Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
SF Activists Had Hand in Making of "Battle in Seattle"
SF Activists Had Hand in Making of "Battle of Seattle"
However, Hollywood Hype Overarches Movie
However, Hollywood Hype Overarches Movie
Red-hot in a ruby designer gown, Actress Cherize Theron gushed praise on mainstream media television for her director boyfriend at the opening of "Battle in Seattle". The wall paper behind her screamed not-so-subtle product placement for couture fashion house Christian Dior. Contrast this with the causes Theron claims to clamor for: poverty, injustice, and misery around the world.
"It's a global thing," the usually eloquent actress told John Stewart in an interview on The Daily Show. And worse: "Anarchists are always funny but they do screw things up." Makes one wonder what the key players in the movie including Theron, who has a leading role, and director Stuart Townsend really came away with after the years they spent making the movie.
San Francisco activist David Solnit did his best to educate. He was an on-the-ground and arts organizer in Seattle for 6 months leading up to the WTO protests, and was contacted by Townsend to work with the film's art department as they tried to recreate the puppets used in the original street demonstrations. David and several other former Seattle anti-WTO organizers showed up during the filming to try to influence the film as best they could. An Indybay contributor's photos are featured in the movie, with thanks in the credits.
In fact, if not for the events surrounding the Seattle WTO protests of 1999 I wouldn't be posting this review to indybay today. The very first indymedia project was started as an alternative media source to report on protests against the Seattle WTO meeting. After Seattle, indymedia spread rapidly growing to over 150 projects by January 2006. The origins of IMCs themselves came out of protests against the biases of mainstream media.
So my biggest criticism of the movie has to be this: why is one of the heroines of the film a mainstream television news reporter who joins the demonstrators after observing the police brutality? WTO activists created indymedia precisely because corporate media focuses on violence and confrontation and portrays protesters negatively.
So, thanks for the photo credit, Battle in Seattle producers, but NO thanks for the Hollywood hype.
"It's a global thing," the usually eloquent actress told John Stewart in an interview on The Daily Show. And worse: "Anarchists are always funny but they do screw things up." Makes one wonder what the key players in the movie including Theron, who has a leading role, and director Stuart Townsend really came away with after the years they spent making the movie.
San Francisco activist David Solnit did his best to educate. He was an on-the-ground and arts organizer in Seattle for 6 months leading up to the WTO protests, and was contacted by Townsend to work with the film's art department as they tried to recreate the puppets used in the original street demonstrations. David and several other former Seattle anti-WTO organizers showed up during the filming to try to influence the film as best they could. An Indybay contributor's photos are featured in the movie, with thanks in the credits.
In fact, if not for the events surrounding the Seattle WTO protests of 1999 I wouldn't be posting this review to indybay today. The very first indymedia project was started as an alternative media source to report on protests against the Seattle WTO meeting. After Seattle, indymedia spread rapidly growing to over 150 projects by January 2006. The origins of IMCs themselves came out of protests against the biases of mainstream media.
So my biggest criticism of the movie has to be this: why is one of the heroines of the film a mainstream television news reporter who joins the demonstrators after observing the police brutality? WTO activists created indymedia precisely because corporate media focuses on violence and confrontation and portrays protesters negatively.
So, thanks for the photo credit, Battle in Seattle producers, but NO thanks for the Hollywood hype.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
I was really grossed out when I read that a Hollywood film was being made about the WTO protests. Reading that it would star Charlize Theron as a "bystander caught in the middle of the mayhem" made me cringe. I am now also extremely disappointed that Indybay chose to participate in the production of this film by supplying photos. Was money a deciding factor in why you chose to aid a film that will trivialize and distort radical events?
So, so disappointed in you Indymedia.
So, so disappointed in you Indymedia.
No - I disagree and think this is great. Plenty of people were 9 years old back then, or didn't get adequate coverage. Even if this is fictionalized and has a few moments of hollywood dialog, and some details that aren't accurate to our real culture, I think this is an overwhelmingly good topic for a movie. Seriously, a lot of people have never been exposed to the positive side of the global justice movement, and in some areas of our country, activism takes completely different forms. This movie sounds very important, *particularly* because they threw in the historical documentary photos from indymedia.
Students and other lower-income Vancouverites were encouraged to 'volunteer' their time to be extras in this film. Under claims that this was an independent film (which means nothing really, or shouldn't, in terms of maintaining industry standards), producers recruited many who were too naive to know that they should be paid to do this work.
It's shameful that a movie about battling for social justice would do such unjust things. Don't support it!
It's shameful that a movie about battling for social justice would do such unjust things. Don't support it!
even with it's uneveneness and sentimentality at parts. I went to Seattle. It was an important victory and this movie shows somewhat how the victory occurred. Everyone should see it and make their own judgemnt.
If you want to use the film to our advantage - I would urge you to dress up like black blocers and copy off the flyers that crimethinc made for handing out at the movie, "And what about tomorrow?" Can be downloaded here. Even if the movie sucks, it gives us an opportunity to intervene.
http://shiftshapers.gnn.tv/blogs/29511/_And_What_About_Tomorrow_An_Anarchist_Response_to_Battle_in_Seattle
http://shiftshapers.gnn.tv/blogs/29511/_And_What_About_Tomorrow_An_Anarchist_Response_to_Battle_in_Seattle
Just a quick comment for consideration:
This film is not documentary. It is fiction. It is presented as entertainment. It is produced for profit. The profits, if any, will go the very corporations the people in Seattle were protesting against. I think that is reason enough to denounce the film and to boycott it.
That said I don’t think anyone should protest at openings for the film, that would only add to the spectacle.
This film is not documentary. It is fiction. It is presented as entertainment. It is produced for profit. The profits, if any, will go the very corporations the people in Seattle were protesting against. I think that is reason enough to denounce the film and to boycott it.
That said I don’t think anyone should protest at openings for the film, that would only add to the spectacle.
For more information:
http://www.nothingness.org/
I saw the movie the other day and I was at WTO demonstrations in 1999 and continue to be active in the global justice movement. Though there were flaws, I firmly believe that the creation of this film is good for the movement. Though I despise capitalism and co-optation by mainstream media as much as the next anti-authoritarian, I would rather this generation of young adults see a film that actively portrays police brutality against nonviolent demonstrators, the truth about Free Trade, and shows activists as people trying to do what is right, than to go see a movie that glorifies violence and portrays all dissent as terrorism. We are living in a very different climate now than we were in 1999. As the media turns us into terrorists it is important for our history and our message to get out, even if it is watered down. I think this film has the potential to inspire people who may not otherwise think about this type of dissent to act.
I saw this movie last weekend. The movie basically fails, mostly because it's poorly written. or me at least, there's no "willing suspension of disbelief' which is necessary to enage with any work of narrative story telling, let alone for any deepr message to be effectively carried by the film or stroynin question.
Also, the dynamics of the politically incoherent hippie libearl protesters weren't credible, either. The main alpha-male is deffered to automatically by the other hygenicall-challenged career protesters, and as anyone who knows the cureent day protest ghetto knows, this kind of defference to leaders is for the most part happily absent in the interpersonal dynamics of ths actual scene itself.
The main reason that the message of the anti-WTO people got heard in Seattle in 1999 was because of the combative crew who trashed sundry deserving capitalist enterprises and symbols of global corporate homoginization. Acting alone they might not have made that much of a difference, but in combination with the larger demos and the ineptitude of the forces of order they made a difference in a big way. These people get a wholly dishonest, Kevin-Danaher-like short-shrift in the crappy Charlize Therzon/Woody Harrelson flick. The fur-bearing main hippie prtoester guy yells something like, "this is supposed to be non-violnet!" the logical response to that is of course "according to who?!" It isn't convincingly shiwn that the demo is his private property, or that it should be, or that his brand of nebulous liberalism is going to be any more effective than anybody elses take on things.
The filmmakers weak writing may in part have been a function of their desire to dumb-down their story for the consumption of the semi-mythical entity known as Mainstream America. Whether this succeeds in communicating anything to anybody is an open question. I doubt that people who stick their noses up Rush Limbaugh's ass are going to accidentally wander into a showing of this film, instead of, say, "The Dale Ernhardt Story." And if they did, poor writing and flaccid storytelling probably don't do them any better than they do for the rest of us supposedly more sophisticated folks.
One place that the filmmakers could have done more withis when the Woody Harrelson cop visits the alpha-male hippie protester dude in jail. The writing was somewhat less weak here, and with a little more work this scene could have helped to lift the film above the 'Romper Room' level that it ended up on. Even here they dropped the ball, with the hippie-guy inappropriately almost breaking into a laugh after the cop has told him that his wife just suffered a miscarriage.
Two thumbs down; a story with crappy politics, told poorly.
Also, the dynamics of the politically incoherent hippie libearl protesters weren't credible, either. The main alpha-male is deffered to automatically by the other hygenicall-challenged career protesters, and as anyone who knows the cureent day protest ghetto knows, this kind of defference to leaders is for the most part happily absent in the interpersonal dynamics of ths actual scene itself.
The main reason that the message of the anti-WTO people got heard in Seattle in 1999 was because of the combative crew who trashed sundry deserving capitalist enterprises and symbols of global corporate homoginization. Acting alone they might not have made that much of a difference, but in combination with the larger demos and the ineptitude of the forces of order they made a difference in a big way. These people get a wholly dishonest, Kevin-Danaher-like short-shrift in the crappy Charlize Therzon/Woody Harrelson flick. The fur-bearing main hippie prtoester guy yells something like, "this is supposed to be non-violnet!" the logical response to that is of course "according to who?!" It isn't convincingly shiwn that the demo is his private property, or that it should be, or that his brand of nebulous liberalism is going to be any more effective than anybody elses take on things.
The filmmakers weak writing may in part have been a function of their desire to dumb-down their story for the consumption of the semi-mythical entity known as Mainstream America. Whether this succeeds in communicating anything to anybody is an open question. I doubt that people who stick their noses up Rush Limbaugh's ass are going to accidentally wander into a showing of this film, instead of, say, "The Dale Ernhardt Story." And if they did, poor writing and flaccid storytelling probably don't do them any better than they do for the rest of us supposedly more sophisticated folks.
One place that the filmmakers could have done more withis when the Woody Harrelson cop visits the alpha-male hippie protester dude in jail. The writing was somewhat less weak here, and with a little more work this scene could have helped to lift the film above the 'Romper Room' level that it ended up on. Even here they dropped the ball, with the hippie-guy inappropriately almost breaking into a laugh after the cop has told him that his wife just suffered a miscarriage.
Two thumbs down; a story with crappy politics, told poorly.
Dear David Solnit,
I went to the recent screening of "Battle in Seattle" and I stayed for the monologues that followed. I was disappointed in the movie and in what Kevin and Randy had to say. But, I was glad that you were there and that you chose to speak. I gathered from what you said that you and I would have similar critiques of the movie ...
I personally don't think that I'm going to contact anyone about this ... but, someone has to say it - THE MOVIE WAS REVISIONIST AND PRESENTED A TOTALLY FALSE RENDITION OF EVENTS SURROUNDING THE BLACK BLOCK AND THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS IN GENERAL. There, I said it ... phew ... I feel better.
1.) The window-smashing that occurred on (or after Nov. 30) was a response to police violence (not the reason for it.) In other words, the police started gassing and blasting people out of intersections first. Then, the "flying squadrons" (or little mobile groups of the "black block") started trying to distract the police from gassing the people that were sitting in the intersections ... so, at that point, they smashed some windows.
They were respecting the "non-violent" demonstration and going along with the plan until the cops started really getting busy in the intersections and breaking through the blockades and gassing and shooting people with "non-lethal" items at point-blank range. It is very important that someone gets this point right - despite what some among us would like to present.
2.) The mainstream press was not very focussed on the truth and/or giving time to the good activists message - even without the window smashing to focus on. One myth that has evolved into a sort-of biblical truth among the "good activists" is that they were being so successful at getting the good points across until the black block came along and screwed it all up by smashing a window or two. Now, you and I know that there were so many articulate people out on the streets and so many people who were trained to deal with the media ... trained to "stay on message" and so on. If the press wanted a good story, it was all around them. Press releases were being sent to all the right places. Press-friendly events were occurring from all angles (Jubilee 2000, labor, environment, genetic engineering, democracy and so forth.) We activists and the NGO's were so ready and eager to make super-valid points all up and down. And, still there was never any mention of really key points or really anything of substance that was occurring inside the ministerial meeting ... no mention of what the official agenda was ... no mention of the Global Free Logging Agreement ... etc ... etc ... So, to then later come along and blame a'couple of black blockers for screwing up the media campaign is naive and misguided.
Sure, the press loved to focus on the smashed Starbuck's window and sure they loved to paint the whole thing as "chaos" and so on ... that is what the press does. It is after the press does this that we all need to get a lot better at "staying on message" THEN! That is not the time to fall into their trap and to start blaming other activists because our point isn't really being totally reverberated by the mainstream (corporate-owned) press. Anytime anyone of us was ever asked about the "violence" or "mayhem" ... we should have popped right back with, "Well, what is really violent is what the corporations are doing on a daily basis in countries all over the world." ... Instead of saying to the press and at movie screenings, "well, there were some bad protesters who unfortunately screwed everything up because they are dumb anarchists who like to smash things. We, the educated reform capitalists are the reasonable ones ... listen to us ... " That is such a wrong position to take publicly - even if that is how one feels privately.
Look, I still count Seattle as a big success. Where we failed was in the follow up. I mean, if you really think about it and try to predict what the media is going to do and how "the man" is going to respond with their own press machinery ... their own video news releases and so on ... then, it is all very predictable that the take-away for the mainstream press is going to be that angry protesters descended on Seattle and screwed up an otherwise perfectly good shopping season. We activists and NGO types should have known this ... should have predicted this ... been ready to respond to this ... instead of constantly feeding the media the "bad protester" story.
And, so now, fast forward to the Canadian movie with a medium/small budget and a couple of celebs - THE BATTLE IN SEATTLE. The movie makers are talking to the upper-class "activists" such as the Rain Forest Action Network. They are in dialogue with the likes of them. So, they get a lot more of this "good protester / bad protester" perspective. And, of course, they are really making a movie that is a lot of hype and human-interest drama. It is not surprising that they would want to focus on the internal clashes between the window smashers and the truly violent peace-police that tried to protect the corporate windows. But, what is surprising is that the "green capitalists" such as Paul Hawking would support it to the extent that they have. It is also kind of sickening to see the self-congratulating, seasoned "activists" like Kevin Danaher and Randy Hayes using the screening as an opportunity to pat themselves on the back and to further this myth of the "good protester vs. bad protester" thing. It is disheartening and disgusting. No real activist should champion and/or legitimize this movie. We should just say, "it's a movie ... it's fiction ... not a bad human drama ... but, not any kind of valid depiction of what occurred in Seattle."
In the past, the "Left" itself has shown that it is happy to live with a sanitized version of Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. and his ultimate message. And now, in our era, our most financially-endowed and well-connected "activists" are happy to perpetuate lies and myths about what really happened in Seattle.
I saw that you were trying to balance this out and for that I am appreciative.
Thank you, Jeff
... an interesting article about the impact of the Seattle Protests
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/10/04-2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom without economic freedom is sentimental and anemic."
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
9:36 AM - 3 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove -
sabrina
I can honestly say that I had a better time getting gassed and pepper sprayed in Seattle in 1999, than I did sitting through the movie I just watched. It was so poorly written, that I felt sorry for everyone involved in making the film. Stuart Townsed, decided to ignore historically accurate and exciting stories (ie, the Union march joining the direct action, the spontaneous convergence of a variety of different activists from around the world, the symbolic marginalization of WTO African delegates even in their accomodations) for a tawdry, pat storyline and lousy performances.
Pregnant woman who gets injured and loses baby? Cop who loses his shit and beats a protestor, then apologizes when the activist is in jail? Macho activist dude sweeping tough girl protesor off her feet after getting beaten by cop who later apologizes? Evil black bock activist endangers pregnant lady when wrecklessly smashing baby gap window. Journalist miraculously drops her career in the course of a couple of hours and transforms from a sleazy mainstream anchor to a dedicated protestor...The list goes on and on....
Why was I laughing when Charlise Theron lost her baby? Is it because I'm a heartless cold person? Maybe. But it's also because the film was all so unbelievable and ridiculous! The whole thing made me kind of depressed really. So few mainstream films are done about politically relevant, modern historical events and I felt kind of jipped.
This is what we get? I wanted a t-shirt that said "I got tear gassed at the Seattle WTO protests and all I got was this lousy movie!!!"
But seriously, the truth is the movie isn't going to have much of a presence in the theaters. It's, quite frankly, too weak of a film (disregarding the historical inaccuracies) for a major theatrical release. It will have a limited release (2 weeks), then straight to video...I can guarantee it.
If the film was made with more skill, if it treated the audience with more respect (ie that we are intelligent) then it may have a chance of reaching the mainstream. Unfortunately it's going to go in the fire sale at the DVD store by next summer. I'd definatley rate it in the B movie category of filmmaking. And it is because of its shoddy execution from a cinematic perspective, that I personally, don't even think it warrants much of a critique. Just another lousy hollywood film to be placed into the bottom shelf of the DVD store. It isn't going to be seen by very many people. Maybe some wide eyed kid will see the film and be inspired to protest the WTO which should be considered a major triumph at this point. The story of Seattle should be left to the documentarians who were there. Thanks for doing your part.
Posted by sabrina on Sep 22, 2008 8:57 AM
[Remove] [Reply to this]
Mango
Hey .. On a positive note - the website about all this "realbattleinseattle dot org" is really nice to see. It is a user-driven, wiki type of website featuring people telling their own Seattle stories and reactions to the recent movie. It was good to see that a good many people feel that the movie is shite. And, many are using the bad movie as an excuse to refocus their thoughts and re-transmit their own impressions.
In a sense, our whole struggle against the WTO, IMF and the World Bank were eclipsed by the events that have followed the attacks of September 11, 2001. So, now, we are confronted with this bad movie about N30 and it is (in a round about way) encouraging us all to look at this again ... to review what went right and what went wrong ... to re-evaluate the qualities of our struggles and groups ... to examine our possibilities now.
So, I think that is what to take away from this horrible film release - the realization that we were the ones who really did accomplish a lot in Seattle and we need to again focus on OUR AGENDA instead of always just reacting to the fears, crises and wars that the corporate system is creating. What do we want? Who do we want to work with? Can we get invovled in a struggle that has meaning and make some progress ... in the context of the post-911 world? If the so-called "leaders" of the Rain Forest Action Network and A.N.S.W.E.R. are really lame, then, how to diminish the disheartening impact they have on all the rest of us? In other words, how to reclaim our strengths and organize really effective actions in spite of the lame ones who are deluded into thinking that they are leading? We just have to get back in the game and go on with or without the so-called "vanguard."
Posted by Mango on Sep 22, 2008 1:37 PM
[Remove] [Reply to this]
Mango
Smashing Mothers for Shock - Bad Filmmaker Bad ...
>Hey there, How is everybody. ...something about the
>movie ...
>
>The writing was bad ... the good parts were derivative ... and one
>part should be renounced by anyone calling themselves an "activist."
>The scene I refer to, is a set with two young motherly women looking
>at infant clothes at a store that is apparently still open in the
>midst of a giant protest. Anyway, a "blackblocker" suddenly smashes
>the window of this still-open store and very close to the
>mother-women. We all know that this type of thing never happened ...
>but, the question for the filmmakers and for the "activists" that
>they were working with, is WHY DO THAT? Are you trying to villify
>activists in the eyes of the public on purpose? or, are you just
>incredibly stupid? If I had anything to do with the vetting of this
>movie (as some of the RAN folks claimed to at the party) ... then,
>that scene would have had to go.
>
>But, on a positive note, I do like how the movie is getting people
>to talk again and I like the website ... realbattleinseattle.org ...
>and the fact that I am writing you now, that is all completely
>positive ... so, ah ... keep it real amigos ...
>Mango
I went to the recent screening of "Battle in Seattle" and I stayed for the monologues that followed. I was disappointed in the movie and in what Kevin and Randy had to say. But, I was glad that you were there and that you chose to speak. I gathered from what you said that you and I would have similar critiques of the movie ...
I personally don't think that I'm going to contact anyone about this ... but, someone has to say it - THE MOVIE WAS REVISIONIST AND PRESENTED A TOTALLY FALSE RENDITION OF EVENTS SURROUNDING THE BLACK BLOCK AND THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS IN GENERAL. There, I said it ... phew ... I feel better.
1.) The window-smashing that occurred on (or after Nov. 30) was a response to police violence (not the reason for it.) In other words, the police started gassing and blasting people out of intersections first. Then, the "flying squadrons" (or little mobile groups of the "black block") started trying to distract the police from gassing the people that were sitting in the intersections ... so, at that point, they smashed some windows.
They were respecting the "non-violent" demonstration and going along with the plan until the cops started really getting busy in the intersections and breaking through the blockades and gassing and shooting people with "non-lethal" items at point-blank range. It is very important that someone gets this point right - despite what some among us would like to present.
2.) The mainstream press was not very focussed on the truth and/or giving time to the good activists message - even without the window smashing to focus on. One myth that has evolved into a sort-of biblical truth among the "good activists" is that they were being so successful at getting the good points across until the black block came along and screwed it all up by smashing a window or two. Now, you and I know that there were so many articulate people out on the streets and so many people who were trained to deal with the media ... trained to "stay on message" and so on. If the press wanted a good story, it was all around them. Press releases were being sent to all the right places. Press-friendly events were occurring from all angles (Jubilee 2000, labor, environment, genetic engineering, democracy and so forth.) We activists and the NGO's were so ready and eager to make super-valid points all up and down. And, still there was never any mention of really key points or really anything of substance that was occurring inside the ministerial meeting ... no mention of what the official agenda was ... no mention of the Global Free Logging Agreement ... etc ... etc ... So, to then later come along and blame a'couple of black blockers for screwing up the media campaign is naive and misguided.
Sure, the press loved to focus on the smashed Starbuck's window and sure they loved to paint the whole thing as "chaos" and so on ... that is what the press does. It is after the press does this that we all need to get a lot better at "staying on message" THEN! That is not the time to fall into their trap and to start blaming other activists because our point isn't really being totally reverberated by the mainstream (corporate-owned) press. Anytime anyone of us was ever asked about the "violence" or "mayhem" ... we should have popped right back with, "Well, what is really violent is what the corporations are doing on a daily basis in countries all over the world." ... Instead of saying to the press and at movie screenings, "well, there were some bad protesters who unfortunately screwed everything up because they are dumb anarchists who like to smash things. We, the educated reform capitalists are the reasonable ones ... listen to us ... " That is such a wrong position to take publicly - even if that is how one feels privately.
Look, I still count Seattle as a big success. Where we failed was in the follow up. I mean, if you really think about it and try to predict what the media is going to do and how "the man" is going to respond with their own press machinery ... their own video news releases and so on ... then, it is all very predictable that the take-away for the mainstream press is going to be that angry protesters descended on Seattle and screwed up an otherwise perfectly good shopping season. We activists and NGO types should have known this ... should have predicted this ... been ready to respond to this ... instead of constantly feeding the media the "bad protester" story.
And, so now, fast forward to the Canadian movie with a medium/small budget and a couple of celebs - THE BATTLE IN SEATTLE. The movie makers are talking to the upper-class "activists" such as the Rain Forest Action Network. They are in dialogue with the likes of them. So, they get a lot more of this "good protester / bad protester" perspective. And, of course, they are really making a movie that is a lot of hype and human-interest drama. It is not surprising that they would want to focus on the internal clashes between the window smashers and the truly violent peace-police that tried to protect the corporate windows. But, what is surprising is that the "green capitalists" such as Paul Hawking would support it to the extent that they have. It is also kind of sickening to see the self-congratulating, seasoned "activists" like Kevin Danaher and Randy Hayes using the screening as an opportunity to pat themselves on the back and to further this myth of the "good protester vs. bad protester" thing. It is disheartening and disgusting. No real activist should champion and/or legitimize this movie. We should just say, "it's a movie ... it's fiction ... not a bad human drama ... but, not any kind of valid depiction of what occurred in Seattle."
In the past, the "Left" itself has shown that it is happy to live with a sanitized version of Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. and his ultimate message. And now, in our era, our most financially-endowed and well-connected "activists" are happy to perpetuate lies and myths about what really happened in Seattle.
I saw that you were trying to balance this out and for that I am appreciative.
Thank you, Jeff
... an interesting article about the impact of the Seattle Protests
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/10/04-2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom without economic freedom is sentimental and anemic."
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
9:36 AM - 3 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove -
sabrina
I can honestly say that I had a better time getting gassed and pepper sprayed in Seattle in 1999, than I did sitting through the movie I just watched. It was so poorly written, that I felt sorry for everyone involved in making the film. Stuart Townsed, decided to ignore historically accurate and exciting stories (ie, the Union march joining the direct action, the spontaneous convergence of a variety of different activists from around the world, the symbolic marginalization of WTO African delegates even in their accomodations) for a tawdry, pat storyline and lousy performances.
Pregnant woman who gets injured and loses baby? Cop who loses his shit and beats a protestor, then apologizes when the activist is in jail? Macho activist dude sweeping tough girl protesor off her feet after getting beaten by cop who later apologizes? Evil black bock activist endangers pregnant lady when wrecklessly smashing baby gap window. Journalist miraculously drops her career in the course of a couple of hours and transforms from a sleazy mainstream anchor to a dedicated protestor...The list goes on and on....
Why was I laughing when Charlise Theron lost her baby? Is it because I'm a heartless cold person? Maybe. But it's also because the film was all so unbelievable and ridiculous! The whole thing made me kind of depressed really. So few mainstream films are done about politically relevant, modern historical events and I felt kind of jipped.
This is what we get? I wanted a t-shirt that said "I got tear gassed at the Seattle WTO protests and all I got was this lousy movie!!!"
But seriously, the truth is the movie isn't going to have much of a presence in the theaters. It's, quite frankly, too weak of a film (disregarding the historical inaccuracies) for a major theatrical release. It will have a limited release (2 weeks), then straight to video...I can guarantee it.
If the film was made with more skill, if it treated the audience with more respect (ie that we are intelligent) then it may have a chance of reaching the mainstream. Unfortunately it's going to go in the fire sale at the DVD store by next summer. I'd definatley rate it in the B movie category of filmmaking. And it is because of its shoddy execution from a cinematic perspective, that I personally, don't even think it warrants much of a critique. Just another lousy hollywood film to be placed into the bottom shelf of the DVD store. It isn't going to be seen by very many people. Maybe some wide eyed kid will see the film and be inspired to protest the WTO which should be considered a major triumph at this point. The story of Seattle should be left to the documentarians who were there. Thanks for doing your part.
Posted by sabrina on Sep 22, 2008 8:57 AM
[Remove] [Reply to this]
Mango
Hey .. On a positive note - the website about all this "realbattleinseattle dot org" is really nice to see. It is a user-driven, wiki type of website featuring people telling their own Seattle stories and reactions to the recent movie. It was good to see that a good many people feel that the movie is shite. And, many are using the bad movie as an excuse to refocus their thoughts and re-transmit their own impressions.
In a sense, our whole struggle against the WTO, IMF and the World Bank were eclipsed by the events that have followed the attacks of September 11, 2001. So, now, we are confronted with this bad movie about N30 and it is (in a round about way) encouraging us all to look at this again ... to review what went right and what went wrong ... to re-evaluate the qualities of our struggles and groups ... to examine our possibilities now.
So, I think that is what to take away from this horrible film release - the realization that we were the ones who really did accomplish a lot in Seattle and we need to again focus on OUR AGENDA instead of always just reacting to the fears, crises and wars that the corporate system is creating. What do we want? Who do we want to work with? Can we get invovled in a struggle that has meaning and make some progress ... in the context of the post-911 world? If the so-called "leaders" of the Rain Forest Action Network and A.N.S.W.E.R. are really lame, then, how to diminish the disheartening impact they have on all the rest of us? In other words, how to reclaim our strengths and organize really effective actions in spite of the lame ones who are deluded into thinking that they are leading? We just have to get back in the game and go on with or without the so-called "vanguard."
Posted by Mango on Sep 22, 2008 1:37 PM
[Remove] [Reply to this]
Mango
Smashing Mothers for Shock - Bad Filmmaker Bad ...
>Hey there, How is everybody. ...something about the
>movie ...
>
>The writing was bad ... the good parts were derivative ... and one
>part should be renounced by anyone calling themselves an "activist."
>The scene I refer to, is a set with two young motherly women looking
>at infant clothes at a store that is apparently still open in the
>midst of a giant protest. Anyway, a "blackblocker" suddenly smashes
>the window of this still-open store and very close to the
>mother-women. We all know that this type of thing never happened ...
>but, the question for the filmmakers and for the "activists" that
>they were working with, is WHY DO THAT? Are you trying to villify
>activists in the eyes of the public on purpose? or, are you just
>incredibly stupid? If I had anything to do with the vetting of this
>movie (as some of the RAN folks claimed to at the party) ... then,
>that scene would have had to go.
>
>But, on a positive note, I do like how the movie is getting people
>to talk again and I like the website ... realbattleinseattle.org ...
>and the fact that I am writing you now, that is all completely
>positive ... so, ah ... keep it real amigos ...
>Mango
For more information:
http://www.youtube.com/mangomawn
As one who was at sixth and university with a group of folks locked into the concrete steel lockboxes, i knew some of those blackblockers out in the streets on N30. they were rad! by far some of the heroes on that day, along with lots of other wonderful comrades. to me it seemed like there was the lockdown or convergence at 6th and pike, the robo cops aka storm troopers marched on in them first thing that morning and gassed the crap out of everyone, beat up people and the black block hung back until the beatings started. IE..my recollection was there wasn't window smashing until the billy clubs came out. then it seemed like some windows got smashed. non-violent protesters met by violent pigs. blackblockers stepped up and took some heat from those blocking the intersection, and vulnerable as hell because of being in that position of being passive resistors. then the pigs came up to sixth and university. i can remember telling some friends who were black blockers, hey we're going to stand our ground at this intersection with the lockdown tactics. total respect from the black block folks. it was magical, until the robo cops came up and gassed the shit out of us and pummelled some with their billy clubs and rubber bullets. i remember, that there was a stand off, the robo cops surrounding the intersection at 6th and university after the gas cleared, the cops couldn't clear us out, those locked down couldn't get their arms out of the lock boxes, all the while, i remember a line of black blockers holding each other arm to arm with backs to the convention center, preventing delegates from entering into the convention center and doing it non violently. delegate approached and the black bloc firmly but politely told them the WTO meeting wasn't happening on that day. the only violence i saw on the morning of N30, 1999 was instigated by the cops. and poor them, they were under prepared, didn't expect it, bullshit! ruckus folks had been telling the popo and the mayor, there will be acts of civil disobedience, prepare to arrest people. instead the cops march in like facist dictators and beat people down.
now the big ten NGO groups can argue what they want being privileged and having access to those from stuart townsend's crew, but it was those who you'd see on the front lines at a lot of woods actions throughout the country who i saw put themselves on the line and taking beat downs in a civil disobedience manner. the black bloc folks were heroes respecting that tactic and taking major heat for a few window's being smashed while sculls got bashed. i thought the black bloc was just another component to the thousands who took to the streets. demonizing the black bloc is horrible, shame on those who have criticized them.
la luchue sigue!
now the big ten NGO groups can argue what they want being privileged and having access to those from stuart townsend's crew, but it was those who you'd see on the front lines at a lot of woods actions throughout the country who i saw put themselves on the line and taking beat downs in a civil disobedience manner. the black bloc folks were heroes respecting that tactic and taking major heat for a few window's being smashed while sculls got bashed. i thought the black bloc was just another component to the thousands who took to the streets. demonizing the black bloc is horrible, shame on those who have criticized them.
la luchue sigue!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network