Documentary "No End in Sight" exposes the lack of planning and downright ridiculous screw-ups of the top engineers of the Iraq war. It was a pretty interesting movie that I learned some things from that I didn't think about before. Like the fact that American soldiers were told to ignore the chaotic lootings that ensued immediately after the toppling of Saddam's government. This wasn't just petty stealing of "vases" as Rumsfeld purported in a press conference. This included breaking off of whole chunks of concrete from major buildings. The most heart-wrenching of it all was the destruction of the museum and the library, and in the documentary a man poignantly weeps that his country no longer has a heritage. Those artifacts and books were records of thousands of years of civilization. US troops did nothing to protect things of value to the Iraqi people, while the oil facilities were the most heavily guarded in all the country.
This was big mistake number 1. Big mistake number 2 was the blacklisting of all those civil officials who worked under Sadaam's regime. But a lot of these people were simply bureaucrats who had no ideological alliances with Sadaam. They became jobless, and humiliated. Big mistake number 3 was to disband the Iraqi army, hundreds of thousands of individuals who literally went to the US army and volunteered to fight with them, but no, they were disbanded, and became unemployed. These breadwinners trained with military skills, frustrated and down-trodden, and the only organizations willing to take them in were insurgent groups.
And so the movie is a great almost exhaustive look at all the mistakes made in the managing of the war. But conspicuously absent from the documentary was a discussion about the biggest mistake of the war, one that trumped the three I summarized above. And that is the war itself. A critic quoted on rotten-tomatoes puts it perfectly: "A documentary that rues the fact that the US was not able to impose its will on the Iraqi people, but never questions the right to do so."
I also found myself towards the end of the film hoping to see some sort of discussion about "okay, we fucked up. Now what? Where do we go from here?" But this issue never surfaced.
Indeed, I did feel a bit uncomfortable by the film's contribution and partaking in Orientalism. Orientalism facilitates the idea that Arabs are irrational and can't govern themselves. According to the Orientalist psyche, it is the duty and responsibility of the West, because the West is rational and scientifically advanced, to impose its will on Oriental peoples. The film then is Orientalist in that it looks at where and how we went wrong and failed in this Orientalist project, not so much lamenting the oppressive actions we took against Iraqi people, but lamenting that we, the West, could fail, and not questioning the "civilizing mission" itself. And that's the problematic thorn in the side of this otherwise good and informative documentary.
Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie reviews. Show all posts
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Movie Review - Shrek 1
Sometimes I'm a little slow on picking up on a good thing, and Shrek was one of those. It had a fame of the same sort as Harry Potter. Okay, so it might not have such a cultish following as Harry Potter, but none-the-less, it was really popular, and as with all things really popular, I'm skeptical.
But Shrek is a good movie, and instead of go over why it's a good movie, I think I'd rather talk about the issue of race in the movie. The old children's classics that Shrek sattires, like Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, and Cinderella, all perpetuated racialized and gender normalized norms...damsels in distress were always fair, and helpless of course, and knights in shining armor were the defenders of these damsels as well as defenders against dragons, evil witches or ogres, all racial others. But in Shrek, the knight in shining armor is not this idealized white man, but it's in fact the ostracized racial other, an ogre, and in the end we even find out that the damsel in distress is also an ogre.
But what's most interesting to me is Shrek himself, and not the system of oppression...but maybe this system deserves a word or two. The "perfect kingdom", Dulock, symbolizes white suburbia. This is very easily interpretted from the film - the parking lot in front of the castle, the artificiality of the landscaping, the deadness but artificially-created 'perfection' of the castle inside, and especially the policy of keeping non-whites, such as ogres, out...because non-whites are scary...and eat weird things like slugs and eyeballs. But back to Shrek. He's a hardened guy, much like an "angry asian man", but only because everyone never accepted him. But when we close ourselves up and become angry, that anger consumes us, and racism wins in my opinion. Anyway, in the end, when Shrek said "you are beautiful," is when he begins to resolve his racial identity, because the "you are beautiful" statement also implied a "green is beautiful," echoing similar self-affirmations such as "black is beautiful," "yellow is beautiful," or "brown is beautiful.
Progress is slow, but it is there. After all, change, ironically enough, is one of the only constants in this universe.
But Shrek is a good movie, and instead of go over why it's a good movie, I think I'd rather talk about the issue of race in the movie. The old children's classics that Shrek sattires, like Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, and Cinderella, all perpetuated racialized and gender normalized norms...damsels in distress were always fair, and helpless of course, and knights in shining armor were the defenders of these damsels as well as defenders against dragons, evil witches or ogres, all racial others. But in Shrek, the knight in shining armor is not this idealized white man, but it's in fact the ostracized racial other, an ogre, and in the end we even find out that the damsel in distress is also an ogre.
But what's most interesting to me is Shrek himself, and not the system of oppression...but maybe this system deserves a word or two. The "perfect kingdom", Dulock, symbolizes white suburbia. This is very easily interpretted from the film - the parking lot in front of the castle, the artificiality of the landscaping, the deadness but artificially-created 'perfection' of the castle inside, and especially the policy of keeping non-whites, such as ogres, out...because non-whites are scary...and eat weird things like slugs and eyeballs. But back to Shrek. He's a hardened guy, much like an "angry asian man", but only because everyone never accepted him. But when we close ourselves up and become angry, that anger consumes us, and racism wins in my opinion. Anyway, in the end, when Shrek said "you are beautiful," is when he begins to resolve his racial identity, because the "you are beautiful" statement also implied a "green is beautiful," echoing similar self-affirmations such as "black is beautiful," "yellow is beautiful," or "brown is beautiful.
Progress is slow, but it is there. After all, change, ironically enough, is one of the only constants in this universe.
Friday, February 23, 2007
10 Reasons why I didn’t like Babel.
Just a note, I've updated my top ten favorite movies and books on the right, including links to learn more about them!
As for this post...there aren't really 10 reasons. Plus, I've included some praise and related personal experiences.
(***Don’t read this if you want to watch the movie. There are tons of spoilers from here on!!***).
Okay, let me get the praise out of the way before I move on to criticisms. From my experience in traveling, what is portrayed in the movie is so true, about what happens when people from totally different parts of the worlds “clash” or intertwine. I’ve seen it myself. The stereotypes that the West, (and various privileged non-west societies eg Hong Kong), have of the “Third World” is so far off the mark. They think, oh, they’re so “backwards” or “poor”, those villagers, living in the Stone Age…they’ll “kill us all! You know how those people are!” or “rob us!” But in fact, they’re the friendliest people in the world in my experience. Hong Kong relatives warned me “they’re Muslim! Watch out!,” and my mother expressing concern about my travels in Western China, just as the White bus-riding tourists in the movie thought about the Moroccan villagers. For me, I was taken in to a complete stranger’s tiny home in the middle of the world’s second largest desert during a big sand-storm and the lady fed us so much and showed genuine concern for our safety not to go into the storm. “Stay the night” she even offered. “No, we have to make it out of the desert, but thanks.” In Cambodia, when I lost my wallet, all the warnings ingrained into my head about “these kinds of places” made me suspect somebody stole my wallet. “Nobody would do something like that here,” the security guard said. It’s true. Rural country people aren’t socialized to covet money like we do. One Khmer young woman I talked to said she found a wad of foreign cash at the hotel she was working at. She didn’t feel good about taking it because she hadn’t earned it, so she gave it to the higher ups. Seriously, when you have a problem in “these places,” they go all out to help you. I had like 5 people hunting for my wallet…and a random family in the town center took me in for the night ‘cause I had nowhere to stay, and they gave me a free bus ticket back to Thailand. The hospitality was echoed in the movie where the wounded white woman was treated like a queen. It reminded me of even China, where a local gets heavier sentences if he assaults a white foreigner than if he assaults a local Chinese.
What is the value of a white tourist compared to some ordinary “local” in the Third World? What is the value of an undocumented immigrant of color compared to some ordinary American in America?
I like the movie because it exposes these global systems of privilege, and reflects reality. I don’t like the movie because it pissed me off, and I didn’t take much away from it. I’ve already been frustrated by these global systems of privilege when they smack me in the gut in my travels. One example that pissed me off in 2005 Western China was when some white hippie-looking woman shoved her camcorder into the face of a Uighur woman just plain sitting at a street stall in the dusty bazaar (market), minding her own business eating her dinner. I understand where the fascination was coming from: the image was straight out of a Disney movie called “Aladdin,” and to finally see something exotic like that up-close and personal, Wow! Let’s catch it on film like we’re working for the National Geographic or something. But…how I wish I could give that Uighur lady a camcorder and a ticket to New York City, to go into a McDonald’s, and film a hippie eating a bigmac. Afterall, they don’t have those in Xinjiang! But you can see them in the Uighur-dubbed Hollywood movies!
Returning to my point all the movie did for me was thrust these kinds of things right into my face only to uselessly piss me off and frustrate me. Secondly, the movie was so obvious about setting up every single second to be prone to disaster. It was like “duuhhh…something bad is gonna happen. I’m just waiting for it to happen.” The moment those 2 kids got the rifle, you know some accident will happen. The moment that the Mexican guy got into the car saying “I’m not drunk! Don’t worry man!” you know something’s gonna happen. Actually, in that thread, you knew something bad was gonna happen from the moment the 2 white kids got into the car to cross the border. The whole movie is just one continuous anticipationg of bad things leaving me feeling uncomfortable because the whole time I’m feeling “uh oh…here it comes…oh no…it’s gonna happen…there it happened…oh no, something else bad is going to happen again” Too predictable, too cliché. What frustrated me more were the stupid decisions by some of the characters. You’ve got a really good aim kid…why are you shooting at a bus? You’re undocumented, why are you risking crossing the border back to Mexico when there could be problems crossing back? With 2 white kids in tow nonetheless! Plus you let your dopey nephew behind the wheel, drunk? And, Nephew, why are you provoking the border patrol cop? Why are you leaving them in the middle of the desert?
I guess I should also throw in a comment about the Japanese thread. Well, again, too cliché, predictable: “how about this for a story idea…let’s make the character have major self-esteem issues and then make her run in with a gang of druggie boys,” in a movie nonetheless.
And finally, because the movie wanted to focus on the general issue of globalization, there wasn’t any character development. I guess there’s nothing wrong with this…but it turned me off, cause I didn’t care about them, couldn’t connect or relate with them.
Well, the movie objectively speaking isn’t as bad as I make it out to be. I just don’t like it personally.
As for this post...there aren't really 10 reasons. Plus, I've included some praise and related personal experiences.
(***Don’t read this if you want to watch the movie. There are tons of spoilers from here on!!***).
Okay, let me get the praise out of the way before I move on to criticisms. From my experience in traveling, what is portrayed in the movie is so true, about what happens when people from totally different parts of the worlds “clash” or intertwine. I’ve seen it myself. The stereotypes that the West, (and various privileged non-west societies eg Hong Kong), have of the “Third World” is so far off the mark. They think, oh, they’re so “backwards” or “poor”, those villagers, living in the Stone Age…they’ll “kill us all! You know how those people are!” or “rob us!” But in fact, they’re the friendliest people in the world in my experience. Hong Kong relatives warned me “they’re Muslim! Watch out!,” and my mother expressing concern about my travels in Western China, just as the White bus-riding tourists in the movie thought about the Moroccan villagers. For me, I was taken in to a complete stranger’s tiny home in the middle of the world’s second largest desert during a big sand-storm and the lady fed us so much and showed genuine concern for our safety not to go into the storm. “Stay the night” she even offered. “No, we have to make it out of the desert, but thanks.” In Cambodia, when I lost my wallet, all the warnings ingrained into my head about “these kinds of places” made me suspect somebody stole my wallet. “Nobody would do something like that here,” the security guard said. It’s true. Rural country people aren’t socialized to covet money like we do. One Khmer young woman I talked to said she found a wad of foreign cash at the hotel she was working at. She didn’t feel good about taking it because she hadn’t earned it, so she gave it to the higher ups. Seriously, when you have a problem in “these places,” they go all out to help you. I had like 5 people hunting for my wallet…and a random family in the town center took me in for the night ‘cause I had nowhere to stay, and they gave me a free bus ticket back to Thailand. The hospitality was echoed in the movie where the wounded white woman was treated like a queen. It reminded me of even China, where a local gets heavier sentences if he assaults a white foreigner than if he assaults a local Chinese.
What is the value of a white tourist compared to some ordinary “local” in the Third World? What is the value of an undocumented immigrant of color compared to some ordinary American in America?
I like the movie because it exposes these global systems of privilege, and reflects reality. I don’t like the movie because it pissed me off, and I didn’t take much away from it. I’ve already been frustrated by these global systems of privilege when they smack me in the gut in my travels. One example that pissed me off in 2005 Western China was when some white hippie-looking woman shoved her camcorder into the face of a Uighur woman just plain sitting at a street stall in the dusty bazaar (market), minding her own business eating her dinner. I understand where the fascination was coming from: the image was straight out of a Disney movie called “Aladdin,” and to finally see something exotic like that up-close and personal, Wow! Let’s catch it on film like we’re working for the National Geographic or something. But…how I wish I could give that Uighur lady a camcorder and a ticket to New York City, to go into a McDonald’s, and film a hippie eating a bigmac. Afterall, they don’t have those in Xinjiang! But you can see them in the Uighur-dubbed Hollywood movies!
Returning to my point all the movie did for me was thrust these kinds of things right into my face only to uselessly piss me off and frustrate me. Secondly, the movie was so obvious about setting up every single second to be prone to disaster. It was like “duuhhh…something bad is gonna happen. I’m just waiting for it to happen.” The moment those 2 kids got the rifle, you know some accident will happen. The moment that the Mexican guy got into the car saying “I’m not drunk! Don’t worry man!” you know something’s gonna happen. Actually, in that thread, you knew something bad was gonna happen from the moment the 2 white kids got into the car to cross the border. The whole movie is just one continuous anticipationg of bad things leaving me feeling uncomfortable because the whole time I’m feeling “uh oh…here it comes…oh no…it’s gonna happen…there it happened…oh no, something else bad is going to happen again” Too predictable, too cliché. What frustrated me more were the stupid decisions by some of the characters. You’ve got a really good aim kid…why are you shooting at a bus? You’re undocumented, why are you risking crossing the border back to Mexico when there could be problems crossing back? With 2 white kids in tow nonetheless! Plus you let your dopey nephew behind the wheel, drunk? And, Nephew, why are you provoking the border patrol cop? Why are you leaving them in the middle of the desert?
I guess I should also throw in a comment about the Japanese thread. Well, again, too cliché, predictable: “how about this for a story idea…let’s make the character have major self-esteem issues and then make her run in with a gang of druggie boys,” in a movie nonetheless.
And finally, because the movie wanted to focus on the general issue of globalization, there wasn’t any character development. I guess there’s nothing wrong with this…but it turned me off, cause I didn’t care about them, couldn’t connect or relate with them.
Well, the movie objectively speaking isn’t as bad as I make it out to be. I just don’t like it personally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)