200 Movies, 1 Woman, 1 Blog

Bully, 2011, USA

This documentary hit close to home. I was bullied growing up and middle school and high school were an awful sort of hell that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. I can look back on those years with a more rounded and mature perspective now – but I am also close to five years past high school. I know that the sort of pain a bullied teenager feels will begin to heal once they’re out of that environment, but it’s hard to tell that to someone who is hurting. They have to learn it for themselves once they’re out of there. That makes the suicides of young teens and preteens even more heartbreaking.

Filmmaker Lee Hirsch speaks to many families: some have lost children because of suicide, and others are dealing with the realities of having a child that is being bullied. Alex’s story was especially heartbreaking because the poor kid was being tortured in a way I never was. He spoke casually about being strangled on the bus, and stabbed with pencils, and it made me so angry.

The worst thing is that the school officials seemed almost indifferent with confronted with what he (and other bullied students) were going through. Alex’s principal actually lectured a bullied child for not shaking the hand of his bully. When this poor child spoke up and started talking about all of the things this kid was doing to him, the principal said that HE was no better than the bully and that he hurt the bully’s feelings for not shaking his hand. I wanted, more than anything, to jump into the scene and yell and scream at this ignorant woman. I wanted to speak up for this poor kid because the principal was obviously unwilling to act for him. Later on in the film, when another child tried to speak about for themselves, a school official talked down to the child. Young people are taught to tell an adult or school official if they’re being bullied, but being spoken down to appears to be the norm.

That actually happened to me once. When I was in my first year of high school, I was being treated poorly by a male classmate who’d tormented me since elementary school. One day, while we were watching Schindler’s List, he coloured on a tampon with red marker and shoved it in my face. He also threw candy at the back of my head throughout the entire class. I loudly told him to stop it, and our teacher told him to stop it, as well. But he didn’t listen, so she pulled me aside after class and told me she was going to tell the principal about what he did. She did, and he got detention. This opened up a whole can of worms, because friends of his who were previously kind to me started treating me very badly. They hurled abuse at me, and eventually I got fed up and went to the school guidance councilor. The day he came to speak to all of us, the girls were being so mean to me that I was crying in class, and he spoke to us all together and they blamed me, and said that I was being uncooperative. So…I got a lecture by this guidance councilor while they sat there smirking. After that, they continued to be mean to me and mocked me for talking to the school officials about them.

I’ve let go of that sort of shit in my life for the most part, because I know that I’m better than them. But seeing these kids go through exactly what I went through made me cry really hard, because I know how much they must be hurting. But I also know how much better life gets after high school, and I hope I can follow their lives in the years to come to see all of these wonderful preteens and teenagers blossom into adults. I do recognize that one’s experiences shape who they become as an adult, and I know that being bullied has shaped me greatly. I like to think it’s made me a more compassionate person, but it’s also made me very shy.

The documentary is an independent documentary, and, as a result, the budget is fairly low. Hirsch filmed the movie himself, and it seems to have been filmed on a handheld camera. This gave the film a sort of “raw” look and tone. But the camera must have had an autofocus feature, because it was always going in and out of focus. This was slightly irritating, but cinematography was not the priority in this movie. Getting the story and the audio was far more important.

Here in Canada, Bully is rated PG. We also got the “unedited” version, with all of the F-bombs retained. I find it, quite frankly, ridiculous that it originally received an R rating in the United States. I’d like to go into that issue in more detail in a later blog post, because I found it disgusting. I think this movie is one that preteens and teenagers need to see. It will give them perspective on how their actions are affecting others, or show them that they are not alone. That being said, the movie does examine mature, and somewhat disturbing subject matter that may be too much for younger children. I’d show this movie to children in middle school and above.

So, how can we solve the bullying solution? Sadly, neither I nor the documentary have any answers. I don’t know how to make growing up any easier for children, and I don’t know how to solve bullying. I don’t think it’s something that can ever be solved. I do think school officials need to pay more attention to bullying, and lay down stronger punishments. But I also think parents need to watch what their children are doing, and advocate for their kids if they’re being bullied, or offer consequences if they are the bullies.

This documentary is so important, so please see it as soon as possible, especially if you’re a parent or work with children.

No Impact Man: The Documentary, 2009, USA

This documentary looked at the Beavan family, who spent a year living so that they would have no negative impact on the environment.  This was Colin’s idea, and his wife, Michelle went along with it.  Michelle was initially reluctant, and missed several aspects of her life before the changes.

Over the course of the year, they used human powered transportation, purchased local foods without packaging, and eventually gave up electricity.  The family went vegetarian, and gave up all take out food. Colin even returned used egg cartons to the farmers’ market to be reused.

I found the experiment very interesting.  They obviously went to a lot of trouble and inconvenience (or, at least, I saw it as inconvenience) to live this lifestyle.  Our society is not exactly conductive to an impact-free lifestyle.  Generally it’s possible to limit the carbon footprint one leaves, but it’s extraordinarily difficult to leave no impact whatsoever.  I do think there were flaws in Colin’s thinking, though.  When he rejected packaging at the Farmers’ Market, it was still being thrown out – but it wasn’t being thrown out at his apartment.  Therefore, he was still responsible for that garbage, but he wasn’t personally throwing it out.  This isn’t his fault, of course, it’s just a side effect of the fact that our society packages all products people purchase.

One other thing I was curious about was how laundering certain pieces of fabric worked.  They didn’t purchase toilet paper and used rags when they used the washroom.  This is odd, but seemingly fine if one has a washing machine to properly decontaminate the rags, but, since they began doing laundry in the tub, I have to wonder how they properly cleaned the rags.  This wasn’t shown, which I’m partially thankful for, but I would have liked to know how they took care of cleaning these rags.

The documentary offered a very honest look at the challenges this family faced over the course of the project.  Michelle and Colin definitely butted heads over the course of the project, and we get to see their arguments on screen.  I appreciated that these changes weren’t portrayed solely as a positive.  We also got some insight into how the general public perceived the project.  While some people were positive about it, many were negative about it.  They felt that his project was a waste of time, and that Colin was displaying a “holier than thou” attitude.  While I don’t have any intention of ever adopting the “no impact” lifestyle, I admired what they did.  It has made me more mindful of what I waste and how I can reduce my carbon footprint.

Mine, 2009, USA

This documentary was a moving look at the animals that were left behind when Hurricane Katrina hit, and the owners who loved them and were trying to find them after the fact.  When people were evacuating, they were not allowed to bring their animals, so they had to leave them behind and hope they could return in a day or two.  Unfortunately, people weren’t able to return that quickly, so in the weeks after Katrina, rescue crews found animals and they were scattered across America.  Many were re-homed.  This left the people who originally owned the animals searching frantically for their pets, and in some cases, suing for custody of their pets.

The fact that people couldn’t bring their pets infuriated me and breaks my heart.  I love animals, and I don’t think I could ever leave a pet behind in such a situation.  Pets are family and if I had to evacuate, they’d be coming along with me.  This hardly compares, but I currently cannot keep a pet where I live, and, while I am searching for a pet-friendly accommodation, I wouldn’t be able to sneak a pet into a place that does not allow pets.  I’d be too afraid of being caught, and, if placed in a situation where I had to give up a pet in order to stay in an apartment….I’d sooner be homeless.  I take commitment to pet ownership very seriously.

A number of individuals were profiled in this documentary.  Some of them were on-the-ground pet rescuers during Katrina, but most of them were pet owners who were forced to leave their beloved animals.  They all told stories that made it evident that their pets were members of their family.

Hurricane Katrina was a very unusual situation.  Some of the animals that were rescued were found in obviously terrible and abusive homes.  But most were in homes where they were loved deeply.  One person interviewed said that people involved in pet rescue are often biased against original owners, because they surrender animals when they become inconvenient, or abuse their animals.  So they assumed the worst when these animals were found in houses in New Orleans.  This means that many of them were re-homed prematurely, leading to heartache for their original owners.  It’s a difficult situation, and one that I’d never want to be in.  The rescues couldn’t keep the animals indefinitely in the hopes that their owners would turn up, but one could argue that the effort to reunite the pets with their owners was a flawed one.  But – had this sort of mass reunion effort ever happened before?  Pets can’t talk and tell people who their owners are, and the residents of New Orleans were scattered all over the country, so it was very hard to find the owners.

Luckily, laws have been changed in America so animals will always be a part of future evacuation plans.  Hopefully this sort of tragedy will never happen again.  I can only hope that Canada has similar laws in case of some sort of emergency here.

Mine was a beautiful, touching documentary.  It is a must-watch if you’re an animal lover.

The other night I watched an episode of The Nature of Things that looked at “American” tigers.  These tigers are the descendants of tigers taken from the wild in order to satisfy the desire for exotic pets.  There are more captive tigers in the United States than there are wild tigers.

It is unclear what will happen to these captive tigers.  A federal ban may be brought in preventing the backyard breeding of these tigers.  Laws regarding the ownership of exotic animals are becoming stronger.  These are laws that I strongly support, because I do not feel that dangerous exotic animals should be pets.

Tigers with rare markings and coats like this “golden tabby” tiger have become more common because of backyard breeding.

That being said, this documentary offered an interesting alternative perspective.  The genetic diversity of tigers in the wild is very poor, and American tigers offer a wider genetic pool to choose from.  What if American tigers were reintroduced to the wild?  Or their offspring?  I’d never actually thought about it that way, but it could offer hope for the species.  Not everyone feels that it is a viable option, though.  Some feel that American tigers are too far removed from the wild.  They’ve become sedentary creatures too used to captive life, after generations of being bred in captivity.

Even if the genetic diversity of the captive population provides hope for the future of the wild species, I still can’t support keeping them as pets.  Backyard breeding needs to stop.  People have no business breeding tigers without any professional training in biology and wild animal care.  The conditions these creatures are kept in are often deplorable and abusive.  Tigers are roamers in the wild and should not be kept in three metre wide cages.  It’s disgusting.

I recognized one of the interview subjects from another documentary I watched on this subject, The Elephant in the Living Room.  The woman owns six tigers and is a strong supporter of the rights of those who own exotic pets.  I don’t agree with her opinions, or with what she is doing with her pets, but she does seem to be caring for her tigers as best as possible in a home environment.

This documentary was so interesting.  I really respect documentaries that can challenge my perspective on an issue.  I feel very strongly about exotic animals as pets, but this documentary managed to make me consider these pet tigers may have.  Admittedly, I had no idea the state of all wild tiger populations were as dire as they are, nor did I know the extent of the American tiger population.  I thought that tiger ownership was a rare fringe hobby; the fact that up to 10,000 tigers live as pets in America blows me away.

You can watch the episode on the CBC website.

The Last Days, 1998, USA

I signed up for Netflix solely to watch this film, which is pretty significant. I’ve long wanted to watch this documentary about the Holocaust, because Steven Spielberg produced it.

The documentary looks at the experiences of several Hungarian Holocaust survivors. Hungarian Jews weren’t taken to the concentration camps until the last year of the war when it became clear that the Nazis were going to lose the war. Instead of focusing their resources on fighting the war, the Nazis attacked the Hungarian Jews and murdered them or sent them to the concentration camps.

The interviews with the survivors were so interesting. They spoke candidly about their lives before the Holocaust, and about how they survived in the concentration camps. Many of the subjects journeyed back to Europe in order to find some sort of closure. One visited the town she grew up in and discovered her childhood home. These journeys added another layer to the film. The horrific atrocities of the Holocaust are fairly well known, but we often forget about what the survivors experienced after they were liberated. Many never returned home, and many lost their entire families.

It was not an easy documentary to watch. There are photos and video from the concentration camps, and it was just awful to watch. But this footage was necessary, because it shows what the Holocaust was. Humanity needs to see this footage. As I was watching it, I thought about the fact that these people were someone’s son or daughter. These people were loved, and they were treated as if they were vermin. It was very difficult to think about. We must never forget that this happened, and we can never let this happen again.

I did have one minor beef: the film was in a letterbox format. I’m assuming it was in letterbox format because it’s an older film and it isn’t one that necessarily needs to be converted back to a widescreen format. Or, it’s possible that it was filmed in that format. It was just a bit odd to watch a letterbox film on my widescreen TV.

Watch this documentary. Hearing the stories of these survivors was such a privilege. It saddens me to think that, in a few years, there won’t be any more Holocaust survivors left. It’s important to hear these stories; to get them on film or paper, before it’s too late.

Last Train Home, 2009, Canada/China/UK

This was a beautifully made, thought-provoking documentary.  It looks at the migrant workers in China.  There are over 135 migrant workers in China, and these workers only return home to see their families once a year: During Chinese New Year.

The film is not narrated and follows the lives of a single family.  The parents are both migrant workers, and they have two children who have been raised by their grandparents.  Their daughter, Qin, resents her parents for being so absent in her life.  The parents work very hard and do not like being away from their children, but they must work in a factory in order to support their family.

As I watched these two people sew day in and day out at a factory, I thought about my own shopping habits.  The clothes that I buy have most likely been sewed by migrant workers.  The other day, my mom repaired a knit sweater of mine that had a hole in it.  It was a new sweater, and I was really annoyed that it had developed a hole so quickly.  Mom noticed that the sleeve that developed the hole was poorly knitted compared to the other sleeve.  I didn’t think much of it at the time.

But, now, I can’t stop thinking about it.  Why was that sleeve poorly knitted?  Was the person who knitted it a new worker?  Or had they received some bad news that distracted them?  It made me feel very lucky.  I can afford to buy a new sweater if I need to, but the person who made it probably wouldn’t be able to replace a sweater as quickly as I can.

I’ve known about the factories in China for years, but this documentary really made me face the realities of my lifestyle.  I try really hard to buy cosmetics and skin care products that are cruelty free (especially since I spend a lot of money on bath and skin products!), but many of my other purchases are made in Chinese factories.  Is it possible to avoid it nowadays?  The sad thing is that I doubt it is possible to only buy locally produced products because most, if not all electronics are built in Asia.  The best we can do is research the conditions in factories that produce our favourite products to ensure that their workers are treated with respect.

The other day I blogged about how I make most of my entertainment purchases off of Amazon because of the price of local retailers.  If I can buy the exact same product for considerably cheaper, I will.  Would I be willing to pay more for goods manufactured in factories where workers received fair pay, benefits and time off?  I make most of my skin care purchases at LUSH or The Body Shop, and those products are manufactured in North America or the UK.  They’re slightly more expensive, but they’re also better products.  But, most importantly: I believe it’s important to support ethical companies.  I’d like to think I’d be more willing to give my money to an electronics or clothing company that gave their workers a fair wage.  I know many people would not do the same.  As a society, we’re accustomed to the prices we’re currently paying, and we expect products to be instantly available.  Overseas factory labour is not going to go away anytime soon.  China has developed itself as an industrial power because of these factories.  People are willing to work in these factories, and Western companies need to take initiative and insist that the people who make their products receive a living wage.

This documentary was amazing.  It is available on Apple TV, so please rent it.  It will make you think about the social impact North America’s purchasing habits have on individuals in China.

This Film is Not Yet Rated, 2006, UK/USA

This documentary is a must-see for any film lover.  It delves into the MPAA and the inner workings of an extraordinarily private organization.  Before director Kirby Dick and his team of private investigators found the names of the raters, they had never been made public.  The MPAA claims that this is to prevent them from being “influenced”.

I’ve long had issues with the American rating system.  It is one that condemns foul language, while glorifying violence.  Human sexuality is also unfairly targeted, specifically sexuality featuring same-sex couples.  A film can be extremely violent and receive a PG-13 rating, but a film with too many “thrusts” can receive an NC-17 rating.  My argument is that most people experience sexual intimacy at some point in their lives, but few people in comparison witness a violent crime.  What is more traumatizing?  Experiencing consensual sex or watching someone get bludgeoned in front of you?  The answer is obvious.  But the MPAA is far more likely to give the sex an R rating or even an NC-17 rating.

The film also looks at gender differences and the impact they have on the MPAA.  American Pie is an R-rated film and features a rather graphic (and infamous) masturbation scene featuring a male actor.  But I’m a Cheerleader originally received an NC-17 rating because it showed a brief sequence of a fully clothed female masturbating.  Jamie Babbit, who directed But I’m a Cheerleader was interviewed and spoke about how female sexuality is judged more harshly than male sexuality.  She also spoke about sexual content featuring same sex couples.  Eventually But I’m a Cheerleader received an R-rating in the United States.  In Canada it received a 14A rating.

I don’t have as many issues with the Canadian rating system.  We tend to judge explicit violence more harshly than the United States was.  Grindhouse (which, admittedly, I haven’t seen) was given an R-rating in the United States, but received the equivalent of an NC-17 here in Canada.  The NC-17 rating here in Canada is extremely rare; most explicit films get an 18A, which is roughly equivalent to an R-rating in the United States.

The people who rate the films for the MPAA are all parents, and they all come from a similar sort of household.  Babbit, who lives with her partner and their two children, questioned whether there were any gay or lesbian parents rating films.  It’s a great point.  There didn’t appear to be any younger parents, as well.  I’m not a parent, but my values differ greatly from those of the MPAA.  I would rather show tweens a film featuring rather tame adult activity as opposed to a film featuring violence.  I also tend to avoid films featuring too much graphic, realistic violence because it makes me feel ill.

I loved this documentary.  It’s truly one of the best ones I’ve ever seen.  It’s compelling, damning, and fun.  The subject matter is so important because people need to know how their entertainment is being rated and censored.  I highly recommend it.

This Film is Not Yet Rated is an example in of itself of the flaws of the MPAA.  It received an NC-17 rating, and Dick decided to release it unrated.  Guess what rating it received here in Canada?

…..14A.  The equivalent to PG-13 in the United States.

There’s Something Wrong with Aunt Diane, 2011, USA

I remember reading about the tragic car crash that was the focus of this documentary. Diane Schuler drove a minivan with her two children, and her three nieces on the wrong side of the road. She crashed head on into a vehicle, killing herself, her three nieces, her daughter and the three men in the other vehicle. Her blood alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit and she had THC in her system. What I found most interesting about the coverage was that her husband, Daniel, continually swore that the tests were wrong and that his wife did not drink or abuse marijuana.

This documentary looked at Daniel and his sister, Jay and their investigation into the accident. They believe that Diane had a stroke or self-medicated as a result of a tooth abscess. They still firmly believe that the test results are inaccurate. Jay is the primary caregiver of Bryan – the only survivor of the crash. Bryan has eye problems as a result of the head injury he sustained in the crash.

I felt some sympathy for Jay, who appeared to be trying her best to help her brother and nephew. While she was in denial about Diane’s inebriation at the time of the crash, she still focused on Bryan. I felt no sympathy for Daniel, and I do not think he is a very good person. He ignored Bryan on numerous occasions and is obsessed with “clearing” his wife’s name. He’s in denial and has since sued his in-laws for owning the minivan (what?!?!) and the state of New York for failing to provide proper signage warning drivers about driving the wrong way. Such signage is only put up when the correct direction could be unclear – not on a parkway. He’s absolutely despicable.

By behaving the way he is, he’s not “clearing” his late wife’s name; he’s dragging it through the mud. We’ll never know what really happened and why Diane drank and smoked marijuana that day, but it sounds to me like she was a functioning alcoholic. The family of two of the deceased were angry that Daniel would not drop the case. They appeared to accept that she had a problem and they wanted him to accept that she had substance abuse issues. I imagine Daniel lived in denial while Diane was alive, and ignored any signs that she had a substance abuse problem or potential mental health issues. He believed that Diane was perfect, and I can’t help but wonder if his expectations coupled with her desire for perfection lead to her issues.

The story was a real tragedy, and Daniel’s behaviour is only making the situation even worse. Bryan is being neglected because of Daniel’s obsession, and the families of the other victims are continually being affected as well. It’s a very sad situation, and this haunting documentary tells the story very well. I feel so sad for Bryan and I hope he can eventually have a normal life. It’s clear that Daniel has no interest in being a parent and did admit that he did not want children.

We’ll never know why Diane drank and smoke marijuana that day, but this documentary provides fascinating insight into her life, and the ongoing repercussions of the crash.

Bigfoot’s Reflection, 2007, Canada

As a child, I was fascinated by the legend of Bigfoot. I was certain this creature existed and that it was only a matter of time before it was discovered. I’ve since become a skeptic. I don’t believe such a creature exists, and I also don’t believe in any of the other legendary creatures cryptozoologists study.

This documentary is essentially a defense of Bigfoot’s existence. When I recorded this documentary, I assumed it would be about Bigfoot hoaxes, but when I discovered it was not, I continued to watch it in the hopes that they would be able to present some sort of convincing evidence. I was open to their differing viewpoint.

Unfortunately, there was no convincing evidence. The cryptozoologists interviewed in the documentary spoke about footprint patterns, and they had many casts of the footprints they had found. One claimed that people would not go far up north to place false footprints. I don’t buy it. Were I interested in perpetuating a hoax, that is precisely what I would do. I’d go up to a remote area, and place footprints in protected areas. It may be months before they were found, but in the cold, the footprints would be preserved within the soil. The cryptozoologists themselves could even be furthering the hoax. They also claim that hunters have experienced sightings but have been unable to shoot the creature they see. They are too “overwhelmed”. Surely there would be at least one hunter by now who is able to shoot the creature they are seeing. Or maybe there have been – but they’ve discovered that the animal they’ve shot is simply a large bear.

The documentary completely lost me when the Patterson-Gimlin film was shown. The filmmakers claim that they had come across a Bigfoot in California. Most scientists believe this video to be a hoax. The interviewees claim that the fact that this “Bigfoot” is a female, has a lump that looks to be a hernia, and walks in a completely non-human manner “proves” that the footage is genuine. If they had wanted to convince me, they would have had to use footage and/or photographs not widely believed to be a hoax.

The biggest thing working against the Bigfoot theory is that a body has never been found. Even if “Bigfoot” is a subspecies of Neanderthal or another intelligent human subspecies that buries their dead, surely a body would have been found by now. And surely we would have clear video or photographic evidence by now.

Humans tend to see what they want to see. As Bigfoot is an enduring legend, when we come across any creature that looks unusual, we tend to believe it’s a legendary creature. I imagine almost all of the sightings are simply unusual looking bears or other large mammals. Photographs taken in 2007 are generally accepted to be a bear with a bad case of mange, as opposed to a Bigfoot.

The film itself was interesting, but the interview subjects offered nothing that could convince me that Bigfoot exists. At this point, the lack of evidence, coupled with the numerous rational, scientific explanations lead me to the conclusion that Bigfoot is simply an interesting myth.

The Third Sex, Canada

I caught this fascinating documentary on CBC News Network late last night. Just prior to it, I was watching a documentary about transgendered children (although I missed about a third of it). They worked well as a double feature because they both looked at unusual gender conditions.

To be honest, I didn’t know much about what it meant to be intersex until Caster Semenya was in the news about gender testing and possibly being intersex. The results of her tests were never officially made public, though I have seen them reported in places. I’m not going to link to any story claiming to have the findings because, quite frankly, it is none of our business. Semenya identifies as a woman, so as far as I’m concerned, she is a woman.

The film looked at how medicine dealt with babies born without a clear physical gender. Doctors sometimes made a gender decision and surgically “corrected” the baby. In many cases, they chose wrong. Gender is so much more than our anatomy, so I don’t think corrective surgery should be done until the child has been able to determine what their gender is. They may not even want any sort of corrective surgery. In too many cases, the surgery has done more harm than good, so it should be avoided until the child is older and able to participate in the decision.

One individual interviewed doesn’t identify solely as a male or a female. They feel they are both – or the “third sex”. In our society, we feel that people should be either male or female, which perpetuates the panic when an intersex child is born. But in Thailand, people who identify as the “third sex” are accepted and known as “kathoey“. Thailand is definitely more progressive when it comes to accepting intersex individuals.

As I could tell by this documentary and the one I watched before, people are uncomfortable when one’s gender does not match their body. Intersex is not something that is talked about publicly at this point. There are communities online where people can discuss being intersex or having a child that is intersex, but you don’t tell friends or family that your child has the condition. People are a bit more open about having a transgendered family member, because the transition is so public. Being intersex is a far more private matter, but I’d imagine it would be very isolating to feel you are different from people who identify solely as male or as female.