VIFF: Close To Home

Posted by
Filed in VIFF 2006
October 11, 2006

20061010 Viff Close To Home

I went into this screening expecting Close to Home to be another Israeli border patrol documentary, only pointing the camera at female recruits. This fictionalization follows two women in their required national service and depicts them as being pretty much normal people with normal concerns.

Family, men, vices, cell phones, and cute hats are first on their minds. There appears to be a redeeming quality in all the women; that they seem to be reluctant to detain and search the Arab populace that they are required to do.

Rather than taking the names of all the Arabs they see on the streets or in buses; checking identification documents, and searching bags; they would rather sit in a coffee shop and smoke. These are normal kids, and only when they happen to be standing nearly on top of a bomb blast do they gain any insight into what their function is in harassing the populace.

IMDB entry

Reader Reviews and Comments

Submit a Review or Comment

but in the name of rationalization? in the name of normalizing the war? Showing the human/humane side of the IDF? The fetishization of the Israeli soldier? Vice magazine did a little photo shoot of pretty Israeli soldiers. I'm sure there were some pretty reluctant nazis who would rather be shopping. But this occupation is still on so do we really need to see an ambivalent, sorta reluctant pair of occupiers? Do we need to romanticize, or even the opposite, banalize (if thats a word)?

Posted by: sean orr at October 11, 2006 1:05 AM | Quote Comment

It's not romantic or forgiving; it's showing kids who, by law, have to serve in the military.

It's not making a political statement supporting the policies of the IDF or the state of Israel as far as I see it. It shows kids who do their job with enthusiasm and it shows those who are repulsed by what they're doing and those that are bored and performing their jobs poorly... The directors don't appear to be apologists as much as realists.

It stands a chance of appearing at the Jewish film festival in 2007, and bears watching. Watch it along with "More Than 1000 Words" and "Checkpoint"

http://www.transfax.co.il/title.asp?id=181

Posted by: Richard Murray

at October 11, 2006 7:12 AM | Quote Comment

In an ideal world where the western morality is distributed evenly on the both sides of this conflict, Israeli movies would be banned altogether unless IDF ends its multi decade long occupation of the Palestinian territories. But since we live amidst an ocean of hypocrisy and one sided moral preference, Israeli movies about the occupation are seen as a sign of openness on the Israeli side.

I smell fesses .

Posted by: NEVER AGAIN at October 11, 2006 10:05 AM | Quote Comment

NEVER AGAIN: HUH?

What's 'fesses'?

Posted by: Richard Murray

at October 11, 2006 1:08 PM | Quote Comment

It is bizarre to say that in an ideal world Israeli movies would be banned altogether. It's one thing to advocate economic sanctions against Israel, but even then the principle of open debate would require an exception for film.

It's like saying that you are opposed to the U.S. military action in Iraq, so all American films should be banned -- including antiwar films like Fahrenheit 9/11.

Posted by: Mathew Englander

at October 11, 2006 10:49 PM | Quote Comment