2007/09/13

Les victimes des totalitarismes ne sont plus là pour faire de la masturbation intellectuelle, eux

Le propos de ce film est indigne, d'abord et avant tout par égard pour les victimes des totalitarismes qui ne sont plus là pour faire de la masturbation intellectuelle, eux.
Ainsi parle Bigstop, un lecteur du "quotidien de référence", et on ose espérer — sans grande conviction — que dans sa conclusion, il puisse se tromper.
Tenter ensuite de récupérer Hannah Arendt est encore plus ignoble de la part de ces néo-marxistes. Je constate avec une certaine amertume que depuis le départ de JCC, le Monde s'aligne sur le Monde Diplomatique. A quand M. Ignacio Ramonet directeur du journal Le Monde?

2007/09/11

On 9/11, French Movie Likening the Symbol of the World Trade Center — Big Business — to Nazism Appears on Le Monde's Front Page

As Plantuagain — compares (the sightless) Uncle Sam to (the sightless) Osama Bin Laden — with all their common victims (in fact, there seem to be more in America's hair) entangled in their common bloody beard (replete with whiskers that looks like military-style barbed wire) — Le Monde uses the 9/11 anniversary to treat us to its usual pompous editorial ("total war" against terrorism, ignorance or minimizing of December 7, 1941 (only six years after 9/11 was ubiquitously called a modern-day "Pearl Harbor"!), "petitions of friendship for a great people that is making a mistake") along with a front page article about a movie (by Nicolas Klotz, due to be released on September 12, and based on a book by François Emmanuel) that compares the average multinational company (i.e., the typical American creation as well as the symbol of New York and its World Trade Center per se) to Nazi Germany.
La Question humaine … un film noir qui … établit en effet un lien entre le monde des multinationales et l'idéologie nazie. A mesure [qu'un psychologue d'entreprise, magistralement interprété par Mathieu Amalric] perce à jour la nature du pouvoir de son entreprise, une effarante proximité lui saute aux yeux entre la langue administrative nazie et celle qu'il emploie dans son travail.
In an interview with Jacques Mandelbaum, Nicolas Klotz and Elisabeth Perceval state that
C'était frappant de voir à quel point [les étudiants d'HEC ou de l'Essec qui ont tourné dans La Question Humaine] comprenaient le film, pour ainsi dire de l'intérieur : ces jeunes gens se considèrent eux-mêmes comme des guerriers, des tueurs, et ont tout à fait conscience de servir une logique de productivité et de profit exponentiels où les plus faibles sont impitoyablement éliminés.
In addition, it turns out that the movie is the third in a trilogy (the first two were about the homeless and foreigners without documents — you can see that this movie follows in the same logic) and (as we learn from Le Monde's review) that the name of the bad guy (played by a "very disturbing" Jean-Pierre Kalfon) in this movie (which Isabelle Regnier tells us "keeps its promises from end to end") is… Karl Rove! (Actually, the movie lists his name as Karl Rose — as does the book — but Regnier (or the daily's spell-checker) seems to have gotten the screenwriters' intention right!) Karl Rove (or Karl Rose), it turns out, was born in a Third Reich Lebensborn and was involved somehow with the SS Einsatzgruppen! We then learn how the "striking proximity" between the multinational firm (whose workers are "warriors, killers" and from which "the weakest are pitilessly eliminated") and the Holocaust:
To gas the Jews, or fire an alcoholic, the same dehumanizing terminology allows the human being to be treated as a production unit, valid or not.
Mon Dieu! The filmmakers have discovered the meaning of life (or death)! How can one avoid being dazzled by so much lucidité?! Regnier couldn't, as shown in her conclusion (about the movie in which there is a scene during which, "alors que les acteurs parlent parfois sans qu'on entende leur voix, un magnifique et interminable chant de flamenco est filmé en temps réel"):
La Question Humaine is a sophisticated film. It is also a beautiful film, a loving film, because its author likes his characters. … it is a great political film.
How wonderful. The viewpoint of one Le Monde reader is slightly different:
The raison d'être of this film is shameful, first and foremost in consideration of the victims of totalitarianism who [unlike the movie's authors] are no longer around to engage in mental masturbation.
Update: See how French (and European) TV commemorated the sixth anniversary of 9/11 (and the murder of 3,000 people)…