The Shock Doctrine

2009
The Shock Doctrine
7.6| 1h22m| en| More Info
Released: 01 September 2009 Released
Producted By: Renegade Pictures
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

An investigation of "disaster capitalism", based on Naomi Klein's proposition that neo-liberal capitalism feeds on natural disasters, war and terror to establish its dominance.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Renegade Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Edgar Soberon Torchia It is as old as humankind is, but we only react when our stomachs are empty (and that is not a privilege of Marxist regimes). All over the world the ordinary people look the other way when told that actions have always been taken to control our planet (and of course its economy). I was not surprised with what I saw and heard in this fine documentary, but my info about the who, what, where and when of the whole Neoliberalism business was too vague. Therefore, when I see a film like this I appreciate to be illustrated, but I am mainly surprised at the wickedness of some human beings. My only regret is that "The Shock Doctrine" is a product from a specific time; it was made in the first decade of this century, so it ends with the Obama government. Nevertheless, the information it gives us is still valid to analyze the present. If you prefer to label this as leftist, propaganda or biased thought, well, it is your right to do so and believe in what you want. From my perspective, I do believe that such option leads us all to remain blindfold. I do not pretend things are exactly as described here, but the film does help to make us aware, a bit wiser and conscious that our rights are violated on a daily basis. We best stop believing it happens in "other countries". All of us, up and down, left and right, white and black, are subject to the decisions of evil, greedy persons, persons as those that were expelled from the temple in the Bible, as those that complain about the holocaust they were victim of, without thinking about all the wrong they do to people around the globe with their avaricious economic plans.
Ariana The popularity that Naomi Klein has garnered oddly reminds me of Paolo Coelho...sometimes depth can be very aptly simulated...When the documentary started out by mentioning sensory deprivation I thought it would talk about how lack of real information (or perceived lack of information) can shape the human psyche and how this is used as a means of political control (during the Arab spring, every government that faced upheaval tried to close off its population and muffle the internet). But nooooo.....it conflated sensory deprivation with physical torture thus managing to say nothing new or interesting about either. Then it veers into electric shock therapy because....documentary logic....and then compares it to the economic doctrine of "shock therapy" as envisaged by Friedman. These two things have similar names but are comparable in as much as the Razzies are comparable to the actual raspberry fruit...See, in the world according to this documentary, every time you drink raspberry juice....you taste Halle Berry's tears.And it just goes downhill from there as the documentary meanders in paranoid stupor towards telling us that all sudden political and social change is part of an evil plot and it always ends bad, capitalism is the source of all that is rotten and Friedman is a bad dude.Of course, while it spends some time on Russia (but don't worry, the analysis is not too deep or in any way tries to capture the complexity of the situation there), it neglects to mention what happened to countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic which have successfully used "shock therapy" in their transition to democracy and the free market after the fall of the Berlin wall....because cherry-picking is fun. Also let's not talk about the former Eastern Block countries that adopted Gorbachev's gradual reform route and how that turned our for them....because that would be pointing out that while a sudden switch to capitalism can be risky and painful....sometimes it may just be the lesser or 2 evils. The hell with that, it's far more fun, and easier to get more attention, if you pick an idea that you find "edgy" (someone or something is out to get you), an evil shady boogie man (Friedman) we can all boo at, and then throw everything and the kitchen sink into your version of reality until it somehow starts to make sense, at least if you can't be bothered with nuances or the real complexity of geopolitics and how it's never just one variable that determines an outcome as huge as a country plunging into disarray, but many factors influencing each other in subtle ways. I don't think capitalism is above reproach and there are many fair criticisms of both capitalism as a doctrine and the flavor it has acquired in contemporary times. I also don't think that the idea that crisis situations make us more willing to accept things we would not normally accept is without merit. But the way these 2 ideas are tied in "Shock Doctrine" is painfully contrived and the documentary overall has both the clarity of thought and the logic of your average conspiracy theory flick.
imdb2-556-923983 The question on my mind after seeing The Shock Doctrine was whether ends justify means. Quite possibly, this is the question Klein wanted to be asked, because much of her case regards the distasteful means taken in order to further free market economics, tactics which the very proponents of these dogmas may feel they want to disassociate themselves with. However, my question was about Klein's/Winterbottom's own tactics.The film uses all methods that we've grown used to from modern politics: cherry-picked facts, "proofs" by emotionally-charged metaphors, hinted claims of guilt by association, sound-bite slogans that are repeated incessantly, and, of course, scare tactics. Sad to say, I've come to expect these things from political candidates that need to make their points in a 30-second TV appearance. I've even come to expect them in rating-seeking news programs. But have we stooped so low that these tactics are now par-for-the-course in documentaries, where a film-maker has 90 minutes of canvas to make a clear, compelling, and well-argued case? I happen to agree with Klein's stance that extreme capitalism is dangerous, and I think what we are seeing in both Europe and China in recent years (e.g. the collapse of Chinese nation-wide education and health policies) are just further proofs of the narrative Klein forwards. However, I don't see that there is a well-argued case here that would convince someone claiming that any change, good or bad, rarely happens in a peaceful way, or that the ultimate outcome of privatization is better than the alternative. In fact, only a handful of minutes of this film are devoted to the question of what the final outcome of extreme capitalism looks like, historically, and these minutes are full of unsubstantiated claims thrown into the air in what is exactly the tactic Klein warns against: shock a person for just over an hour, and suddenly that person becomes much more open to suggestion, at which point you can sprinkle some of your favorite dogmas on him.So, perhaps this film does a good job with all those who are willing to be convinced by visceral arguments, the likes of which have, unfortunately, come to dominate the public discourse, but I rather promote those who educate people to think. Scaring people to make the choices you think are right... well, that's what this film is all about. Isn't it?
Java Bean After watching this film with a few friends (one of which was a former World bank employee), we had a rather mixed and somewhat heated conversation in the cinema bar. The film is basically a summary of the book, which talks about the ideas of Milton Friedman and how they have been used to influence world affairs. However, for those of you who may find the film 'superficial' I would recommend the book, as there is much more detail. Regarding the objectivity of the film, I don't believe that it's anti-American or anti-capitalistic (as my world bank friend remarked). Quite the contrary, it is very balanced and in my opinion Klein does not point a finger at a company without first presenting the facts. I think what a lot of pro-capitalists probably find annoying about Klein is that she brings the whole idea of multinational dirty dealings and currents affairs into the spotlight. After all, Halliburton, Shell, BP, the World bank etc. are far from angels when it comes to making money! I for one, commend the producers of this film and Mrs. Klein for a job well done!