now at lumiere.net.nz
Empty Clothes: Useless
Observations in three sectors of China’s garment industry offers an open-ended musing on consumerism. By ROSEANNE LIANG.CHINA’s industrialisation-on-steroids throws up such a rich and complex tangle of issues that it could fill an entire festival of documentaries and still not be done. At the New Zealand International Film Festivals alone, 2006’s China Blue left audiences despondent with its intimate portrait on life in a South Chinese jeans factory. In 2007, the epic and perversely beautiful Manufacturing Landscapes made art of China’s ecological disasters and put into striking relief the sheer scale of ‘progress’. This year’s Useless continues in that vein, with fly-on-the-wall observations of three varied corners of China’s garment industry: workers in a large-scale production line factory; a designer who rallies against the mass-machine-production of clothes and has created the eponymous hand-made collection called ‘Useless’ (Wuyong) for Paris Fashion Week; and finally the simple life of increasingly out-of-work tailors in small town Fengdang.
While Useless distinguishes itself as the perspective of a Chinese national (China Blue, Manufacturing Landscapes and this year’s Up the Yangtze are all American and Canadian productions), the one thing it seems to lack is a clear point of view. Ostensibly this was the filmmaker’s intention, to allow the audience to come to their own conclusions, but the overall effect instead seems to be one of confusion and/or apathy. This isn’t helped by the sneaking suspicion that little care has gone into the craft of the film – the camera technique appears to be ‘have dolly, will track very slowly, mostly from left to right’; the sound design is sparse and naturalistic, apart from sudden unmotivated level changes and awkward segues into cheesy-sounding Chinese ballads. Jia Zhang-ke focuses largely on objects and places – a ceiling fan in the grey concrete room where the factory workers have their meals; their lunchboxes all in a row – but ultimately fails to contextualise the inanimate with the people, whose lives are surely the main point of interest for the film. Strangely, their self-conscious stares at the camera objectify them rather than humanise, as if they were some kind of curious case-study and nothing more.
Useless does have its moments – for instance when a tailor insists on charging a meagre 2 yuan (40 cents) for mending trousers, even when offered more, even when – in the absence of any customers – she is left to deal with her drunken brother-in-law. The questions around consumerism and the value of human labour and life start to mean something when a tailor-turned-coalminer is asked if he likes the pink department-store satin suit he bought specially for his wife, and he answers simply “to be honest, she’s beautiful whatever she wears”. Their blushes speak volumes, and imbue what little is left of the film with a real poignancy. Earlier in the film, well-to-do designer Ma Ke insists that mass-produced clothes are disposable and devoid of history or story. That she imbues her garments with meaning by burying them in the ground or employing other workers to do the painstaking hand-weaving for her seems to be a metaphor for the film itself – without care, craft and true emotional investment in the creation of something, it is otherwise empty.

» Useless [Akld/Wgtn]
Jia Zhang-ke | Hong Kong/China | 2007 | 80 min | Featuring: Ma Ke. In Mandarin, with English subtitles.
Jia Zhang-ke | Hong Kong/China | 2007 | 80 min | Featuring: Ma Ke. In Mandarin, with English subtitles.






gradnick wrote:
Having seen virtually all of Jia Zhang-ke’s films, he strikes me as a highly sophisticated visual artist who speaks primarily through images rather than text. As such his films are very dependent on the perceptive and creative input of the viewer. He has said that he makes documentaries to learn something, and features to express something. Most documentarists make films specifically to make a point, but some (Mr Jia in particular) use the form primarily to look, and they invite the viewer to look with them. Those expecting a clear summation are likely to walk away empty-handed, but those content to look with Mr Jia may see (and feel) much more than they might if he had elected to steer their attention towards clearly defined considerations. Whether it’s a feature or a documentary, a Jia Zhang-ke film is not going to direct the viewer in this manner. Active participation is imperative. This is as much a philosophical position for Jia Zhang-ke as it is an artistic and aesthetic one – they are intrinsically linked.
It’s telling that the instances of substance Ms Liang identifies are those that come closest to the more conventional human interest tropes of the medium: the tailor and her drunken brother, and the couple with the pink satin dress. These are engaging moments effectively and respectfully used by Mr Jia, but he doesn’t depend on such scenes. These were enough to indicate where his sympathies lie, sympathies that the observant viewer will recognize throughout the remainder of this quietly thoughtful and compassionate film. The irony as I see it is that Jia Zhang-ke has made a film that deliberately eschews the temptation to do what Roseanne Liang suggests he has done, to objectify the people who pass in front of his camera as if they were case studies. In my opinion, Mr Jia’s observational style is unobtrusive and respectful, and those who appear in it are left with their dignity and privacy completely intact. I guess, when it comes to cinema, emptiness is relative.