esotericbonanza A brilliant and angry piece of filmmaking, so assured in its style as a mock-documentary that the seams of fiction barely show. With the clarity of a working crystal ball, this film saw the world around it as it was when it was made and saw somehow where things were heading and the result is one of the most despairing pieces of work imaginable. Misanthropic, and with good reason, Watkins' film has no hope for the media or the youth and no faith the governing forces that direct them. I urge you to seek this out.

Joakim Thiesen (thefilmmann) Peter Watkins is arguably one of the most underrated and under appreciated filmmakers of all time. His documentary approach to fictional filmmaking is both unique and challenging in a way many modern audiences may have become unaccustomed too.Listen here: http://moccast.blogspot.no/2013/03/episode-one-punishment-park.htmlWatkins career never saw him become a mainstream director, his one studio production 1967's Privilege was not a commercial success although it did not stop Watkins from making several more films.In this first episode of the Masters of Cinema Cast Joakim and I will be discussing the Blu Ray re- release of his 1971 film Punishment Park.It is a film that could hardly be described as easy going wearing its political heart well and truly on its sleeve. It is possibly the most angry of Watkins films too, the 60's had come and gone and the cultural and sociological revolution many had anticipated had failed to materialise. Vietnam was still raging and even the Apollo moon landings were now barley making the news.Yet Punishment Park is not merely a relic of its time. Even today it is still frightening pertinent and in the wake of the War on Terror and the blurring of the lines of morality remains as powerful now as it was on its release.http://moccast.blogspot.no/2013/03/episode-one-punishment-park.html

solomonmethod **** POSSIBLE SPOILER ****What we have here are a lot of angry people, and the more emotional the characters become, the greater the potential for well produced cinema.Anyone who has taken basic Sociology will tell you that there are 2 major philosophic viewpoints a person can take on society. The first being the Marxist perspective: The 'have nots' will eventually rise up against the establishment. The second being Emile Durkheim's 'Functionalism': Every part of society serves a purpose for maintaining it's structure. The need for an economic system, the postal system, business development, the judicial system, the political system, hospitals and even the protesters who help to keep things in check.The hippies in this movie, although angry, were able to articulate themselves enough to present a somewhat intelligent point of view. The educated judiciary council were not able to put forth anything worth listening to. They seemed to be far more concerned with containing the prisoners' behaviours. What really got me was that one of the members of this council was a sociologist. Not only were the Republican right wingers not able to effectively communicate their beliefs, they weren't even able to listen to the prisoners when it was their turn to speak. Sadly everything became little more than a yelling match, and this is where it all became one sided.As far as we know the prisoners were arrested for some sort of conspiracy to commit an act of treason against America. We were not told of any real actions that any of the prisoners may have legitimately committed. The only thing we know is that the prisoners were verbally expressive. So as far as I can see, the people in charge of the sentencing seemed to think that the first amendment was just a joke.So for anyone who has half an understanding of basic Sociology, you may want to skip this movie. It is an overly one sided movie geared towards hippie rhetoric, with heaps of authoritarian counter force thrown in to make the movie's Marxist point that much more vibrant. That is all.

shikimo9 I loved the first 15 minutes, and I loved some of the dialogue in the tribunal--which proved to be the best showcase for the director's ahead-of-its-time method acting technique--but this movie ultimately disappoints. Even when viewed purely as a metaphor of the oppressor/oppressed dynamics that were and are prevalent in the relationship between the US government and its more "disobedient" citizens, it still lacks punch and believability, and ultimately left me looking at my watch hoping the obvious ending would happen already.And for the record: despite rampant rumors to the contrary, this movie has never been banned in the US (I can't comment on the rumors of UK censorship, but I'm suspicious). Hollywood refused to distribute it after its initial film festival showing, and I am more than willing to believe the Nixon government had some influence on this decision; however, the fact that it never appeared on American television is merely a reflection of this medium's rather careful and advertising-driven fashion of doing business. As for the present, you can have your very own copy of the DVD delivered to your door via Amazon in a few days.