MovieChat Forums > How to Survive a Plague (2013) Discussion > Way too self righteous.

Way too self righteous.

posted 11 years ago by mohammed-4
11 replies | jump to latest

I am glad this movie was made, and the message is important. Yet, the movie gives too much credit to the grassroots movement. One person claims "we were responsible for saving those lives" .. clearly ignoring the efforts of the scientists, and other branches involved.

What was most annoying was the constant clips of those denouncing Regan/Bush as a murderer.

In the end, there may have been inertia, but there wasn't a nefarious bogeyman as this movie portrays.

What about Africa? There was nothing about the problem.. There is no future movement. They made it sound the disease was cured.

[–] lucy_naribola 11 years ago

I completely agree, I came here to say exactly this. I had problems with all the stuff you bring up. I wish they had dedicated the movie or at least mentioned the effort of the scientists a little bit at the end.

[–] mohammed-4 11 years ago

I am glad others agree. It seems like the film-makers had a simple agenda.

[–] evil_ice_dragon 11 years ago

Not mentioning the efforts of scientists doesn't make the film have an agenda, nor does it invalidate what they did. This is not a film about the scientists and the obstacles they may have faced and the lives they saved. In short, How to Survive a Plague is a documentary about ACT UP and their struggles against injustice and homophobia. Adding information about the scientists would have been tangential to the focus of the subjects and characters of the film, not to mention it would've stretched out the running time past two hours.

Another documentary might examine and explore who these scientists were, and there's probably enough material out there for a whole other film. But you are mistaken if you think there's any agenda here.

___________________________
http://www.theaaronchan.com

[–] mohammed-4 10 years ago

In that case, the movie is more repulsive. It clearly over emphasizes the role ACT UP played in helping those with HIV. They were a lobby group and that's it. However, the director selectively chose clips that ACT UP members were so critical to the discovery of important drugs -- they were a small component at best.

It would have been nice to see ACT UP do something about the problem in Africa. Seeing them proud that they served their own communities with no larger picture, makes the organization seem petty.

[–] totokeke 10 years ago

A lobby group? Semantically challenged, greedy, selfish people who make statements like that ... it's sad, the moral decline of the world since the 80s really is palpable, isn't it?

[–] daedalus1337 11 years ago

It's funny, because do you remember all the celebration when George W. Bush gave billions of dollars to fight AIDS under PEPFAR and saved hundreds of thousands of lives?

Because I don't. Not a Bush fan myself, but it's funny how these silent these guys were about that. I just hate how politicized everything is. It's like because GWB was a Republican, there was literally nothing he could do to please certain groups of people. Same goes for Obama and organizations on the right, btw.

[–] Leaborb192 10 years ago

Basically. First they wanted them to rush the meds and treatment and claimed that the pharmaceutical industry was "dragging its feet", then toward the end they were like, "Woah, hold up. Wait a minute now." You can't have it both ways guys.

That said. I'm glad that the groups existed in the 1980's, 90's, because I do believe that by coming together -- power of voice-- that they really did help. They applied pressure where it needed to be and got stuff done. But yes, they definitely had a bit of a God complex. But what can you do? Before the group really started protesting, no one was *really* doing anything, especially in the early days of the epidemic where it was labeled a "gay disease," and no one wanted to touch or be around a gay person.

As a gay man in 2013-- soon to be 2014-- I very much appreciate the efforts of ACT UP and TAG because I truly believe they did help pave the way. While they can't take all the credit, they definitely are entitled to their share. It's sad, though, that in 2014, the 21st century, people are still very ignorant of HIV/AIDS peoples and there still exists a strong prejudice in many places against them. I'm an HIV peer educator and every time I try to talk to my family about this topic, they interrupt with, "Why? Do you have AIDS?" Just because I'm interested (and passionate) about knowledge and educating others (as a teacher), doesn't mean I have to be HIV+. There are plenty of breast cancer advocates who didn't have it themselves, but lost close relatives and friends to it. However, HIV/AIDS still has this, sadly, pejorative connotation and stigma, especially in the small towns. I'm also a gay man so that doesn't help.

I watched the documentary last night on PBS and thought it was very good. It did have an obvious bias, but there was a reason for it.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] truetexian 10 years ago

Your statement, "you can't have it both ways guys", is exactly why these initial groups (ie. GMHC) split into the two factions that they did (ie. ACT UP & TAG). The fight was the same, approaches toward how to achieve things differed though, as is common within any combination of attitudes and personalities.
I share in your sadness that now, in 2014, there is still far too much ignorance, fear, and stigma. Nowadays, the latter, is a double-punch...along with the original attitude that anyone with HIV "deserved it" is added "they should have known better".

[–] Strazdamonas 10 years ago

It is posts like these than make me wish there was an upvote on IMDB.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

[–] Satantangoandcash 9 years ago

You must have missed the written messages at the end said that one of the founders of Act Up started another group (that helps people pay for the drugs, I think) and that showed that Aids is still a worldwide problem:
"The number of people who die because they can't afford aids drugs:
2,000,000 every year; 5,500 every day; 4 every minute."