Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Isle of Flowers (1989)

Part I


Part II



To explain in brief the obscenity of capitalism, one must only have to quote the old socialist Fourier when he described the system as one where “abundance becomes the source of distress and want.” This is a very curious feature. Human crises up to this point could be attributed mainly to scarcity. But capitalism’s periodic “booms and busts” resulting in recession or depression are very much as Marx described when he said, “Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce.” Though the U.N. estimates that the world produces enough food every year to feed double the current human population, we live in a world where two billion live with chronic malnutrition and where six million children die every year from hunger-related diseases. We live in a world where scientific advancement has led to effective AIDS treatment, while Africa dies because it’s too poor to afford it. We live in a world where we can send satellites to the corners of our solar system, yet can’t seem to find a way to provide safe drinking water for everyone. The facts are so recognizable that its shock value has been seriously compromised. With numerous ideologies competing to justify the way the world is today, it is hard to step back and see it for what it is. We are led to believe that the issues are far “too complicated.” The truth however, is that inequality today is an absurdity reinforced by those who own capital. While documentaries like Harvest of Shame tackle the issue seriously, it can easily be corralled into the “policy debate.” On the other hand, films like Isle of Flowers are much more interested in getting beyond that—making it a much more devastating critique.

Isle of Flowers is told as if it were a National Geographic piece. It examines humans, their habitat, and organization as if it were foreign and animal-like. This detachment allows the film to rise above “policy debate” and posture as if it were a neutral observer, interested only in the human species for educational purposes. Our ways of life are stripped of its normalcy and are examined as if by a civilization from another planet. The narrator continually defines our species with our biology—our highly developed telencephalon and opposable thumbs. This definition works on two levels: it reminds us that in spite of our self-importance we remain animals, yet we are also distinguished from animals in a very significant way. We therefore should hold ourselves to a higher standard. With that said, the film show us coldly how we are not. Shocking images of humanity at its worst—the holocaust and Hiroshima/Nagasaki—are juxtaposed with the narrator’s “matter of fact” description of our way of life. Whenever the narrator reminds us that, “Mr. Suzuki is a Japanese, and therefore a human being,” it is a cleverly subversive tool to demonstrate our relationship to power. Some human beings labor and other human beings own. Yet since we are all human beings, why do we accept the distinction? That device is used again to differentiate between the owner of pigs and the women and children. Because the women and children “have no owner” they are left to dig through the leftovers of pigs! Yet we are reminded that women and children are too, human beings, defined also by their highly developed telencephalon and opposable thumbs. But then why are human beings deciding that others, particularly poor women and children, are beneath that category? Why are some human beings lower than pigs?

Isle of Flowers follows and condenses the history of human civilization and all its creations. Emphasizing the fact that they are creations. Money was developed as a way to exchange products. However, money has taken on a fantastical form where it is now valued over those who created it. It is imbued with a sense of importance not at all intrinsic to its physical properties. And in that process, humanity has become entirely alienated from itself. This is fundamental thesis of the film. Whenever private property (or rather the private ownership of the means of production—differentiated from personal property) is defended, it is the acknowledgement of the extent of said alienation. The creation of wealth is a social process, involving many workers sometimes spread out over the globe. Yet the private ownership of the means of production denies this, and instead takes this social creation and puts it under the ownership of a few individuals. To socialize property is to acknowledge the real role labor plays in the production of wealth. The film is a devastating look at capitalism, stripped away from all its illusions. Its fundamental characteristics are laid out for all to see. It is a system that puts profits and sometimes pigs, before people. And despite what its many apologists will argue, such absurdity can no longer be justified.

Thursday, January 8, 2009

Best Films of 2008*

I've compiled a list of my favorites and reasons why you should love them too.



The Dark Knight-The Dark Knight is ultimately about the limitations of the "hero." His/her existence is a reflection of a problem they can never truly solve. No matter how sacrificing, no matter how incorruptible, the inequality that allows Bruce Wayne to stay ahead of the criminal element is what guarantees that criminal element's survival. Though the Joker is presented as an unstoppable force, free from motivation and explanation, he still must make alliances with those whose criminality DO have social causes. Batman is forever locked into a fight that will never end for him. This is the tragedy of the Dark Knight, but also our opportunity to present an alternative to a system that can only go so far.

The Wrestler-"With its grown men bellowing like comic book heroes and villains, pro wrestling has always been a cartoon, and that's the appeal to performers and fans alike: It absolves life's complexities with a turnbuckle to the skull. "The Wrestler" is about the seductions of superficiality and the dull ache of living beyond one's moment. It stares with compassion at the man pinned on the mat and wonders how he'll ever get out of this one." TY BURR Boston Globe

Revolutionary Road-a film not only about life and love never meeting expectations, but more importantly a film that meticulously demonstrates how sexism shapes our relationships. The film reminds us of a time when abortion was not a right, and the heavy consequences of it. Not only do we feel April's suffocation and the slow defeat of her soul, but we see how sexist gender roles trap men as well. It was Frank's insecurity every time his "manhood" was challenged that turned him into everything he never wanted to be.

Synecdoche, New York-"To say that Charlie Kaufman’s 'Synecdoche, New York' is one of the best films of the year or even one closest to my heart is such a pathetic response to its soaring ambition that I might as well pack it in right now. That at least would be an appropriate response to a film about failure, about the struggle to make your mark in a world filled with people who are more gifted, beautiful, glamorous and desirable than the rest of us — we who are crippled by narcissistic inadequacy, yes, of course, but also by real horror, by zits, flab and the cancer that we know (we know!) is eating away at us and leaving us no choice but to lie down and die." MANOHLA DARGIS New York Times

Milk-"In a scene reminiscent of the recent California initiative battle over Proposition 8 in which gay marriage rights were overturned, the audience is treated to a glimpse of a timely debate. Milk effectively challenges gay magazine magnate David Goodstein who insists on circulating fliers against the Briggs Initiative that never mention the word "gay" or explicitly argue what the battle is really about.
If only an unapologetic and openly gay civil rights movement had been organized this time around, perhaps Prop 8 would have had a similar fate." SHERRY WOLF Socialist Worker

Rachel Getting Married- "While battles between the sisters will continue throughout the film, there is a beautiful moment of reconciliation and tenderness between the two which comes much later in the work and doesn't feel cheated or forced. How permanently the peace will last is another question. One can be thankful that a neat, happy ending is avoided for the most part. The film is too honest for that."- HIRAM LEE wsws.org

Slumdog Millionaire-"Like all good fairy tales, this outsize celebration of perseverance and moral triumph contains within it a deeper idea -- in this case, the relative nature of what we think we know, and what's worth knowing at all." ANN HORNADAY Washington Post

CHE- "That helps explain another peculiarity of the film. Surprising attention is given to Che meeting the volunteers who join his guerrilla bands. Names, embraces. But little effort is made to single them out as individuals, to develop complex relationships. Che enforces an inviolable rule: He will leave no wounded man behind. But there is no sense that he is personally emotionally involved with his men. It is a man he will not leave behind, not this man. It is the idea."- ROGER EBERT Chicago Sun Times

Most Overrated
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button-The premise opens the film up for some interesting insights on living and dying, seen from the perspective of a life lived backwards. However the film doesn't say much at all, settling for such banal phrases as "...and some of us are dancers." The oddness of the story is blunted by its tired structure (the old woman telling the story through a diary).