I Just Saw "The Corporation"
The Corporation - A film by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, and Joel Bakan
Fahrenheit/911, Orwell Rolls In His Grave, The Hunting of The President, and "The Corporation"...it is like back in 1975 when "disaster movies" were terrorising audiences, only this time it is pissed-off documentarians. For the 2nd time in a month, my wife and I attended a screening of a documentary in a packed theater. The last time we went for an evening of non-fiction cinema prior to this summer was for Microcosmos back in 1997. We still talk about the two mating snails and the Little Dung Beetle Who Could — very engaging stars who must have lost their SAG cards, because they were never seen again.
My first impression of "The Corporation" occurred prior to the opening shot when the opening title said the movie was from "Zeitgeist Films"; good name for a distribution company considering the SRO crowd waiting to see the film. There appears to be a significant segment of the population ready to see films, buy books, and otherwise engage in commercialized forms of dissent. Apparently, we are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore.
But overall is this the case? Concurrently, there is another segment of the population that loves nothing more than to slap liberals about the head and face until they fall down. This summer is the summer of "Who's Side Are You On?", and perhaps like 1968 it is turning into a possibly ugly standoff.
If a corporation is an "artificial human being", than what kind of human being is it? Would you let him date your daughter? The movie opens with the premise that corporate personhood may be psychologically analyzed to determine its overall mental state. The diagnosis: corporations exhibit psychopathic behaviors — run for your lives! Is this some sort of propaganda that excites people to rise up and storm the gates of industry! Are we to commandeer and liberate the tools of production for a just society? Afterwards, I asked Laura if she thought the movie was propaganda. "My idea of propaganda..." she noted, "is not something that makes you think, it is something that gives you the impression that you don't need to think." Her thoughts were she was going to be more vigilant about keeping our 5 year old away from mass media (we try, believe me) and she is going to be adament about keeping hormone-free milk in the fridge, not an impossible task.
The movie makes a good case that transnational corporations ultimately seek loosely regulated ownership of virtually every aspect of the commonwealth. In their quest for usurpation, they are reliant on the police powers of nation states to secure their property, and they must be vigilant in their public relations so that We The People are perpetually marketed the idea that our best interests are being inexorably served. But pick up a can of spray paint and point it at a corporate logo and police will show up in riot gear, club you in the back, take your spray paint away, and shuffle you off for processing. The ugly night of Fascism has descended from the high-rise office towers and is prowling the streets — very dramatic.
What struck me sitting in the movie, was the memory of the police presence at last year's Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue Conference here in Chicago. The police outnumbered the protesters. I remember businesses closing early to allow workers a chance to get out of the loop before the CPD imposed the lockdown. It was an impressive show of force to protect a small band of conference goers at the Sheraton. Perhaps unfairly, I contrast this with when the LAPD abandoned whole swaths of South Central LA during the Rodney King riots. They were later criticized for not doing enough to protect private property. I wonder if South Central had been an enclave of sprawling corporate headquarters and an ugly mob was descending on it, what kind of force would be present? This, to me, is less looney paranoia than it is a simple acknowledgement of where the priorities possibly lie in today's society.
Ultimately, the movie shows some CEOs working to show virtues of environmental stewardship and engaging in dialogue with their detractors. It shows a clearly appalled Kathy Lee Gifford finding out that clothing bearing her name is being made by 13 year olds being paid $0.17 an hour. It also notes that production shifted to another continent subsequently and clothing bearing her likeness is still being manufactured in a sweatshop by Wal-Mart after all the hub-bub died down. McDonald's is your kind of place; they feed you rattlesnakes ; they throw them in your face... etc. Yes, the rhetoric is of the blue-in-the-face variety at times and the choir is certainly preached to — but as I heard Bill Moyers say recently about the small churches he knew back in the day in Texas, "on some Sundays if it was too cold or too hot, the choir were the only ones who would show up. We need the choir!"
Fahrenheit/911, Orwell Rolls In His Grave, The Hunting of The President, and "The Corporation"...it is like back in 1975 when "disaster movies" were terrorising audiences, only this time it is pissed-off documentarians. For the 2nd time in a month, my wife and I attended a screening of a documentary in a packed theater. The last time we went for an evening of non-fiction cinema prior to this summer was for Microcosmos back in 1997. We still talk about the two mating snails and the Little Dung Beetle Who Could — very engaging stars who must have lost their SAG cards, because they were never seen again.
My first impression of "The Corporation" occurred prior to the opening shot when the opening title said the movie was from "Zeitgeist Films"; good name for a distribution company considering the SRO crowd waiting to see the film. There appears to be a significant segment of the population ready to see films, buy books, and otherwise engage in commercialized forms of dissent. Apparently, we are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore.
But overall is this the case? Concurrently, there is another segment of the population that loves nothing more than to slap liberals about the head and face until they fall down. This summer is the summer of "Who's Side Are You On?", and perhaps like 1968 it is turning into a possibly ugly standoff.
If a corporation is an "artificial human being", than what kind of human being is it? Would you let him date your daughter? The movie opens with the premise that corporate personhood may be psychologically analyzed to determine its overall mental state. The diagnosis: corporations exhibit psychopathic behaviors — run for your lives! Is this some sort of propaganda that excites people to rise up and storm the gates of industry! Are we to commandeer and liberate the tools of production for a just society? Afterwards, I asked Laura if she thought the movie was propaganda. "My idea of propaganda..." she noted, "is not something that makes you think, it is something that gives you the impression that you don't need to think." Her thoughts were she was going to be more vigilant about keeping our 5 year old away from mass media (we try, believe me) and she is going to be adament about keeping hormone-free milk in the fridge, not an impossible task.
The movie makes a good case that transnational corporations ultimately seek loosely regulated ownership of virtually every aspect of the commonwealth. In their quest for usurpation, they are reliant on the police powers of nation states to secure their property, and they must be vigilant in their public relations so that We The People are perpetually marketed the idea that our best interests are being inexorably served. But pick up a can of spray paint and point it at a corporate logo and police will show up in riot gear, club you in the back, take your spray paint away, and shuffle you off for processing. The ugly night of Fascism has descended from the high-rise office towers and is prowling the streets — very dramatic.
What struck me sitting in the movie, was the memory of the police presence at last year's Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue Conference here in Chicago. The police outnumbered the protesters. I remember businesses closing early to allow workers a chance to get out of the loop before the CPD imposed the lockdown. It was an impressive show of force to protect a small band of conference goers at the Sheraton. Perhaps unfairly, I contrast this with when the LAPD abandoned whole swaths of South Central LA during the Rodney King riots. They were later criticized for not doing enough to protect private property. I wonder if South Central had been an enclave of sprawling corporate headquarters and an ugly mob was descending on it, what kind of force would be present? This, to me, is less looney paranoia than it is a simple acknowledgement of where the priorities possibly lie in today's society.
Ultimately, the movie shows some CEOs working to show virtues of environmental stewardship and engaging in dialogue with their detractors. It shows a clearly appalled Kathy Lee Gifford finding out that clothing bearing her name is being made by 13 year olds being paid $0.17 an hour. It also notes that production shifted to another continent subsequently and clothing bearing her likeness is still being manufactured in a sweatshop by Wal-Mart after all the hub-bub died down. McDonald's is your kind of place; they feed you rattlesnakes ; they throw them in your face... etc. Yes, the rhetoric is of the blue-in-the-face variety at times and the choir is certainly preached to — but as I heard Bill Moyers say recently about the small churches he knew back in the day in Texas, "on some Sundays if it was too cold or too hot, the choir were the only ones who would show up. We need the choir!"
LINK
posted by obelus at 7/25/2004 11:48:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home