Banned in Beijing: Three Films that the Chinese Communist Party Doesn't Want You to See By Lauren Ennis

In recent weeks the world has become engulfed by one story; the spread of the novel coronavirus also known as COVID-19. The virus was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan, where it wreaked utter devastation upon the local population before rapidly making its way across the globe. In the months since the virus was first detected the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has launched a massive campaign of censorship and misinformation against any who dare question its botched efforts to contain and conceal the virus. Despite the CCP's attempts to suppress any reports of the virus, several heroic individuals risked their freedom and lives to ensure that the truth would be known.

Dr. Ai Fen shared her revelations concerning the emergence of a new SARS like virus in Wuhan with colleagues and was reprimanded by state authorities. She later related her story to China's People (Renwu) magazine in an article entitled "The One Who Supplied the Whistle". The article was quickly deleted and she is now missing, presumed to be in state custody. Her colleague, Dr. Li Wenliang reported Dr. Ai's findings to colleagues and patients in an effort to warn them of the epidemic, but was detained by authorities along with eight other medical professionals. Dr. Li later contracted the virus from a patient and died on  February 7, 2020.

Law professor Xu Zhangrun published an essay criticizing the state's actions regarding the crisis and was placed under guarded house arrest under the pretense of a 'medical quarantine'. While his house arrest was later lifted his internet access remains restricted.

In late January lawyer and citizen journalist Chen Quishi arrived in Wuhan to cover the outbreak, posting over one hundred videos of footage and interviews to Twitter and Youtube. His posts ceased on February 6, and no one has been able to contact him since; his friends and family believe that he is in state custody.

Textile trader Fang Bin returned to his hometown of Wuhan after receiving news of the outbreak and took on the role of citizen journalist. Like Chen he posted videos on Youtube and Twitter, including one particularly damning video showing patients dying of the virus while body bags piled up outside of a Wuhan hospital. He was detained late on the night of February 2 and released the following morning only to be arrested one week later on February 9; he has not been seen or heard from since.

On March 31 real estate tycoon Ren Zhiqiang published an essay in which he criticized Chinese president Xi Jinping's handling of the crisis and both he and his son went missing shortly thereafter. The CCP has since filed charges of "serious violations of discipline and law" against him in an effort to explain and justify his disappearance.

Li Zehua, a reporter for a state run television station quit his job and took it upon himself to travel to Wuhan and cover the outbreak. During his stay in the city he posted numerous videos chronicling the effects of the outbreak, including his final video of his own arrest on February 26. He is reported to have resurfaced on April 22, his tone markedly different from his earlier videos as he described his government ordered quarantine.While Li's sudden reappearance and subsequent praise of the CCP may seem surprising at first glance, activists and critics of the regime have been released in the past on the condition that they cease their activities and provide a false confession which often includes praise of the CCP.

The CCP's efforts to silence the whistle blowers of Wuhan, while brutal, are neither new nor surprising. Since its formation in 1949 the People's Republic of China has regularly suppressed any information that is critical of or contrary to its communist policies, including news media, art, and film. This week, in an effort to pay tribute to the whistle blowers of Wuhan and the countless others who have sacrificed their freedom and lives in the fight against tyranny I'll be turning the spotlight on three films that remain banned in mainland China to this day.

Oh, go fly a kite!

The Blue Kite: This 1993 film has gained the status of an international classic, but has yet to be viewed in mainland China. The film follows a young boy, Tietou, as he comes of age amidst the upheaval of Chairman Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward of the 1950's and Cultural Revolution of the 1960's. The deceptively simple story focuses upon ordinary people struggling to lead some semblance of a normal life amidst some of the darkest chapters in China's history. While the film avoids any outright criticism of Mao or his policies, its depiction of those policies' impact upon countless lives is nothing short of damning. Even though Tietou's parents consider themselves proud and loyal communists, his father is named as a traitor and condemned to a work camp after his employer is forced to meet government mandated quotas for naming 'rightists' . Soon after, his uncle's fiancee, a proud member of the People's Liberation Army is arrested when she refuses to fulfill her 'duty' and act as an escort for high ranking military officials. Later, when he grows into a rebellious teenager Tietou witnesses his school close and his teachers rounded up as counter revolutionaries. Rather than defend his teachers, he instead follows the dictates that the communist party has laid down for him and his fellow students and gleefully participates in beating his teacher. The film also highlights the ways in which no one, not even supposed high ranking party members, was safe during this time when Tietou's prominent stepfather is arrested during one of Mao's purges. The film ends bleakly with Tietou beaten as he watches his stepfather and mother be dragged away by a mob of Red Guard cadres. The final shot of Tietou's blue kite from his childhood, a symbol of hope throughout the film, stuck in a tree and damaged beyond repair serves as a heartbreaking reminder of the lives lost and hopes shattered under Mao's regime. Although the film offers an unflinching portrayal of the suffering that the CCP inflicted upon its own people its most subversive element may be its depiction of the bond between Tietou and his mother, which surpasses political loyalties and survives personal disaster. Nearly thirty years after its release The Blue Kite is more than just a classic film, it is a testament to the human spirit and a tribute to the resilience of the Chinese people.



The Eight Hundred: This 80 million dollar war epic was scheduled to be released in July, 2019, but has yet to be seen by audiences either in China or abroad. Marketed as a "Chinese Dunkirk", the film relays the true story of 400 hundred grossly outnumbered Chinese soldiers and their four day battle to defend Shanghai's Sihang Warehouse from invading Japanese troops in 1937. The soldiers' efforts ultimately allowed the main Chinese forces time to escape further into the mainland and to this day their story remains a patriotic rallying cry in China. Given its budget and subject matter the film seemed to be destined to become a national blockbuster. So why then was this surefire hit shelved? The answer is surprisingly simple; because the 400 soldiers were members of China's Kuomintang or Nationalist forces. It was these same forces that Mao Zedong's Communist Party later defeated in 1949 to form the People's Republic of China. Any positive portrayal of the Kuomintang would be subject to controversy in modern China, but the fact that the film was scheduled to be released mere months before the 70th anniversary of birth of the People's Republic of China was deemed grounds for censor. The film's censure highlights the fact that despite the CCP's carefully constructed public image life in the People's Republic of China remains one oppression and suppression. With its all star cast and crew, substantial budget, and winning story The Eight Hundred had the potential to become an international blockbuster, but thanks to the efforts of government censors it just might be the best war movie never seen.

Who thought history could be too hot to handle?

Ben-Hur: This 1959 biblical drama seems like a unlikely candidate for censure in 2020...except in mainland China. The film was officially banned by state censors for "objectionable superstitious parts" due to its depiction of Christ, but upon closer observation the film likely owes its censured status as much to its political stance as to its religious content. The story follows Judah Ben-Hur, a Judean prince who is wrongfully imprisoned after he refuses to collaborate with occupying Roman forces. While the film is set in first century Judea, its message of freedom and resistance resonates in any era in which tyranny holds sway. When he is asked by his childhood friend, Messala, to act as an informant for Rome Judah rejects the offer without hesitation saying, "Rome is an affront to God. Rome is strangling my people and my country...the day Rome falls there will be a shout of freedom such as the world has never heard". Although the quote is specifically about the Roman Empire it applies as much to any number of oppressive regimes, including the Chinese Communist Party, and recalls the pro-democracy slogans of protesters in the 1989 Tianamen Square Massacre. When Messala reminds him of the danger of defying Rome Judah offers a particularly powerful retort by saying, "You may conquer the land, you may slaughter the people. That is not the end. We will rise again", an apt reminder that even in the most adverse of circumstances there will always be courageous individuals willing to fight and sacrifice for freedom. This tale of freedom, revenge, and redemption is regarded as a cinema classic in the West, but gains new poignancy and relevance when viewed within the context today's Hong Kong protests and Wuhan's missing whistle blowers.

Classic or subversive?

Classics: A Review of Howards End By Lauren Ennis

Ah the British period piece; a nostalgic look back to a gentler time and place. These cinematic staples are the perfect antidote to the hustle and bustle of modern living as they transport viewers back to a time when everyone and everything was in its proper place and the tea was always served on time...except for when they don't. The 2018 miniseries adaptation of Howards End takes the peace out of period piece as it uses its historical context to explore such contemporary issues as class division, evolving gender roles, and sexual double standards. This version of the classic tale is more drama than costume drama, functioning equally well as both a character study and an exploration of the ways in which the conflicts of the past paved the way for the present.

The story follows the interactions between two very different families as they struggle to navigate the rapidly changing landscape of turn of the century England. The series begins by introducing viewers to the orphaned Schlegel sisters, Meg and Helen, who through their independence and intellectualism personify the modernity overtaking London. The forward thinking pair stand in stark contrast to the  traditional Wilcoxes who, despite their immense wealth, are struggling to maintain their place in a changing society. What begins as a friendly acquaintance quickly develops into something more complicated when Helen embarks upon a comically disastrous romance with young Paul Wilcox while Meg forms a fast friendship with Wilcox family matriarch Ruth. Upon Mrs. Wilcox's sudden death revelations are made that will determine the fate of both families as well as that of their mutual acquaintances, the working class Basts.

Adapted from E.M. Forster's classic novel, the miniseries showcases all of the requisite eye candy (enviable costumes and breath taking scenery) associated with a British period piece, but beneath its glossy exterior is at heart a biting social commentary befitting our own era. Through the contrasting depictions of the Schlegels, Wilcoxes, and Basts, the series highlights the class, gender, and ideological conflicts of Edwardian England. As the series unfolds, however, these same conflicts become more then mere historical footnotes as the characters find themselves faced with moral and ethical questions that remain provocative today. None of the characters are either entirely wrong or completely right, and as they maneuver life's grey areas each of them are ultimately forced to question their own values as well as their impressions of each other. By the series'  bittersweet conclusion each of the characters has learned valid lessons in life, love, and the need to embrace our differences. The series expertly combines the historical backdrop of the novel with surprisingly fast paced drama, all while offering a bit of sly social commentary that is sure to leave viewers pondering plenty of questions of their own. For a period piece with a contemporary twist pay a visit to Howards End.

The series transports viewers back to the cobble stoned streets of Edwardian London thanks to the superb work of its cast. Julie Ormond lends dept to what easily could have been a stock role by infusing Ruth with warmth and quiet strength. Matthew MacFayden portrays Henry Wilcox with the perfect balance between blunt practicality and guarded vulnerability in his charismatic performance. Tracey Ullman and Alex Lawther prove to be comic delights in their supporting roles as Helen and Margaret's overbearing aunt and eccentric younger brother. Joseph Quinn achingly portrays ambitious but ultimately tragic Leonard Bast. Rosalind Eleaazar shines in her sympathetic portrayal of Leonard's neglected mistress, Jackie. Helen Schlegel leaps off off the page and onto the screen in all of her impulsiveness and vivacity thanks to the work of Phillipa Coulthard. Hayley Atwill is nothing short of brilliant in her nuanced portrayal of the ever ahead of her time Meg.

Over the course of its four episodes Howards End takes viewers on a journey into a past that proves not so very different from our present. Through its expertly crafted script the series more than does justice to its source material as it relates a tale every bit as warm, witty, and thought provoking as the original novel. The cast lend each of their roles a depth and nuance that ensures that each of Forster's many characters are vividly and memorably brought to life. For a viewing experience that you won't want to end join the Schlegels, Wilcoxes, and Basts in Howards End.