The "After the Empire" screening includes the film "Children" by Italian filmmaker Paolo Gioli. I really appreciate the films I've seen by him. His political consciousness also speaks to me, in the fire he has about politics. The anger transformed into art. I was just thinking that many of the films I chose for this screening of political wondermental film happen to be films made from photographs - "Children" by Paolo Gioli, "Lingchi: Echoes of a Historical Photograph" by Chen Chien-jen, and "K (Acugher/Acimi)" (in a way) by Frederique Devaux. Quite a few of the other films are reworking of footage or reinterpretations of footage (the "Holly Would..." screening was also in this vein a lot, and was also quite politically minded). I'm thinking - is there something inherently political about the marriage between film and photography? There is something certainly inherently political about the image and its appropriation/power/representation. But what of motion and stasis of image occurring at once? Is this what helps make Chris Marker's "La Jetee" so politically resonant? I'm thinking about it, anyway. I am also of the view that aesthetics are political - maybe even super-political, and therefore outside the narrow defines of "politics" as we understand it. Hmm. The use of the optical printer also makes you see film as photographs. I wish I had one!!