Stupidity

Stupidity

                                   There is great importance that there be a fair discourse on cinema and it’s role in shaping our society. Of course my personal preference is that this discourse be informed by fair and balanced opinion. Its not even a matter of politics or philosophical belief. When Canadian independent filmmaker Albert Nerenberg made this film in 2003 it set about to do something that had never been done before-to analyze and investigate in depth the subject of ignorance and lack of intellectual thought process in modern society. Promising a witty and, yes balanced outlook on a subject that I was greatly interested in. Much of my own writing and exploration has been on the same subject. And this movie was presented to me in aa potentially exciting and even mildly humorous way, which gave it all the more appeal. To say that anything but these factors were met in this documentary would be an understatement of the highest order.

                                 Nerenberg gathered together a group of writers, cultural analysts and celebrities such as Coolio, John Cleese and Noam Chomsky to make the point that we live in a time where society is bombarded with far more information than the mind can mentally handle. And therefore too many people have resorted to either “zoning out” after their long and tedious day by watching television programs and movies that showcase other people making fools of themselves. It also points to the fact that all human beings are in fact inherently stupid. And our ability to cope with our surroundings largely depends on our own individual understanding of that stupidity. It also makes the assertion that society has come to worship an uneducated youth culture where even the universities have increasingly become institutes of higher ignorance rather than learning.

                                      When all is said and done the key to this film is it’s complete ineffectiveness in making its point. The narration, sounding very much read hurriedly off of a cue card and the often grainy and pixelated  quality of the film greatly add to this unprofessional atmosphere-even for an independent film. A good deal of the footage is also composed of bizarre footage of bucked toothed people jumping about in dunce caps, very much like a poorly executed satire of the type of reality television the movie condemns. While the origin points of terms such as moron, idiot and even a rather feeble attempt at explaining the origin story of the dunce cap are made, the manner in which these are presented lack any conceptual coherence and come off as mere vignettes randomly strung together with little care for logic or sequencing.

                                     The most irksome quality of this film is on the more personal level. Stupidity is a bad movie. Not in the sense of the low quality/low budget films of an Ed Wood. But bad in the sense that its presentation has high potential to encourage negativity. All of the dialog of the film is presented in an extremely hectoring manner-almost as if it had been deliberately designed to provoke loud and unpleasant arguments between the different people who might be watching this film together, for example.  Most of the social experts and writers speaking on this film take an extremely patronizing and insulting tone about everyone and everything they talk about. They make it more than clear without directly saying it that they look down their nose at most human beings. And they consider their views to be morally and intellectually above any given viewer of the film. The film does this in different was-each worthy of mention as far as I’m concerned.

                                    First off, this film is extremely anti-children-to the point of being abusive. I would even recommend that people under 20 year of age shouldn’t watch this film as it never articulates such a person has any right to be on this planet.  Bill Maher himself states in his appearance in this film that young people are inherently stupid by virtue of their young and that, as in other countries it’s only the old who should be considered worthy of any veneration. An author who spoke toward the end of the film actually evoked  the concept of finding ones inner child to be a stupid concept because, to quote him whenever he saw a child in a grocery store they were “stupid and ugly”. Emphasis on youth is also blamed for Hollywood movies, dumbed down because of pandering to a “younger” audience. It personally attacks actress Uma Thurman for not completing high school with an academic father-along with her apparent interest in metaphysical literature which is of course dismissed as “rubbish”.

                                 Perhaps most importantly every participant in this film are treated in a cruel manner . The man and women on the street, including a homeless street philosopher are interviewed for this film with the plainly obvious intent of making fun of their lifestyles.  Not only that but the film itself dismisses all politicians and artists’ entire points of view as being based in inherent stupidity. While much of the historical information such as tracing genetic intelligence among immigrants, the origin of the term IQ and how the brain has been observed and studied are compelling this film defeats its own purpose by not further emphasizing these points within its own context. Instead it chooses to revel in the side of itself that is emotionally abusive to a number of different people,especially the young, by utilizing the scripted equivalent of bullying tactics. In the end I would never recommend this film to the enlightened, intelligent, the ignorant or the stupid people of the world. And those who created and participated in this should be ashamed for their involvement in this horrible insult to documentary making and all it stands for.

Advertisements

Capitalism: A Love Story

Capitalism-A Love Story

                         Moore begins his film very much in his typical fashion-linking his subject matter to the framework of history.  He visually compares America in the immediate post GW Bush era as similar to the Roman empire as it was about to fall: a paper thin level of surface sheen disguising an ailing socio-political construct. Of course after this we are treated to a time line that traces the post war economic boom following the second world war all the way up to the election of Ronald Reagan. It illustrates that that administration instituted a system by which American finances would be distributed from within enormous corporations. This resulted in a syndrome of trickle down economics that slowly declined throughout the 1990’s up to the present. And being a Michael Moore film,his ideal example of this is the infamous mass closing of and layoffs at the GM auto plants,and anything connected to them,in his native city of Flint. And from there Moore is off to the races.

                        Michael Moore is as always asked to leave just about any building he and his film crew approach as he pursues his investigation. Basically the world has become a ghetto,where people all over the country are being evicted from their homes after buying into all sorts of big bank based sub-primes and all manner of corrupt loans. While the news media is insisting that the economy is growing,the evidence is mounting all around Moore of the CEO’s of most major corporations are taking extended vacations and personal raises with the money that had provided his generation with a steady and secure middle glass. He introduces us to a juvenile jail where young people are imprisoned,often for below misdemeanor offenses,for a profit.  We also see the value of the dead placed over that of the living with the detestably named “dead peasant” insurance policies of corporations such as Wal-Mart. Amid the ever growing double talk as Moore tries in vein to understand modern financial codes,everything culminates in that massive 2008 Wall Street Bank collapse.

                       While the White House debates a government bailout during that years high stakes presidential election,Michael Moore takes us to the mid west where an industrial robot manufacturing plant and a bread distributor are making new economic strides with a democratic cooperate system,whereby the workers own the plants and all have a say in the economic distribution  As Obama is elected amid conservative backlash of his politics as being “socialist”,Moore talks to a member of the cabinet about how America has basically redefined the barriers between democracy and socialism to the point where they are made out to be one and the same. Moore ends the film by illustrating the looming anti-corporate  and pro Union attitude beginning to return to the average American working class individual.  In the end,Moore evokes a comparison to how FDR stood up for the auto plant strikers in his native Flint with Obama’s pro labor stance and sense of financial fairness.

                        Since I’m sure Michael Moore is more than aware of the irony of using the capitalist system in order to decry it by making this film,the pros and cons of this film are very personal. In his typical fashion he showcases both the everyday working American and there hopes and dreams to service with bankers and corporate CEO’s who,somewhere along the line,seem to have lost some of their heart and soul. One wonderful point he makes here is taking to the minister who married him and his wife,who along with other religious figures presented here,agree capitalism has in fact become unchristian and ungodly by their standards. This shows that,in truth,money has become a god to be worshiped  by a number of people. His narration and approach to the people he is trying to interview is calm and reasonable. Typically he never seems to raise his voice.  This makes his outlook even more accessible to those who may come into this with a skeptical eye.

                          The only quality about this film is one I’ve noticed is very typical of Michael Moore. And that is that he tends to equate the many societal ills that his films look to remedy under the banner of the closing of the GM plants in his native Flint, Michigan. Fact is,he covered that topic with remarkable thoroughness in his debut film Roger & Me and doesn’t really need to dwell on that theme as much as he does. Of course I could probably make the same remark on any Michael Moore film.  All and all,releasing this film during a time when American’s were taking back their democracy and were finally beginning to receive information in the media affirming the corruption surrounding them was a definite masterstroke.  It was also gratifying that this film ended with a great deal of optimism and hope in the future. And perhaps most importantly that our economic past and present are invariably tied together in helping to determine it’s own future.