Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room

This documentary, directed by Alex Gibney, explored the story surrounding the Enron scandal. In my opinion, the best part of the film was the way it really delved into the life stories/personalities of the key players in the affair. The narrative of the film moved at a fast pace and provided an element of suspense in a story that we already know the outcome to.

There also seemed to be an element of compassion for the lead figures at Enron who have commanded so much scorn. The filmmakers present the lives of these men in a way that suggests there were a number of paths they could have taken. Placed in other situations, they might have acted differently, but combined together in the seductive environment of fantastic corporate success, they seemed almost doomed to be consumed by greed.

The film was an excellent psychological study of what kind of person commits acts of fraud such as this. Not only did men like Skilling and Lay show no regard for the welfare of their employees, they were capable of lying to them to cover up Enron's failures, and to continue lying long after the charade was over. The section of the film which covered the blackouts in California was a particularly compelling example of how greed corrupts. The comparison to the Milgram experiments was also very clever.

It was definitely and informative film which portrayed a side of the Enron case you don't always see. Like The Intimacy of Strangers, the film was effective because it was disturbing. There seems to be no limit to greed, no amount of money that can satisfy those with a hunger. With the rise of huge multinational corporations we have lost personal accountability. In the corporate world we are all capable of just staring at a partition, complacently pushing a button marked 450 volts.

The Intimacy of Strangers

"The Intimacy of Strangers" was a short (20 min.) documentary which consisted entirely of the overheard cell phone conversations of random people. The camera watched the subjects from a distance and the conversations, which mostly involved romantic entanglements, were picked up with sound equipment. A melancholy soundtrack was added to the background for emotional effect, but there was no narration.

The film brought up issues regarding the difference between public and private space. Now that we can talk anywhere, all areas have the ability of becoming private spaces. The people involved in the cell phone conversations usually appeared totally unaware of their surroundings, or the fact that the crowds of people around them were perfectly capable of overhearing these conversations, which were quite personal in nature. Through its intrusion, the film poses the question, is there such thing as privacy anymore?

"The Intimacy of Strangers" is effective because it is disturbing. At any point in time, our conversations could also be recorded and distributed, and there is nothing we can do about it. It is enough to make anyone with a cell phone think twice before they talk. While watching the film, I couldn't thinking about the last time I had used my cell phone.

One of the most visually interesting scenes in the film showed a man talking on his cell phone in a subway station. He was standing in front of a large advertisement, I think for coffee, which read: "Unlock your senses." When we make that connection on our cell phone, the whole rest of the world seems to fade away and we are completely unaware of what is going on around us. We, in a sense, violate our own privacy by refusing to protect it.

This Film is Not Yet Rated

"This Film is Not Yet Rated" was an investigation into the practices of the MPAA, the organization which assigns film ratings. The director of the documentary examined several films which received NC-17 ratings, and interviewed the directors of these films about their experiences with the MPAA. He also hired a team of female private investigators to try and determine the identity of the members of the secret ratings board. The process of uncovering their identities is interwoven with the interviews with film makers, information on the MPAA and its founder, Jack Valenti, clips from the NC-17 movies, and humorous insight into exactly what constitutes an NC-17 rating (with the help of some anatomically correct cartoons).

The film makes its point very clearly and very effectively. The system of rating films in our country is not only completely out of our control, it is also shrouded in secrecy. The MPAA controls which movies we get to see in the theatres and in advertisements, yet there are no discernible guidelines for the rating system, and no information on the people who do the actual rating. It is also clear that there is a huge bias against sexual content. Extreme violence rarely earns an NC-17 rating, but most types of sexual content will. Whats worse, when a film maker receives an NC-17 they are offered no explicit explanation and given only a vague appeals process which usually offers little hope of a change.

In an ingenious move, the director of the documentary (after securing the identities of the ratings board) submitted his film to the MPAA to be rated. Surprise, surprise, he receives a call to inform him he's received an NC-17 rating. He then enters an appeal and is able to re-enact his experience with the appeals board for the final documentary.

"This Film is Not Yet Rated" was entertaining, but also quite disturbing. It is frightening that the film industry is so tightly controlled by this secretive organization which is headed by a man like Jack Valenti. In our country its okay to watch people being blown up or tortured, but should a film maker dare to include the human body or the female orgasm he/she is suddenly a threat to society. It makes absolutely no sense, but it sure offers a lot of insight into our culture.

20th Century Fox

The documentary on the history of 20th Century Fox was very interesting at first. It delved into the very beginning of the film industry and provided footage of some of the first films ever made. Through its wealth of film clips and historical context, the viewer not only witnessed the progression of film technology, but also of the studio, and of the film industry in general. We watched as Richard Zanuck built his empire and navigated it through its considerable up and downs. The film studios which have survived from the beginning are the ones which were headed by strong leaders such as Zanuck, who could survive the challenges (such as the rise of television) that the film industry faced. Unfortunately the film dragged on and began to seem like long commercial for the studio (maybe that's because it was). The incessant stream of clips eventually lost their appeal and began to become somewhat annoying. I was really glad that we didn't finish it.