|
|
|
|
 |
The Movie:
Morgan Spurlock has made a name for himself by essentially exposing the obvious.
In 2004, Spurlock directed and stared in the Oscar nominated documentary, Super Size Me, where he vowed to eat nothing but McDonald's for a full month. His goal? To show that the fast food dynamo's effect on the human body can be catastrophic.
And while Spurlock documented his self-imposed destruction with honest and raw vigor, there was a nagging sense of "so what?" attached to his rather superfluous analysis. Was there ever really a doubt about the effects of fast food on the human body, especially that of a chain like McDonalds? Was anyone really unaware of the health effects it could have which, as Spurlock dared to show, included an increase in cholesterol, massive weight gain, and of course, sudden vomiting? Was this an example of daring and brutally honest filmmaking, or simply documenting what most already knew to be true, and simply chose to ignore?
Those same nagging questions plague Spurlock's second foray into exposing the unspoken controversy's that riddle American culture. The result is 30 Days, a docu-drama that has various people placed into situations that they either viamently oppose or are simply unfamiliar with. Such subjects include a border patrolman of Project Minutemen living with a family of illegal immigrants, an atheist living with a family of devout Christians, a Pro-Choice activist living in a Pro-Life center, and more. All of these experiements last 30 days, with the episodes showing us the results in forty-five minute episodes.
But while Spurlock's Super Size Me seemed delightfully comfortable with its inability to dare venture outside of the lines, 30 days not only dares to go further, but uses this lack of reaction as the basis for its argument. In short, if all of these results are so obvious, why haven't we talked about it yet?
Spurlock manages to stay relatively detached from his creation, opting to only serve as narrator for most of the episodes. Each segment begins with Spurlock explaining the concept of the given show's experiment, with episodic thesis statements so riffed with puns it would make Carrie Bradshaw blush. While he does appear every once and a while in given episodes doing outside research for the segments topic and participating in random side experiments, Spurlock is only really present in the seasons final episode, "Jail", where he spends 30 days in a minimum security jail. This episode proves to be one of the seasons best, rounding out the set nicely.
His infusion of humor throughout the episodes (as well as animated history lessons on both sides of the segments debate) proves to often times be both distracting and necessary. There is a definite need to update the viewer on exactly what the question of the segment is, and the back-story that Spurlock provides really helps viewers understand the opposing ideals, allowing them to perhaps choose whom they side with most. When 30 Days is at its best, however, is when it gives a debate so well argued on both sides that it takes viewing the episode in its entirety to really give you a glimpse into ones true opinion.
Some episodes fare better than others; the season premiere, "Immigration", proves to be one of the season's better episodes, partly because of the focus on a strong believer. By having the border-obsessed activist be devout in his ideals, there is a stronger connect to his side of the argument, and a stronger disconnect between him and the opposing ideals. As a result, the episode becomes one of better examples of the opposing sides being shown equally, with the minuteman understanding the contrasting ideal of immigration, while still standing by his own beliefs.
Yet, "Outsourcing" proves to be one of the season's more confusing episodes, by never really presenting an argument for the segment to focus on. We are shown a white-collar worker who has lost his job to Indian outsourcing. For 30 days, he is to go live in India and work the job of a telemarketer, a highly regarded job within Indian culture. The episode shifts between a variety of topics, including, but not limited to, the faltering of Indian traditions, the rise of Americanization within the culture, the treatment of women within the Indian culture, the publics reaction to the growing wealth of the Indian economy, the intensity of the country's poverty, the process of being outsourced, and even a riot (?). The episode never finds a smooth way to go from subject to subject, and doesn't even state what the question being asked is. By the episodes end, the subject has a cultural realization this the loosing of his job serves as an odd, new-millennial form of charity, but this epiphany is so sudden, and seemingly unrelated to the bevy of other topics brought up, that one assumes it was a last minute thesis to tie the episode up.
30 Days has unnerving maturity in its presentation of such controversial topics, treating each side of the given debate with equal explanation and understanding. Never is one side painted badly, or the opposing shone as the obvious answer to the nagging questions being presented. And alternately, we never have any over-dramatic clash of ideals. The series is delightfully comfortable in being honest, never taking advantage of the tension to "create" a moment of two opposing views that lead to an all out war. There are no clichéd fights, yet no tidy endings; the two sides never really change their position or their beliefs, but simply beginning to understand the "other half" better.
But perhaps that was Spurlock's goal - to create a show that gives not the answers, but the questions, and reminds us of the need to ask them. We aren't presented with a clear-cut answer to Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice. We never get enough of a viewership epiphany about the argument of illegal immigration to truly come to a subjective verdict. But that doesn't seem to be the goal; 30 Days is beyond the gimmick of promising that the viewer, or the on-camera subject for that matter, will come to any outstanding conclusion. The most it can do is remind one of the true nature of what is being discussed, and remind us that the only thing more important then finding an answer to these questions is having the nerve to ask them in the first place.
The DVD
Video:
Arts Alliance America, the DVD distributor, didn't send final products of the discs, so on assumes that this isn't how the final consumer copy will be. The check disc's video quality was fairy poor, having the full-screen format be presented in rather grainy and blunt images. The lack of color intensity and sharp video really took away from the segments, especially since so many of the episode's highlighted the living situations of the given subject. No subtitles of any kind were included.
Audio:
<>
The audio fared slightly worse than the video, with screechy and static ambient noise having made its way into the segments. The non-digetic noise really proved distracting in various scenes of quiet tension, as the noise would often interrupt the moment. Again, this will likely be repaired before the final products are shipped out for purchase.
The Extras:
30 Days doesn't have a lot going for it in the way of extras, so the most we get is an audio commentary on each disc. We get one for the first episode, "Immigration", and the second episode, "Jail", which Spurlock served as the subject of. These are two of the season's best episodes, so it seems only fitting that they get the commentary, which proves to actually be quite informative, giving more information as to how various risk were handled - namely keeping the anonymity of the illegal family. Since these two segments had on-camera subjects that were in the midst of important decisions, it's logical that we get further explanation as to what happened to them. The commentaries include key production members and a few of the on-camera subjects.
Final Thoughts:
30 Days proves to be interesting and thought provoking material, delving into the complexities that surround controversial topics within the American stratosphere. And while the show provides interesting topics of discussion, causing viewers to want to delve into lively debates on the subject matter, the show constantly tip-toes around being fair and balanced, and simply indecisive. By showing both sides of the argument to the degree that it does, 30 Days never truly connects as anything more than a reminder of why these questions are so controversial in the first place.
But if the old adage is true, and seeing truly is believing, than Spurlock has crafted an enormously engaging way to state facts that we already assumed. And while the results of his given experiments are anything but startling, maybe it takes actually seeing them to have a real effect. Perhaps that's Spurlock's overall goal - to test our comfort with witnessing things we claim to be aware of. Perhaps the shows inability to come to a general consensus is meant to leave viewers with the impression that these subjects are about more than just coming up with answers - they're about having the ability to ask the questions. Recommended |
|
| Other Reviews:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
