Professor Green: Suicide and Me

'Suicide and me' does a lot for the image of mental health. Professor Green (Stephen Manderson) brings it within our reach, lets us know that even the best of us have a relationship with a struggle for self-worth and happiness.

sheerluxe.com

It certainly identified with me. I struggled with finding happiness when I first moved to London and even more in telling people how I felt. The day I knew I needed help was when I first self-harmed, which, alongside suicide and eating disorders, is one of the most misunderstood acts of depression, both by those who have inflicted it upon themselves, and by those who haven't. To those who cut, it's a coping mechanism, a symbolic image that separates the pain and channels your negative feelings. To those who don't, it's a sign of weakness, attention seeking, a cry for help. I would never have shown anyone my cuts, it was my way of coping not of seeking attention. Manderson does well to open up these kinds of conversations around suicide and throw away the taboo to discover the reality of what's going on inside. He discovers that although these acts are too often seen as selfish, to the sufferer, it is often the opposite. A way to make things better, to relieve the burden on their families, to end the negative cycle.

Stephen explores what happens when we are unable to speak up about our troubles and share them, as well as exploring the negative thought processes that can lead to suicide. Spaces like the Maytree play integral roles in changing the way we approach conversations around suicide and mental health issues. Showing approaches like this, is why this programme, among others, is so important. (http://www.maytree.org.uk/)

mirror.co.uk

There has to be change in the way we, as a society, tackle the hard times, talk about depression, about ill mental health, about suicide. Only by doing this, can we go any way towards preventing it. I've learned not to set the bar too high, not to expect anything and be happily surprised when good things come. I work hard, dedicate myself to projects, to my career, to my family, friends and my partner, who was the first person to really understand. I also allow more time for the things that I enjoy, like playing football and photography. I learned that 'It's ok to cry, it's ok to talk about it' as Manderson's relatives echo. Everyone has bad days, but the good days will come.

tv.bt.com

This isn't a review on the quality of the programme, but instead a view on the issue at hand. We can't keep quiet about suicide, keep suppressing our feelings, swallowing our words. The fear is that when we are exposed to self-harm and to suicide, we're more vulnerable to it. But with discussion, needs to come education on how to cope. I suffered for longer than I needed to because I'd convinced myself that I could cope, when actually, I needed to talk things through to escape the blurred vision I had of life and find the beauty in it again. I did, but only because I found a way of talking, before it was too late. Sharing how we feel with family, partners, friends or even strangers, can do wonders for taking the weight off our shoulders.

It's great to see the BBC tackling these issues first hand, especially with young talent. It was all too familiar to watch as Stephen looks to camera and frustratedly exclaims, 'I'm crying again!' I s'pose filming these things is a form of therapy in itself, you spend enough takes talking about your feelings. I hope Manderson finds peace following this journey and that the programme will encourage others to travel a similar path.

I hope to see more programmes bringing the issues around mental health to the surface and encourage debate and conversation around mental health issues in the near future.

Waste

If going to a theatre and watching 'nothing much happen' and hearing 'too much said' amongst a cast of predominantly middle-aged men who sit down a lot, then 'Waste' is definitely one for you.

nationaltheatre.org - Johan Persson Photography

For me, it certainly wasn't. The 1927 version of the piece is filled with waste, wasted opportunity to provide drama. There is the unfulfilled drama of adultery, of a potential illegitimate child, of a rumoured affair in parliament - but actually we see none of that. The adulterer dies before she becomes a problem, the child goes with her. The father of the child dies too and alas, all hopes of an explosive second act are well and truly dusted away into the wings. It seems that every bit of potential this piece has, is not actually written into the script. It is left away from the stage leaving us willing, begging even, for the action to wake us from our cramped-seat-slumber.

nationaltheatre.org - Johan Persson

I liked the set, I'll give it that. There was at least some attempt to make the piece interesting through its transitions, stylishly marking the four acts and allowing for a masked set-change. For those moments that we saw the set changes, props were moved by maids and directed by the butler, making it seem to be simply, part of the furniture. It was like a dance to watch as they swung their arms flamboyantly. It's a shame the leads didn't catch on, instead they remain almost static throughout the entire piece. I think a smaller stage might have suited it best. It felt unused and empty, leaving me feeling distant and unengaged.

nationaltheatre.org - Johan Persson Photography

Michael Elwyn gave an amateur performance as Horsham, with absolutely no convincing authoritative trait. Gerrard McArthur gave a stronger performance as Lord Cantilupe, using his stage presence to his advantage when plotting to join the front benches for the Disestablishment Act. Olivia Williams was a little too reserved as adulterer Amy O'Connell, her flirting not nearly loud enough to convince me of her character's amorous nature. Charles Edwards did the best he could with a script that gave him nothing but words, and no feelings to exercise. Although with a man who didn't care enough to love a woman, nor enough in losing a child yet hold a revolver to his head over his career - I couldn't have cared less that he'd met his end, making it very hard to sympathise with those left behind. Oh and for goodness sake, the mourning Walter only needs to say the word 'waste' once, stop making a long play longer with more unnecessary words. We all got the point quite quickly, the affair is going to ruin his career and his life. I didn't need further repetitive sentences to clarify what the entire play had been screaming at me: WASTED OPPORTUNITIES!!!

A whopping 140mins of dilly-dally-dialogue to delay the inevitable is enough to drive the audience to suicide too. Cut-throat it most certainly was not. My verdict: 'Waste' is a waste of time - or at least 2hrs and 40mins of it.

Life Inside 'Islamic State'

This was a great 17min animated short, created from the diary entries of one brave individual who kept track of daily life under Daesh rule. Where shopkeepers are taxed unlawfully, men are arrested for wearing trousers that are too long and women for failing to wear a veil. Where stoning to death is a just punishment and lashing and beheadings a daily occurrence. How can we possibly understand what it's like to live our lives like this?

bbc.co.uk

Animators Ross Plaskow and Scott Coello have done a brilliant job in portraying these scenes in ways that will not distance us as Westerners. It informs us, shows us only the humanity of the victims and does not aim to shock or turn us away from its content - which is important when all too many turn their backs on the problem. Not only are the drawings skilful, with the aid of dan Pollard's score, they are symbolic of the many meanings behind the look in a man's eye, of the acts of violence, of defiance and of despair.

bbc.co.uk

What came across most for me is the loneliness of a life in Raqqa. Attending any meetings in public places can see you accused of plotting against Daesh, you cannot see your friends, you cannot watch television to connect with the outside world, what can you do? There is nothing but the four walls of your home, and the sound and tremor of bombs dropping all around you. The world has deserted you. Our diarist is advised, 'Live your life without considering the present' - well what else can he do?

It is frustrating for me as a viewer as I too search for ways to act, to fight back, to help the civilians of Raqqa - but fail to come to any hopeful conclusion. All I can do is write this post and let someone somewhere know that I am thinking of them, that they are not forgotten, that they are not alone.

Find Life Inside 'Islamic State' on Iplayer, available until 9th April: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p03lcxh7/life-inside-islamic-state

Cleansed

art-sheep.com

Sarah Kane is, of course, known for her particularly dark and radical writing and is one iconic theatre writer I really wish I'd met. She's a troubled young writer of the past who, almost 20yrs later, still manages to shake up our theatre audiences, or if nothing else, certainly makes us stop abruptly to think, to analyse, to be shocked.

10 mins into 'Cleansed' at the Dorfman Theatre and we'd already lost two members of the audience due to fainting. That tells you most of what you need to know about a Kane theatre experience. As director, Katie Mitchell says: 'We are not shirking any of the violence requested in the stage directions'. 'Kane's stage directions request literal violence. A tongue is cut off with a pair of scissors. Hands are cut off. So how do you do that in a way that is not symbolic?' Well she found the answer to that one pretty quickly it seems. Mitchell embraces the sexual violence, ripping it from the page and brandishing it to audiences that shift uncomfortably in their seats, discover an unusual interest in the lighting rig and distract themselves by digging the dirt from beneath their fingernails - perhaps this is what Kane pictured when she titled the piece 'cleansed' -  never before have fingernails emerged so immaculate.

nationaltheatre.org.uk

SPOILERS

The production is set in what seems like a derelict school or prison facility in which it is not just the body that is trapped. The mind is too. Outside the walls of this prison there is nothing but hopelessness with the sound of bombs dropping, placing our abstract narrative amidst a world at war. The war exists inside as well, with a power hierarchy much representative of Nazi brutality during the holocaust. As Kane referenced herself, Roland Barthes said, 'when one is in love, one is in Dachau', so perhaps this informed the location that Kane needed for such a powerful and brutal, sexual message.

theartsdesk.com

The play begins with protagonist 'Grace' in a red dress, watching on as Graham begs for heroine from Tinker, the complex villain of our tale, who sadistically injects it into his eye - a bit of a metaphor for the piece really - injecting pain and brutality into the eyes of its beholders. That's where we lost audience member number one.

Grace, is looking for her brother (Graham). Her journey leads her to him, alive and well and the two duel like lovers, dancing together half-naked until Grace clambers on top of him to make love.

thestage.co.uk

Though Graham is not the only one with affection for Grace. Matthew Tennyson is marvellous as Robin, who not only looks amazing in a dress but who conveys the vulnerability of his character beautifully. He ventures out to buy Grace chocolates before Tinker catches him and feeds them to him one by one, with the same tool he'd cut Carl's tongue off with. We were watching torture, with Tinker instilling his dominance over such a likable and fragile victim. Robin struggles with his feelings for Grace, explaining that he's never been with anyone before. He exclaims 'I love you'. Grace replies 'I love you too'. He is delicate and it is a tragic moment as he shouts for help, for understanding, for someone to talk to, before ending it all with a noose made from tights. Matthew Tennyson is most definitely the highlight of this wholly unbearable experience.

metro.co.uk

We also meet two homosexual lovers, Rod and Carl. Carl declares 'I'll love you forever'. Rod can only say, 'I love you now'. He struggles with commitment. The savage nature of love places them in this facility together, as Carl is systematically tortured, his tongue cut off, his hands cut off, his feet cut off. He is forced to confront exactly what commitment to Rod meant for him, 'I love you, forever'. The very words that had placed him in this nightmare. His final torture, is also his final moment of pleasure, as Rod struggles to support him as they have sex with one another. Soon after, Rod is shot. Carl - his fate is much worse.

standard.co.uk

Our torturer Tinker is just as complex as our other characters. An exotic dancer arrives throughout the piece to perform for him, as he tries to pleasure himself, though it seems that he struggles with intimacy and instead asks, 'can we be friends?'. Grace mimics the girl's dancing, drawing attention to her quest for understanding her sexuality. Tinker is as emotionally trapped as his prisoners. He tells the woman 'I love you'. She replies 'I love you' too. They later have sex, with the girl dirty-talking as they do so, telling him she loves him, telling him to finish 'inside' - only he can't. Suddenly his villainy aligns - he is punishing those around him for their sexuality because he is unsure of his. He cannot be aroused by women or perhaps, cannot be aroused by the very nature of sexuality at all, that he so greatly despises.

nationaltheatre.org.uk

nationaltheatre.org

The final scene emerges. Tinker, out of frustration, shoots the woman dead. Grace is strapped to a bed and wheeled offstage, Carl wheeled offstage too. The two return to stun their audience as it all begins to make sense. Grace did not love her brother Graham. Not sexually anyway. Graham was the embodiment of who she wanted to be. She was trapped inside a woman's body and was screaming to find her true self, fantasising about his body. As she seeks help, she is subjected to systematic rape and violence. She tries to mimic the actions of those around her, flirting with the confusion of her gender and sexuality both at once. She explores both the female and male body and is finally confronted with her primary wish.

She reappears as Tinker reveals menacingly that the surgery is complete. He has removed Carl's sexual organs and attached them to Grace, with some very clever, if-not shocking, costume design here. She becomes Graham and despite the turmoil she's been through, says 'thank you'? This is, it seems, the harrowing and completely sickening journey of a desperate woman's journey to become who she was inside. A systematic torture centre, punishing the gender identity and sexuality of its prisoners, again as Barthes said, 'when one is in love, one is in Dachau'.

thestage.co.uk

The piece, although abstract, is extraordinarily clever. The events managing to represent ill mental health, torture, sexual desire, confusion, growth and love, all at once. It is a play about identity about pushing and pulling ourselves through our own sexual discoveries, about growing through our pain (symbolised by the sunflowers and daffodils that appear through the boards). It's about others taking pleasure in our torture and only some of us make it out the other side. Mitchell manages to give this piece new meaning with the growing conversation around transgender identity - the piece portraying the struggle, the betrayal, the hope, the torment, the torture - all parts of this tragic clambering through life in order to find our true selves.

Despite my acknowledgement of this vigorous declaration of all aspects of love and pain, one thing was certainly clear upon leaving the theatre, I felt anything but 'Cleansed'.

Sources: http://londoncalling.com/features/katie-mitchell-cleansed-national-theatre

Unicorns and Hook-Up Apps

So last night I watched a film about a man who identifies as a unicorn - yes a unicorn. 

i.ytimg.com

A recovering alcoholic and prolific drug-addict, a burning-man enthusiast has created his very own universe, cornicopia, in which all of his polyamorous friends can live - only it's not a universe, it's his bedroom and apparently they can't all bring themselves to sleep together. 

I can't say much more without directing you to watch it - I'm all for extroversion, gender fluidity and non-binary expression but unicorns are taking it too far. With his obsessive personality and recurrent need to try new outrageous hobbies - he clearly needs counselling above anything else. Maybe one of the glamicorns should tell him?

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/video/unicorns-038  

vice-images.vice.com

Then I watched a film about the mobile love industry - that's things like Tinder, Grindr and Her for the layman. Most of these apps feel a little too much like window shopping for me to ever get stuck in - that, and I already have a partner. There was however, one exception. If you Happen to come across Happn you may be surprised at how it manages to keep the spontaneity and coincidence of an actual meeting. It tracks the route of your travel and matches you with someone nearby who shares part of that journey - almost as though you were to bump into them on the way to work. Magical...that is until we meet the guy who says it's good for a girl not to sleep with a guy on the first date - only to be asked, 'why does the girl have to say no, why can't it be the guy?' - good question!

I'm stuck in the past a bit with dating apps, I don't trust things (or people) I cannot see. Particularly when you look at stats of sexual violence against the increase in the use of hook-up apps. Because that's what they really are aren't they, hook-up apps. I don't think dating has been a part of dating apps for a while now. I'm not planning on using an app to find my catch, but if i found myself single and was ever to start, I'd start with the gift from the city of love: Happn.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J9V3fLUSQFM

9999

9999, a documentary filmed at Merksplas, a maximum security prison in Belgium. Home to mentally ill inmates who have no guarantee of ever seeing freedom again; their release date: 31/12/9999.

9999_Trailer English from Associate Directors on Vimeo.

This documentary by Ellen Vermeulen granted fantastic access to one of the most timeless places on Earth. Where the only thing to do each day is watch shadows disappear from the wall and listen to the slow knocking of pipes. It is tragic, to see so many people unsure of their futures. Unsure of their present. They are granted no access to psychiatric help, no proper advice or control of medication and essentially left to be forgotten about in prison until either they kill themselves or die naturally. These men have made mistakes, but Vermeulen's characters are remorseful and it is heart-breaking to watch as they sit confined to their tiny rooms, that have become their only world, as their mental health and emotions fluctuate. One man explains the story of how he came to be here. He had done wrong and was scared that his father would send him to prison for fear that he would be admitted to a prison like Merksplas and left to rot, so he attacks him and leaves him for dead. He powerfully states, 'because I wanted to keep my life, I lost my life'. He knows he did wrong and he has had many years to confront this decision.

Another young man was trying to seek help for his mental health but being turned away from a clinic, he set fire to a bike to get attention. He did not receive the help he was seeking, instead he was incarcerated and has been in prison without therapy for 8 years.

The Human Rights Commission condemns the Belgian government by serving fines to them. The government merely pays the fine for the breach in human rights, and continues, business as usual, whilst approx 900 people remain in prison, without a release date.

After the showing of this incredible documentary, we were treated to a Q&A with director Ellen Vermeulen. Here's what happened:

Aud: A really powerful film with amazing access.

It's only afterwards when the media said to me, this is really absurd that you can make this, that I realise this is maybe strange, that they allow me.

Aud: So it was a challenge? You knew it was a challenge to try and make this film?

Dir: I think the challenge was not that much, how to make this film but how to be honest with what I saw and to capture this kind of, their lives. What will I show to show how their life is? I think that was the most difficult thing.

Aud: Could you tell us a little bit about how you made, why you chose to make the film as you did in the sense of locking off the camera, filming people mostly as they're doing things and keeping most of the, well keeping the interviews off camera.

9999themovie.com

Dir: Yeh, very important moment was when, to find funding I had to shoot a trailer so I filmed myself. Afterwards I worked with a cameraman so I filmed myself. And as I was very close to my characters I filmed like very close and when i looked at it I felt bad because it was, you know a very famous dutch film-maker says 'when you have poor children with a little dirt on their mouth you feel sad for them', you feel it's like exotic and I didn't want to do that. I wanted to respect them and show them in their strength. This is one thing. but also you want to film the space. I am not a filmmaker with lots of words, I want to show. So my idea was I want to make this film and if you turn off the sound you can also see the film. But before I worked for one year and a half doing research. So the moment I filmed it was very obvious what I wanted to film, I only shot for 4 days. So I did research for one year and a half and filmed for four days. I knew how they would react when something was happening. There was one moment there was a fight between one of the prisoners and the guard. And I thought I cannot film this because if I film this I have to show tomorrow, this relationship with this guard and my film is not about that, my film is about the timelessness of their being. So, it was all very clear and that's why I think the shooting was very strict, very obvious for me.

Aud: Did you actually film the interviews or just record the sound?

Dir: Both. there are some interviews I did before I recorded them myself when I was alone.

Aud: And so the period of research, you worked without a camera did you?

Dir: Yeh, I only want to film when I'm tired of talking. The characters also said finished, stop.

Aud: Stop the research?

moviesthatmatter.nl

Dir: We were tired talking to each other I new every spot on the wall I knew everything. I had been there for so many times so long time and I had to film. I was so upset I had to film, I had to film something with what I saw.

Aud: Have they seen the film?

Dir: Sure. They have seen it I think three times and they were really also tired of it. Yeh but it's very important because it was screened on telvsion twice in belgium and I was so afraid. They are in this little room alone and they look at television and they see themselves and this is so difficult for them. So I wanted to make sure that they knew everythign by heart. They had to know it so good because one day they are good, the next day they can be ill. And I wanted to show the film in every stage of their, every stage as much as possible.

Aud: So you also made a decision not to film, or put in the film, any sequences where they were less in control of their lives. Less well?

Dir: These are the moments that I'm not going to film because I'm there with them and there is something happening I am not a film-maker. I'm not the kind of film-maker who wants to film err, this in my reality. I didn't put the camera for 24hrs. It's the way I see their lives and it's a confusion maybe. Of course there are moments when you really see that they are ill. It's hard to film and I'm not going to show them in their weakest moment. But, I think you can feel that there is something happening with them so I wanted to give the feeling and not show everything. A judge said to me, if you see the film you can realise how much worse it is in reality and I think he's right. This is very, ok. Their life is good when you see this film. In reality it's much worse.

9999themovie.com

Aud: There were a couple of moments in the film, when people address you. Was that, were you questioning him. Or did he know he wanted to make a statement?

Dir: Yeh he wanted to make a statement and it's also about who is watching who. You are watching him all the time and I think at one moment he's like, I'm like a character in a fiction film, but he's playing with that all the time. When I entered his room he always had something for me, like I'm from the mafia. He was addressing, always symbolic to me and I think this moment is a very important moment because as a spectator you are confronted with your position of watching them and being on the outside. I was not asking anything I think this is the moment that lots of people would cut, I was just like not watching him coz I don't want him to react to me.

Aud: You say the film has been shown on TV, judges have watched it. Has the film had any impact, any debate at least?

Dir: Yeh. Things are changing. I'm not going to say it's completely because of the film but I think this film also had an impact. I showed this film for example in the European Court of Human Rights and that's very nice because lots of judges said to me, we are reading these files and now for the first time we see faces. It's like the same with judges, they say we send people to prison and now, we see what's happening in prison. The European Court is judging individuals and one month after this film, they judged the complete, they gave a fine to Belgium for everybody, not only individual anymore. So, this maybe the film, and also there is one of these guys not in my film but one of these guys who asked for euthanasia, to end his life, so it was a huge thing in Europe and it was shameful for Belgium. I think these things are, helping to change, because they now have a building for 200 people, and there are now 800-900 left. Also what is strange is that some months after the first screening, the characters were put in psychiatry, after 16yrs, 15yrs of prison, something - I don't say it's my film. but I say, it's strange.

Aud: All your 5 characters got therapy?

Dir: Yes. Very strange. Yeh, you say applause but for me it's hard because then I should have made a film about 1100 people. It's very sad that I chose them and not others.

Aud: Why did you choose those 5 people?

cobra.canvas.be

Dir: Very early I wanted to film them. Four of them didn't want to be int eh film, they said no I don't want to be filmed. I think so many other people asked, can I please be in your film but they are very angry and they shout at the guard and they say, it's all their fault, no it's not. And also I wanted people to have, they have to know that they did something wrong. I met people who were proud of what they did and that was very difficult. I have to like my characters. And very early in my process I decided I wanted to film them. Like Wilfried, everybody said to me, the guards, they said 'don't talk to him, he will play with you, he will play games' and for one year and a half he has played games. he has teased me, he has offended me, he has attacked me. there was one, in my head I think there was a changing point. I was in his room and I touched the door and it closes and I couldn't go out anymore. I think I was there for 15minutes. He said to me, 'now you are depending on me, I can do whatever I want, you have to trust me'. And I was really relaxed, I am happy for that and I said 'Wilfried I totally trust you' and this was the first time I could show it to him. And I think from that moment on he had a different way of reacting to me. There were some moments he shouted at me and I never panicked, I said 'you're right', I also shout. So I thin that made him like 'ok she comes back every week, she doesn't hate me for that'. So it has been a long process.

Aud: So you talk about 8months research. Were you there once a week?

Dir: Yeh. I was there once a week, a whole day that was enough. It was not funny time, it was horrible to be there. I could not explain to anybody what is happening and now I have the feeling I can show it with this film. there was one nice thing in the European court also, there was a woman from I think Latvia and she cried and said, 'for years I am trying to explain to people what is happening and now I don't have to explain any more'. This is, it's impossible to explain, these people, whats happening. It's impossible for them to live in this way.

Aud: Do you think that in the time you were there that they found the therapy they were lacking, through you? 

Dir: Yeh, I think. I think, it's also very hard to know, they only see two kinds of people; people who judge them for what they did, like criminals and people who treat them like mentally ill people who are, who have to be treated. And I was I think the only person in their, in a long time, who was just there not judging them, not saying you are ill. I just talked to them like human beings and I think that was very nice but also very hard when I left I think. When I left I was very emotional and they were like, (happily) 'bye-bye'.

Aud: You say you wrote it, I just wondered how you call yourself a writer when this is a documentary?

Dir: Oh but this is a very directed film.

Aud: The writing aspect?

dailymatters.moviesthatmatter.nl

Dir: Yeh I wrote every scene, I. It's not I know this will happen but I know this is what I'm searching for. After so many times of being there i know when I do this, how they will react so I knew for example, every scene has to have timelessness. There can be no chronology. so, the only moment there is someone saying something, is the moment the boy leaves the prison. The rest of the film is built without scenes of chronology. Even inside the scenes. this was very important for me, to write scenes that have this timelessness. So, when I make a film I know exactly what I want and I write everything down so this is a very directed film. I put people there and I say. There is one scene that I didn't know and I don't like it at all, this scene. But it was very hot in Belgium, this bit on medication. This was the first news, there was big news in Belgium, and this is the scene I really don't like and I didn't want to put in the film because it has something 'now', somebody is coming inside the room and this is not. It's very concrete what's happening there.

Aud: When they're discussing when he's going to take his medicine, today, tomorrow?

Dir: And also it was not presented, I didn't know, it was out of my control. So when this guard was coming in I was like shit, my morning scene is gone. And then, we kept on filming and then afterwards I saw that it was very hard to see because this was against the law but I really fought against my editor because I didn't want to have it in the film.

Aud: When you say it's hard to see because it's against the norm, what do you mean?

Dir: Somebody who is mentally ill in prison has to have the same treatment as somebody outside the prison, but then you see no, they have to be responsible for their own medication. So there is a doctor, a psychiatrist that says you have to take your medication. Wilfried is collecting all his pills and sometimes he says 'I'm going to kill myself one day so I collect them, it's my only freedom'. Sometimes he puts them in his toilet and he says 'eat', 'bon a petit, have a nice meal' to his toilet.

Aud: I have a question about the environment. I was amazed to see they were locked in with glass glazed doors, and was wondering about the safety aspect of that. In prison here, those safety things would never be allowed, like the stack of chairs in another scene, that could be used as weapons.

Dir: It's a very old prison, it's good for my film of course. In a very modern hospital it could be different. When I was there were some moments when there were a lot of guards who had to attack somebody who was aggressive but er, I cannot really answer your question, because they have never attacked me.

Aud: In a British prison there'd be no glass.

Dir: Wilfried says that they will happy if I kill myself coz they have the room for somebody else, and I think he's right. Nobody takes care of them, they don't mind. So I can just say that, if somebody kills themselves - next one.

physicalimpossibility.com

Aud: When you showed the film, was there any sense from the people running the prison that this was actually, there was something shocking here.

Dir: I made one decision that was, when you make a film people have to sign a contract. I accept that I'm in your film etc. I said to them you have to sign this contract when you have seen the film and you like it, otherwise you don't sign it. They don't have any rights, they don't have any control in their lives, I said to them I give you back something which was a huge risk for me as well because they have their strange moments as well, so I was a little bit afraid. Also with the prison itself I said to them only afterwards you have to sign and if you don't like it...but I'm not somebody who will offend the prison itself. So I show them the film, to the prisoners and nobody, they were sad to see themselves. One said, I am sad but this one is very bad, I'm ok. So it's funny to see how they react on their neighbours. And the head of the prison itself, said it's shocking but it's reality so we cannot say anything. The head of the prison was at my screening and she took the mic and she talked to the audience which was also very nice. They said, we don't like what's happening, we hope something will change.

Aud: Has anyone tried to escape?

Dir: there was one very strange moment, I made jokes about it when I was there. I said 'next time I'll bring white sheets and I'll help you escape' but no. There was one very strange moment with Wilfried, he said to me, 'this weekend you have to watch the news because somebody will be killed who is responsible for my situation, so you have to watch the news'. And then I didn't, it was very difficult for me to decide what to do because I cannot be responsible for this. I was quite sure that he would not do that but if I would share it with somebody and he knows it, then I would lose his trust. So, it happened that people said things to me, where I had to make some ethical decisions. But nobody, no, they are too weak to escape I think. They can't run.

Aud: When you say they can't run, do mean in a state of mind where they can't escape or physically unable to run? Is it the medicine?

Dir: You have seen Salem in the film, the French speaking man, that says 'I'm lost'? This man, I knew he was between 9-10 o'clock in the morning I could a little bit, we could communicate a little bit. And then it finished for the rest of the day he's sleeping, it's impossible to really talk to him. So after the film one month after the film, after shooting the film, I visited him again and maybe at 2 o'clock he was very ok, and I said 'what's happening with you Salem, it's very nice to talk but what's happening'. He said, 'I don't know, they changed my medication'. So maybe he's there 8yrs, so maybe for 8 years he had been like this, and somebody decides we'll try something else and, he woke up. They don't have anybody to defend them so they are, completely lost.

cinergie.be

Aud: Did your research include talking to psychiatrists to see how they SHOULD be treated?

Dir: Yes but limited. Because I really decided to show their situation from inside and I thought I don't really know the situation with law and so on. Once I talked to them, I decide now I have to shut myself off from the outside world. Of course before I could talk to them, and spoke to the guards and the people around them. So I talked a lot to them in the beginning. I had to be positive about this film because, the day I said to Wilfried a little bit from outside, I said 'I will start filming', he said 'oh you cannot'. After one year and a half he said, 'no, forget it'. And I stayed calm and I said ,'ok I'll find somebody else'. And he said 'no, no, no film us'.

Aud: how come you chose not to interview the guards?

Dir: I'm not interested int their situation. My film is about them. Every information has to be. I'm not a journalist, I hate objective films, I hate it. I want to make subjective films and I don't want if somebody says, if somebody gives an a, somebody has to give a b - no, I'm not interested in that. It's the spectator who has to make their own story and there are so many.. I'm not interested at all in showing the opinion of everybody.

Aud: Comment on the sound scape. Was it almost all, filmed in the room?

Dir: A little bit composing but the challenge was, how can we reduce the sound because in reality, there is so much sound and so we had to put filters on it to reduce the sound. And so we decided, me and the editor decided, to put some details on it, to make it there. You don't want to be in a bath of sound, you want some little points to point out some feelings. Like the toilet, the water in the pipes, this is re-constructed. it's impossible, you stand there with the mic, it's not always reality but I'm sure it's like... And sometimes I wanted to have this effect of being in their head.

Walking the Himalayas

standard.co.uk

I'd been waiting for Lev Wood's second series, 'Walking the Himalayas' for some time, having followed the Twitter storm caused by his first series 'Walking the Nile'.

This one though, had a slightly different tone than the first, whether that was intentional or not, who knows. This one felt as though it was more about Lev and his challenge, rather than the places he travelled through, and the people he met along the way. These encounters seemed all too brief and I wanted to know more about life throughout the mountain range , more about the history, (and less about the fuel crisis).

That's not to say the series wasn't good, it was, but the bar was set very high with 'Walking the Nile'.

In Ep 1, Lev began his journey with Milang, by wading unnecessarily through a lake he could have walked around (like the crew did) - but then, why not, I guess. He travelled high into the mountains where the air thinned, where tribes are scarcely populated and settlements far and few between. We meet a mountain tribe,and are told how short the life expectancy is up here, particularly for women. It made me wonder, when you visit remote tribes like this, surely there's a risk that you may carry illnesses that they are not immune to? If so, is there something you can do to prevent it? I'd never really thought about it before and wondered whether the production team had either. (I also wanted to know, when Lev and Milang are both on camera at the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan at the snow top, who is the third person holding the camera?!!).

In my opinion Lev lost a few adventurer points in this episode, when he hit the rope-bridge and succumbed to a feeling of what looked like genuine terror. The wooden planks were precarious but as an ex-squaddie I did think - come on, step on the wire and man up!

EP2

In Ep 2 Lev's terror increased, when his tent was invaded by a large spider. Though this time, it was nice to know that even someone like Lev is scared of spiders - maybe I'll camp in the jungle yet!

dawn.com

Throughout his journey through Northern Pakistan, it still amazes me that everything, everywhere, is written in English - 'Look to your Left Nanga Parbat' - you don't quite realise the extent of British imperialism until you see things like this - everywhere. It almost feels wrong to see it in English.

Later Lev is faced with another questionable river crossing donning a home-made pulley system. Lev was reluctant to climb aboard but did so anyway, needing a helping hand to get back across to Milang - who sensibly turned down the offer to follow. I would've jumped at the chance to pull myself across, even if my arms were left aching for days - in fact I already have, in the pitch black in River Valley, New Zealand and I can back Lev up 100%, they're harder than they look!

We learnt a bit more about the people of the region here, and it was interesting that the community living by the line of control on the militarised border with India, are happy for their children to leave the nomadic life, even though it dates back to the 6th century. Tradition vs. opportunity; it's a tough one wherever you grow up I guess.

channel4.com

EP3

In Ep 3, Lev reaches Nepal where we say goodbye to Milang and hello to his old friend Binod. The pair trek across the country coming close to crocodiles and fast-flowing rivers. 

After the tragic death of journalist Matthew Power during the last series, I can guess that no-one in the production office wanted to answer the phone to the shocking message that Lev, brother Peter and Binod were all in hospital. Having been moved on by communists in the village, the boys had decided to get a taxi elsewhere. The brakes had failed in the car they were travelling in and the car had plummeted and rolled off the side of a steep verge, leaving Lev's shoulder dislocated and Binod concussed. Of all the dangers that they face by walking on foot across the Himalayas, the most dangerous part of their journey was the 5 minutes that they spent in a car. Lev spent a week recuperating with minimal pain relief before flying back to the UK for further treatment.

The team were soon back on their feet though, his brother back on the camera as soon as they got to the hospital. 

EP4 

awesci.com

In Ep4, after 5 weeks away to recover, Lev returns for Binod, sharing an emotional reunion with his wife and children. Continuing the journey, the researchers did well to find a rather extreme form of collecting honey - hallucinogenic honey at that. Men flung themselves down the cliff towards angry bees, to gather a rather meagre amount of honey but allowed for some entertaining recollections from villagers of the properties of it. In this episode the team revisit the villagers who rescued them after the car accident to thank them. The entire village gathers around to greet them, showing just how friendly these remote villages often are to visitors. The pair continue their walk towards Everest towards royal festivals of Bhutan.

twitter.com

EP5

In the final episode, Lev and Binod complete their trip in Bhutan - travelling via a village that expressed an obsession with artwork portraying the male sexual organ - which Lev of course found unusually uncomfortable. The pair equipped themselves with the national dress, to celebrate the former King of Bhutan's birthday, narrowly managing to catch a few comments from the locals about the society they live in - I would have liked more of that throughout the series. They then visited a local monastery in hope of seeking good luck for a safe passage. It seemed that luck was not on their side as they are warned not to progress on their journey. Of course, Lev isn't one to heed this kind of warning, he presses on nevertheless.

channel4.com

The end was near, with a climb to a snowy peak in Bhutan, without Binod by his side. Binod has been suffering with bad feet from the hard roads and was unable to join him, which was clearly an emotional moment for them both. If only the government were more relaxed with timings, perhaps Lev could have waited until Binod was fit enough to join him. Perhaps this was what they had been warned of.

All in all, the production team did another grand job. The addition of Binod was a good chance to hear more of Lev's personality but didn't offer much more in terms of content.  In fact, it may even have discouraged Lev to find conversation elsewhere, which previously had been the way the audience found out about the regions he travelled through. It was less exhilarating than 'Walking The Nile', but equally as addictive.

PD Jamie Berry has another successful series under his belt, averaging about 2.2million views per episode. The stakes were relatively lower than series 1 but enjoyable nonetheless. I can't wait to hear what's next for the October Films team.