You are here:Home-Léo Teste

About Léo Teste

A documentary addict of sorts currently serving as Managing Director of the SEDPA (Syndicat des Entreprises de Distribution de Programmes Audiovisuels), an organization representing the moral and financial interests of French audiovisual distributors, in France and in Europe.
9 05, 2017

The Wolfpack (2015) — Dir. Crystal Moselle

By | 2017-09-20T20:15:44+00:00 May 9th, 2017|Categories: #6 MISFITS|Tags: , |0 Comments

© The Wolfpack — Crystal Moselle / Magnolia Pictures

2015, 80 minutes

What happens behind the door of a tiny New York City apartment? Surely, not many people would expect to find six young men raised in a near-cult environment and deprived of almost any contact with the outside world. Some years, the Angulo brothers were allowed to go outside for short trips. Other years, they would not be allowed to go out at all. With no one but each other for entertainment, and no means to physically escape the authoritative rule of their aggressive and paranoiac father, the Angulo brothers developed an obsession for movies, their only portal to the outside world and a way for them to express the emotions they had learned to hide for fear of reprisal. Transcribing the dialogue word-for-word of their favorite films—Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, etc.—they spend most of their time reenacting them in fine detail with homemade costumes and props.

A stunning testament of the liberating power of cinema and one of the most touching coming of age story ever captured on film, The Wolfpack, winner of the U.S. Documentary Grand Jury Prize at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival, perfectly captures the brothers’ desire to escape their Lower East Side home prison while at the same time catalyzing it. The camera probably has a healing power for the brothers; it at least allows them to interact with a world they had been deprived of for so long.

9 05, 2017

Grey Gardens (1975) — Dir. David & Albert Maysles

By | 2017-05-12T16:59:33+00:00 May 9th, 2017|Categories: #6 MISFITS|Tags: , |0 Comments

© Grey Gardens — Albert & David Maysles / Janus Films

1975, 94 minutes

For more than 20 years, Edith ‘Big Edie’ Bouvier Beale, 82, and her daughter, Edie ‘Litlle Edie’, 56, have lived together in a decaying 28-room East Hampton mansion by the sea. Close relatives of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis (aunt and first cousin respectively), they are surrounded on all sides by the summer quarters of the powerful and wealthy, but gone are the days when mother and daughter would live in the splendors of high-society.
The women have lost their wealth but certainly not their wit. Nor their odd grandeur, oscillating at times from tragic to comic and perfectly captured by the Maysles brothers’ cameras. Shot in a direct cinema style with no commentary from the directors and almost no contextualization on the lives of these socialites-turned-recluses, Grey Gardens leaves it to the eccentric duo to tell their own story. And boy do they speak !

Both women have a way with words that is key to the film’s hypnotic appeal, and though they may seem at times to verge towards lunacy, they become increasingly empowered by the undivided attention they receive from the Maysles. Ultimately, one of the most influential films of the last few decades, and an unprecedented mining of human psychology realized not by seeking questions, but by ‘simply’ observing.

19 04, 2017

The Imposter (2012) — Dir. Bart Layton

By | 2017-04-21T19:15:41+00:00 April 19th, 2017|Categories: #5 SELF-DECEPTION|1 Comment

© The Imposter — Bart Layton/Indomina Films

2012, 95 minutes

The story begins in 1994, in Texas, when a 13-year-old boy named Nicholas Barclay was reported missing. Three and a half years later, his grieving family was shocked and overjoyed to hear that he had turned up thousands of kilometers away, in Spain. Though the family was quick to accept him back into their lives, some things did not add up. The boy was certainly older than what he should have been, his skin color a bit darker, and now talking with a foreign accent. Surely the effects of the trauma would change the boy…but changing eye color might be a bit more difficult to explain.

Why did the family accept him so easily? Who would not recognize their own kid? Revealing more would give the film away, as this is a story full of twists, deception and outright lies. Peeling back the layers of the intricate family drama, Bart Layton’s assured directorial choices reinforce viewer engagement in the story, forcing us to judge the imposter yet making us also more vulnerable to how persuasive he is: first, by featuring all the subjects in a normal interview style setting, with characters looking off-frame and shot with an in-depth background, expect of course for the imposter, looking straight into the camera, at eye-level, with a blurry background behind him. Shady much? Then, by shooting most of the reconstructions from the man’s point of view, allowing the viewer to fall for the conman’s tricks despite knowing that they are watching the work of a master manipulator. The imposter’s addiction to deceit is clearly apparent yet we cannot help but doubt when he tries to cover up his lies with other sensational stories…

19 04, 2017

Grizzly Man (2005) — Dir. Werner Herzog

By | 2017-04-21T19:16:10+00:00 April 19th, 2017|Categories: #5 SELF-DECEPTION|0 Comments

© Grizzly Man — Werner Herzog / Lions Gate Releasing

2005, 100 minutes

Part nature documentary, part twisted character study of an unstable and possibly insane man who desperately wanted to live amongst the bears he worshipped, Grizzly Man is a masterfully crafted essay on the fallibilities of the human mind, and the fine line between devotion and delusion.
Centered around Timothy Treadwell, a former alcoholic and failed TV actor who spent thirteen summers living among wild grizzlies in Alaska before being decapitated and eaten by one of them in the fall of 2003 (no spoiler, you hear about his fate at the beginning of the documentary), the film is also very much about Herzog himself, which shouldn’t come as a surprise for all those familiar with the German director’s filmography. Constructed with some of the footage shot by Treadwell during his time spent at the Katmai National Park and Preserve in Alaska (clips of him naively at ease when surrounded by the wild animals are definitely arresting), and punctuated with narration from Herzog, the film opposes Treadwell’s sentimentalized view of nature with Herzog’s hardcore nihilism. The director even confesses during the film: “I believe the common denominator of the universe is not harmony, but chaos, hostility, and murder. […] And what haunts me is that in all the faces of all the bears that Treadwell ever filmed, I discover no kinship, no understanding, no mercy. I see only the overwhelming indifference of nature.” Classic Herzog !

19 04, 2017

Mr Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter Jr. (1999) — Dir. Errol Morris

By | 2017-04-22T01:40:59+00:00 April 19th, 2017|Categories: #5 SELF-DECEPTION|0 Comments

© Mr Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter Jr. — Errol Morris / Lions Gate Releasing

1999, 96 minutes

While Errol Morris’s Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. participates in the ever-increasing—and one could argue, overcrowded— subgenre of Holocaust documentary filmmaking, the movie could hardly be characterized as a traditional Holocaust story. A portrayal of the depth to which human beings are capable of self-deception, Mr. Death probes what led Fred. A Leuchter Jr.—an eccentric execution system engineer from Massachusetts—to preach Holocaust denial in neo-Nazi conferences across the world. Recognized, despite his obvious lack of expertise, for his work in penitentiaries within the United States, Leuchter precipitated his own downfall with The Leuchter Report (1988), a bizarre pseudoscientific document held by deniers since its publication as a watershed moment in our perception of the Holocaust, and proof of a large-scale conspiracy.

Structured around significant events in Leuchter’s life, Mr. Death simultaneously investigates how Leuchter engages with the past and perceives the world around him. The narrative structure is largely chronological; the first part of the movie (30 min.) focuses on Leuchter’s work as a successful designer of execution equipment, while the second part addresses Leuchter’s fateful involvement with negationist theories and subsequent trip to Poland.

Morris—reiterating his belief that “truth isn’t guaranteed by style”—decided to employ many of the stylistic devices used throughout his career to enhance Leuchter’s moral ambiguities and contradictions. Starting with the opening credit sequence—which one may associate more with experimental or fiction cinema than conventional documentary filmmaking—when Leuchter stands unperturbed in the middle of an apocalyptic blast of movement, color and sound. Surely, this sequence is a nod to what’s to come, since Morris continuously uses all three elements to further investigate his character’s subjectivity. As the scenes oscillate randomly between color and black-and-white, and as changes in focus or camera angle occur, the audience is invited to consider different sides of Leuchter’s personality. In one of the most highly stylized sequences of the film, Leuchter, standing next to the electric chair in the now defunct Tennessee State Prison, appears unstable, and somewhat sadistic—his figure distorted by the high-contrast black-and-white and by Morris’s exaggerated handheld camera movements. As we hear in voice-over Leuchter calmly describing the horrific effects on the human body of botched executions, ambiguities about the character’s personality and motives start to appear.

These discrepancies are further materialized throughout the movie as Morris puts emphasis on devices that mediate or reflect/deflect reality. In the first shot of the film, as the audience enters Fred’s subjectivity and perspective on the world, his eyes appear in the rear-view mirror of the car he is driving—his vision already mediated by the glasses he has on. Similar sequences are used throughout the movie, none more striking than the one in Auschwitz, where we see Leuchter’s reflection looking into a pool of water at the base of Crematorium 2, his face getting distorted as a single water droplet falls on the surface. In a chilling editing of sound and image, a voice-over tells the audience that Leuchter is standing in the room where the largest number of people had died—a stark contrast compared to the description of the room made by Leuchter minutes prior, as “kind of spooky.”
Mistakenly overestimating his own scientific knowledge and technical abilities, Leuchter is clearly out of place in this environment he does not comprehend. Interestingly enough, Leuchter had professed some of the limits of his competencies in the beginning of the film, arguing that “simply because I’m capable of building an electric chair doesn’t mean I’m capable of building a lethal injection machine. They’re two totally different concepts.” Yet, convinced of his expertise and suffering from an illusory superiority, Leuchter arrives in Auschwitz thinking he can subject history to a simple chemistry experiment.

Ultimately, Leuchter is unyielding in his senseless conception of reality, refusing to accept the evidence even as it leads to his demise. In a possible nod to the final scene of The Thin Blue Line, Morris—near the end of Mr. Death—steps in as a surrogate audience member, and asks Leuchter “Have you ever thought that you might be wrong? Or do you think that you could make a mistake?” To which a definitively clueless Leuchter replies “No, I am past that. […] I did everything possible to substantiate and prove the existence of the gas chambers, and I was unable to.” Blinded by his vanity, and unwilling to engage in self-criticism, Leuchter’s ‘evil’ comes from a failure to think—perhaps the greatest evil of them all.

13 04, 2017

Kate Plays Christine (2016) — Dir. Robert Greene

By | 2017-04-21T19:17:45+00:00 April 13th, 2017|Categories: #4 STORYTELLING|0 Comments

© Kate Plays Christine (2016) dir. Robert Greene / 4th Row Films

2016, 112 minutes

A reflection on the ethics of storytelling and the modern-day sensationalist spectacles that seem to have pervaded almost all the things we consume. At times infuriating and off-putting, this documentary nonetheless provides a singular look into the transformation of actress Kate Kate Lyn Sheilas as she prepares for the role of Christine Chubbuck, the first journalist to commit suicide live on television in the United States. As the film progresses, lines get blurred between performer and character until we are not exactly sure what or who we are watching: is it Kate being herself, Kate playing Kate the actress (her attitude changing in front of Greene’s camera as she makes clear in various instances throughout the film), Kate playing Christine, or Kate playing Kate playing Christine? The ever-changing nature of the performance we see on camera—enhanced by Kate’s obsessive and slippery slide down the rabbit hole—is unsettling at times, but ultimately provides a sobering reflection on what is true and what is false.

13 04, 2017

The Act of Killing (2012) — Dir. Joshua Oppenheimer

By | 2017-04-21T19:19:02+00:00 April 13th, 2017|Categories: #4 STORYTELLING|0 Comments

2012, 166 minutes © The Act of Killing (2013) dir. Joshua Oppenheimer, Christine Cynn / Drafthouse Films

Executively produced by Werner Herzog and Errol Morris (not too shabby), Oppenheimer’s feature will surely prove uncomfortable for some viewers, as it gives a rather unfiltered voice to some of the killers responsible for the Indonesian Communist purge of 1965-1966. To examine the mind of these joking and laughing mass-murderers, still heralded as heroes and holding tremendous power within the country, the director encourages them to produce filmic reconstructions of their death squad activities. The surreal cinematic structure through which the protagonists process reality allows the documentary to expand from the sole focus of the Indonesian genocide to a much more global tale of human nature, providing a riveting yet terrifying watch for viewers.

13 04, 2017

Cameraperson (2016) — Dir. Kirsten Johnson

By | 2017-04-21T19:19:39+00:00 April 13th, 2017|Categories: #4 STORYTELLING|0 Comments

2016, 102 minutes © Cameraperson (2016) dir. Kirsten Johnson / Fork Films

A poetic and philosophic collage of encounters across the world and throughout the years, and an amazing reflection on the ethics of documentary filmmaking, and the tension between objectivity and storytelling.
Through a series of episodic juxtapositions, Kirsten Johnson—a cinematographer with credits including the Academy Award winner Citizenfour (2014) by Laura Poitras—brings us to the forefront of her worldly adventures, drip-feeding the audience information in installments, that take on new meanings as the film progresses.

4 04, 2017

El Sicario: room 164 (2010) — Dir. Gianfranco Rosi

By | 2017-04-21T19:20:18+00:00 April 4th, 2017|Categories: #3 DRUG|Tags: , |0 Comments

2010, 84 minutes ® El Sicario: room 164 ?

Confined in a motel room in which he used to torture victims, a masked, anonymous, hit man recounts twenty years of criminal life working at the behest of a Mexican drug cartel. Using a marker pen and notepad, he illustrates his career of crime with unparalleled intensity. Rather than filling the screen with reenactments or cutaway images, Rosi’s camera is unflinching, staying on the sicario at almost all times, as the latter alternate between gory details of torture and killing methods (it’s not often you hear about ways to peel off a man’s skin, layer by layer) and stories of faith and repentance. A must-see!

4 04, 2017

Cartel Land (2015) — Dir. Matthew Heineman

By | 2017-04-21T19:20:47+00:00 April 4th, 2017|Categories: #3 DRUG|Tags: , |0 Comments

2015, 98 minutes ® Cartel Land?

Nominated at the 88th Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature, and winner of the Best Director Award and Special Jury Award for Cinematography (U.S. Documentary Competition) at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival, Cartel Land offers a dramatic look at vigilante efforts to counter organized drug crime at the Mexican–American border. When fighting against violence, lines between good and evil become increasingly blurred…a slipping morality in the pursuit of justice perfectly captured by the film.