Reflection on 2 Films on Environmentalism

Mononoke-Hime (Princess Mononoke, 1997, Hayao Miyazaki)

This is not a butterflies-and-rainbows optimistic cartoon preaching us to save planet and to love animals & trees, like other animations from ordinary social campaigns. Rather, Mononoke-Hime, the masterpiece of Ghibli wizard Hayao Miyazaki, offers the balance and mature point of view on environmental conservation.

Journeying to the nowhere to cure the curse of diabolic wound, the protagonist, Prince Ashitaka, arrived in ‘Irontown’, where villagers cut forest, use charcoal to smelt iron, devastate nearby forest. The leader, Lady Ebosi, adopted many prostitutes and poverty-stricken families to work here, let them have a good quality of life, while cutting down forest, forcing wild animals refuge from their former sanctuary.  As the conflict being accentuated, a number of battles between the Lady’s pose and animals erupted – the battles in which Price Ashitaka cannot decide which side he should be with. Actually, this dilemma is presenting in an enormous amount of issues on public policy: one side is the quality of life of those who can garner the benefits from environment and the other the environment. So, the problem on environment does not relate to just the environment itself, but the life of labours, the villagers’ welfare, as well as other human factors, all ,also ,intertwine in that so-called ‘environmental’ issues. The lack of concentration on human aspects is the key characteristic, and the failure as well, of environmantal campaigne nowadays.

In my opinion, the pinnacle of environmental problem is not to find the way to keep environment intact forever, but how to make BOTH human and environment sustainably live together.

But what was the conclusion of the problematic situation in Irontown? You should find out yourself.


Home (2009, Yann Arthus-Bertrand)

The first time I saw this movie, I, to be frank, did not like it. There were seemingly endless montages of aerial photo of places around the world accompanied by bubbling of narrator, and many audiences in the theater fell asleep.

But when it came to the second thought, I have changed my mind. The film tries to show the interconnectedness of life in this biosphere, and succeeds. The eye candy images of bird eye shot on various landscapes of the world represents the face of our home where people, though geographically, socially and culturally different, share the same fate on the climate and welfare crisis. The narrative script also well illustrates the point.

The only problem is probably the style of deliver which is quite monotonous – the viewers will find themselves hard to hold conscious from the beginning to the end of the movie.

The documentary is in public domain by voluntary of Yann Arthus-Bertrand, the copyrightholder and the keen aerial cinematographer of the film, and could be watch (or download) fot free [here] and [here]

This post is a part of Blog Action Day 2009: Climate Change


2 ความเห็น on “Reflection on 2 Films on Environmentalism”

  1. น้องทัก พูดว่า:

    I couldn’t agree more when you point out that HOME, in the first place, was about to make me fell asleep. Luckily it got better and better. In the end, the film make me think even harder before gettin any plastic bag. I have to confess that, since it was an airial film, I felt airsick!!

  2. mortgage loans พูดว่า:

    You without scruple be undergoing a style all your own when it comes to creating these sharp blog posts.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  เปลี่ยนแปลง )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  เปลี่ยนแปลง )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  เปลี่ยนแปลง )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  เปลี่ยนแปลง )


Connecting to %s