review of "born in flames"
"Born in Flames" seems to be the only film of it's kind: it tells a feminist story in a very radical way, and addresses sexism, racism, classism, and heterosexism, as well as the lack of ability of a government to truly address the problems of its people, even in a socialist democracy.
The story involves several different women coming from different perspectives and attempts to show several examples of how sexism plays out and how it can be dealt with through direct action. A famous scene is one during which two men are attacking a woman on the street and dozens of women on bicycles with whistles come to chase the men away and comfort the woman. The women in the movie have different ideas about what can and should be done, but all know that something must be done, because the government will not take care of it. The movie shows women organizing in meetings, doing radio shows, creating art, wheatpasting, etc. With violence against women continuing, women getting laid off their jobs, activists targeted by the government, the women start to get together to make a bigger impact, by means that our current U.S. government would call terrorism. The discussions about action and violence are interesting ones.
This movie seems to be an attempt at creating a picture of what radical feminist resistance could look like; what it takes to get to that point, and how it can happen. It also seems to make the point that an authoritarian government, no matter how socialist, will not set us free (thus is an anarchist or anti-authoritarian movie). It may be a response to socialist feminists' lack of critique of the state. It certainly paints a clear picture of the limits of a government to make us free no matter how much they try (or pretend to try) to force fairness. If the political goals of the movie/characters are not anti-statist, it is unclear what they are.
Some call this movie "futuristic", but it seems the intended portrayal was that of 10 years after a fictional socialist revolution that took place in the early seventies. The social climate represented in the movie is very much like the U.S. today (or back in the 80s), despite our government not being socialist at all. We're made to think we are free, but so many of us know we are not. "Born in Flames" shows the media's role in how a happy false picture is painted to keep us quiet, but also shows that there's enough injustice that people are not going to stay quiet.
The movie is not anti-male at all, but simply portrays men as neutral or antagonistic (and very seldom)- often how women are portrayed in a lot of typical movies. The representations of different people are not tokenistic, but central to the plot. The movie does at times seem disjointed, but could easily be enjoyed by anyone who relates to the issues addressed in it.
The story involves several different women coming from different perspectives and attempts to show several examples of how sexism plays out and how it can be dealt with through direct action. A famous scene is one during which two men are attacking a woman on the street and dozens of women on bicycles with whistles come to chase the men away and comfort the woman. The women in the movie have different ideas about what can and should be done, but all know that something must be done, because the government will not take care of it. The movie shows women organizing in meetings, doing radio shows, creating art, wheatpasting, etc. With violence against women continuing, women getting laid off their jobs, activists targeted by the government, the women start to get together to make a bigger impact, by means that our current U.S. government would call terrorism. The discussions about action and violence are interesting ones.
This movie seems to be an attempt at creating a picture of what radical feminist resistance could look like; what it takes to get to that point, and how it can happen. It also seems to make the point that an authoritarian government, no matter how socialist, will not set us free (thus is an anarchist or anti-authoritarian movie). It may be a response to socialist feminists' lack of critique of the state. It certainly paints a clear picture of the limits of a government to make us free no matter how much they try (or pretend to try) to force fairness. If the political goals of the movie/characters are not anti-statist, it is unclear what they are.
Some call this movie "futuristic", but it seems the intended portrayal was that of 10 years after a fictional socialist revolution that took place in the early seventies. The social climate represented in the movie is very much like the U.S. today (or back in the 80s), despite our government not being socialist at all. We're made to think we are free, but so many of us know we are not. "Born in Flames" shows the media's role in how a happy false picture is painted to keep us quiet, but also shows that there's enough injustice that people are not going to stay quiet.
The movie is not anti-male at all, but simply portrays men as neutral or antagonistic (and very seldom)- often how women are portrayed in a lot of typical movies. The representations of different people are not tokenistic, but central to the plot. The movie does at times seem disjointed, but could easily be enjoyed by anyone who relates to the issues addressed in it.