Life Out of Balance

This minimalist documentary opens with brilliant shots of nature: canyons, sand dunes, and crashing waves, to name a few. Directory Godfrey Reggio’s images depict the majesty of nature and each frame commands respect. The shots however, do have a rather ominous feel. The coinciding music assists in portraying nature as a formidable, mighty force. There is a frightening power in the billowing waves and the sweeping clouds. Slowly and surely the focus of the film transitions to humans and destruction. There is a type of progression suggesting that first there is nature, then the destruction of nature, and lastly human life, as we know it. Time-lapse sequences show different forms of human behavior over a period of time and patterns emerge. Philip Glass’ accompanying music – constant and drilling – adds a sense of agitation and urgency to the actions.

           

I couldn’t fully and committedly focus on this documentary. I felt the repetitious, aggressive music digging grooves in my brain, like those created by the foot traffic of Reggio’s subjects. This documentary tried my patience and tested my attention span. I busied myself by multi-tasking and trying to be productive. Instead of calmly surrendering myself to this one thing, I was preoccupied in multiple things, whether physically or mentally. Perhaps you can imagine my surprise when I finally reached the end of the film and saw the definition. Unbeknownst to me, I had been exemplifying the very “crazy life” and “life out of balance” to which the film refers. I realized that Reggio had in fact done an impressive job of leading the audience to his intended conclusion. With the concrete understanding of Koyaanisqatsi, I became aware that the feelings of chaos and hurriedness had been aroused in me simply from the director’s audio and visual choices. The definition was a conclusion, which solidified the purpose of the film, though I had not seen it before.

Since I did not have the best experience with his contribution to Koyaanisqatsi, I did some exploring to see which, if any, of Philip Glass' music I might like. Being a dancer, I was interested to see if Philip Glass' work had ever been used in ballet. It turns out his music has been used by a few well-known choreographers, which was exciting for me to discover. I found that the prestigious San Francisco Ballet performed a work called Glass Pieces by Jerome Robbins in which the fourth and fifth movements of Glass' six movement chamber composition, Glassworks, was used. The video below is of the company performing the piece with Glass' Rubric and Facades in the background.

Plastic Planet paragraph

In Plastic Planet, Werner Boote convinces the audience of the dangers of plastic and the seriousness of the pandemic. He interviews sources that explain the intoxicating capabilities of plastic use on the human body, as well as its detrimental effects to our environment. His compelling imagery of nature displays the damage done, and appeals to the emotions of the audience. Boote strengthens his argument by traveling the world and communicating with many, different, global citizens and companies. Boote portrays the plastic corporations in a negative light by revealing their interests in the industry’s profit. He uncovers their resistance to accepting the negative truth about their products, which is a critical part of why the problem is so overwhelming. Though Boote primarily displays one side of the plastic argument, the information is valuable. With information about both environmental and physical effects, viewers can utilize Boote’s perspective when forming their own conclusions about the issue.

The Plastic Problem

If the goal of Plastic Planet director, Werner Boote, was to shock, worry, and disturb his audience, he has succeeded. I’d heard before about plastic leaching when exposed to high temperatures, or about it being unsafe to microwave Tupperware, but this documentary gave me a new frightening awareness. According to the information shown, no kind of plastic has actually been deemed safe. There were traces of mercury found in some, and carcinogens in others. Not only does plastic pollute our environment – as we have always been taught in school – but it also pollutes our bodies. While watching the film, I found myself searching my surroundings to see what plastic was in my presence. The magnitude to which plastic is used in creating commonplace items is incredible.

There is clear bias in this film and it is plain to see its aim is to frighten its audience into action. In the very first line of the film, Boote says, “I would’ve loved to start my film about plastic with a helicopter flight over nothing but pure, untouched nature, only there isn’t any untouched nature left on earth anymore.” Immediately the audience knows what sort of a film they are about to view. There are several shots where an overwhelmingly negative discovery about plastic is being discussed while the director and current guest sit in a spot of natural beauty. The juxtaposition of the two elements made an impression. It supports Boote’s goal of enforcing the seriousness of this issue. This all being said, I don’t mind the bias. I don’t feel as if I am being shown narrow information that may or may not be relevant to the overarching concept. I found the director’s choice of interviewees discerning and credible and the points made to be valid.

It is frightening to think that unbeknownst to the majority of the population, the everyday plastic we use is an insidious killer. Its also appalling to see how many companies are willing to ignore this information when their financial welfare rests upon the success of the industry. Perhaps they, like I, are overcome and don’t know how to begin reacting properly. The information is almost too much to handle, much like the information provided by other films exploring ideas surrounding human impact on our species and the environment. I’m left feeling like nothing I do will make a difference, because the problem is so huge. I feel intimidated by the issue at hand and worried about how my habits may be negatively affecting my own life. Though clearly Boote was personally invested in this cause because of his grandfather’s work in the field, it is definitely something impacting our whole society and needs to be taken seriously.

            

"God's Army": The Ultimate Branswashing

I don’t even know where to begin with this documentary. Watching Jesus Camp made so angry and so profoundly sad. The blatant disregard for the innocence of these children greatly disturbs me. It is one thing to have faith in a higher power and seek guidance or solace when need be, but it is another thing entirely to force specific, radical practices and beliefs on children. In an early scene Becky Fischer, youth pastor of the camp, says of children, “they are so usable in Christianity.” She doesn’t even attempt to hide her intentions and those of her fellow fundamentalists. Throughout the film various adults argue that the children are “moved” and affected on their own, that they come to such strong faith of their own accord. However, undeniably, children are impressionable. They will naturally soak in the information that is thrown at them. What else do they have to believe, but what they are exposed to?

During a few personal moments with a young girl Tory, she confides, “when I dance I really have to make sure that that’s God. Because people will notice when I’m just dancing for the flesh, and I do that sometimes and I must admit that, and I really need to get over that.” It literally sickens me to think someone has taught this innocent ten year old that dancing for fun is a sin. What kind of parent robs their child of the chance to be young and carefree? The people whose goal is to create a radical evangelist army with which to “bring Jesus back to this country.” They are indoctrinating soldiers for a cause, which isn’t their own. I am forcibly reminded of children raised in fundamentalist Islam, the very same against whom the Evangelists preach.

Maybe the most disturbing part of the film was when a man came to speak to the camp about abortion. He shoved his pro-life agenda in the children's faces. If you confront a child with death, they’re going to have a strong negative reaction regardless of the context. These children had no context. All they knew was that someone was telling them these things resembling babies were being killed. A child doesn’t know the difference between a zygote and an embryo, all they have are their tender hearts. Of course they’re going to plead for an end to the “killing.” The idea of using these misguided children to protest an adult issue is deranged.

By contrasting the radicalism of the evangelists with the opinions of the Christian radio host, I believe the directors were making a strong statement. Showing that even other Christians think of the evangelists as crazy seeks to make more of an impression than using the opinions of a Jewish person, an Atheist, or otherwise. It further alienates the beliefs and principles of the extreme sect. The lack of narration appears to allow the audience to come to their own conclusions. However, the use of content and other editorial elements create a less obvious, but equally potent bias.