Do not be swayed by popular opinion - The Constant Gardener (2005) Discussion

[–] montyburns56 15 years ago

What are you talking about? Have you actually watched the film? The fact that you wonder why Rachel Weisz's character would be with someone like Ralph Fiennes's character suggests that you haven't.

It's not about how "evil" all corporations are, it's about how a number of pharmaceutical companies are shafting the African people, with the help of corrupt politicians. Oh and it is film as well NOT a documentary about the pharmaceutical industry.

reply

[–] breadman8 13 years ago

it was a jumbled liberal pipe dream that makes this film so "intelligent and groundbreaking" I gather.. PEOPLE ! the movie, given every latitude, STINKS. My favorite moment is when the Weisz character jumps up moments after having a baby and RUNS to the assistance of all of Africa. THATS reality, thats serious? Oh my aching head.
And No it was not "well acted"

This movie DOES Not go up with "The Killing Fields or Chinatown" etc etc. It should be shelved with "Plan 9 from Outer Space" and "Porky's 2".

And liberals talking the horror of corrupt politicians? OH How rich. Check out ANY major city controlled by Demo-rats. Chicago, Newark, Baltimore, Detroit. Before ALL Else...they are CORRUPT. But that's okay i guess, it's for the poor.(?)

reply

[–] Spacebaby1 15 years ago

I agree. This was a piece of left-wing agitprop that actually minimized problems in Africa by using them as a dramatic backdrop for the predictable liberal mini-drama with big stars. As an example of this genre, Blood Diamond was a better movie than this one. I generally like both Fiennes and Weisz as actors and am willing to sit through cinematic agitprop even when I don't always agree with the political angles it takes. This movie was not a breathtaking classic.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Eatmybolonga 14 years ago

You should have put "P.S I'm an idiot, beware" in the title. Would have saved some of my time. No but seriously, educate yourself.
___________________________________________
I measure intelligence on the basis of a species compatibility to live in harmony with nature.

reply

[–] yogagirl031102-797-818334 14 years ago

Perhaps you should pick up a book Mr. Monkey. Try Dead Aid (Dambisa Moyo) or The Aid Trap (Glenn Hubbard). It doesn't take a film to explain to the rest of us that coruption exists where exploitation reigns. The movie had nothing to do with solutions. If you want an entertaining film with a decent story and good acting, try watching the film again. If you want to educate yourself on Africa's plight and the dire situation there caused when guilt ridden countries throw money at a underdeveloped impoverished nation, then pick up one of the books listed above.

reply

[–] bite_me_loser_86 13 years ago

What a complete buffoon you are, OP.

To most people that are aware of how corporations work this movie didn't bring any brand new or shocking information. In fact there are several examples from real life of similar things happen.
There are however some people that might be clueless about this particular sort of thing and this movie portrays it just the way it is. It isn't at all exaggerated, this sort of thing is happening RIGHT NOW, every day.

Corporations aren't 'evil' per se, they are just machines, driven by the urge to make as much profit as possible. That is what makes it thrive, expand, able to hire more staff, raise salaries etc, it's what makes a company successful.
It's not in their best interest to do charity or turn down a chance at profit UNLESS there is some OTHER kind of profit involved, and there rarely is (except maybe for PR). That is why corporations will exploit corruption, weakness or social injustice as much as they can if there is something in it for them. They will EVEN go as far as violate human rights if that's what it takes to maximize the profit and if they think they can get away with it.

And they WILL get away with it, unless they are called on it and the atrocities they commit in the name of money are exposed to the public. The public can then choose to punish the company financially but it could also lead to the higher-ups getting prosecuted and held accountable for their actions.
Awareness is so very important. If this movie has enlightened any new people at all, then that is a success!

reply

[–] Emreka 13 years ago

_____________________________________
That is why corporations will exploit corruption, weakness or social injustice as much as they can if there is something in it for them. They will EVEN go as far as violate human rights if that's what it takes to maximize the profit and if they -think they can get away with it.
_____________________________________

Exactly what United Fruit Company did in South America. Well put. What does the OP have to say about UFC?

reply

[–] Helena727 9 years ago

bite_me: Exceptionally well stated. Thanks.

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."

reply

[–] Eumenides_0 13 years ago

This movie is an excellent dramatisation of situations that happen not just in Africa but anywhere in the world where corporations do business. Corporations exist for profits. They will cheat, lie, bribe, exploit and collaborate with corrupt politicians and dictators to protect their profits. Corporations don't care about ethics.

Anyone who wants to have a good idea of how corporations harm countries, need only look at the situation in Nigeria, where oil companies and the government are trying to silence the locals claiming their rights to the billions made from the oil extracted from their lands. Nigeria is a ridiculously rich country, but most of the money goes to companies like BP and Shell, and the corrupt politicians. The rest of the population live in abject poverty in a country without basic infrastructures like hospitals, roads, electricity or tap water.

This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.

reply

[–] ned38 13 years ago

Will someone please explain to me why ANYONE who doesn't actually work as a spokesperson for a large corporation would feel the need to defend them so vigorously on these boards? I mean, I'm a real Anglophile, but if a movie (like say "Bloody Sunday") were to portray England (correctly) doing something wrong, I wouldn't freak out about it.

This movie shows an imaginary corporation testing drugs in Africa, which happens. It shows them "donating" useless drugs as a PR stunt/tax write-off, which also happens. It shows them rushing a drug through without fully testing it, in order to beat the competition, and falsifying data in order to do so, which also happens. The only fictional element is the murder, which is a pretty standard trope of the thriller genre.

What is it about power structures (corporations, the military, the police, governments, etc) that's so attractive to conservative's? Why the need to defend what doesn't even need defending? I'm sure the pharmaceutical industry appreciates it, but really, that's what they pay lawyers for. Why are you guys doing it for free?

reply

[–] ned38 13 years ago

Will someone please explain to me why ANYONE who doesn't actually work as a spokesperson for a large corporation would feel the need to defend them so vigorously on these boards? I mean, I'm a real Anglophile, but if a movie (like say "Bloody Sunday") were to portray England (correctly) doing something wrong, I wouldn't freak out about it.

This movie shows an imaginary corporation testing drugs in Africa, which happens. It shows them "donating" useless drugs as a PR stunt/tax write-off, which also happens. It shows them rushing a drug through without fully testing it, in order to beat the competition, and falsifying data in order to do so, which also happens. The only fictional element is the murder, which is a pretty standard trope of the thriller genre.

What is it about power structures (corporations, the military, the police, governments, etc) that's so attractive to conservative's? Why the need to defend what doesn't even need defending? I'm sure the pharmaceutical industry appreciates it, but really, that's what they pay lawyers for. Why are you guys doing it for free?

reply

[–] sandifay62 13 years ago

The corruption lies within the individuals. There was corruption all over in this movie. Tess was corrupt when she promised sex to Sandy to get access to information, then not putting up once it was given. The police were corrupt. The medical people giving out the medicine were corrupt. Sadly, the corporations can commit corrupt acts on the population if it didn't have a lot of willing helpers. The other corrupt people were shown.
The bandits shooting the people at the refugee camp, the people willing to carry out the hits on the company's enemies, the cops that tried to intimidate Justin into a bribe and did who knows what to the innocent child he talked to.

It's not simply popular opinion that make people suspicious of corporate corruption, it's the ongoing examples of it. Every example is carried out by human beings. When this movie ended I wasn't thinking about how corrupt corporations were. I was thinking about how evil people get away with evil deeds, how Tess endangered those around her, and the fact the you can't even trust your own friends.

reply

[–] wildbillharding 13 years ago

I'm sorry, folks, but even coming from a legend like Le Carre The Constant Gardener, as a novel, was a boring read. I finished it with great difficulty (I'm a published novelist myself, so not a complete moron, I hope!) and would not watch the film adaptation if I were paid.

What I can say, from speaking to a 'food technician' at Nestle, is that the third world IS a cash-cow for disreputable companies in both the pharmaceutical and food industries. The likelihood of this turgid story changing that one iota is, in my opinion, highly unlikely.

reply

[–] jd-276 12 years ago

Do yourself a favour and read a textbook. Don't waste time on this drivel.

And where might one find "a textbook" on a subject such as this?

Just another excuse for inane liberal bashing on a subject you don't care about.

reply

[–] jubekkum 11 years ago

OP, if you were truly a capitalist you would realize that when you're dealing with corrupt governments you're not dealing with capitalism anymore. When a company can bribe a government to operate in their country that destroys normal competition, and therefore this is NOT CAPITALISM!

reply

[–] askebisgaard 8 years ago

Hehe, that kind of capitalism is a fantasy, just like socialism and communism. You can't have an economic machine that maximizes profits and then hold a grudge when people violate "moral principles" to maximize said profits. The only known way to have capitalism obey moral rules is to build those rules into the economic machine, i.e. by having it be bad for business to be morally irresponsible. And the best known ways to achieve that requires government methods that a Libertarian typically wouldn't be happy about. Seems like a pretty big dilemma to me.

reply