I'm not a member of the Bowdoin Film Society, so it might seem presumptuous of me to opine on how it should conduct its affairs. But I don't believe it's unreasonable for me to suggest that a film society should concern itself purely with film. If it were my decision, the film society would focus on the "classics," particularly those that are not standard fare on American television and in American theaters?here I'm thinking of Fellini, Bergman, Kurosawa, and the like. These are only my personal preferences; however, I think a film society would remain on the correct track as long as it focused on film as film, that is, in the stylistic and artistic sense.
It would be curious if a film society didn't agree on this aim or something near to it. It is apparent ours does not. This November, the Bowdoin Film Society is planning to try its hand at propagandizing by participating in the premiere of Robert Greenwald's latest documentary, Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices.
It is frustratingly clear that this is a political affair having little to do with the rightly understood focus of a film society. The High Cost of Low Prices is being cheered, not by cinema buffs and casual film-goers, but by a vocal and well-organized minority of anti-business, profit-hating activists. Like all of Greenwald's recent films, The High Cost of Low Prices aims solely at exercising a left-liberal social and political bias.
The Film Society should select films that all fans of cinema are likely to enjoy or at least appreciate. One would have to be a thoroughgoing socialist to get any pleasure out of a movie like The High Cost of Low Prices.
Anticipating the path of my argument, one might point out that social and political sensibilities can be detected in most films and that the film society is without any deliberate bias. I agree insofar as I do not suspect the film society of intentionally propagandizing (although I won't rule out that possibility). They may believe the film is important because it seems informative or because it expresses sentiments with which many Americans may agree. Or perhaps they feel that the film society would be committing an obvious error in not showing this film since its release is being touted as an "event."
But all of this is beside the point. The High Cost of Low Prices is getting attention almost solely because of its political message. Its release is being planned as the centerpiece of what the activists at WalMartWatch.com are touting as "Higher Expectations Week: A National Week of Action." It is not a film that happens to contain a political message; it is political disinformation conveyed through the film medium. Regardless of its intent, the film society is allowing itself to become a part of a massive, ideologically-driven, anti-capitalist effort. This should be evident to anyone whether or not they agree with the film's content.
Luckily, I can rescue the film society from its blunder by summarizing the predictable message of The High Cost of Low Prices. That way, everyone can digest its collectivist bromide without actually having to watch the film. Here it goes: The High Cost of Low Prices will claim that Wal-Mart pays low wages, abuses its workers, intimidates shoppers by having elderly folk greet them at the door, puts small stores out of business, purchases low-priced goods from abroad which puts Americans out of jobs, and generally contributes to the plague of consumerism that is sweeping the globe.
My humble assessment is that this message is little more than distortion and lies. Wal-Mart is successful because it satisfies the wants and needs of consumers. Its low prices and high-quality goods mean a higher real wage and a better life for millions of people. Its accessibility (lots of stuff under one roof) saves everyone time.
Wal-Mart coerces neither its employees nor the businesses it out-competes; it simply responds to the demands of consumers as expressed through the market. This is what frustrates activists more than anything: that Wal-Mart's success is based on the free choice of individuals. This is in keeping with a long history of progressives using government intervention to punish businesses and firms for offering consumers newer, better, and cheaper goods and services. As in many political battles, a minority aims to use the state as a tool to bludgeon free society.
So that sums up The High Cost of Low Prices. Thanks to my selflessness, the film society can cancel its scheduled screening in favor of a proper film, preferably something in black and white with subtitles.