Use of media clips in the film put the exclamation point on the framings and ways stories about Latin America have been distorted. How Colombia and Chile and the U.S. relationships with those countries create friction with other countries on the continent really demonstrates the threat that these countries pose to U.S. dominance in the region.
It's noted that, historically, the U.S. has been able to heavily influence Latin America and enjoy the good fortune of leaders who were receptive to working with them to defend U.S. interests. The rise of leaders who are willing to represent the people of South America is an obvious risk to the America as a superpower and the "Washington Consensus" that has been developed to protect certain interests.
The election of President Obama is highlighted toward the end of the documentary. Earlier in the film, Cristina Kirchner tells Stone that here, on this continent, for once the presidents look like the people. There is a natural emotional reaction to seeing President Obama that makes one wish the fact that he looks more like the people in America would have meant change would take place. All it shows to those knowledgeable of political issues is that skin color doesn't automatically mean you will stand up for the poor, working and middle classes.
In a scene filmed with days left in the Bush Administration, Chavez reminds Stone at the end of the movie that change can be done. Over the course of history, struggles and movements can make a difference just like they have in his country of Venezuela, just like the people of Bolivia did when they stoop up to Bechtel and fought against the privatization of their water (and just like gays and lesbians in Argentina just did now that Argentina has legalized gay marriage).
This is a film that should be required viewing for anyone being taught about history in South America. Unfortunately, the responses and reviews of this film have been atrocious. They have been a direct indication of the political immaturity of this country and also proof of how media manufactures consent. (But, given the current media response to Oliver Stone's alleged "anti-Semitic" remark, is anyone surprised?)
Stone and others have produced a "labor of love" that challenges the myths, which we Americans typically believe. It humanizes the leaders of South America and dispels many of the myths we harbor as a result of media distortions and perceptions. And, we owe Stone for going on this journey to bring us true insight into how people are rising up to take control of their very lives; what they are doing should inspire all Americans and, really, that's why a documentary like this has been trashed so much by media.
South of the Border
will continue to open in cities all over the country, but it will not enjoy the
wide distribution that it should have. Check the South of the Border documentary website to see if it is opening in
your area (although it's likely that the film already came through your city).
For more on how this film takes on media coverage of Latin America, listen to this interview on the "Media Matters" show with host Robert McChesney and guest Mark Weisbrot, co-writer of South of the Border.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
