MovieChat Forums > Powaqqatsi (1988) Discussion > totally exploitative

totally exploitative

posted 18 years ago by stymon
8 replies | jump to latest

I didn't understand the point of this film at all. It was totally disjunctured and the theme and message was unclear. What was entirely clear however was that it was pretty exploitative. The scenes of children's faces, the camera panning from one to the next, must have been directed, produced. I spent the past summer in India, in small villages across Gujarat and there wasn't one time that if a camera was around children couldn't wait to jump in front of it, giggle and smile. I understand that this film was made in 1988, so obviously cameras and their technology were less known to certain parts of the world than they are now but, with or without camera, the sight of visitors always sparked interest, giggles and laughs, the way it does anywhere in the world. I think that the filmmakers had a direct interest however, in portraying these children as desperate, hard, old, angry. It plays into the theme that life in the "developing world" is difficult and tough. Which it is to a certain extent. They may have to carry bags of dirt up hills on their backs but the US has the longest work day, high suicide rates and a deteriorating family. etc. etc.

[–] kidoe113 18 years ago

Life in the developing world IS difficult and tough! If that is all you got out of the movie, then that is kinda unfortunate. I think that the director meant to capture reality with this movie, which he did. Can things in reality be exploitive? Yes of course, but above all Reggio has taken the viewers to a different time and a different place that everyone can feel and experience. He isn't trying to capture the entire human experience(if he was, he might choose to show third world children smiling, which would probably make you happy) but a specific element of it. In the case of Powaqatsi, it is the lives of people in the third worlds, living generally without technology and the hardships they face. The viewer will probably be greatly moved by many of the images and will hopefully think about our current situation and other's in the world. To complain that there aren't enough smiling children or that that doesn't reflect reality is to miss out on so much that this film has to offer.

[–] jamesisin 18 years ago

I find that the best way to shoot children naturally (not hamming it up) is to use a long lens and shoot from a distance. That way they don't realize they are being captured (I do still, but the same ought to work with motion) on film. I suspect that the film makers probably employed some technique like this where ever possible.

[–] markandrewschultz 18 years ago

Thats what they did... they shot from very long distance and in concealed positions,

only once in the whole film does n e one notice them...

its the one joke moment, the old man in india i believe, about 20 mins from the end

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Green_Death 17 years ago

The mine scene was shot in South America, not India.

I too agree that that comment was outrageously stupid. To my mind the mine scene is showing the people at the very bottom level of industrial society. They put in the most work for the least reward and are in essence the primary producers.

[–] fuzzy_wunz 17 years ago

"Listen to the fools reproach! it is a kingly title!"

[–] erixdel 8 years ago

It's great that we are even asking if this film is exploitive. It may not be totally exploitative, but there are definitely some aspects that are. The idea that something that is tough and unjust (like the mining scene at the beginning) is beautiful makes me feel uncomfortable. The way they capture it is visually beautiful but if we were to live it, maybe we would see it differently.

I first saw this movie when I was 15 and it shook me to my core. Even though it makes me feel a little uncomfortable now, It's a great piece to show to kids/teens to give them a new perspective.