Occupy Documentary

Today I watched a documentary about the Occupy Chicago protests. The film was created by fellow protesters. I was hoping the film would dive into some of the deeper motives behind the protests, but the 20 minute film instead merely skimmed the surface of the issues.

Not sure if you can read the text. It basically says "Capitalism Sucks"

I am a supporter of the Occupy movement. Had I been alive during the 60's I would have supported all the protests that were happening then as well. I think protesting is a given right that should be exercised frequently. To not protest means there's nothing that could be improved, reformed, or left to discuss as a country. I support the rights of all protesters, even Westboro Church and the Tea Party Movement. As Voltaire once said, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to your death the right to say it."

But I take issue with those who only protest. Protesting, though a good starting point, will rarely create enough of the change needed to make a difference. Protesting is the ignition- the spark that can get bigger, more sustainable actions underway. It's biggest functions are to: 1. highlight a problem. 2. Address it. 3. Inform others. 4. Prove that no one is alone in opposing it. 5. Rally around a common solution.

That's where I take issue with this documentary. It's supposed to be an official product of the Occupy movement, but it barely dives into the real problems that Occupy should be addressing. It shows footage of the thousand-strong crowds, of the the police barricades and the clashes that ensue. But there's little time spent on the big, looming question: what comes after the protests? Where do we go from here?

Maybe I'm not the intended audience. I am already on board, and sympathetic to the cause. Maybe this is more for the fence sitters who are still believing the outdated stereotypes about the kinds of people who protest. But eventually enough of the population will start to favor the cause, and will want to know that there are steps in place to take us off the streets and into the next phase, whatever that might be.

Overall the documentary is fine for what it is, but I am still looking for more.

You can watch it on Vimeo here.

Return to Main Page

Running Man Documentary #2

Today I watched the second documentary on the 'Running Man' Dvd. If you've never seen the movie, it's awesome. Seriously one of my top 5 favorite Arnold movies (up there with Total Recall, 6th Day, and Kindergarten  Cop).

This documentary is about the current police state within America. I thought this was a pretty interesting subject choice for something as relatively shallow as a Schwarzenegger movie, even considering its relation to the movie's subject matter. Why take a cheesy 80's movie and make it a platform to preach your political views? What do you gain? You just run the risk of alienating audience members. Plus the obvious fact that Arnold's a committed Republican...

That being said, most of the documentary was in line with my own views, so I was willing to let that slide. The film mainly focuses on the Patriot Act, and the many many ways it impedes upon and invades our civil liberties. I could stand on my soap box and wail about the amazing injustice we call the Patriot Act, but I won't. 

I'll just say this- are we safer than we were before 9/11? Are these extreme measures (wire tappings, illegal searches, detainment without trial) making a noticeable difference in our safety? Or even our perception of safety? There's a difference between being safe and feeling safe. In my opinion Americans have given up a lot of freedoms without gaining any stronger sense of safety. 

Anyway, as far as political docs go, this is not the most hard hitting or informative. But considering it's 20 mins on the 2nd disc of a Arnold movie, it isn't that bad. 

Return to Main Page 

Day 56: Obama's Deal

My rooommate Jonny and I got into a conversation about healthcare reform and quickly concluded we both know very little about the issue and what has changed about it since Obama took office. I've been on my parent's insurance my whole life so I never had reason to involve myself in understanding the complexities of healthcare or insurance. It seems unnecessarily complicated.

What I learned: This hour long Frontline episode focuses less on the mechanics of healthcare and more about the political moves needed to make it happen. It plays on the apparent contradiction of Obama running on a campaign of transparency and being a Washingtion outsider, but promoting back-room deals to get his ambitious healthcare deal pushed through Congress.

A lot of it centered on Rahm Emanuel and his history with healthcare bills. Rahm was an instrumental member of the Clinton administration and worked on the bill for years only to watch it fall apart in Congress. He vowed to return to the issue someday, and had his chance once Obama took office. 

No wonder Rahm supports better healthcare; look at his messed up finger!

Obama, for his part, was playing it cool for the start of the public and political debates, believing his staff could handle the criticisms and smear campaigns of Republicans and insurance companies. Eventually Obama realized he had to get involved directly, and that helped the bill get passed. 

What I liked: The film painted in-depth and multi-layered portrayals of Obama and his staff, especially Rahm. Rahm is interesting to me; tough as nails, rough around the edges, but he knows how to get things done in Washington. The contrast between him and Obama also intrigues me: Obama is polished and well spoken, but slow and methodical and too inexperienced to see much progress with Congress. Although I'm glad to have Rahm as my mayor I was sad to see him leave the White House. 

What I didn't like: Though I didn't expect a simple hour-long episode to cover all the complexity of the enormous healthcare bill, I did expect to gain at least a decent understanding of what it was and what it meant for the average American. But the film focused less on the content of the bill and more on the process of the bill being passed. I will have to do more research on my own I suppose. 

Anyway, it was good for what it was and I will always sit through anything Obama-related. 

You can watch it online on Netflix or the Frontline website.

Return to the main site

Day 40: Secrets of Body Language

Somedays it's hard to just watch one documentary. That's a good sign!

Today I watched a History Channel doc about the secrets of body language, which is aptly titled "Secrets of Body Language".

Body language specialists examine clips of celebrities and politicians and discuss what their body language is expressing. Sometimes the body language aligns with the verbal language, and sometimes it betrays what they are trying to say.

What I learned: I learned some interesting terms about body language. Micro-expressions are the tiny facial expressions that occur milliseconds before a real, typically forced, expression is expressed. Micro-expressions are believed to be subconscious and thus more truthful.

What I liked: It was awesome viewing and reviewing clips of celebs and Presidents to see what messages they were really conveying. We watched clips of Obama, Nixon, FDR meeting with Stalin and Churchill, and celebs like Paris Hilton and Brad Pitt. It was so interesting to see how even the rich, famous, and pretty don't have total control over their physicality and sometimes let it say more than their words ever can. One of the most interesting clips was of Clinton's famous interview during the Lewinsky trial. Though he words say one thing, his head and hands say something different. One body language specialist states that his fingers point in one direction but his eyes look in another, a tell-tale sign of lying.

Bill Clinton: Telling the truth about China. Probably. 

What I didn't like:Though I gave these specialists a lot of credit (more than most people would I think), there were parts that even I couldn't get behind. Some of the examples of micro-expressions seemed to make too big a deal out of a millisecond of video. They watched a speech frame by frame, and would pause it at random moments to tell us how the speaker was "really" feeling. Well I don't know how much you can really decipher from a single frame of footage. 

Overall, pretty interesting stuff. Definitely food for thought, and entertaining to theorize about, but I haven't been completely converted to the school of body language theory just yet.

The film can be viewed on youtube here: