MovieChat Forums > Home (2009) Discussion > Eyecandy nothing more.

Eyecandy nothing more.

posted 13 years ago by huibie88
9 replies | jump to latest

Some pretty footage, I have to admit that but the rest was just pure propaganda. All the narrator did was repeat herself over and over again. "More and more this, increasingly this and that, faster and faster, bigger and bigger, gigantic, extremely, never seen before!" It's like left-wing pornography.

Anyway, the fun thing is the mixed message in the end. We have to tone down the way we live, we have to consume less. Okay, that's something one can believe. Fine. But later on they whine about poor people. Now what is the point of that? Isn't that what we're supposed to converge to according to these ecologist zealots? In touch with nature and all. If we bring all the poor people up to our standard of living the world is gonna be worse off.

So, okay, let's see. There are too many people according to the movie. Fair enough, but why would we send aid to those poor countries then? Let them starve, that's what nature is doing. Why fight it? Be in touch with nature and let it go. The movie complains about artificial living conditions in Vegas, but guess what is even more artificial? Trying to build up a life in the middle of a desert and expect the west to drop food every now and then.

Left-wing zealots have to choose. Either the planet or the poor people. Pick your P.

[–] shellmaan 13 years ago

Its not a choice between the planet or the poor people, the poor countries can be a greater danger to the environment than the developed ones. Theres exploitation of the natural resources going on because of the rising population in developing countries and the demand for resources is higher..

The solution to this comes when the country develops, then the population wont rise as much, resources will be better shared and technology will bring a more sustainable way of dealing with the environment..

Yeah English is my secondary language..

[–] jessepolowin 13 years ago

You have a desire to tie political affiliation with this film that is obscuring your ability to see what the real message is here. Climate change is going to affect countries like Nigeria, Kenya even more than North America. That's why they encourage foreign aid. And they wouldn't be raising the standard of living to our level. North America is considered a post-industrial society while the poorer country's mentioned in this film are pre-industrial. Foreign aid would simply raise to it to a sustainable level where much less people are going hungry and thirsty.

Do you call years of scientific research propaganda? If you want to speak politics, I'd say you'd fit in with the republicans, the conservatives and the climate change deny-ers.

I'd say you wasted 90 minutes looking to criticize this film instead of listening to its message.

[–] renokevin 13 years ago

I have no political affiliation and refuse to be associated with any one side.
I did enjoy the beautiful landscapes and agree was visually top notch.But to be perfectly honest,the only solution I felt would be appropriate it buying a gun and putting it to my own head.Everything in nature is so amazing and profound,minus of course the single most incredible thing it produced humanity.
Its so easy to pick on oil as the culprit,how about addressing children,birth control,and the religious beliefs of various cultures?Does america send this aid to foreign countries by sail boat??I think even more people would go hungry and die if we did.

I found it very depressing.Not a single solution that would realistically make a difference,other than 'blame oil'

just me

[–] marcos_ho 13 years ago

I'm not known for my compassion or my empathy (I'm know for the lack of any, actually) but Africa wouldn't be such a sh*thole if we really let them live their own way. We can not continue to exploit them and then say "why help them?" Do not forget that we are exploiting their natural resources like crazy. And they get almost nothing because of all the thugs that have procured Western guns for themselves. And don't forget either about how Wall Street and all these *beep* organisations are driving the prices of elementary products such as rice and flour to sky-rocketing values, which makes their living even worse.

[–] Bob_Brooker 10 years ago

^ This

__________
Last movie watched: Cypher (5/10)

[–] vishal-20 11 years ago

Very true. That is exactly how I felt. Narrator conveniently (and shamelessly) changes her tone from "WE have to save the planet as YOU have almost destroyed it" throughout the documentary. I seriously considered watching it on mute. :-)

[–] SwissCheeze 11 years ago

Is this the new simpleton go-to criticism?
"Pure liberal trash!!!" or "Propaganda at its finest!!!"

-sigh- when will you silly people learn that just because a film leans on one side of a political spectrum doesn't take anything away from its quality. I am more left leaning myself but there are plenty of conservative/right wing films that I find absolutely beautiful. Art is supposed to be opinionated and unapologetic, didn't you get the memo?

[–] taseron 10 years ago

I agree.

Just look at the sponsors; yve saint laurent, puma, gucci etc...
All produce toxic waste just for luxury.

Even this documentary is powered by what it disses.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]