One Child Nation [2019] – The Systematic Horrors of an Infamous State Policy

In One Child Nation (2019), Nanfu Wang, a first-time mother and documentarian now living in the US, commits herself to the arduous job of scrutinizing various aspects of collective trauma inflicted upon generations of Chinese people, in the name of an allegedly necessary ‘social experiment’. The one-child policy, first presented in 1979, included into the Chinese constitution in 1982, and staunchly enforced until it was terminated in 2015, is one among the many examples of an infamous communist regime diktat, where deified economic plans are churned out by dumping the human lives into a statistical bucket. As this controversial law is now replaced by the considerably ‘generous’ Two-Child Policy, the state propaganda machine has kicked off campaigns to erase the memories of horrifying past in a truly Orwellian fashion. Nevertheless, Nanfu Wang & Jialing Zhang’s multi-pronged investigation of one-child policy puts a stop to this sweep-it-under-the-rug approach and valiantly displays all the micro and macro level adverse impacts of the policy.

The one-child policy was strictly imposed all across China with few exceptions. In fact, Nanfu Wang came from a two-child household, which was possible in rural communities although it also had set of restrictions (demanding a five-year gap between children). The preference of boy child over girl is a common yet ineradicable cultural phenomenon across the world, but the policy has added brought upon sinister dimensions to it. Wang chillingly confesses that her parents were ready to get rid of her younger brother, if he had been born a girl. In one of the interviews with her uncle, Wang captures him grievously admitting the reasons for giving up a daughter. Starting with family members and cautious community elders, Wang gradually deepens her inquiry by talking with retired family planning officials, who provide the first-hand account of forced sterilizations (women were brought to medical centres hog-tied like a pig) and late-stage abortions.

A guilt-ridden mid-wife who says she conducted between 50,000 and 60,000 involuntary abortions now treats couples suffering from infertility. She invites Wang into her home and shows roomful of banners (affixed with infant’s photo) that expresses gratitude to the mid-wife from those benefited. Another old family planning official proudly exhibits the awards she gleaned from the authorities. Unlike the redemption-seeking mid-wife, this health worker believes that despite its harsh and upsetting nature, the policy was absolutely necessary and that she would do it again, if given a choice. She speaks like the firmly indoctrinated individual and never uses the typical refrain of “we had no choice”. In the earlier, episodic investigations, Wang and Zhang also focus on how the authorities efficiently applied different forms of propaganda to indoctrinate people: from billboards, folk music performances to playing cards and calendars.

It is only when Wang meets an artist (named Wang Peng), who painted Mao’s little red books with pictures of fetuses, the unimaginable ugly layers of the policy begins to unravel. More than the upsetting testimonies of health workers performing late-stage abortions, it is the artists’ devastating photos of ‘yellow bags’ (bags containing fetus or abandoned babies died of exposure) which sharply reveals the atrocities of the policy. It is definitely ironical that the ones who offer glimmer of hope for the abandoned babies are human traffickers (aka ‘match-makers’). Not only the black market for babies is linked to the one-child policy, but such black markets have played a dominant role in China’s international adoption scheme (initiated in 1992). One of the former child traffickers, now working as a security guard after a stint in prison, describes how he started rescuing babies out of compassion, which later became a lucrative family business. Wang’s researching on trafficking and adoption policies disentangles a much more intricate web of fraud and deception, sponsored by the state.

Wang speaks to an American couple – Brian and Long Lan Stuy -- the adopted parents of three Chinese daughters, who established Research China to provide the service of helping adoptees to track down the origins of the alleged orphans. Eventually, Wang follows the investigations of an exiled Chinese reporter, updating his story on separated twin girls, one growing up in rural China while the other in US. The effectiveness of One Child Nation lies in the manner it connects all the dots, intertwining the personal, political, and social dimensions of the story. Wang starts her narrative by evoking a deeply personal context (having recently given birth to her first child), but gradually reaches out to discuss the wider social impacts of the policy. The personal context (Wang’s voice-overs keeps alive a conversational tone) compliments the investigative reporting part and vice-versa. Despite going through trove of archived materials and information, the directors take time to look at the psychological trauma of a populace, indoctrinated by the propaganda. Most importantly, the individuals who find the state policy adequate enough are never demonized; all have served the agenda of a faceless state that trains humans to be at odds with their own humanity.

Overall, One Child Nation (88 minutes) offers a comprehensive account of one of the darkest, heavily obscured chapters in China’s modern history. It also works as a seamless and haunting portrait of collective trauma and guilt. 

 Trailer

RBG [2018] – A Hagiographic Yet Compelling Account on one of the Pivotal Figures of American Judiciary

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a soft-spoken yet steely octogenarian Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court. Her dissenting opinions at the Supreme Court, unmatched work ethic, and life-long fight for gender equality in the courtroom has not only made her a formidable force in the judicial circuit, but also bestowed upon her the pop-culture icon status. Millennial youths and legion of liberals have turned her into a rock-star, a meme, a T-shirt, and an affectionate signifier – Notorious R.B.G.  Julie Cohen and Betsy West’s documentary RBG (2018) tries to track down Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s life in a linear fashion, starting from her childhood, girlhood to the current position as America’s liberal legal icon. Obviously, Julie and Betsy’s RBG is a hagiography, whose traditional (superficial) approach mainly feeds off the mythology created around the judge by the meme-addicted culture. Thankfully, Julie and Betsy have brought in Ruth Ginsburg herself to flesh out her own tale, which doesn’t make the hagiographic overreach so nauseating.

For a large part RBG, the woman of short stature and quiet speech, effectively showcases her powerful legal mind without resorting to irritating gregariousness. The film-makers show the kind of urgency to turn Ruth’s life into a woman empowerment story. The approach is akin to the mentality of desperate people in internet attempting to create a cult of personality, and in turn forgetting or not caring about the inherent groundbreaking qualities of the person. Nevertheless, the film-makers’ patience in engaging good amounts of sit-down time with the lady herself remains the documentary’s truly upbeat aspect. Julie and Betsy may not have offered profound insights into the Supreme Court Justice’s legal mind, although when Ruth Ginsburg graces the screen (as we listen to her velvety voice) we could perceive her power and persistence.

RBG opens in a brash manner with a montage of US government Washington monuments, while in the background the extreme remarks on the Supreme Court Judge is played out (including a remark from Donald Trump). Then, RBG appears on-screen and quotes the words of Sarah Grimke (written in 1838), a noted abolitionist and member of the women's suffrage movement: “I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” The words naturally strike a chord for many even in the modern world. The film-makers has done archival sifting and conducted interviews with the judge's family, associates, and friends. They quickly assemble a portrait of a shy, studious Brooklynite, born to Jewish immigrants. Ruth Ginsburg reveals she has adhered to her mom’s advice (who died of cancer when her daughter was 17): “Be a lady and be independent”. Ruth makes a fine definition of the word ‘lady’: a person making her points with politeness. The second part of advice (‘be independent’) is evident in the way she has shaped her legal career by often taking cases that bolster her argument for gender equality.

There was also considerable focus on the unusually smooth marriage between Ruth and Marty Ginsburg, a highly skilled tax attorney who felt comfortable playing second fiddle to his super-star wife. The talking-heads include RBG’s son and daughter, who explain the struggles and joys of growing up with such a unique mother. Interviews with recent Harvard law graduate granddaughter Clare Spera gives some insight into RBG’s workaholic behavior (working until at least 3 am and yet arriving to the court by 9 am), love for opera, etc. As much as detailing the warm relationship RBG had with Marty, Julie and Betsy doesn’t present a clear-sighted analysis of the hard-working lawyer’s victory on the courts. Except for spelling out the strategy Ruth Ginsburg formulated in the 1970s to expand constitutional protections against gender discrimination case by case (which included even taking a case of gender discrimination against a male), the treatment of Ginsburg’s legal victories are reduced to rhetorics. Of course, it’s not possible to ponder over the complex legal issues involved in the cases, but the direction seems prosaic and hollow.

Ruth Ginsburg was named to the Supreme Court in 1993 by President Clinton (confirmed by a vote of 96 to 3 and became the 2^nd female justice of the US Supreme Court) who himself makes an appearance in the documentary and comments on the less partisan period in American politics. Among the glorified aspect of RBG is her true friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. On commenting about this, feminist activist Brenda Feigen says that RBG possesses this amazing quality to ‘compartmentalize’ and she goes on to quip, “I don’t have close friends who are right-wing nutcases”. And in these times of great ideological divide and partisanship, RBG’s acquaintance with firebrand conservatives seems a wonderful achievement. At the same time, the documentary also notes how her stance on Supreme Court has gradually shifted from center left to far left as the rest of the bench has teetered towards far-right. Hence there was the slew of admirable dissenting opinions from Ruth Ginsburg in recent landmark cases like Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., Shelby Counter v. Holder, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

What’s maddening about the documentary, as I already mentioned, is the film-makers’ extraneous efforts to elevate their subject to a super-hero, when Ruth Ginsburg’s personality and legal work as a judge and advocate itself speaks volumes about her fight for gender equality. The heavy-handed attempts to make her a uni-dimensional ‘badass revolutionary’ or ‘Adorable Dissenter’ (to probably sell more merchandise) didn’t work for me (already an ‘inspirational’ movie is in making with Felicity Jones playing RBG). Nevertheless, Julie Cohen and Betsy West’s RBG (97 minutes) is a good starting point to comprehend the tremendous legacy of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. 

 Trailer

Active Measures [2018] – Chilling Facts Rendered in a Blatant, Mildly Annoying Mode

The constant barrage of information on Trump [election] campaign and his administration’s relationship with various shady yet powerful Russian nationals could have been attributed to the vivid imagination of an American espionage novelist, if not for the mountain of damning evidence hinting at deeper, darker truths behind the generally obfuscating reactions of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. In many ways, the alleged Trump campaign collusion with Kremlin and Russian election meddling were as incendiary as the Watergate Scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon. There might not be proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a criminal conspiracy on the collusion-interference case (yet), although the Special Counsel investigation of Robert Mueller has ignited flow of revelations whose implications are far scarier and deeply contentious in the history of American politics. Jack Bryan’s documentary Active Measures (2018) is the latest of chilling inquiry into American President’s indisputable connection to Russia; one that would actively inspire outrage and doubtfulness.

Having keenly followed (following) the developments on Capitol Hill and Mueller’s investigation I must say that Jack Bryan’s crash course on the greatest 21^st century espionage story, beginning from Putin’s rise to political power and sustenance of that power, by relying on an inner circle of kleptocratic oligarchs, gangsters, money-laundering bankers, and unscrupulous political advisers, doesn’t offer anything shockingly fresh. Active Measures does a good job in weaving disparate threads of the Trump-Russian/Putin story that could well serve as a recap on the startling developments (so far). Just before starting Bryan’s documentary, I had finished reading Michael Isikoff and David Corn’s ‘Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump’, a sober and meticulous look at the nefarious Russian interference ploy. Metaphorically speaking, even as the ink on the investigative journalists’ report dries, the story has taken more twists and turns. But, what’s missing in Active Measures is the earnest, journalistic approach pursued by Isikoff and Corn. The documentary is heavily persuasive, and the assembled information is delivered in a delirious manner as the pulsating electronic music and assortment of high-profile talking heads displays a kind of urgency (much like social-media-fake-news) to instantly reach great number of the unsuspecting populace.

This whirlwind of devastating geopolitical maneuver by Putin and Kremlin is presented by Bryan through a team of notable figures, including Hillary Clinton, the late John McCain, and John Podesta. The title comes from what the intelligence community calls as key tactics from Russia to exert influence around the world (through propaganda, cyber-attacks, and centralized Russian power) despite the decline of its military and economic power. Director Bryan chronicles Putin's dirty work, starting from his ruthless treatment of former Soviet countries like Georgia, Ukraine and Estonia. He had unleashed Russian hackers, military and thugs to overturn democratic elections in the smaller nations, something the documentary (and various other news sources) attests as sort of experimental study before attacking the American elections. The narrative also strongly stresses on Putin’s dirty money, laundered by mobsters and oligarchs through real estate, particularly by buying the kind of overpriced condos Trump offers through his 30-plus towers around the world. Menacing mug shots of mobsters like Semion Mogilevich and Dmitry Rybolovlev, and oligarchs like Oleg Deripaska & Aras Agalarov are repeatedly displayed while extensively suggesting their operations to launder millions through untraceable shell companies. American-born British financier Bill Browder – the man behind Magnitsky Act which rattled Putin (strangely Magnitsky isn’t mentioned in the doc) – has already detailed how Putin how could very well be the richest man on the planet.

What’s more alarming was Trump’s alliance with seedy figures like Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen. Their dastardly schemes are damning in itself, especially Flynn’s ironical and hypocritical ‘Lock her Up’ chant during the election campaign, while he was deeply involved in duplicitous plans. Nevertheless, the frustrating thing about Jack Bryan’s approach is the choice to present host of documented facts alongside hearsay and overly familiar tidbits. In Isikoff’s book, Putin’s alleged origin story (as said to be) uttered by himself to Hillary Clinton is just a simple event used to glimpse at the man’s myth-making skills. But director Jack Bryan brings HRC to reiterate the story using old pics of Nazi menace (Clinton in one of her digressions about Putin calls him as the guy who likes ‘to manspread’). The strangely funny tidbit here becomes a foreshadowing element for Putin’s agents of influence. Nuance seems to be a farfetched word in the whole documentary. There’s a former Miss Hungary telling how Trump once invited her to his hotel room. It’s a big question what the film gains by reiterating the very familiar faulty nature of Trump with regard to his connection with Putin. Hence at certain point, the loud declamations by the interviewees become more propagandistic in nature. In fact, Bryan’s presentation of the outlandish claims mixed with true facts is too flashy that there is not much difference between his style and news agencies like RT and Sputnik (the propaganda outlets of Kremlin). Overall, Active Measures (110 minutes) lays out the dreadful issues afflicting current American political arena, albeit in a lopsided (conspicuous) manner that could be cherished more by those with little or no knowledge of possible Trump-Russia Collusion (and of course ardent supporters of Trump may still find it hard to digest the facts). 

 Trailer

Welcome to Leith [2015] – An Incredibly Compelling Documentary on Extremism and Civil Liberties

Leith is a tiny & tranquil hamlet in North Dakota, USA with a population of just 24 (including children) and widely dotted with crumbling, dilapidated structures. It definitely questions the definition of a town and the only working business in it is the local bar. The people seem well-mannered and remain representatives of the very rural phrase “Everybody has each other’s backs.” The ghost town was direct effect of the state’s oil boom and everything from Leith’s vintage signboard to its total isolation gives the feeling of having traveled back in time. Directors Christopher Walker and Michael Beach Nichols’ remarkable documentary Welcome to Leith (2015), however, isn’t a muted chronicle of the life in a sleepy town.

Back in 2011, a thin, bearded elderly guy named Craig Cobb moved to Leith. He first brought a decrepit house with no running water. Later, he bought few other cheap lots of land in and around Leith. What the town residents didn’t know was that Cobb is a notorious Nazism-spouting, anti-Semitic white supremacist. With land prices at an all-time low in Leith, Cobb has put out a call to his brethren to help him take political control of the small town and turn it into a haven for like-minded racists. Walker and Nichols’ documentary drops us straight into this conflict of attempted takeover, with dozen or so local people seeming to stand against Cobb’s desire to build his own Nazi utopia. Despite the high-running tensions and an allegedly clear-cut good vs evil perspective, directors Nichols and Walker take a calm, even-keeled approach, gaining full access and trust (over the course of eight months) of the bewildered residents and the overly determined Cobb (and his supporters).  

Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit organization that monitors hate groups and other extremist factions throughout the US, considers Cobb “one of the top ten white supremacists in the United States”. Some of his cronies include Alex Linder of the Vanguard News Network and Tom Metzger, people who advocate Jewish genocide. Once Cobb’s intentions were made clear to the townspeople and after New York Times did a story on Cobb’s plans in Leith (in August 2013), the situation turned kind of scary. Cobb started posting the town residents’ personal information online – as he had previously done with judges who’d ruled against him, where in one case it (indirectly) led to two murders – and proudly displayed flags of formerly all-white nations of Europe. He spouted hate at town-hall meeting, hoping to make them react with fear. And not long before, the reasonable people of Leith declared: “We’re going to start packing guns all the time”.

In one extreme situation, Cobb and his invitee Kynan Dutton – a troubled war veteran and member of National Socialist Movement who has moved with his wife and two kids – patrol the streets of Leith carrying loaded weapons. Eventually, the Sheriff’s deputies arrest Cobb and Dutton and charge them with seven counts of terrorizing. However, a less-punishing plea deal angers the residents, although the deal forced Cobb out of town (the vacant plots of land are however still owned by white supremacists). Cobb has from then on attempted similar moves in small towns and his increasing online activity is centered on endorsing Donald Trump.

Welcome to Leith tells a very specific tale of extremism, even though its emotional implications are easily relatable. Nichols and Walker’s distanced observational skills help in showcasing how toxic beliefs could perpetuate a climate of fear which may irreparably affect the lives and perspectives of rational, reasonable individuals. The directing duo could have simply made this into black & white affair by solely focusing on Cobb’s obnoxious, irritable ideology. But they subtly raise questions about how Leith residents finally reacted to the perceived danger (the bullying and burning as they view police & judicial system super-inefficient). Much more interesting is the way Nichols and Walker allow the Aryan separatists and Neo-Nazis to speak for themselves. The matter-of-fact declarations of these racist head cases provide a very palpable, terrifying look at extremist beliefs. Craig Cobb comes off as the multi-faceted guy no fiction writer could conceive. His warm smile may make some think him as the nicest guy on the planet. But the striking moment where he marches with a rifle around the town, bragging about being ‘one of the most famous racists in the world’ is outright horrific.

The sheer volatile nature of Cobb, not only makes him fearful, but also at times pathetic. Nichols and Walker’s approach might be seen passive and laid-back to a fault. However, their staunchly neutral stance raises some important questions about freedom of speech (most particularly about US constitution's first amendment rights), especially when Cobb admits he spends 16 or 17 hours a day to spread pure hate online. While Cobb is no doubt dangerous, few observations by the directors kind of make him a laughable character. It’s amusing to see him after the release from jail, courteously requesting an African-American motel clerk for a room. Despite understanding the weight of Cobb’s hateful thoughts, we unnaturally feel an iota of pity at the sight of this forlorn old guy carrying all his possessions in a garbage bag. The directors’ nuanced pronouncement here is that they don’t have to demonize Cobb, when he is very much capable of doing it through his words and actions. Nevertheless, there are few occasions where Nicholas and Walker’s gliding camera movements seem to belong in a horror feature (aided by a haunting score done by composer T. Griffin), creating a tense immediacy. The documentary as one could expect ends without a conclusion. The people of Leith have put the things behind them and want things to go back to normal, the way they were before coming under national spotlight. Craig Cobb is also following his normal routine of hate-spouting who adores his leader & US President Trump. Overall, Welcome to Leith (85 minutes) is a timely and terrifying look at hate-groups roaming the land of dreams and opportunities.

Trailer