IMDb > Derrida (2002)

Derrida (2002) More at IMDbPro »

Photos (See all 2 | slideshow)

Overview

User Rating:
6.5/10   574 votes »
Your Rating:
Saving vote...
Deleting vote...
/10   (delete | history)
Sorry, there was a problem
MOVIEmeter: ?
Up 4% in popularity this week. See why on IMDbPro.
Directors:
Contact:
View company contact information for Derrida on IMDbPro.
Release Date:
31 January 2003 (UK) See more »
Genre:
Tagline:
What if someone came along who changed not the way you think about everything, but everything about the way you think?
Plot:
Documentary about French philosopher (and author of deconstructionism) Jacques Derrida, who sparked fierce debate throughout American academia. | Add synopsis »
Awards:
1 win & 1 nomination See more »
User Reviews:
Only the look and feel of Deconstruction See more (29 total) »

Cast

  (in credits order)
Jacques Derrida ... Himself
Marguerite Derrida ... Herself
René Major ... Himself
Chantal Major ... Herself

Avital Ronell ... Herself
René Derrida ... Himself
Eddie Yeghiayan ... Himself

Directed by
Kirby Dick 
Amy Ziering  (as Amy Ziering Kofman)
 
Produced by
Gil Kofman .... associate producer
Amy Ziering .... producer (as Amy Ziering Kofman)
 
Original Music by
Ryûichi Sakamoto 
 
Cinematography by
Kirsten Johnson 
 
Film Editing by
Matthew Clarke  (as Matt Clarke)
Kirby Dick 
 
Sound Department
Alan Barker .... sound mixer
Mark Z. Danielewski .... sound
Clifford 'Kip' Gynn .... sound mixer
David Scharf .... dialogue editor
 
Editorial Department
Adam Finberg .... assistant editor
Brian Jonason .... assistant editor
Matvey Shatz .... color timer
 
Music Department
Fernando Aponte .... score mixer
Fernando Aponte .... score recordist
Roberto Concina .... composer: song "Improvisations Part 2"
 
Other crew
Steven C. Beer .... producer's representative
Mike Kahne .... titles
 
Thanks
Eddie Schmidt .... thanks
 

Production CompaniesDistributorsOther Companies

Additional Details

Runtime:
84 min
Country:
Language:
Color:
Aspect Ratio:
1.85 : 1 See more »
Sound Mix:
Certification:

FAQ

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.
10 out of 13 people found the following review useful.
Only the look and feel of Deconstruction, 28 October 2002
Author: Dyske Suematsu (dyske@dyske.com) from New York City, USA

A documentary can never be anything other than a director's interpretation of the subject. Making a documentary about a philosopher is a particularly difficult proposition; with most other subjects, we welcome and enjoy varying interpretations, but, with philosophy, we tend to resist variance, because the very aim of philosophy, at least until Post-Structuralists came along, has always been to arrive at the Truth. The challenge of a filmmaker here is that either you properly understand the philosopher, or you may potentially embarrass yourself, though, for the audience, either way could be interesting.

"Derrida", a documentary by the established filmmaker, Kirby Dick, and a former student of Jacques Derrida, Amy Ziering Kofman, attempts to deconstruct the idea of biography itself, but it fails to do so. It takes only the trappings of deconstruction, stripped of its objectives, and applies it as an editorial gimmick by constantly reminding the audience of the film's own awareness of itself. It frequently steps back in an effort to show its self-awareness, but it actually deconstructs nothing. For example, we see Derrida watching himself being interviewed, and later we see him watching this very footage, thereby creating the effect of two facing mirrors with infinite reflections.

The objective of deconstruction is to de-center, that is, to identify the center of the argument--or of the proposed truth--that it relies on in order to make its case. You may argue here that I have just made a logocentric statement by defining what deconstruction is, that I have just centered the definition of deconstruction (note the appearance here of stepping back); you are right (and I'm leaving it at that, because I'm only a hack philosopher.). The film did not succeed in de-centering anything; not the philosopher, the medium, the filmmakers themselves, nor the film itself.

Throughout the film, the narrator reads excerpts from his books against the backdrop of abstract footage of Derrida's face and his surroundings. This effectively makes Derrida the chief story-teller of the film. Instead of presenting the filmmakers' interpretations, they hide behind the power of his words, taking no chances at misinterpretation. Derrida is involuntarily made to be the center that secures and stabilizes the film. Ironically, this film that supposedly tries to explore deconstructionism and apply its tools to the medium of filmmaking finds a secure center in Derrida, and he is left un-deconstructed.

We can feel the insecurity of the filmmakers in often not knowing what to ask their subject. Derrida, out of his affection for the filmmaker, tries hard to turn Kofman's dull questions into something more interesting. The camera, in effect, takes on the perspective of someone who adores him like a rock star. If the film were aware of its own insecurity, it would have been more interesting. Instead, it simply hides behind its own reverence and awe of the famous philosopher.

One way to achieve this deconstruction would have been to hire multiple filmmaking crews where each goes off in its own direction, and presents a 20 minute piece each. The chances are, each will draw a very different picture of Derrida. By presenting them in sequence, the audience will wonder who Derrida really is, and they will inevitably question the process of documentary filmmaking itself, thereby deconstructing not only the idea of Derrida, but also the idea of documentary.

Although I have always been an admirer of Ryuichi Sakamoto, his music in this movie was superfluous. The power of his music attached unnecessary, and often inappropriate, emotional values to the images of Derrida. I can't see any justification for emotionally manipulating the audience in this film, unless it was to deconstruct the use of music in film, which it did not.

Towards the end of the movie, Derrida tells Amy Ziering Kofman that this will be a good autobiography for her. It should have been, but unfortunately it isn't a biography for either Derrida or Kofman. What this movie is to Derrida's philosophy is analogous to what music video is to a piece of music; the imagery is only superficially juxtaposed to his ideas. It is no more than a pretty way to listen to his words.

One redeeming quality of this movie was that I got to see and hear him speak for the first time. After all, I'm a sucker for fame too. If I made a documentary about him, I'm sure I would have been just as nervous and insecure, if not more. In that sense, I have to praise the filmmakers for attempting.

Was the above review useful to you?
See more (29 total) »

Message Boards

Discuss this movie with other users on IMDb message board for Derrida (2002)

Recommendations

If you enjoyed this title, our database also recommends:
- - - - -
Schizopolis Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life Religulous Borders "Arena: Burroughs"
IMDb User Rating:
IMDb User Rating:
IMDb User Rating:
IMDb User Rating:
IMDb User Rating:
Show more recommendations

Related Links

Full cast and crew Company credits External reviews
News articles IMDb Documentary section IMDb USA section

You may report errors and omissions on this page to the IMDb database managers. They will be examined and if approved will be included in a future update. Clicking the 'Edit page' button will take you through a step-by-step process.