Directed by JJ Garvine and Tai Parquet
I try my hardest to separate my politics from what I'm watching onscreen. I was quite successful with the very good documentary Outrage that I watched earlier this week. Unfortunately, Keeping the Peace, a documentary by local Delawarean filmmakers, just made me angry.
First off, George W. Bush is Hitler according to this film's subject, Michael Berg. That quote was said in the first ten minutes and then repeated again by someone else (the real Dr. Patch Adams actually...you know the guy Robin Williams portrayed a few years ago). Berg's son, a young man contracted out to do work in Iraq, was brutally beheaded when he was captured by our enemies. Now, I understand Berg's frustration with the Bush administration (sort of), but Hitler comparisons? You lose your credibility, buddy. Berg decides to run for Delaware's single House of Representatives seat in 2006 as a member of the Green Party on a platform of peace. He's shut out of debates, has very little campaign money, and can't seem to get his message across despite getting national press (going on Larry King and some Inside Edition-ish-type show). Maybe he can't get his message across because it's hard to take the guy seriously since he's always wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Nevertheless, the filmmakers really paint the guy as kind of a saint. [While at the same time, painting long-time Delaware Representative Mike Castle as devilish character initially (he is later depicted in an actual normal manner). The first time the film mentions Castle, a still photo is displayed onscreen with Castle shaded in "scary" blues and reds (kind of like a negative picture) with an ominous drumbeat playing behind him. Aargh! Frustrating!]
The people that make the most sense in this movie are Berg's campaign manager whom Berg fires a few months before the election. Berg's manager states that he "wanted Berg to win, but Berg just wanted to be a martyr." Amen, brother, amen! And then, they interview the communications director for the Republican Party of Delaware (props to my peeps!) who states that in order for third party candidates to really succeed, they need to start off small, winning county elections, etc, prior to moving up to the "big time." They need to gain their support before pushing for a run in the big leagues. And he's right. There's something to be said about the US being essentially a two-party system, but the film doesn't really say anything about it.
I feel bad for Michael Berg. Who wouldn't? What happened to his son was awful. But people like Berg make me angry. Even a simple throwaway segment where we learn that Berg was a public school teacher in the 90s and he posted peace rally signs all over his classroom made me peeved. Am I supposed to pay taxes so he can spout his beliefs to the kids of America? Nope. I'm not.
A frustrating movie that irked me immensely.
First off, George W. Bush is Hitler according to this film's subject, Michael Berg. That quote was said in the first ten minutes and then repeated again by someone else (the real Dr. Patch Adams actually...you know the guy Robin Williams portrayed a few years ago). Berg's son, a young man contracted out to do work in Iraq, was brutally beheaded when he was captured by our enemies. Now, I understand Berg's frustration with the Bush administration (sort of), but Hitler comparisons? You lose your credibility, buddy. Berg decides to run for Delaware's single House of Representatives seat in 2006 as a member of the Green Party on a platform of peace. He's shut out of debates, has very little campaign money, and can't seem to get his message across despite getting national press (going on Larry King and some Inside Edition-ish-type show). Maybe he can't get his message across because it's hard to take the guy seriously since he's always wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Nevertheless, the filmmakers really paint the guy as kind of a saint. [While at the same time, painting long-time Delaware Representative Mike Castle as devilish character initially (he is later depicted in an actual normal manner). The first time the film mentions Castle, a still photo is displayed onscreen with Castle shaded in "scary" blues and reds (kind of like a negative picture) with an ominous drumbeat playing behind him. Aargh! Frustrating!]
The people that make the most sense in this movie are Berg's campaign manager whom Berg fires a few months before the election. Berg's manager states that he "wanted Berg to win, but Berg just wanted to be a martyr." Amen, brother, amen! And then, they interview the communications director for the Republican Party of Delaware (props to my peeps!) who states that in order for third party candidates to really succeed, they need to start off small, winning county elections, etc, prior to moving up to the "big time." They need to gain their support before pushing for a run in the big leagues. And he's right. There's something to be said about the US being essentially a two-party system, but the film doesn't really say anything about it.
I feel bad for Michael Berg. Who wouldn't? What happened to his son was awful. But people like Berg make me angry. Even a simple throwaway segment where we learn that Berg was a public school teacher in the 90s and he posted peace rally signs all over his classroom made me peeved. Am I supposed to pay taxes so he can spout his beliefs to the kids of America? Nope. I'm not.
A frustrating movie that irked me immensely.
The RyMickey Rating: D-
Like your (non)review of OUTRAGE, you need to let go of your own political viewpoints for an hour & a half to get the effect of what the filmmakers were trying to say. You couldn't do that and proved that you do not know how to properly review a film.
ReplyDeleteActually, Anonymous 1, I did let go of my political views for Outrage...and, even if I didn't, I still recognize that it's a good film. This one, unfortunately, didn't work for me. And I let them go for this one, too. I just wasn't a fan of the saintly light Berg was painted in.
ReplyDeleteAt his introduction of the film, Berg certainly seemed like a nice guy and I'm sure he is, but the film didn't win me over.
Apparently, I'm the only person who feels this way, and, since I'm sure you're either friends with the filmmakers and/or friends of Berg (how else would you have come across this blog if not searching for thoughts on the movie?), revel in the fact that it seems like most people in the theater enjoyed the movie. You had the most attended movie in NFF history. Or, you could just be really angry that I didn't like your film.
Whatever floats your boat...
Don't feed the trolls.
ReplyDeleteThat goes for the entirety of the film fest comments.
Just passing on some advice.
As not to be misunderstood I meant the anon comments obviously mean to create incense.
ReplyDeleteJustin - Well aware of not feeding them...but they're my first ones...I had to indulge myself a little...
ReplyDeleteAwesome movie review! Oh wait it didn't talk about the filmmaking. Just this blogger's beliefs. I want to see this guy review Titanic. "I sat 2 seats away from Leo, SO I KNOW HE DIDN'T REALLY DIE IN THE MOVIE! ARRGH! FRUSTRATING"
ReplyDeleteOnce again, an insignificant blogger with a readership of about six (on a good day) manages to get you all ticked off and riled up.
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean I've made it?
These 'people' should not be allowed to class themselves as being of the 'anonymous' persuasion. I had no idea you had such angry followers!
ReplyDelete