 |  | Get Showtimes... |
Review #265 of 365
Film: America: Freedom to Fascism (2006) [NR] 107 minutes
WIP™ Scale: $11.75
Where Viewed: Regency Tamarac Square, Denver, CO
When 1st Seen: 3 October 2006
Time: 7:30 p.m.
Directed by: Aaron Russo (Rude Awakening)
Written by: Aaron Russo
Featured Cast:
Aaron Russo (producer of Trading Places and Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 2004) • Joe Banister • Dave Champion • Sherry Peel Jackson • Vernice Kuglin • Ron Paul • Irwin Schiff
Link to the Film's Official Web Site and Blog: America: Freedom to Fascism
Click for 'Review Lite' [a 150-word or less review of this film]
To be sure, film producer, part-time director, and Libertarian presidential candidate, Aaron Russo, has put himself way out on a limb with his incredibly poorly made new documentary America: Freedom to Fascism. It may be difficult to argue his message, and a lot of people may not want to argue his message because his message which, uniformly attacks the elected representatives in the government of both major parties, may be right. Maybe there is no law that specifically authorizes the IRS to collect federal income taxes. Maybe none of the taxes collected do go toward anything but paying the national debt to the Federal Reserve Bank system—which, by the way, according to the film, is NOT a government bank as the name might lead people to believe, think Federal Express which we all know is not a government institution. Maybe the Federal Reserve Bank is the agency that controls the Federal Reserve notes—the official currency of the United States of America—and charges the US government interest to use the money it supposedly backs up. Maybe, as the film charges, the Federal Reserve backs up the currency with nothing because no one in the Congress has had the stomach to conduct an audit on the gold supposedly stored in Fort Knox and the US Denver Mint as the two largest repositories of the USA's gold. Maybe all of this is true. If it is, seeing the film will probably make a lot of people very, very nervous and a lot of other people very, very angry. The film also asserts that the war on terror is really a war on the freedoms of USA citizens as it continues to be used to further justify the conversion of the once land of the free into a totalitarian police state headed by a stooge put in power by the Federal Reserve bank in cahoots with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund by simply rigging the elections. It has long been known by the media, though the film suggests the media is entirely complicit in this vast conspiracy, that there has been no actual way for the millions of votes to be tabulated and collated in time to report a winner by the next morning. In fact, the process of tabulation and summation takes weeks. So, projections and samples are used. Ironic, huh? Don't believe it? Well, just stop and think about it and you'll see it's true. Nonetheless, the last two presidential elections have done enough to prove that there's (a) the potential for rampant tampering, and (b) really nothing in place to prove the outcome because there is no outside agency that stores all the finished ballots for people to later to go and verify. Josef Stalin reportedly said that voters don't control elections the people who tabulate the votes control the elections. People in the USA have long wanted to believe that the elections are, in fact, fair, legal, tamper free, etc., but there has never been any proof that this is the case. Not that it would matter because, as it turns out, if one actually reads the laws for determining the president, one would see that the president is not determined by the votes of the people in the first place. The president is elected by electors who submit their own ballots long after the general election, and most states do not require that these electors submit their ballot to conform with the reported outcome of the election in the state. So, technically, in those states, which are the majority, these electors could vote for whomsoever they wish, and elect the president they wish to see in office. [This part is not in the film, but was found to be true in research after the last general election.]
"See the film for it gives alternate views than the current media and provides fodder for thought."
So, boiling the film down, there is a lot in it about which to think. Mr. Russo throws down the gauntlet so to speak in challenging the federal government to prove it has the right to collect the federal income tax which he claims is presently in violation of the Unites States Federal Constitution. He does a decent job of proving this point including interviewing a large number of tax law experts. He even interviews a juror who sat on a trial of the IRS vs. a gentleman who had failed to file for three consecutive years. He was exonerated by the jury to the chagrin of the IRS, the judge, and the US Federal government because the neither the IRS nor the Judge could produce the law that required the man to do so, so the jury could not find him guilty of breaking a non-existent law. After this point in the film, however, the direction becomes a laundry list of other points the director wants to make all sort of jumbled together. It leaps from mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina to RIFD chips being implanted into citizens to track their every movement to National ID cards. This disjointed effort continues to generate a disquieting feeling toward the future and a possible realization that George Orwell may not have been writing science fiction, rather he might have been predicting the future and just got the year wrong.
My biggest criticism of the film is that, not unlike Michael Moore's films at times, there is a non-linear approach taken to the arguments that makes them incredibly hard to follow. They can, therefore, come across as disjointed and illogical sounding more like the ravings of a mad man than an articulately delivered, cogent argument. This is compounded by the repetition of the same key phrases which skeptics can see are being used the same way the subjects of these films use them to achieve the brainwashing effect under attack. If I say, "The US government is turning you into a slave," over and over and over and over, in twenty different ways, then followed by the phrase in big letters on the screen, then I am, in effect brainwashing you to believe it. True or not. Evidence or not. Well, maybe it is time that somebody try to brainwash the USAers back into remembering the founding notions of the United States of America. Maybe there is a reason the Constitution was created the way it was created. It's just too bad that Aaron Russo didn't stop and really plan out this film in a more logical, straightforward, and comprehensible fashion. It's too bad that he doesn't utilize a wider base of experts in his film because then it would come across like a film designed to brainwash people into becoming Libertarians. The true measure of success of ideas in politics in the USA, that is if they are to follow the core ideals of USA Constitution and founding principles, should be in whether the messenger delivers the message and allows the listener to make his own decision or the messenger delivers the message and commands the listener to believe in and blindly follow the message. In this area, the film does not aptly succeed for it falls too far into the latter category. See the film for it gives alternate views than the current media and provides fodder for thought. Keep in mind, however, that the backers of the film also have an agenda, and they do not state their agenda in any less eloquent "We are trying to protect your freedom" language than the current powers that be. As was famously printed on the poster in Fox Mulder's office, "The Truth is Out There". We may never know what it is, but it is out there.
My biggest criticism of the film is that, not unlike Michael Moore's films at times, there is a non-linear approach taken to the arguments that makes them incredibly hard to follow. They can, therefore, come across as disjointed and illogical sounding more like the ravings of a mad man than an articulately delivered, cogent argument. This is compounded by the repetition of the same key phrases which skeptics can see are being used the same way the subjects of these films use them to achieve the brainwashing effect under attack. If I say, "The US government is turning you into a slave," over and over and over and over, in twenty different ways, then followed by the phrase in big letters on the screen, then I am, in effect brainwashing you to believe it. True or not. Evidence or not. Well, maybe it is time that somebody try to brainwash the USAers back into remembering the founding notions of the United States of America. Maybe there is a reason the Constitution was created the way it was created. It's just too bad that Aaron Russo didn't stop and really plan out this film in a more logical, straightforward, and comprehensible fashion. It's too bad that he doesn't utilize a wider base of experts in his film because then it would come across like a film designed to brainwash people into becoming Libertarians. The true measure of success of ideas in politics in the USA, that is if they are to follow the core ideals of USA Constitution and founding principles, should be in whether the messenger delivers the message and allows the listener to make his own decision or the messenger delivers the message and commands the listener to believe in and blindly follow the message. In this area, the film does not aptly succeed for it falls too far into the latter category. See the film for it gives alternate views than the current media and provides fodder for thought. Keep in mind, however, that the backers of the film also have an agenda, and they do not state their agenda in any less eloquent "We are trying to protect your freedom" language than the current powers that be. As was famously printed on the poster in Fox Mulder's office, "The Truth is Out There". We may never know what it is, but it is out there.
Back to Top | W.I.P. Scale™ | Most Recently Reviewed Films | Films of 2005 | Films of 2006
Click for 'Review Lite' [a 150-word review of this film]
Click for 'Review Lite' [a 150-word review of this film]
| Same Director | ||
America: Freedom to Fascism (2006) Review-lite [150-word cap]
To be sure, film producer, part-time director, and Libertarian presidential candidate, Aaron Russo, has put himself way out on a limb with his incredibly poorly made new documentary America: Freedom to Fascism. Granted, it provides ample material to discuss and consider. Unfortunately, the non-linear, scrambled approach to the topics makes them incredibly difficult to follow. The film becomes a laundry list of scattered talking points seemingly designed to convert audiences to Libertarianism rather than to really get them to challenge and question what's going on in the USA. Do see the film for it gives alternate views than the current media and provides fodder for thought. Keep in mind, however, that the backers of the film also have an agenda, and they do not state their agenda in any less eloquent "We are trying to protect your freedom" language than the current powers that be.
No comments:
Post a Comment