Films we’ll never see …

Here’s a film to add to our list of Films we will never see at the Fundy Film Festival – or on CBC.

Mine Your Own Business

Mine Your Own Business” follows George, a 23-year-old unemployed miner from northern Romania whose life has been put on hold after an anti-mining campaign orchestrated by foreign environmentalists. George explains his hopes and dreams for the future – which are different from those prescribed for him by foreign environmentalists. He then travels to other impoverished communities in Madagascar and Chile who are also desperately waiting for large mining projects. George finds people similar to himself with similar hopes and dreams of a decent job and house and a decent education and better life for their children.

Controversial? Yes, yes. But not favoured by the self-appointed anointed. [Mind you we would love to see a certain Councillor prove us wrong.]

It will however be shown at the Free Thinking Film Society of Ottawa in conjunction with a debate between Ezra Levant and Elizabeth May in Nov.

Advertisements

15 responses to “Films we’ll never see …

  1. William Zimmerman

    Rent the theatre, get the public performance rights and show the film. That’s how it works.

  2. Yes, we know how it works. That was NOT the point – which went completely over your head. You see, what we are trying to say is this – let us spell it out in capital letters – THIS COMMUNITY, A UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE DIVERSE, IS NOT OPEN TO A RANGE OF IDEAS, OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE A FILM ON THE FUNDY FILM LIST. The Fundy Film list does not want to show films which are uncomfortable to the world view of those who make up the list.

  3. William Zimmerman

    Your shouting! Put your money where your mouth is, bring in the film and see how it does. As Fitz’s father said, “would you like some cheese with your whine?”

    • You STILL don’t get it. I wouldn’t waste my money because the market isn’t here. The seats would be empty. Do you think I am stupid? People’s minds are blinkered and they don’t want to disturb their world view. Yet they think they have open minds and talk as if they do.

  4. It’s been years since I saw anything beyond a kids movie. I guess I prefer books. Paul Colinvaux, “Why Big Fierce Animals Are Rare; An Ecologists Perspective”, spelled it all out very clearly way back in 1978. This highly accessible treatment of ecology arms the reader with the scientific tools that are required to see environmentalist mythology for the clap-trap that it most surely is. Colinvaux also provides the beginning of a good theoretical foundation for understanding why we have poverty. (His lesson is not politically correct. And so the muddleheads of polite society resort to mythology — and flail around without achievement.)

  5. William Zimmerman

    YOU still don’t get it. Let the free market decide.
    From your elitist perspective, I presume you would prefer to avoid dealing with the “blinkered minds” of us mere mortals.
    By the way, have you seen any reviews of the film or is it just that it appeals to your ideological position?

  6. William Zimmerman

    PS Are you suggesting that the Fundy Film Society should waste money? The Film Society has operated without subsidy since it was established and has actually directly supported other non-profit arts organizations and raised significant sums for charities through special screenings – most recently handing over more than $1500 to the Valley Hospice Foundation raised at the COLVILLE screenings.

    • No. I am not at all suggesting that. I am predicting that we will not see this film shown here. I am making an observation about the open-mindedness – or not – of our community. I am making an observation about the prevailing mindset in Wolfville, the mindset of those who make decisions for our community. It should not surprise me – but it does – that you still do not see my point.

  7. William Zimmerman

    You see yourself as open minded where the “prevailing mindset in Wolfville” is not. That sounds elitist to me.
    Show the film, or any other film you think should be shown. Be brave enough to stand out from the “prevailing mindset” instead of hiding behind an anonymous blog.
    Enough.

    You are sounding less and less rational as this discussion goes on.

    • Your definition of what is elitist differs completely from ours. Are you saying that anyone who thinks he is open minded is elitist? That anyone who observes a blind spot in others is elitist [whether or not he has a blind spot of his own] ? We would say that “elites” have influence. Elites are leaders in the community. We would say that you have influence over Town policy, how we are taxed and what films are shown. We see you as influential where we are not. You perhaps do not see yourself as part of the elite but from our point of view you are. With that comes responsibility to be open to other views. Elitists, we would say, are of the elite but are deaf to other views.

      • Not being an elite linguist, I’ll settle for a wikipedia definition: “the elite is a hypothetical group of relatively small size, that is dominant within a large society, having a privileged status perceived as being envied by others of a lower line of order”.

        Bill Zimmerman says Wofville Watch is elite. Is this true or false?
        (1) Is WW a relatively small group? True/False
        (2) Does WW dominate Wolfville, or anyone? True/False
        (3) Does WW have privileged status, say a seat on Council or a fat municipal grant? True/False
        (4) Does anyone of low rank (other than Mr Z, perhaps) envy WW? True/False

        I suspect that “Mine Your Own Business” is about a foreign elite undermining the livelihood of the underprivileged. (I’ve yet to see the movie.) That is one form of tyranny. But it is no less tyrannical for the ordinary majority to lord over a minority. Both forms of tyranny are common place in so called “advanced nations”. We have been legislated/domesticated/regulated/licensed/registered to the point of brain death.

  8. William Zimmerman

    I was talking about elitists, not elites. An elitist values his/her opinions over those of others. WW holds the position that the rest of us are less enlightened and thus would not attend films of his/her choice.

    1. WW is a VERY small group.
    2. To be dominant and to dominate are two different things. I think WW would like to be dominant – exercise influence and control – and is frustrated that he/she seems unable to do this in the face of the “prevailing mindset in Wolfville.”
    3. I would argue that a seat on council is not privileged. To quote Pepys:
    “As the city is now, there is no great honour or joy to be had, in being a public officer”
    4. It is nice to have a position from which to anonymously attack others. Some of us have to stand behind what we say. Right Brian? Don’t know if envy is the right word.

    • Do you not value your opinions over others? If not why do you still have them? By this definition anyone who has an opinion is an elitist.

    • I’m sorry that the public officer(s) may not be very satisfied with their lot. Perhaps their dissatisfaction stems from what they have wrought? I know my dissatisfaction does.

      Are the elite elitists? Perhaps not? It’s all a matter of whose opinion one values, after all. I guess the elite would not be elitists if they were to value the opinions of others above their own — but could they do that and still be elite?

      Admit it Bill, “elitist” is just a label that you use to get on someones goat. Like when I talk about “Spend-a-Buck Bob” — although, in that case, the facts unambiguously fit the name-calling.

      Frankly, the only opinion I ever consider worth considering is the one that best fits the facts. So, when “Spend-a-Zillion-Z-man” rationalizes spending and halves property taxation, I’ll call him “Mr-Miser-My-Monetary-Maestro”. Yep, it’s all about the facts of the matter — in my opinion.