All thirteen of Stanley Krubrick’s film will be shown over the next month at the Belcourt Theatre in Nashville. The Belcourt is located in Hillsboro Village; it is a great place to see the newest indie film or foreign film, as well as catch a classic movie.

I first discovered the Belcourt back in 1998, when they had a Warner Brothers film festival.  The first movie I saw in the Belcourt was Krubrick’s Full Metal Jacket. It is always a treat to see a movie you’ve seen a hundred times on a TV up on the big screen.  My wife , a friend and I went to see The Shining last weekend.  I had never seen it on a big screen before, and what a difference that makes.  The shots of the drive up to the Overlook Hotel, the eerieness of the hotel’s hallways, and, of course, Jack Torrence’s spiral into madness take on new meaning on a huge movie screen.  Imagine  2001 Space Odyssey, Spartacus, or Clockwork Orange shown in larger than life.

About a month ago I rented The Killing; Krubrick’s first movie circa 1956.  Being a big fan of old film noir movies, I loved this one.  I still can’t believe it is over 50 years old. It doesn’t have that big star and big special effect, but it just oozes quality with it great script and seamless direction.

Treat yourself and others to a night out.  Hillsboro Village has several good places to eat.  If you’ve got the cash, there is Bosco just down the street, which has great pizza and an extensive beer lists, all brewed in house.  Short on cash?  Try the Taste of Toyko, the most affordable sushi in Nashville.  After the show, you can visit one of numerous little pubs in the area to chat about the movie.  And if you are short on time, the Belcourt has a refreshment bar, with popcorn, candy, a nice selections of beers (including the locally brewed Yazoo Pale Ale, one of my favorites) and a limited by the drink offering.  Movie tickets are $8 at the door, $10 if you pre-buy online (highly suggested), or for the dedicated film buff, they offer the Krubrick package, admission for one to all the movies for $70.  They also offer student discounts.

So do it, c’mon….Krubrick, big screen, good food…an opportunity like this doesn’t come around very often.

Krubrick Retrospective website: http://www.belcourt.org/events?id=59741

Jack Nicholson in 'The Shining'

THE SHINING (1980)
Friday, Oct. 31 @ 9:10pm
Saturday, Nov. 1 @ Noon, 9:10, 11:50pm
Sunday, Nov. 2 @ Noon, 7:00

FEAR AND DESIRE (1953)  at the Frist Center
Sunday, November 2nd at 4:30pm
***EXTREMELY RARE*** NOT AVAILABLE IN ANY HOME VIDEO FORMAT***
***This FREE screening will be shown at the Frist Center for the Visual Arts***

FULL METAL JACKET (1987)
Wed-Thu, Nov 5-6 @ 4:35, 7:00, 9:25

SPARTACUS (1960)
Sat-Sun, Nov 8-9 @ Noon, 4:00, 8:00
Mon, Nov 10 @ 7:00

A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (1971)
Thur-Fri, Nov 13-14 @ 4:20, 7:00, 9:40

Kubrick's 'Barry Lyndon'

BARRY LYNDON (1975)
Sat-Sun, Nov 15-16 @ Noon
Mon, Nov 17 @ 3:30, 7pm

KILLER’S KISS (1955)
Tue, Nov 18 @ 4:50, 6:25, 8:00, 9:35
Wed, Nov 19 @ 4:50, 9:35
Thu, Nov 20 @ 4:50, 6:25, 8:00, 9:35

LOLITA (1962)
Sat-Sun, Nov 22-23 @ Noon, 4:55
Mon, Nov 24 @ 7pm

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968)
Wed, Nov 26 @ 7pm
Thu, Nov 27 @ noon, 7pm
Fri, Nov 28: showtimes TBA

PATHS OF GLORY (1957)
Sat-Sun, Nov 29-30 @ Noon
Mon, Dec 1 @ 7pm

EYES WIDE SHUT (1999)
Tue-Thu, Nov 2-4
Showtimes TBA

THE KILLING (1956)
Sat-Sun, Dec 6-7 @ Noon
Mon, Dec 8 @ 7pm

The famed "bombdrop" scene in Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove'

DR. STRANGELOVE or: HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE BOMB (1964)
Sat-Sun, Dec 13-14 @ Noon
Mon, Dec 15 @ 7pm

I remember the first time I heard about Milk; it was during a meeting of the gay-straight alliance at Austin Peay State University. The advisor was long-time gay activist and art professor, Dr. Bruce Childs (who’s now enjoying a very well-deserved retirement). Childs mentioned Harvey Milk in passing during a conversation, which inspired me to learn more about this keystone piece of American gay history.

Back in 1977, when Milk first came to light in San Francisco politics, the country’s gay community was beginning to enjoy some much-needed exposure and was well on its way to achieving a few minor protections and gay-rights laws. (Some, like the anti-discrimination law passed in Dade County, Florida, were later repealed through the work of “religious right” leaders). Bryant later received her thanks: a pie in the face.

Bryant also led the push for Florida’s ban on gay adoption (still the only one in the country, thank goodness). It was men and women like Harvey Milk and other leaders who would work to provide a strong, positive face for the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender community. To say that tempers were flared during that time (especially with Bryant’s asinine declaration that she would help “get rid” of all the homosexuals in the country) was a bit of an understatement.

Milk, in stark contrast to the hateful rants of those using religion to excuse their vitriol, devoted much of his life to speaking out against the humanitarian crises of the day. After moving with his then-partner Scott Smith to San Francisco’s, they opened a camera shop on Castro Street — which was quickly becoming that city’s gay neighborhood.

Milk’s popularity grew quickly, thanks to his humor and a certain charm, eventually being called “the mayor of Castro Street,” Ironically, he lost his first election, coming in tenth out of thirty-two candidates in the race for a seat on the Board of Supervisors (city council) of San Francisco. He ran (and lost) again in 1975, and finally won the seat in 1977, thus becoming the first openly-gay elected official in the country.

The brief Biography shown on notablebiographies.com details his very brief time on the supervisory board:

As city supervisor, Milk was the driving force behind the passage of a gay-rights law that prohibited discrimination, or unequal treatment, in housing and employment based on sexual orientation. At his urging, the city announced a drive to hire more gay and lesbian police officers. He also started programs that benefited minorities, workers, and the elderly. Milk then gained national attention for his role in defeating a state senate proposal that would have prohibited gays and lesbians from teaching in public schools in California.

Harvey Milk once said, “If a bullet should go through my head let that bullet go through every closet door.” That’s exactly what happened on November 27, 1978, when former city supervisor Dan White shot Milk and Mayor George Moscone. Both men were killed.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Milk, a new film by Gus Van Sant, will be released to theatres all across the country. It will be premiered this week in California, sent to limited release on November 26th, and then will go to a wide USA release on December 5th. The movie stars Sean Penn as Harvey Milk, Emile Hirsch as Cleve Jones, and Josh Brolin as Dan White. James Franco plays Scott Smith. It’s my sincere hope that it will come to Clarksville.

Milk himself was the topic of an earlier Academy Award-winning documentary, The Times of Harvey Milk, released in 1984. The documentary is already known throughout the gay community as the definitive story of Harvey Milk, and the new film stands to reintroduce the entire nation to the story of one man who made a difference in both life and death.

I want to give a special thanks to Dr. Bruce Childs for his work and his tireless passion that he held for his entire tenure at Austin Peay. And I especially thank him for introducing me to the story of a man who’s passion — and life — changed everything.

Thanks, Bruce.

Depressed about Global Warming? Using amusing and inspiring stories Kilowatt Ours teaches how you can personally make this a greener world.  This 2008 updated version of Kilowatt Ours will be broadcast on Nashville Public Television, NPT Channel 8, on Friday, October 24 at 7:00 pm.

Kilowatt Ours provides simple, practical, affordable solutions to America’s energy crisis and shows how we can save electricity, save money and make a difference for ourselves and the planet. It is unique in that it is a solutions-oriented look at one of America’s most pressing environmental challenges. Yes, this film has solutions for us; it is not “this is too depressing” and it is not “this problem is too big”. 

Filmmaker Jeff Barrie offers hope as he turns the camera on himself and asks, “How can I make a difference?”

In his journey Barrie explores the source of our electricity and the problems caused by energy production including mountain top removal, childhood asthma and global warming. Along the way he encounters individuals, businesses, organizations, and communities who are leading the way, using energy conservation, efficiency and renewable, green power all while saving money and the environment. For more information, visit kilowattours.org

For one night only, both Opry Mills and Nashville’s Green Hills cinemas screened what can only be described as a new kind of horror film, I.O.U.S.A., a Sundance award-winning documentary on the state of the nation’s finances. The picture isn’t pretty.

The film itself is a medley of old political footage, newly taped events, lots of graphics and a occasionally irritating hand held cam in need of a steadier ride. Its opening is an eclectic selection of former Presidents, and current President George W. Bush, making statements about how we must get the economy (read: out of control spending) under control. From Presidents Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, the first G. Bush, Clinton and the current White occupant, we hear the same noise.

Robert Bixby on the economy

Led by a giant copper penny, we ride a roller coaster of sound bites and budget charts, learning that health care (Medicare and Medicaid) are more of a threat that the surge of baby boomers heading to maturity and social security. We are told that 3% of our gross national product devoted to military spending is not our biggest threat. We are told that the fact that foreign entities hold a huge portion of our indebtedness is really not the crisis we think it is (that didn’t convince me).

What is a threat to our fiscal security as individuals and as a nation? Let’s start with spending. All the panelists agreed that we as individuals and as a nation have to stop spending more than we can afford.  Taken from a skit on Saturday Night Live, Steve Martin makes two quick appearances as a family man grappling with the concept of not buying on credit. That idea combined with the need for a new emphasis on saving were keys to change. The closest America has come to balancing the budget was in 1998 in the Clinton administration, a period when the famous “debt clock” could be shut down. In just eight years under Bush Jr. we are trillions and trillions of dollars in debt.

The film is structured around a road trip, a tour of America called the “Fiscal wake Up Tour.” Robert Bixby, director of the Concord Coalition, and David Walker, the U.S. comptroller general now resigned from that post, travel America with the often dry story of what is wrong with America’s fiscal policies and behavior, and attempting to answer the question “how do we fix it?”

In just eight years, the Bush/Cheney administration turned Clinton's balanced budget into a $9 trillion deficit

It was noted in the film that over two plus centuries of American history we have incurred serious debt, we have always managed to spend it down. What is different this time is the public mindset, which is not in tune with or even knowledgeable about the fact that America is broke. Not just broke, but trillions of dollars in debt. Trillions. Nine trillion dollars. That’s nine with lots of zeros and four commas.

The trade deficit is a second area of concern; we import more than we export, and that sending of American dollars to overseas vendors erodes our financial stability.

In another brief segment, we are told that when it comes to education, our students are at the bottom of an international heap, and without more access to training and motivation to reach higher standards, the chances of rebuilding and sustaining a solid footing in the world is not likely.

The punchline is the indebtedness factor. Children not even born yet will be shouldering tens of thousands of dollars of debt when they are still in diapers, and when or if they graduate from college. Yes, it’s that bad.

Click here to view the embedded video.

After the film screened, Becky Quick of MSNBC posed questions from the audience and from emails sent from across the country. America’s most notable financial leaders and policy experts, including Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway; William Niskanen, chairman of the Cato Institute; Bill Novelli, CEO of AARP; Pete Peterson, senior chairman of The Blackstone Group and chairman of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation; and Dave Walker, president & CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and former U.S. Comptroller General, offered insight and possible solutions to the nations fiscal woes.

Finally, all five panelists agreed that one of the largest, perhaps the largest, issue was the death of leadership. Electing strong leaders, electing leaders who can set aside partisan politics and work together using basic common sense and sound business principles, can put America on the right track again.

Seeing I.O.U.S.A. in tandem with the panel discussion was the best way to see this provocation and scary film. Though on the dry side, I.O.U.S.A. is the kind of film more people need to see, listen to, and think about, particularly with the 2008 Presidential election on the horizon.

In promoting the film, producers write:

I.O.U.S.A. boldly examines the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens. As the Baby Boomer generation prepares to retire, will there even be any Social Security benefits left to collect? Burdened with an ever-expanding government and military, increased international competition, overextended entitlement programs, and debts to foreign countries that are becoming impossible to honor, America must mend its spendthrift ways or face an economic disaster of epic proportions.

Throughout history, the American government has found it nearly impossible to spend only what has been raised through taxes. Wielding candid interviews with both average American taxpayers and government officials, Sundance veteran Patrick Creadon (Wordplay) helps demystify the nation’s financial practices and policies. The film follows U.S. Comptroller General David Walker as he crisscrosses the country explaining America’s unsustainable fiscal policies to its citizens.

Uncounted: The Movie took a fairly dry subject of black box voting and turned it into a dynamic and passionate film done well enough to inspire political change. I.O.U.S.A. tries to follow that path to success but falls a bit short, a bit flat in the dryness of its subject matter. Granted, they have a more-than-valid concern to play out to the American public, but in the assemblage of suits, ties, talking heads and financial charts they both make a point and occasionally lose viewer interest. Nonetheless, it is a film worth seeing and remembering as we make decisions about who will lead our country out of its financial morass.

This critically-acclaimed documentary film was conceived of, co-written and executive produced by Agora Financial’s Addison Wiggin. In July 2008, the film was acquired by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

The live discussion with America’s most notable financial leaders and policy experts, including Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway; William Niskanen, chairman of the Cato Institute; Bill Novelli, CEO of AARP; Pete Peterson, senior chairman of The Blackstone Group and chairman of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation; and Dave Walker, president & CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and former U.S. Comptroller General, promises riveting dialogue and keen insight into the crisis we currently face. The panel will be moderated by Becky Quick, co-anchor of CNBC’s morning news show Squawk Box.

From the producers of Wordplay and the studio that brought you Supersize Me, the must-see documentary I.O.U.S.A. uncovers the source of critical economic concerns that touch the lives of every American. A tapestry of archival footage, hard data and candid interviews woven together, it paints an authentic profile of today’s economic condition. Solutions for how we can impact this nationwide crisis and evolve into a more fiscally sound nation for future generations are offered by the documentary’s powerful conclusion.

In promoting the film, producers write:

I.O.U.S.A. boldly examines the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens. As the Baby Boomer generation prepares to retire, will there even be any Social Security benefits left to collect? Burdened with an ever-expanding government and military, increased international competition, overextended entitlement programs, and debts to foreign countries that are becoming impossible to honor, America must mend its spendthrift ways or face an economic disaster of epic proportions.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Throughout history, the American government has found it nearly impossible to spend only what has been raised through taxes. Wielding candid interviews with both average American taxpayers and government officials, Sundance veteran Patrick Creadon (Wordplay) helps demystify the nation’s financial practices and policies. The film follows U.S. Comptroller General David Walker as he crisscrosses the country explaining America’s unsustainable fiscal policies to its citizens.

With surgical precision, Creadon interweaves archival footage and economic data to paint a vivid and alarming profile of America’s current economic situation. The ultimate power of I.O.U.S.A. is that the film moves beyond doomsday rhetoric to proffer potential financial scenarios and propose solutions about how we can recreate a fiscally sound nation for future generations.

This critically-acclaimed documentary film was conceived of, co-written and executive produced by Agora Financial’s Addison Wiggin. In July 2008, the film was acquired by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. This live premiere will screen in 400 theatres around the nation tonight, including Nashville’s Opry Mills 20, 570 Opry Mills Drive, Nashville (615.514.4629) and Green Hills 16, 3815 Green Hills Village Drive Nashville (615.269.5910). Tickets are priced at approximately $12.00.

The Power of Nightmares (Part 1) is being shown this Friday, August 1, at 7 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, 3053 Highway 41A South. The screening is a continuation of the UU First Friday Film program.

Adam Curtis showed us in Century of Self a key way of controlling the masses is by making people good consumers. Make people want things they do not need by appealing to their secret desires. Come to present time in The Power of Nightmares, where terror and torture and the fear of such has become the new tools of control by governments.

About the movie: For a time politicians promised to create a better world. When this dream lost its promise, politicians were simply seen as managers. Their power to control has returned as their job became rescuing us from dreadful dangers. Much of the terrorism threat is a fantasy that is an exaggerated and distorted dark illusion spread by governments, security services, and the international media.

This is a series of films about how and why a fantasy about terror was created and who it benefits. This story starts with two groups, American Neo-conservatives and the radical Islams. These idealists, born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world, have similar explanations for what caused that failure.

This screening is free and open to the public and the film is a appropriate for mature, adult audiences. Bring snacks to share if you wish. To reach the UU Church, head south on Madison, 1.9 miles past the Wal-Mart.

http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares

That was my first reaction to Mama Mia, the new pop music turned Broadway hit turned silver screen mega … something??? The OMG does not necessarily denote pleasure.

Mama Mia is a musical rooted in the Abba top-forty playlists of a few decades ago. And yes, the music was toe tapping and hummable, huge hits for the group. In Mama Mia, the music dominates the show; it’s the lynchpin upon which to hang a lightweight story that reaches for words like “rollicking” and “sentimental” and “exuberant” but never makes the real connection. Or rather, it makes it from time to time but doesn’t let you pause to enjoy it. The music goes beyond domination, rolling into subjugation, rather like a steam roller flattening everything in its path. Come on. We need breathing room to separate and tame this relentless tide of song.

Meryl Streep stars as Donna Sheridan, proprietor of Villa Donna in the Greek Islands a woman whose freewheeling lifestyle and rock and roll days resulted in three close encounters with three distinctly different men that produced one child one summer long ago. That child, Sophie [Amanda Seyfried], paternity undetermined, is about to be married, and wants a “daddy” to walk her down the aisle. Having found mom’s old diary, she now has a list of unusual suspects to invite to wedding. Thus we are given a good opening and a good opening song: I have A Dream, beautifully sung by Sophie.

Now that your credulity has been terminally stretched, enter the daddies. Pierce Brosnan as as architect Sam Carmichael, suave, widowed, father of two, perennially handsome, tries hard but can’t sing a note. He was lover #1, left our heroine and returned, only to learn she was “with someone else” and left again for a new life. Colin firth plays banker Harry bright, rugged, vibrant, concerned, doesn’t have to sing much. Thank you. Stellan Skarsgard as Swedish sailor Bill Anderson as , still another great looking guy. Meryl had good taste.

The bridesmaids arrive and rollick on the Grecian beaches with vivacious energy and the appropriate level of pre-nuptial silliness. Donna’s best buddies arrive in the form of unmarried author Rosie [Julie Walters] and thrice divorced Tanya [Christine Baranski], resurrecting more memories of their rock roll days as an all-girl band. Hordes of extras in the roles of local color (the Greeks who inhabit this Aegean island) round out the cast.

To be honest, Meryl Streep is a great actress with impressive range, a woman unafraid to try anything, including a hefty bounce off a bed while executing a mid-air split. I’d need a personal trainer, a chiropractor, acupuncture and possibly traction after that one. She acts, she does comedy, and she sings. Pretty well, in fact. Her rant [The Winner Takes It All] to Brosnan is a powerhouse number. His version of S.O.S. is not. But he is cute and he tries hard.

The high points reached the top with Streep’s show-stopping The Winner Takes It All, which has everything from vocal range to costume and set to keep it afloat. Young Sophie in love sings Honey Honey which segues into a rendition of Money Money Money by mom Sophie and her friends. Clever. We have the requisite Dancing Queen, Our Last Summer, Take A Chance On Me, and the title song, Mama Mia. Read the ABBA Greatest Hits record jacket and that covers the score fairly well.

It’s not that Mama Mia is a bad film; it has many good moments, one or two great ones. The comedy works but laughing too hard may make you miss a joke. Other moments, like watching Pierce Brosnan sing, can only be described as painful.

There’s a frenetic Pied Piper scene with Donna leading the local ladies along a scenic path, and another where young men in swim trunks and flippers dance out of sync (was this “rollicking?”) on a pier. In between the key storylines was a mismosh of under-developed or unnecessary subplots. Editing required. The absence of choreography in several numbers is duly noted, or perhaps that frenetic unsynchronized gyrating and jumping was the effect directors were looking for. It felt unfinished, unpolished. Too many subtexts were fleeting, alluded to and left to dangle, or were completely irrelevant.

Streep and Seyfried, along with the “dads” and the “old friends” are entertaining. But the film as a whole is a bit of a mess, too riotous, too fragmented, too jumbled, to really work. The audience had a good time with the music, but the pace was overwhelming. Enough already.

Most of the filming was done on location in the Greek Islands of Skopelos and Skiathos, and in the Pelion region of Greece.

ABBA fans may have a good time. I had a good time, some of the time. But it’s a guilty pleasure, rooted in the fact the bad parts are so bad you have to love them for simply trying. I would have preferred a little more time to absorb the characters and savor the story.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The film is approximately 1 hour long and a discussion follows the film.

A Century of Self is fascinating look at how America’s masses were/are controlled through the use of Freud’s psychology. We’ve looked at how advertisers used this psychology to sell us things we do not need. Now we will look at how the government used/uses it to control us for its desires.
To find the UU Fellowship, drive south on Madison, 1.9 miles past the Wal Mart. Bring snacks to share if you wish.

Marvel Studios is clearly in the process of establishing something never before attempted in major blockbusters, the creation of a Marvel Universe similar to their comics—er—graphic novels that have been in print for generations. But enough for fanboy mindtwists for now.

Hulk 2’s opening credits present a re-telling of the origins of the big green guy, but it bears little resemblance to the last film. Indeed, it looks a lot more like the opening credits of the megahit 1970’s TV series. I suppose this is the first indication that director Louis Leterrier was actually going to tell a story that would be fun, a trait that was seriously lacking in Lee’s film.

Edward Norton replaces Eric Bana in the lead role, and reportedly assisted in the rewriting of the film as well. Norton’s Bruce Banner is just as intense, but more lighthearted, with a clear nod to Bill Bixby’s tortured hero. He’s once again the wandering loner with a deep, dark, big, nasty, green secret.

This isn’t to say that Hulk 2 isn’t without its faults. Pacing was off, and the entire film is all-too-obvious in catering to the fanboys in its presentation. Where Hulk 1 was entirely too “heady,” the new film is clearly bent for action, and weak on character development. But the comic book nerd in me (forget that graphic novel junk… they were comics when I collected them) could give a batguy’s left butt about romance. I just wanted to see how cool it’d be.

Rest easy, true believers. Hulk 2 has plenty of cool for all of us eternal boys. With plenty of cameos and special appearances by the ubiquitous Stan Lee (No, he’s not Heff again), Lou Ferrigno, a posthumous appearance by Bill Bixby, the TV Hulk theme, and a few other iron-ic surprises, the audience has plenty to gasp about.

In fact, both of the other major roles have been recast, with Liv Tyler as Betty Ross and William Hurt as General Ross. Of the new cast, the only one I didn’t like was Hurt. I liked Sam Elliott better, but that’s just me. Tim Roth bulked up a little too much for his role as Emil Blonsky, and sadly, his character was the most shallow of the bunch.

I do find myself questioning how anyone can move around undetected in today’s post-9/11 world, especially for five years as the film claims. But then, a certain suspension of disbelief is required for a Summer action film, and Hulk 2 is no exception.

The apparent pattern that Marvel Studios has established is that the hero will fight a comparable villain. Iron Man had the Iron Mongrel. The Incredible Hulk has the Abomination (along with hints of another popular Hulk villain in a sure-to-come future film — but I’m not giving that one away). Here’s hoping that this “evil-bigger-badder-twin” concept doesn’t become a true pattern, it’d give away a screaming lack of creativity on the folks at Marvel.

There’s plenty of action, a bit of romance, daughter-hates-father subplots, and big green guys to go around, making Hulk 2 a film that overshadows its predecessor while foreshadowing more big action films to come down the pike.

Even with all its flaws, the smashing emerald dude more than lives up to its paneled past, and smashes open the door that Iron Man cracked: A door to a film world that’s just as big as we comic nerds always hoped for. Sure it’ll be a big mess. But I can’t imagine a better film to make that mess for right now, at least until something better comes along.

7/10

“Both the Islamists and Neoconservatives] were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. And both had a very similar explanation for what caused that failure. These two groups have changed the world, but not in the way that either intended. Together, they created today’s nightmare vision of a secret, organized evil that threatens the world. A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful. “

What’s especially interesting about this film is the theory they propose that the hype about the islamic threat in the from of al-Qaeda, is in fact a myth perpetrated by politicians, particularly American neo-conservatives in an attempt to unite and inspire their people following the failure of earlier, more utopian ideologies.

Part 1: “Baby It’s Cold Outside”

The first part of the series explains the origins of Islamism and Neo-Conservatism. It shows Egyptian civil servant Sayyid Qutb, depicted as the founder of modern Islamist thought, visiting America to learn about our education system, but becoming disgusted with what he saw as a corruption of morals and virtues in western society through individualism. When he returns to Egypt, he is disturbed by westernization under President Nasser and becomes convinced that in order to save society it must be completely restructured along the lines of Islamic law while still using western technology. He also becomes convinced that this can only be accomplished through the use of an elite “vanguard” to lead a revolution against the established order. Qutb becomes a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and, after being tortured in one of Nasser’s jails, comes to believe that western-influenced leaders can justly be killed for the sake of removing their corruption. Qutb is executed in 1966, but he inspires the future mentor of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to start his own secret Islamist group. Inspired by the 1979 Iranian revolution, Zawahiri and his allies assassinate Egyptian president Anwar Al Sadat, in 1981, in hopes of starting their own revolution. The revolution does not materialise, and Zawahiri comes to believe that the majority of Muslims have been corrupted by their western-inspired leaders and thus may be legitimate targets of violence if they do not join him.

At the same time in the United States, a group of disillusioned liberals, including Irving Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz, look to the political thinking of Leo Strauss after the general failure of President Johnson’s “Great Society”. They come to the conclusion that the emphasis on individual liberty was the undoing of the plan. They envisioned restructuring America by uniting the American people against a common evil, and set about creating a mythical enemy. These factions, the Neo-Conservatives, came to power under the Reagan administration, with their allies Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and work to unite the United States in fear of the Soviet Union. The Neo-Conservatives allege the Soviet Union is not following the terms of disarmament between the two countries, and, with the investigation of “Team B”, they accumulate a case to prove this with dubious evidence and methods. President Reagan is convinced nonetheless.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part 2: “The Phantom Victory”

In the second episode, Islamist factions, rapidly falling under the more radical influence of Zawahiri and his rich Saudi acolyte Osama bin Laden, join the Neo-Conservative-influenced Reagan Administration to combat the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. They are successful in repulsing the Soviet armies and, when the Eastern Bloc begins to collapse in the late 1980s, both groups believe they are the primary architects of the “Evil Empire’s” defeat. Curtis argues that the Soviets were on their last legs anyway, and were doomed to collapse without intervention.

However, the Islamists see it quite differently, and in their triumph believe that they had the power to create ‘pure’ Islamic states in Egypt and Algeria. However, attempts to create perpetual Islamic states are blocked by force. The Islamists then try to create revolutions in Egypt and Algeria by the use of terrorism to scare the people into rising up. However, the people are terrified by the violence and the government in Algeria use their fear as a way to maintain power. In the end, the Islamists declare the entire populations of the countries as inherently contaminated by western values, and finally in Algeria shoot each other, due to a perception that the terrorists themselves are not pure enough Moslems either.

In America, the Neo-Conservatives’ aspirations to use the United States Army’s power for further destruction of evil are thrown off track by the ascent of George H. W. Bush to the American Presidency, followed by the 1992 election of Bill Clinton leaving them out of power. The Neo-Conservatives, with their conservative Christian allies, attempted to demonise Clinton throughout his presidency with various real and fabricated stories of corruption and immorality. To their disappointment, however, the American people do not acknowledge him as an enemy as they intended and remain indifferent to Clinton’s alleged evils. The Islamist attempts at revolution end in massive bloodshed, leaving the Islamists without popular support. Zawahiri and bin Laden flee to the sufficiently safe Afghanistan and declare a new strategy; to fight Western-inspired moral decay they must deal a blow to its source: the United States.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part 3: “The Shadows in the Cave”

The final episode addresses the actual rise of al-Qaeda. Curtis argues that, after their failed revolutions, bin Laden and Zawahiri had little or no popular support, let alone a serious complex organisation of terrorists, and were dependent upon independent operatives to carry out their new call for jihad. The film instead shows the United States government wanting to prosecute bin Laden in absentia for the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings, and needing to prove him to be the head of a criminal organisation to do so. They find a former associate of bin Laden, Jamal al-Fadl, and pay him to testify that bin Laden was the head of a massive terrorist organisation called “al-Qaeda”. With the September 11th attacks, Neo-Conservatives in the new Republican government of George W. Bush use this created concept of an organisation to justify another crusade against a new evil enemy, leading to the launch of the War on Terrorism.

After the American invasion of Afghanistan fails to uproot the alleged terrorist network, the Neo-Conservatives focus inwards, searching unsuccessfully for terrorist sleeper cells in America. They then extend the war on “terror” to a war against general perceived evils with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The ideas and tactics also spread to the United Kingdom where Tony Blair uses the threat of terrorism to give him a new moral authority. The repercussions of the Neo-Conservative strategy are also explored with an investigation of indefinitely-detained terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay, many allegedly taken on the word of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance without actual investigation on the part of the United States military, and other forms of “preemption” against non-existent and unlikely threats made simply on the grounds that the parties involved could later become a threat. Curtis also makes a specific attempt to defuse fears of a dirty bomb attack, and concludes by reassuring viewers that politicians will eventually have to concede that some threats are exaggerated and others altogether devoid of reality.

Click here to view the embedded video.

My conclusion

The tactics discussed in this film are still being used today. All you need to do is look at the rhetoric between the Clinton and Obama campaigns on who would you perfer answer the red phone at 3am.  Steve King’s (R-IA) warnings that terrorists will be dancing in the street if you elect a Democrat to the White House. President Bush’s attempts at justifying torture and demanding the Congress grant retroactive immunity to his administration and the telecommunication companies which have been his willing partners in warrantless domestic spying.  It is also being used to attack the GLBT community as seen recently in Oklahoma state Representative Sally Kern  (R-Oklahoma City) comments which were recorded then placed on Youtube…

Click here to view the embedded video.

It’s way past time for the world to grow up and finally say “Enough!” to the politics of fear.

* Information about the film and the majority of the text herein except my conclusion, provided by the english language Wikipedia.

The movie introduces you to several families that have two things in common 1) strong religious ties, and 2) a family member that is a homosexual. Director Daniel Karslake’s selection of families with different backgrounds is sure to connect with a variety of viewers. Theres a Midwest lawyer and stay at home mother that are Lutheran; a African American couple from North Carolina who are ministers in a AME church; there a Episcopalian elderly white couple from blue collar rural Kentucky (no spoiler here but their child was the first openly Gay bishop in the Anglican church, Gene Robinson); a single middle class mother, and a long time politician Dick Gephardt and his family.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Karslake introduces each family through a historical lens, letting the viewer get comfortable and details the love stories of the parents, their marriage, child birth, and the eventual coming out of that child. The parents and family members frankness is refreshingly honest. We see the story of each family, their struggle, grief, and reconciliation; each in their own way but with all the different views it draws the audience into the families lives like your attending their Thanksgiving dinner.

Intermingled between the life stories of these God fearing families, Karslake sprinkles in traditional Biblical arguments, from Leviticus to Romans, regarding homosexuality. Historians, Pastors, Theologians, family members, and others (including clips from news reels and tele-evangelists) all give their interpretation of the Bible.

Later, the movie analyzes how the Bible is often used to demonize and condemn homosexual behavior. It takes those Biblical passages that are typically quoted to say that God thinks its an abomination, and puts them into the context of the time they were written, to offer a different opinion.

The film reveals how religious families react to their child coming out of the closet. We see their fears, confusion, struggles, and how they focus that energy. We see the difference between having supportive parents versus unsupportive. When the director asked Christians what the Bible says about homosexuality, that they didn’tt know what the Bible says but only what they’ve been told.

I thought the movie was good, and at just over 90 minutes was just long enough. The access to the families is intimate and compelling. The historical references to the Bible were informative. For those who are well read, there probably isn’t anything new here. The power in the film lies with the families’ individual stories that really draws the viewer into their story with a fresh perspective.

I encourage you to check out the film and make your own decision.

About the Movie

Can the love between two people ever be an abomination? Is the chasm separating homosexuals and Christianity too wide to cross? How can the Bible be used to justify hate? These are the questions at the heart of Daniel Karslake’s FOR THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO. A World Premiere in competition at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival, FOR THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO was also honored with Audience Awards at the 2007 Seattle and Provincetown International Film Festivals and The Kathleen Bryan Edwards Award for Human Rights at the 2007 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival. This provocative, entertaining film concisely reconciles homosexuality and a literal interpretation of Biblical scripture.

Through the experiences of five very normal, very Christian, very American families — including those of former House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt and Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson — we discover how people of faith handle, or sometimes tragically fail to handle, having a gay child. Informed by such respected voices as Bishop Desmond Tutu, Harvard’s Peter Gomes, Orthodox Rabbi Steve Greenberg and Reverend Jimmy Creech, FOR THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO offers healing, clarity and understanding to anyone caught in the crosshairs of scripture and sexual identity.

Some of what we hear from the Theologians

Reverend Dr. Laurence Keene, Disciples of Christ:

“When people ask questions about homosexuality, almost always they follow with, ‘and what does the Bible really say about it?’”

“When the term ‘abomination’ is used in the Hebrew Bible, it is always used to address a ritual wrong – it never is used to refer to something innately immoral. Eating pork was not innately immoral for a Jew, but it was an abomination because it was a violation of a ritual requirement.”

“I have a soft spot in my heart for literalists because I used to be one. However, when someone says to me ‘this is what the Bible says,’ my response to them is, ‘No, that’s what the Bible reads.’ It is the struggle to understand context and language and culture and customs that helps us to understand the reading, or what it is saying.”

“There’s nothing wrong with a fifth grade understanding of God, as long as you’re in the fifth grade.”

“There is no ability to procreate when you engage in homosexual behavior, so it was a violation of a cultural norm. [This was] the sin of Onan in the Old Testament, where Onan is sentenced to death because he ejaculates out of the woman’s body, so his partner doesn’t get pregnant. As the King James Version says, ‘Onan spills his seed upon the ground, and God strikes him dead.’ It was ritually impure. It was an abomination.”

Reverend Peter Gomes, Harvard:

“There are about 6 or 7 verses in all of Scripture that speak to even remotely what we might call homosexual activity or homosexual conduct.”

“[Literalists] are failing to read the Bible within the context of its authors and of its original culture.”

Reverend Steven Kindle, Clergy United:

“In this particular one, it’s Leviticus Chapter 20, Verse 13, it says if a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination, they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them – if you read the Bible on a face value level, that reading disregards several very important things: the first one is just a few verses before that Moses teaches in Leviticus that it is an abomination to eat shrimp….It is an abomination to eat a rabbit.”

Rabbi Brian Zachary Mayer:

“A few verses above and below it says you shouldn’t plant two different seeds in the same hole, you shouldn’t commingle your crops… There is other text that says you shouldn’t wear linen and wool together. To just pick out, this is the one that we’re going to follow…the Bible doesn’t come that way – it’s selective reading…Those Biblical laws, they’re known as the Holiness Code. They were laws that were supposed to help people at that time find holiness in their lives.”

Reverend Susan Sparks, American Baptist Church:

“To me that’s the important thing to recognize: the historical context in which this was written. That particular section on a man not lying with a man goes to procreation. It is about a nation trying to grow. At the time, the Hebrew people understood that male seed was actually all of nascent life contained right there – women had nothing to do with actually the birth except for just incubation, so that particular section was about saving seed, saving seed only to procreate so the nation could grow.”

Revered Mel White, Soulforce:

“When I was on Larry King Live, somebody called in and said, ‘What do you guys do in bed?’ Larry hung up on him and said, ‘that’s none of your business.’ And I said, ‘We’ve been together in the same bed for 24 years – we’re like everybody else, we sleep in bed. And King said: ‘Once they find out you’re as boring as we are, it’s all over.’”

“Now it (the Bible) is being used, misused, to condemn gay people – it’s an old trick. Fundamentalist Christians have been using it throughout the ages, and now they’re doing it again.”

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate:

“The Bible is the word if God through the word of human beings, speaking in the idiom of their time, and the richness of the Bible comes from the fact that we don’t take it as literally so that it was dictated by God.”

Some of what we hear from the families

The Gephardt Family

Chrissy Gephardt: “Growing up in the Catholic Church, it was never something that I heard explicitly, but I definitely knew that that was part of the Bible and in fact, there were two things that I remember were an abomination: homosexuality and suicide. And I’ll never forget thinking that ‘Oh my gosh, you can never commit suicide because you’re going to go to hell and you can never be gay because you’re going to go to hell.’”

Dick Gephardt: We thought she was…

Jane Gephardt: She was always a jock.

Dick Gephardt: She was athletic

Jane Gephardt: She was good, too. She was a good athlete.

Dick Gephardt: She was a good athlete – she also wore pants more than skirts and dresses

Jane Gephardt: But that was because she was trying to be like Matt, like her older brother

Dick Gephardt: We thought that, but…

Jane Gephardt: Well that’s what we thought, and I still think that…

The Robinson Family

Isabella “Boo” McDaniel (Bishop Gene Robinson’s ex-wife): “I was just glad to be there for the consecration, because I thought by my presence I could really show that I was supportive. I mean, there was just huge security, Gene had a bullet proof vest under his vestments and I realized how scary it must have been for him.”

Bishop Gene Robinson: “My parents are probably the two best Christians I know and they don’t do it because they ought to do it, they just do it because it’s who they are. So to have them presenting this [the consecration vestments] to me – it’s just kind of a coming out for them as well. They’re all of a sudden just completely light hearted and relieved about this and are able to be proud.”

The Reitan Family

Jake Reitan, activist: “I remember very distinctly when I was a kid when I first learned that so much of the world wasn’t Christian – and that just kind of blew my mind – because I was of the perspective that everyone is Christian because everyone wanted to go to Heaven, you know, and then I learned that only one third of the world was Christian and I thought to myself: are that many people going to Hell?”

“I remember one Sunday where my pastor preached on homosexuality and it wasn’t in the best of light, but I didn’t want to question because I knew that the answers wouldn’t be good.”

The Poteat Family

David Poteat: “I had good kids. We had one of each sex – when my kids were growing up, I said ‘God, please don’t let my son grow up to be a faggot and my daughter a slut.’ And he did not. He did not do that. He reversed it.”

Brenda Poteat: “I can’t say where in the scheme of things that I saw this talk show [the Phil Donahue show] and I realized that what I was embarrassed about was that I was thinking totally of how she was having sex and not about her as a person. When I saw the talk show with two guys — buff, good looking guys — and they were asked the question ‘which one of you guys takes on the female role in the relationship’ and they said ‘neither one of us, we are attracted to men, if we were attracted to women, we’d be with women.’

“I’m sitting there thinking, but what about the ones that twist their butts and act like women, what are they attracted to? Who are they? And I’m thinking ‘but that’s all you’ve ever seen.’ That’s what comes to mind when you hear ‘homosexual’: you think of the girlfriend-acting fellow, the butch dykey-acting woman. You don’t think about everyday people, and there are ‘everyday people’ who are gay, and you’re thinking about how they’re having sex.

“I had to realize that she was my daughter: she had the same personality, she enjoyed the same things that she did before I knew she was gay. Then I had to stop thinking about Tonia that way. Although I still do not approve of the lifestyle, it was a big burden off me, that I could relate to her better and I stopped trying to push her.”

Awards

For more information

Visit the official movie web site at http://www.forthebibletellsmeso.org/

About First Run Features

First Run Features was founded in 1979 by a group of filmmakers to advance the distribution of independent film. Under the leadership of the late independent film pioneer, Fran Spielman, First Run Features quickly gained a reputation for its controversial catalog of daring independent fiction and non-fiction films. Today First Run remains one of the largest independent theatrical and home video distributors in the United States; its legacy includes films by such notable directors as Spike Lee, Michael Apted, Jane Campion, Ross McElwee, Michael Winterbottom, Sven Nykvist, Peter Jackson, Dariush Mehrjui, David O. Russell, Lizzie Borden, Claude Chabrol, Jan Svankmajer, Peter Watkins, Radley Metzger, Victor Nunez, the Quay Brothers, Kim Ki-Duk and Satyajit Ray.

For more information, or to browse their many other films, visit their web site at: http://www.firstrunfeatures.com/

In a complex, exhaustive and highly entertaining documentary, The Corporation, Mark Achbar, co-director of the influential and inventive Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, teams up with co-director Jennifer Abbott and writer Joel Bakan to examine the far-reaching repercussions of the corporation’s increasing preeminence.

Based on Bakan’s book, The Corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power, the film is a timely, critical inquiry that invites CEOs, whistle-blowers, brokers, gurus, spies, players, pawns and pundits on a graphic and engaging quest to reveal the corporation’s inner workings, curious history, controversial impacts and possible futures. Featuring illuminating interviews with Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, Howard Zinn and many others, The Corporation charts the spectacular rise of an institution aimed at achieving specific economic goals as it also recounts victories against this apparently invincible force.

Among the 40 interview subjects are CEOs and top-level executives from a range of industries: oil, pharmaceutical, computer, tire, manufacturing, public relations, branding, advertising and undercover marketing. In addition, a Nobel-prize winning economist, the first management guru, a corporate spy, and a range of academics, critics, historians and thinkers are also interviewed.

A legal “Person”

In the mid-1800s the corporation emerged as a legal “person.” Imbued with a “personality” of pure self-interest, the next 100 years saw the corporation’s rise to dominance. The corporation created unprecedented wealth but at what cost? The remorseless rationale of “externalities” (as Milton Friedman explains, the unintended consequences of a transaction between two parties on a third) is responsible for countless cases of illness, death, poverty, pollution, exploitation and lies.

The pathology of commerce: Case histories

To assess the “personality” of the corporate “person,” a checklist is employed, using diagnostic criteria of the World Health Organization and the standard diagnostic tool of psychiatrists and psychologists. The operational principles of the corporation give it a highly anti-social “personality”: it is self-interested, inherently amoral, callous and deceitful; it breaches social and legal standards to get its way; it does not suffer from guilt, yet it can mimic the human qualities of empathy, caring and altruism. Four case studies, drawn from a universe of corporate activity, clearly demonstrate harm to workers, human health, animals and the biosphere. Concluding this point-by-point analysis, a disturbing diagnosis is delivered: the institutional embodiment of laissez-faire capitalism fully meets the diagnostic criteria of a “psychopath.”

Mindset

But what is the ethical mindset of corporate players? Should the institution or the individuals within it be held responsible? The people who work for corporations may be good people, upstanding citizens in their communities, but none of that matters when they enter the corporation’s world. As Sam Gibara, Former CEO and Chairman of Goodyear Tire, explains, “If you really had a free hand, if you really did what you wanted to do that suited your personal thoughts and your personal priorities, you’d act differently.”

Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface, the world’s largest commercial carpet manufacturer, had an environmental epiphany and re-organized his $1.4 billion company on sustainable principles. His company may be a beacon of corporate hope, but is it an exception to the rule?

Monstrous obligations

A case in point: Sir Mark Moody-Stuart recounts an exchange between himself (at the time Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell), his wife, and a motley crew of Earth First activists who arrived on the doorstep of their country home. The protesters chanted and stretched a banner over their roof that read, “Murderers.” The response of the surprised couple was not to call the police, but to engage their uninvited guests in a civil dialogue, share concerns about human rights and the environment and eventually serve them tea on their front lawn. Yet, as the Moody-Stuarts apologize for not being able to provide soy milk for their vegan critics’ tea, Shell Nigeria is flaring unrivaled amounts of gas, making it one of the world’s single worst sources of pollution. And all the professed concerns about the environment do not spare Ken Saro Wiwa and eight other activists from being hanged for opposing Shell’s environmental practices in the Niger Delta.

The Corporation exists to create wealth, and even world disasters can be profit centers. Carlton Brown, a commodities trader, recounts with unabashed honesty the mindset of gold traders while the twin towers crushed their occupants. The first thing that came to their minds, he tells us, was: “How much is gold up?”

Planet Inc.

You’d think that things like disasters, or the purity of childhood, or even milk, let alone water or air, would be sacred. But no. Corporations have no built-in limits on what, who, or how much they can exploit for profit. In the fifteenth century, the enclosure movement began to put fences around public grazing lands so that they might be privately owned and exploited. Today, every molecule on the planet is up for grabs. In a bid to own it all, corporations are patenting animals, plants, even your DNA.

Around things too precious, vulnerable, sacred or important to the public interest, governments have, in the past, drawn protective boundaries against corporate exploitation. Today, governments are inviting corporations into domains from which they were previously barred.

Perception management

The Initiative Corporation spends $22 billion worldwide placing its clients’ advertising in every imaginable – and some unimaginable – media. One new medium: very young children. Their “Nag Factor” study dropped jaws in the world of child psychiatry. It was designed not to help parents cope with their children’s nagging, but to help corporations formulate their ads and promotions so that children would nag for their products more effectively. Initiative Vice President Lucy Hughes elaborates: “You can manipulate consumers into wanting, and therefore buying your products. It’s a game.”

Today people can become brands (Martha Stewart). And brands can build cities (Celebration, Florida). And university students can pay for their educations by shilling on national television for a credit card company (Chris and Luke). And a corporation even owns the rights to the popular song “Happy Birthday” (a division of AOL-Time-Warner). Do you ever get the feeling it’s all a bit much?

Corporations have invested billions to shape public and political opinion. When they own everything, who will stand for the public good?

The price of whistleblowing

It turns out that standing for the public good is an expensive proposition. Ask Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, two investigative reporters fired by Fox News after they refused to water down a story on rBGH, a controversial synthetic hormone widely used in the United States (but banned in Europe and Canada) to rev up cows’ metabolism and boost their milk production. Because of the increased production, the cows suffer from mastitis, a painful infection of the udders. Antibiotics must then be injected, which find their way into the milk, and ultimately reduce people’s resistance to disease.

Fox demanded that they rewrite the story, and ultimately fired Akre and Wilson. Akre and Wilson subsequently sued Fox under Florida’s whistle-blower statute. They proved to a jury that the version of the story Fox would have had them put on the air was false, distorted or slanted. Akre was awarded $425,000. Then Fox appealed, the verdict was overturned on a technicality, and Akre lost her award. [For an update on the case see Disc 2 where we learn that at one point, Jane and Steve became liable for Fox's $1.8 million court costs, later to be reduced to $200,000.]

Democracy LTD.

Democracy is a value that the corporation just doesn’t understand. In fact, corporations have often tried to undo democracy if it is an obstacle to their single-minded drive for profit. From a 1934 business-backed plot to install a military dictator in the White House (undone by the integrity of one U.S. Marine Corps General, Smedley Darlington Butler) to present-day law-drafting, corporations have bought military might, political muscle and public opinion.

And corporations do not hesitate to take advantage of democracy’s absence either. One of the most shocking stories of the twentieth century is Edwin Black’s recounting IBM’s strategic alliance with Nazi Germany-one that began in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to power and continued well into World War II.

Fissures

The corporation may be trying to render governments impotent, but since the landmark WTO protest in Seattle, a rising wave of networked individuals and groups have decided to make their voices heard. Movements to challenge the very foundations of the corporation are afoot: The corporate charter revocation movement tried to bring down oil giant Unocal; a groundbreaking ballot initiative in Arcata, California, put the corporate agenda in the public spotlight in a series of town hall meetings; in Bolivia, the population fought and won a battle against a huge transnational corporation brought in by their government to privatize the water system; in India nearly 99% of the basmati patent of RiceTek was overturned; and W. R. Grace and the U.S. government’s patent on Neem was revoked.

As global individuals take back local power, a growing re-invigoration of the concept of citizenship is taking root. It has the power to not only strip the corporation of its seeming omnipotence, but to create a feeling and an ideology of democracy that is much more than its mere institutional version.

Who’s Who in The Corporation

• Jane Akre – Investigative reporter, fired by Fox News
• Ray Anderson – CEO, Interface, world’s largest commercial carpet manufacturer
• Joe Badaracco - Prof. of Business Ethics, Harvard Business School
• Maude Barlow – Chairperson, Council of Canadians
• Mark Barry – Competitive intelligence professional
• Elaine Bernard – Director, Harvard Business School Labor Program
• Edwin Black – Author, IBM and the holocaust
• Carlton Brown – Commodities broker
• Noam Chomsky – Professor, M.I.T.
• Chris Barrett & Luke McCabe – “Corporately-sponsored“ students
• Peter Drucker – Management guru
• Dr. Samuel Epstein – Emeritus Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, U. of Illinois
• Andrea Finger – Spokesperson, Disney-built town of Celebration
• Milton Friedman – Nobel Prize-winning economist
• Sam Gibara – Chairman and former CEO, Goodyear Tire
• Richard Grossman – Co-founder, Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy
• Dr. Robert Hare, Ph.D. – Psychologist and FBI psychopath consultant
• Lucy Hughes - Vice President, Initiative Media
• Ira Jackson – Director, Center for Business & Government, Kennedy School, Harvard
• Charles Kernaghan – Director, National Labor Committee
• Robert Keyes – President and CEO, Canadian Council for International Business
• Mark Kingwell – Philosopher, cultural critic, author
• Naomi Klein – Author, No logo
• Tom Kline – Vice President, Pfizer Inc., world’s largest pharmaceutical corporation
• Chris Komisarjevsky – CEO, Burson Marsteller Worldwide
• Dr. Susan Linn – Prof. of Psychiatry, Baker Children’s Center, Harvard
• Robert Monks – Corporate governance advisor and shareholder activist
• Sir Mark Moody-Stuart – Former Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell
• Michael Moore – Author, filmmaker
• Oscar Olivera – Leader, Coalition in Defense of Water and Life
• Jonathon Ressler – CEO, Big Fat Inc., undercover marketing specialist
• Jeremy Rifkin – President, Foundation on Economic Trends
• Dr. Vandana Shiva – Physicist, ecologist, feminist and seed activist
• Clay Timon – CEO, Landor and Associates, global branding specialists
• Michael Walker – Executive Director, Fraser Institute
• Robert Weissman – Editor, Multinational monitor
• Steve Wilson – Investigative reporter, fired by Fox News
• Irving Wladawsky-Berger – Vice President, Technology and Strategy, IBM Servers
• Mary Zepernick – Coordinator, Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy
• Howard Zinn – Historian and Author, A people’s history of the united states

The Filmmakers

Mark Achbar Producer, Director

Working for almost 30 years on films, videos and books, Mark Achbar endeavors, through media, to challenge apathy around issues of nuclear lunacy, poverty, media control, East Timor, human rights, the religious right, U.S. hegemony and corporate power.

Achbar is best known for Manufacturing consent: Noam Chomsky and the media, which he co-directed and co-produced with Peter Wintonick. The film was honored with 22 awards and distinctions, screened theatrically in 300 cities and aired on 30 national TV networks. The two-hour, 45-minute epic is the top-grossing feature documentary in Canadian history.

Achbar received a Gemini nomination for Best Writer on The Canadian conspiracy, a cultural/political satire for CBC and HBO’s Comedy Experiments. It won a Gemini for Best Entertainment Special and was nominated for an International Emmy. In 1999 Achbar worked with editor Jennifer Abbott to direct and produce Two brides and a scalpel: Diary of a lesbian marriage, the comi-tragic story of Canada’s first legally married same-sex couple. The film has played worldwide in festivals and has aired in Canada on Pride Vision TV and Knowledge Network.

Jennifer Abbott Director, Editor

Jennifer Abbott is a documentary maker, cultural activist and editor with a particular interest in producing media that shifts perspectives on problematic social norms and practices. In addition to co-directing and editing The Corporation, she produced, directed and edited A cow at my table, a feature documentary about meat, culture and animals, which won eight international awards.

Her other past works include the experimental short film and video installation about interracial relationships, Skinned, which toured North America and Europe including New York’s Museum of Modern Art. Abbott has also edited numerous documentaries, installations and performance works including Two brides and a scalpel: Diary of a lesbian marriage, produced by Mark Achbar. She is the editor and a contributing writer for the book Making video “In”: The contested ground of alternative video on the west coast. She lives on Galiano Island.

Joel Bakan Writer/ Co-Creator

Author of The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power A lawyer, professor and writer, Joel Bakan has degrees from Oxford, Dalhousie and Harvard, and has received several honors and awards including a Rhodes Scholarship and a Governor General’s medal. His work critically examines the social, economic, and political dimensions of law, and he has published in leading academic journals as well as the popular press. Bakan’s book, Just words: Constitutional rights and social wrongs, was characterized as “cutting edge commentary by one of Canada’s rising intellectuals.”

Bakan’s most recent book The Corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power will be released by Penguin Canada in March 2004, and in the U.S. by Simon & Schuster. Co-creator (with Mark Achbar) of The Corporation, Bakan’s book was written during the making of the documentary and formed the basis of the research and writing for the film.

Watch The Corporation Online

The film makers offers an official download via streaming DIVX from Stage6. This requires that you have the free DIVX web player installed on your computer in order to play either of the two videos below.

Part 1

[Stage6 is no more, so this Stage6-hosted video cannot be displayed.]

Part 2

[Stage6 is no more, so this Stage6-hosted video cannot be displayed.]

Please consider buying the DVD or contributing to the filmmaker!

Learn more at http://www.thecorporation.com/

* Much of the content of this article was taken from the press materials provided by Zeitgeist films.

This “action kit” will get you started (or moving faster) to register your concerns with our state leaders.

Here are three things YOU CAN DO NOW to help up ramp up the discussion for voter-verified paper ballots and mandatory random audits here in Tennessee. Now here are three things you can do to help us gain serious momentum:

Action Task 1. Contact the members of the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR).(They meet on December 12, so please contact them right away.) Tell them that you want them to endorse the TACIR staff report, “Trust But Verify”. You also recommend to the legislature that we move rapidly away from paperless touch-screen voting in Tennessee and toward optical scan voting systems that start and end with a voter-completed paper ballot. You also endorse the need for mandatory random audits of those paper ballots to ensure that the opscan systems also count our votes completely and accurately. Here is a sample letter:

Dear TACIR Commissioners,

I am writing to thank you, through your participation in TACIR, for your serious review and assessment of the threats, costs and other issues that paperless touch-screen voting has presented to maintaining the integrity of our elections here in Tennessee. You have heard much testimony and would doubtless hear more if there were time available for citizens to do so once again. However, the time for a decision is now upon us and we hope that TACIR will accomplish the following on December 12:

1. Accept and endorse the TACIR staff report, “Trust But Verify”, as an excellent summary of the many compelling reasons why we must act to restore integrity to our voting process.
2. Act as the influential body that you are to recommend that the Tennessee legislature consider, debate and adopt (as soon as possible) legislation which will support and assist the orderly adoption of voting systems that use or produce voter-verified paper ballots in Tennessee, to be counted on more secure and verifiable voting equipment (specifically, optical scan or similar voting systems) than we have recently installed.
3. Recommend that the state of Tennessee assist counties in the transformation to more secure and verifiable voting systems as soon as possible by working to provide both state funds, redirected HAVA funds (of which we still have between $15-20 million) and other means to reduce the economic impact of these state-mandated efforts to restore integrity in our voting process might have on those county governments.
4. Encourage the Legislative Study Committee assigned to review the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act (HB 1256, Moore; SB 1363, Haynes) on December 18 to recommend that this legislation go forward as quickly as possible and that it be considered, debated and adopted by the full Legislature when it re-convenes in January.

Once again, thank you for the time and attention you have given to the issue of election integrity — and specifically more verifiable voting systems — through your work on the TACIR Board. We sincerely hope that you will support some affirming action by TACIR at the December 12 meeting that will hasten needed election reform in our state.

Thank you for your public service. Here’s hoping we can rescue our franchise and save our democracy here in Tennessee before it is too late.

(Your signature)

Here are all the available TACIR Commission emails we have. You can “cut-and-paste” this list of email addresses into your email address spot and email all of them at once. (It might be nice to “bcc” all of them so the email seems more individually directed.) :

• senator.rosalind..tn.us
• senator.james..tn.us
• senator.mark..tn.us
• senator.jim..tn.us
• rep.jason..tn.us
• rep.gary..tn.us
• rep.randy..tn.us
• rep.larry..tn.us
• senator.randy..tn.us
• rep.craig..tn.us
• john..us
• paula..us
• drew..us
• Rose..us

Action Task 2: Contact the members of the Legislative Study Committee who will review the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act on December 18. Ask them to support repairing our election process by requiring voter-verified paper ballots and mandatory random audits here in Tennessee as soon as possibly, preferably 2008. Here’s a sample letter I just sent:

Dear TN Voter Confidence Act Study Committee Members:

I am writing to thank you in advance for your serious review and assessment of the threats, costs and other issues that paperless touch-screen voting has presented to restoring the integrity of our elections here in Tennessee. We hope you will use the information you receive and review on December 18 to recommend immediate action to restore the integrity of our franchiase here in Tennessee. The time for a decision is now if we are to protect our votes before November, 2008. Please do the following things:

(copy itemized list from above letter)

Thank you for your public service. You can rescue our franchise. We can’t afford another insecure election.

(your signature)

————–
These are the Legislative Study Committee members for the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act. “Cut-and-paste” them into the address box of an email and write them all at once.

• rep.joe..tn.us
• rep.gary..tn.us
• rep.john..tn.us
• rep.jimmy..tn.us
• rep.joe..tn.us
• rep.larry..tn.us
• rep.susan..tn.us
• senator.joe..tn.us
• senator.roy..tn.us
• senator.mark..tn.us
• senator.tim..tn.us
• senator.jamie..tn.us

Action Task 3: Contact other Tennessee officials NOW to ask them to pay attention to this issue and to act themselves, if necessary, to insure that these reforms are enacted. Here’s a preliminary list of state officials that we should be contacting in some way. I hope each of you will email your thoughts directly to some or all of these officials. In addition, you might want to mail copies of UNCOUNTED or the postcards recommending that it be watched to these same offices. I think the post-cards in particular can generate attention to these issues within these state offices.

We are asking all of these officials to do the following:

1. To please give serious consideration to the number of threats which our elections face and to consider what they can do to restore election integrity in our state
2. To do whatever they can do in their official capacity to help us replace the current non-verifiable voting systems used in most Tennessee counties (touch-screen and push-button voting machines) with verifiable voting systems that incorporate paper ballots (for example, the optical scan voting systems)
3. To encourage others in positions of responsibility for our elections to expedite the changes necessary to make our elections more secure and verifiable before the November, 2008 elections or as soon as possible, by whatever means available.

Bottom line

It’s not too late to restore election integrity in Tennessee, but we must act NOW. We can’t afford another insecure election in our state. Not when the solution is achievable NOW.

Please consider emailing and/or writing these officials directly. If you would like some post-cards which use the UNCOUNTED poster as the front and allows you to write your own message on the back, get in touch with me and we’ll get some of those cards to you. You can email me or call 931/682-2864.

Governor’s Office

Governor Phil Bredesen: phil..us
First Lady Andrea Conte: andrea..us

Governor’s Office
TN State Capital
Nashville, TN 37243-0001

TN Attorney General

Robert E. Cooper, Jr.
P.O. Box 20207
Nashville, TN 37202-0207

Department of Finance & Administration

Commissioner Dave Goetz
312 8th Ave., North, 16th Floor
Nashville, TN 37243

Administration: J. Michael Morrow mike..us
Public Info: Lola Potter lola..us

Secretary of State

Riley Darnell: riley..us
312 8th Ave. North, 8th Floor
Nashville, TN 37243

Elections and State Election Commission

Brook Thompson: brook..us
312 8th Ave., North, 9th floor
Nashville, TN 37243

Department of Economic and Community Development

Commissioner Matt Kisber: matt..us
Asst. Commissioner Paula Davis: paula..us
312 8th Ave. North, 11th floor
Nashville, TN 37243

Department of Veterans Affairs

Commissioner John Keys TN..us
215 8th Ave. North
Nashville, TN 37243

Activist Bernie Ellis, who is featured in this film, will facilitate a panel discussion on electronic voting following the film.

Earnhardt was also originally scheduled to attend this session and field questions, but a traffic accident on Thursday that injured family members precludes his attending this event.

The program is sponsored by the Unitarian Universalists, the Freethinkers for Peace and Civil Liberties, and Clarksville Online. Refreshments will be served and the public is welcomed to the first public showing in Clarksville of this important film.

The screenings are being offered in tandem with a celebration of ‘intellectual freedom” known as Banned Books Week, which begins today and runs through October 6. This film includes perspectives on the controversial Patriot Act, views of the burning of John Steinbeck books in the 1930s, and an interview with Author Bay Bradbury.

This 2007 film examines the work of more than 60,000 librarians working in the United States. Libraries welcome more than one billion visitors a year.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The film includes stereotypical images of librarians from vintage and modern film: Sophie’s Choice, Philadelphia and It’s a Wonderful Life offer negative images of librarians, while movies such as the Shawshank Redemption, Desk Set (photo, left with ‘librarian’ Katherine Hepburn) and Lorenzo’s Oil offer a calm, competent, professional view of librarians.

“…the film will hold some surprises for people who may think they know what librarians do. American film contains hundreds of examples of librarians and libraries on screen — some positive, some negative, some laughable and some dead wrong… Dozens of interviews of real librarians will be interwoven with movie clips of cinematic librarians and serve as transitions between the themes of censorship, intellectual freedom, children and librarians, pay equity and funding issues, and the value of reading”

– The Hollywood Librarian

As the film unfolds, viewers meet a dedicated children’s librarian, a high-tech corporate librarian, a medical librarian, and a cataloger. Viewers visit a prison literacy program, an elementary school library and a town faced with the most severe library crisis in decades. The film inspects the challenges created by shrinking financial support and increased materials costs.

The Hollywood Librarian introduces older librarians who have witnessed the explosion of technology and younger librarians, who were born into the information age, traveling to large library systems with dozens of staff and visit small libraries with one librarian working alone.

Beginning with the history of information organization – Hypatia and the Library of Alexandria – it then touches on Andrew Carnegie, Melvil Dewey, and early female library professionals. Moving on into the 21st century, the documentary shows audiences the challenges of book censorship, and most of all, declining library funding.

The documentary was filmed around the country from March 2005 through February 2006. The librarians in the movie are aged 24 through 85, and have a diversity of ethnic background, library position, and geographic location (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin).

The film was written and directed by Ann M. Seidl, who holds an M.A. in Library and Information Services from the University of Denver. The film was produced with a $185,000 grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and with $25,000 in contributions from librarians.

Cost to attend is $8 for adults, $5 for seniors and children. The film is suitable for young adult and up, and runs 95 minutes.

For information about “The Hollywood Librarian,” call APSU’s Woodward Library by at 221-7346, or go online to documentary’s Web site, www.hollywoodlibrarian.com.