was killed by a boyfriend in 2010. The documentary grew out of her thesis project at Columbia Journalism School, where she met Nelson, her co-director.The filmmaker Natalie Pattillo is a domestic-violence survivor.Gwen Capistran“I didn’t realize how common it was, the gravity of women being incarcerated for defending themselves or their children,” Pattillo said. “Once I found out, I couldn’t stop reporting,” in an effort to show just how misunderstood, and punitive, these cases are within the justice system.The film’s first focus was Kim Dadou Brown, who served 17 years in prison for killing her abusive boyfriend. She became an advocate, traveling to Albany to needle New York lawmakers about the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, the long-simmering legislation that eventually helped free Davis. Introduced in 2011, it was finally passed in 2019, after Democrats flipped the State Senate.The act is among the few laws in the country that grant judges more leniency in sentencing domestic violence victims who commit crimes against their abusers. It follows a growing, research-backed understanding of the patterns of abusive relationships, and the unique hold they have on people within them.“Leaving is the hardest part,” and the most dangerous, Dadou Brown said. “I thought that all men hit, and so I stayed with mine, so I knew which way the blows would come.”After Dadou Brown, a Rochester native and former health-care worker, was paroled in 2008, she volunteered with survivors and crisscrossed the state for rallies — even when money was tight because her felony status made jobs hard to find, she said. With 17 earrings (one for each year of her incarceration) and her signature false eyelashes, “she’s just a force,” Pattillo said. “It’s pure tenacity. That’s Kim.”Dadou Brown has become a fierce advocate for the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, which was finally passed in 2019.Libby March for The New York TimesWhen the bill passed, there was elation among its supporters and the filmmakers. But they kept their cameras rolling.One case that was considered a surefire test of the act was that of Nicole Addimando, a young mother of two in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., who in 2017 fatally shot Christopher Grover, her live-in boyfriend and the children’s father. The film includes police camera footage of that night, when she was found disoriented and driving around in the wee hours, her 4- and 2-year-olds in the back seat.Her case made national headlines because of the severity of the abuse she said she endured: bites and black eyes; bruises and burns to her body, including while she was pregnant, that were documented by medical professionals; rapes that Grover videotaped and uploaded to a porn site. In the film, a social worker calls it not just assault, but “sexual torture.” In 2020, Addimando was sentenced to 19 years to life for second-degree manslaughter; the judge denied that the survivors justice act was applicable.“I felt like we failed her,” said Dadou Brown, who was at the sentencing.The film looks at the case of Nicole Addimando, who was sentenced to 19 years to life for killing her abuser. A judge ruled that the new law didn’t apply to her.Daniel A. NelsonIn the film, Addimando is heard mostly as a voice on the phone from prison; in one call, her mother tries to console her that at least she’s alive, that she escaped the abuse. “I’m still not free,” she replies, weeping.Though there are no nationwide statistics on the number of women incarcerated after defending themselves against abusers, federal research suggests that about half of the women in prison have experienced past physical abuse or sexual violence, a majority from romantic partners. Black women are disproportionately victimized through both intimate partner violence and the justice system: They are the most likely to be killed by a romantic partner and more likely to end up in prison, according to Bernadine Waller, a scholar at Adelphi University.In bringing stories like these to the screen, said Nelson, the filmmaker, the aim was not to dispute who pulled a trigger, but to contextualize those convicted. “The legal system forces you to create the perfect victim,” he said, “and a prosecutor will do everything in their power to characterize a survivor into not fitting into that box.” (In Addimando’s case, the judge said she “reluctantly consented” to the sexual abuse.)Garrard Beeney, a lawyer for Addimando, who is awaiting a decision on her appeal, said the documentary’s examination of the way the judicial system treats survivors is “a necessary, but I also think, not sufficient step,” in changing the process. Police, prosecutors, and judges have to be educated on how to think about domestic violence, he said. “We need that kind of retraining more immediately than a gradual process of understanding.”Dadou Brown being filmed by Julian Lim, center, and Daniel A. Nelson. The film grew out of a thesis project. Natalie Pattillo/Grit PicturesFor Pattillo, who had two of her three children while making the film, some moments felt overwhelmingly raw. “There’s survivor’s guilt, always, when you’re dealing with trauma,” she said, adding, in reference to Addimando, “Why did I get to be OK and not Nikki? Why do her kids not get to be tucked in by her every night?”But it was also “very healing,” she added, “to have a hand in making sure the survivors feel seen and heard and believed through this film.”It originally ended on a dark note, at a vigil for Addimando. Then came the Davis case. The filmmakers were there on the day she was released from Bedford Hills Correctional Facility. Reacclimating to life outside — during a pandemic — is still challenging, Davis said last week. But she wanted her story told as a warning for victims, and a beacon. The filmmakers plan to make the documentary available to those in the legal system — “a tool kit,” Nelson said, on how to employ the new law.Dadou Brown was also at Bedford Hills; she drove Davis’s family there. Her advocacy, Dadou Brown said, had become her life’s calling. “I feel so fortunate to have so many dream-come-true moments,” she said. “Even coming home from prison. My next dream-come-true moment will be bringing Nikki home.” More

  • in

    Baron Davis Directs Now. If There’s a ‘Space Jam 3,’ He Wants In.

    Baron Davis has long been a showman. During his N.B.A. career, which lasted from 1999 to 2012, Davis was known as one of the flashiest stars in the league. His best-known play was a 2007 playoff dunk for the Golden State Warriors on the Utah Jazz’s Andrei Kirilenko, which was so instantly memorable that Davis didn’t bother arguing the technical foul he received for celebrating too vociferously. That has long been Davis: an over-the-top talent ready to entertain at a moment’s notice. More

  • in

    Four Secrets About ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’

    As Steven Spielberg’s classic adventure celebrates its 40th anniversary, here are behind-the-scenes stories of dizzy rats, raucous boulders and friendly flies.Eight months after introducing the world to Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia and Chewbacca, George Lucas invited Steven Spielberg and the screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan to his assistant’s home in Los Angeles to pitch a new name for adventure. More

  • in

    ‘In the Heights’ | Anatomy of a Scene

    Film directors walk viewers through one scene of their movies, showing the magic, motives and the mistakes from behind the camera.Film directors walk viewers through one scene of their movies, showing the magic, motives and the mistakes from behind the camera. More

  • in

    Hearing the City, Too, at an Outdoor Berlin Film Festival

    The movie soundtracks are competing with distant techno beats and the subway’s rattle at a coronavirus-proof edition of the annual event.BERLIN — On Thursday night, the mood at the Hasenheide open-air movie theater was buoyant. An audience of about 200 people had assembled for a screening of “The Seed,” a German drama about a construction worker struggling to take care of his daughter in a rural part of the country. Despite the grim subject matter, audience members chatted and drank beer, and a faint smell of pot smoke drifted through the air. More

  • in

    ‘Queen Bees’ Review: Mean Girls on Social Security

    Jane Curtin, Loretta Devine and Ann-Margret rule their senior community in this conventional comedy-drama that doesn’t waste its cast.In what may be a first for cinema, “Queen Bees,” directed by Michael Lembeck, depicts a senior citizen using a mobile phone with no difficulty whatsoever. The senior in question is Helen, played by Ellen Burstyn, an independent woman who’s calling the living center for elders that keeps sending her brochures. In emphatic tones she tells the representative that she’s not moving from her house, which is pleasant but feels a little empty.The problem is, she keeps locking herself out of her house. This habit, and Helen’s isolation as a widow, are of concern to her grandson Peter (Matthew Barnes) and of perhaps mercenary concern to her daughter Laura (Elizabeth Mitchell). When a kitchen fire necessitates repairs, Helen is compelled to move into that living center — on what she repeatedly insists will be a temporary basis.Here she meets the “Queen Bees” of the movie’s title, a trio of imperious women, led by Janet (Jane Curtin), Sally (Loretta Devine) and Margot (Ann-Margret), who rule the community’s card room and cafeteria. When Sally tries to convince Helen to ingratiate herself with these power holders, Helen protests that this isn’t high school. Sally responds that it’s worse; in “high school we graduate. Here, we die.”One needn’t bother to make a “Mean Girls” comparison, as the movie’s dialogue itself does. “Queen Bees” is a thoroughly conventional comedy-drama right down to its saccharine score by Walter Murphy. (Yes, the “A Fifth of Beethoven” guy.) That said, it does not waste its impeccable cast, which also includes Christopher Lloyd and a remarkably game James Caan as Helen’s love interest. Each of these stalwarts bring more than charisma to their roles, and when the writing itself displays some snap (which admittedly isn’t that often) the performers bite right into it.Queen BeesRated PG-13 for language, senior themes. Running time: 1 hour 40 minutes. In theaters and available to rent or buy on Apple TV, Vudu and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. More

  • in

    Hong Kong to Censor Films Under China’s Security Law

    The city’s government said it would block the distribution of films that are deemed to undermine national security, bringing the territory more in line with mainland Chinese censorship.For decades, Hong Kong’s movie industry has enthralled global audiences with balletic shoot-em-ups, epic martial-arts fantasies, chopsocky comedies and shadow-drenched romances. Now, under orders from Beijing, local officials will scrutinize such works with an eye toward safeguarding the People’s Republic of China.The city’s government on Friday said it would begin blocking the distribution of films that are deemed to undermine national security, marking the official arrival of mainland Chinese-style censorship in one of Asia’s most celebrated filmmaking hubs.The new guidelines, which apply to both domestically produced and foreign films, are the latest sign of how thoroughly Hong Kong, a semiautonomous Chinese territory, is being reshaped by a security law enacted last year to quash antigovernment protests.With the blessing of the Communist government in Beijing, the Hong Kong authorities have changed school curriculums, pulled books off library shelves and moved to overhaul elections. The police have arrested pro-democracy activists and politicians as well as a high-profile newspaper publisher.And in the arts, the law has created an atmosphere of fear.The updated rules announced Friday require Hong Kong censors considering a film for distribution to look out not only for violent, sexual and vulgar content, but also for how the film portrays acts “which may amount to an offense endangering national security.”Anything that is “objectively and reasonably capable of being perceived as endorsing, supporting, promoting, glorifying, encouraging or inciting” such acts is potential grounds for deeming a film unfit for exhibition, the rules now say.The new rules do not limit the scope of a censor’s verdict to a film’s content alone.“When considering the effect of the film as a whole and its likely effect on the persons likely to view the film,” the guidelines say, “the censor should have regard to the duties to prevent and suppress act or activity endangering national security.”A Hong Kong government statement on Friday said: “The film censorship regulatory framework is built on the premise of a balance between protection of individual rights and freedoms on the one hand, and the protection of legitimate societal interests on the other.”The vagueness of the new provisions is in keeping with what the security law’s critics say are its ambiguously defined offenses, which give the authorities wide latitude to target activists and critics.Supporters of pro-democracy activists who have been charged under the national security law protested in Hong Kong last month.Lam Yik Fei for The New York Times“How do you raise funds?” asked Evans Chan, a filmmaker who has faced problems screening his work in Hong Kong. “Can you openly crowdsource and say that this is a film about certain points of view, certain activities?”Even feature filmmakers, he said, will be left to wonder whether their movies will fall afoul of the new law. “It’s not just a matter of activist filmmaking or political filmmaking, but the overall scene of filmmaking in Hong Kong.”At its peak during the decades after World War II, the city’s film industry enjoyed huge influence across the moviegoing world, churning out popular genre flicks and nurturing auteurs like Wong Kar-wai and Ann Hui. The influence of Hong Kong cinema can be seen in the work of Hollywood directors including Quentin Tarantino and Martin Scorsese, and in blockbusters such as “The Matrix.”More recently, Hong Kong’s political turmoil has been of intense interest to artists and documentarians, even if their work has sometimes struggled to be shown before audiences.A screening of a documentary about the 2019 protests was canceled at the last minute this year after a pro-Beijing newspaper accused the film of encouraging subversion. The University of Hong Kong urged its student union to cancel a showing of a film about a jailed activist.The screening went on as planned. But a few months later, the university said it would stop collecting membership fees on the organization’s behalf and would stop managing its finances as punishment for its “radical acts.” More

  • in

    ‘Wish Dragon’ Review: ‘Aladdin’ Goes to Shanghai, Sort Of

    John Cho, as Long the dragon, does his best Robin Williams impression in this film animation about a teenage boy who releases him from a magic teapot.In the engaging animated feature “Wish Dragon,” a teenage boy comes into possession of a magic teapot containing a world-weary dragon who’s obliged to grant him three wishes.The movie is geared toward children, but for anyone old enough to remember the Disney Renaissance, there should be a déjà vu warning: Netflix’s newest animation effort is essentially Disney’s “Aladdin” transposed to Shanghai. John Cho, who voices Long, the dragon, does his best impression of Robin Williams, who lent his voice to the fast-talking Genie in the 1992 Disney animation. But without the catchy songs and intergenerational appeal, this movie can only wish to measure up to that classic.When the story begins, Din (Jimmy Wong) is a genial, imaginative child who soon befriends Li Na (Natasha Liu Bordizzo), a fellow troublemaker in school. The pair is shown cavorting in a best-friend montage that screeches to a halt when Li Na’s father moves her out of their humble neighborhood, saying, “We’re off to a better life, and we have to leave this one behind.”Fast-forward by a decade: A chic Li Na appears on billboards around town, while Din lives in the same cramped apartment with his mother (Constance Wu), and works as a food delivery boy, all the while yearning to win back his partner in crime. If only a magical dragon could help Din bluff his way into Li Na’s moneyed circle.Here, the movie goes full folk tale. Some moments, such as when Long’s voice turns squeaky-high as he squeezes back into his itty-bitty teapot space, seem to explicitly quote “Aladdin,” not to mention the airborne date Din and Li Na have on a flying dragon.The biggest break from formula arrives through Long, the wish granter. Unlike the Genie, Long possesses a compelling human back story and follows a defined character arc. Absent a razzle-dazzle production number akin to “Friend Like Me,” endowing the dragon with some emotional depth is the least this movie, directed by Chris Appelhans, could do. “Wish Dragon” is a transporting experience, but it’s far from a whole new world.Wish DragonRated PG. Running time: 1 hour 38 minutes. Watch on Netflix. More