For the indigenous activist, Canada is just a convenient pork barrel to be mercilessly exploited and feverously devoured. The taxpayer is the enemy and fair game for any attack without any rules of engagement. Victimhood is very profitable and money is the casus belli in the war on truth. Thanks again, Nina, for exposing the hypocrisy on those who speak with forked tongue.
"A half-truth is the most cowardly of lies." ~ Mark Twain
The latest contingent liability report (federal government) states a potential contingent liability of 2 TRILLION dollars. taxpayer dollars. If this "documentary" receives an Oscar there will be no stopping the gravy train at taxpayers' expense.
Well on the bright side, if a straw can break a camel's back, surely a 2 trillion dollar liability might stand a good chance of wrecking a gravy train. (And I think the Trump election has already proved that celebrity endorsements are pretty passé.)
This stuff feels like screaming into a cyclone. There are a few dozen people trying to speak up against a multi-billion dollar tax funded industry supported by universities, the government, and the public broadcaster. Everywhere I look, there are lies pushed in glitzy children's books, elementary schools, websites, "documentaries", by the government, and the truth is supressed by threats of cancellation of careers, screaming and weeping "auties", and arson. I will write a letter. If it gets a response, it will be to tell me I need a tune-up. More likely it will simply go to the trash.
I once took a course in media, and we had to make two short documentaries about the same topic from completely different points of view. In the showings after, it was clear that documentaries and film depictions of historical events are not neutral, that what is included or not included, highlighted or put in context or not, can be propaganda for one side or another, or advance a particular point of view. I have this in mind every time I watch a documentary or historical film, from "Triumph of the Will" to Oliver Stone's "JFK" and "Nixon" from documentaries by Michael Moore to "The Crown," etc. Good article.
True enough. But the problem with the Sugarcane "documentary" is that it's not a documentary. There's a fundamental difference between points of view, as you say, and what's going here, which is an almost complete absence of KNOWN facts. It's extremely problematic that people watching this will assume, because it's a "documentary" that it presents a factual account, when in fact it does not.
Yes, exactly. Filmmakers may allow their personal biases to influence their interpretation of facts or interviews, which can lead to a distorted narrative. In this case, it seems like much of the narrative is made up. Narratives are in many cases more influential than strictly factual evidence on making up people's minds on various issues. Which is why I like this article, giving people a critical look at the process and the players.
In a long, shop-talky interview last August, Julian NoiseCat commented that
“… we initially wanted this documentary to kind of watch like a fiction film, like a fiction feature, and to have that sort of feeling. And as we tried to tighten it up to that sort of feel and pacing, it was losing some of its verve, some of its rawness and realness. And so what I learned from that … is that nonfiction needs to still be nonfiction. It needs to remind people that this is real life, that this is real people with a camera in front of them going through real struggle.”
Noisecat and Kassie had apparently pared their initial footage down to a 5.5-hour cut that they “really liked,” but of course they had to trim it a little further! It would be interesting to know what’s on the cutting room floor.
Yeppers. It's clear these young directors were going for impact over fact. They even called the promotional tour of the film their "impact campaign." https://sugarcanefilm.com/ Take a look at the number of "select" communities and "educational spaces" in Canada and the US that they took their screenings to, "to support healing, correct the historical record, provoke dialogue and seek accountability ..."
I think I will reserve comments on this until the film appears on Net Flix next month as a riveting docuseries. Apparently both Tantoo Cardinal and Buffy St. Marie have agreed to make cameo appearances as will iconic film maker, Kevin Annette, who provided technical advice to the film makers.
You should have brought those names forward to National Geographic months ago, Kemosabe! Probably too late now that they've "boarded" Lily Gladstone as their big-name executive producer.
It's a Canadian story with 'sort-of' Canadian directors, so yeah, it would be much more appropriate to bill it as a "Kevin Annett-produced documentary." Annett's contributions to the film are indisputable : )
I only read the title. Let me guess: Is it because they're liars promoting an agenda? (Reading the article and the comments I see that it may be just as much a case of liars promoting themselves.)
For the indigenous activist, Canada is just a convenient pork barrel to be mercilessly exploited and feverously devoured. The taxpayer is the enemy and fair game for any attack without any rules of engagement. Victimhood is very profitable and money is the casus belli in the war on truth. Thanks again, Nina, for exposing the hypocrisy on those who speak with forked tongue.
"A half-truth is the most cowardly of lies." ~ Mark Twain
...most cowardly? Maybe. How about most insidious?
All of the above and more !!!
Follow the money that is what this entire debacle is about and the truth be damned.
The latest contingent liability report (federal government) states a potential contingent liability of 2 TRILLION dollars. taxpayer dollars. If this "documentary" receives an Oscar there will be no stopping the gravy train at taxpayers' expense.
Well on the bright side, if a straw can break a camel's back, surely a 2 trillion dollar liability might stand a good chance of wrecking a gravy train. (And I think the Trump election has already proved that celebrity endorsements are pretty passé.)
You’re doing good work. Keep bringing the truth to light.
This stuff feels like screaming into a cyclone. There are a few dozen people trying to speak up against a multi-billion dollar tax funded industry supported by universities, the government, and the public broadcaster. Everywhere I look, there are lies pushed in glitzy children's books, elementary schools, websites, "documentaries", by the government, and the truth is supressed by threats of cancellation of careers, screaming and weeping "auties", and arson. I will write a letter. If it gets a response, it will be to tell me I need a tune-up. More likely it will simply go to the trash.
I once took a course in media, and we had to make two short documentaries about the same topic from completely different points of view. In the showings after, it was clear that documentaries and film depictions of historical events are not neutral, that what is included or not included, highlighted or put in context or not, can be propaganda for one side or another, or advance a particular point of view. I have this in mind every time I watch a documentary or historical film, from "Triumph of the Will" to Oliver Stone's "JFK" and "Nixon" from documentaries by Michael Moore to "The Crown," etc. Good article.
True enough. But the problem with the Sugarcane "documentary" is that it's not a documentary. There's a fundamental difference between points of view, as you say, and what's going here, which is an almost complete absence of KNOWN facts. It's extremely problematic that people watching this will assume, because it's a "documentary" that it presents a factual account, when in fact it does not.
Yes, exactly. Filmmakers may allow their personal biases to influence their interpretation of facts or interviews, which can lead to a distorted narrative. In this case, it seems like much of the narrative is made up. Narratives are in many cases more influential than strictly factual evidence on making up people's minds on various issues. Which is why I like this article, giving people a critical look at the process and the players.
In a long, shop-talky interview last August, Julian NoiseCat commented that
“… we initially wanted this documentary to kind of watch like a fiction film, like a fiction feature, and to have that sort of feeling. And as we tried to tighten it up to that sort of feel and pacing, it was losing some of its verve, some of its rawness and realness. And so what I learned from that … is that nonfiction needs to still be nonfiction. It needs to remind people that this is real life, that this is real people with a camera in front of them going through real struggle.”
Noisecat and Kassie had apparently pared their initial footage down to a 5.5-hour cut that they “really liked,” but of course they had to trim it a little further! It would be interesting to know what’s on the cutting room floor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbvYQ53-XCI
"watch like a fiction film" because it is, in fact, a fiction film. so it wouldn't have been hard to make it "watch like a fiction film."
Yeppers. It's clear these young directors were going for impact over fact. They even called the promotional tour of the film their "impact campaign." https://sugarcanefilm.com/ Take a look at the number of "select" communities and "educational spaces" in Canada and the US that they took their screenings to, "to support healing, correct the historical record, provoke dialogue and seek accountability ..."
I think I will reserve comments on this until the film appears on Net Flix next month as a riveting docuseries. Apparently both Tantoo Cardinal and Buffy St. Marie have agreed to make cameo appearances as will iconic film maker, Kevin Annette, who provided technical advice to the film makers.
You should have brought those names forward to National Geographic months ago, Kemosabe! Probably too late now that they've "boarded" Lily Gladstone as their big-name executive producer.
It's a Canadian story with 'sort-of' Canadian directors, so yeah, it would be much more appropriate to bill it as a "Kevin Annett-produced documentary." Annett's contributions to the film are indisputable : )
Indigenization is an industry..... check out Frances Widdowson's latest update... some good news heading into 2025.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOIHSY6jaTc
This is also an excellent commentary.... Trudeau's love for multiculturalism breeds disaster for Canada https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJp6oG-BXw8
Its lies all the way down.
The Laurentian elites really do think of and treat Natives as Black American's.
Blood libel is our Canadian version of "unarmed black" man attempting to murder a police officer with a car.
Gotta feed your rage machine somehow, eh?
I only read the title. Let me guess: Is it because they're liars promoting an agenda? (Reading the article and the comments I see that it may be just as much a case of liars promoting themselves.)