Deep mine (c) Dan Wylie
Well, that was –
predictably – a pretty bad film. I had decided to give it a look because it
promised to be about a campaigner fighting heroically against Big Oil. (Objecting
to Big Oil being trendy at COP 26 and all.) The film in question, On Deadly Ground, was predictably bad
because not only is the lead actor Steven Seagal: he was also making his
directorial debut. The film was roundly panned by critics, one of whom was rude
enough to compare Seagal’s “lardy posterior” to the grandiosity of his ego.
Predictably, Seagal’s acting comprises growling, wearing frilly leathers, and
occasionally narrowing his eyes.
His role (I won’t
worry about spoilers, because you’ll never want to watch it) is as a
disillusioned oil company employee, Forrest Taft, who turns on his Big Oil
boss, Michael Jennings, acted by Michael Caine. It must be the estimable
Caine’s worst performance ever, as a monochromatically angry, foul-mouthed exec
who has to complete a slew of pipelines and a gigantic refinery on Alaskan
territories before his leases run out. Those leases, of course, are carved out
of exquisitely beautiful lands belonging to Native Americans, who naturally
object. (Such scenarios, as Donald Trump forcefully reminded us quite recently,
are no idle fiction.)
Jennings’ mercenary
heavies try to kill the whistle-blowing Forrest (get the symbolism?), who is
luckily rescued by local Native Americans. The heavies then sort of
accidentally-on-purpose murder the wise old chief, who has already sort of
initiated Forrest into the tribe via a myth-laden hallucinatory experience.
Many feather headdresses, screeching hawks and incantations threaten to bury
these people under a sludge of stereotyping, though their recourse to a
man-bear legend of origins is well-enough attested. (Some critics call them
Inuit/Eskimo, which is just wrong.)
Forrest is rather
unimpressed by all this traditionalism, interestingly: he says to the chief’s
bereaved and very pissed-off (and very beautiful) daughter Masu, that such
mumbo-jumbo won’t cut it against Big Oil and their army of gun-toting
mercenaries. His methods will. Masu
(Joan Chen) joins him, and between them they go at it: super-efficient
hand-to-hand combat (oh ja, Forrest also happens to be ex-CIA, which
organisation has, as we all know, a spotless legal and environmental record),
explosives conveniently cached nearby, swathes of gunfire and sprays of blood,
downed helicopters, and a numbingly prolonged finale of spectacular explosions
that reduce the refinery to wire wool. Each of the main heavies (including a
young Billy Bob Thornton) get their come-uppance, and the chief’s daughter has
the satisfaction of dropping Mr Jennings into a vat of his own crude oil.
So much, so Seagal,
and the critics I read were almost uniformly scathing. What really upset them, however, was the very
final scene, in which a suited-up Seagal soberly reads a speech to assembled
reporters, tribal members and others. Against a backdrop of documentary footage
of gas flares, highway traffic, smog, oiled seabirds and polluted rivers,
Seagal lays out the venality of Big Oil, its collusion with governments, its
knowing but shrugged-off damage to pristine environments, its roughshod
mistreatment of the first peoples’ rights, rites and wilderness, the deliberate
sabotaging of progressive technologies, and so on. The critics merely raged:
how dare he get so preachy!
To be sure, the
sermon fitted ill with the action genre: blowing up the refinery alone probably
spewed more CO2 into the skies than the whole of Los Angeles on a bad day. Some
doubted the sincerity of the environmental message. Yet it encapsulated what
Bill McKibben, James Hansen, and a thousand other environmental scientists have
been warning for decades. It might have been Greta Thunberg standing there,
though Seagal’s a touch taller.
"Riot" (c) Dan Wylie |
Note: the movie screened in 1994. No one was listening. A quarter of a century later, nothing has changed, except we peer through an ever-thickening murk of rhetorical obfuscation and hollow promises from the very players who might make the greatest difference. I watched the film, after all, in the very week when the Big Oil execs were trying to fudge their way through questions in the US Congress. (Doubtless smug in the knowledge that government, the banks, and Big Oil finance and back one another in an Unholy Trinity.)
I thought to ferret
out other ‘entertainment’ feature films concerning Big Oil, and turned up a
couple of lists. One of them purported to survey the top 5, and included the
superb Let There Be Blood, featuring
Daniel Day Lewis, a truly corrosive exposé of early Big Oil’s horrors. This
particular list, however, was compiled by one “Petroleum Service Company”,
whose raison d’être was clearly to
sell oil products And guess what: you would swear from
their brief summaries that the films were advertising the benefits of fossil
fuel, and not – as they actually are – attacks on it. Either the site’s
compilers are woefully ignorant of the films, stupidly misconstruing them, or
deliberately concealing their critical content. Whichever way, I find this
deceitfulness disturbing, short-sighted, and self-serving, arguably a minor
case but symptomatic and frankly frightening. As noted by one slightly woolly
but more academic article on
the subject, “there are no positive portrayals of oil executives in feature films after the 1950s”!
Clearly, said executives don’t care. Or: they care just enough to try to cover
their butts in such fraudulent ways.
Look, no one thinks
a transition away from fossil fuels will be simple, so dependent has global
society become upon them. Though many technologies already exist to make that
transition, implementing them at scale will cause widespread disruptions to
existing structures of industry and finance. (This is Australian PM Scott
Morrison’s argument for doing nothing to reduce coal, though continuing the way
we’re going is inevitably going to cause exponentially greater disruptions
world-wide.) And panelling the egregious lies of Big Oil, however much they
might deserve it, is to narrow the history and absolve all us users from
responsibility. Big Oil also tries to shift the blame to consumers, in the way
that cigarette, firearm and opioid manufactures repeatedly have: “Oh, we’re
just responding to demand; it’s no concern of ours that our products sicken and kill people!”
"Toxic event" (c) Dan Wylie
But we are also in
this situation because over the last century or two millions of people have
made trillions of little everyday decisions, in perfectly understandable and
non-evil ways, to participate in petroleum’s benefits: from electricity to
vehicles, from plastics to soaps, from syringes to paints, from telephones to
tweets. Only today do we face the inescapable realisation that at the present
massive scale we – the Six Billion Plus – are now over-poisoning the planet
even as we benefit, while consuming its resources way, way faster than they can
be replenished. And changing that – whether or not governments legislate,
whether or not fossil fuel production and dependency shrinks voluntarily or
otherwise – will entail millions of individuals making trillions of little
everyday decisions to do things less damagingly. We might as well start. The
greatest impediment to change is not so much technical as cultural.
OK, I’ll stop preaching now. Good night, Steven.
********
For more art and books see www.netsoka.co.za
Another great post, Dan! Very timely, too, as government and corporate leaders obfuscate and muddle the waters at COP26.
ReplyDeleteThat is, muddy the waters.
ReplyDeleteHere Are The Best Articles About Disorders Like Insomnia, Anti-Anxiety, Pain Relief, ADHD, Obesity, Muscle Relaxant and Erectile Dysfunction. Just Click On Links.
ReplyDeleteBest Online Pharmacy Articles
Best Articles Of Health Symptoms
Online Health Tips
Visit Our Secured Website
Generic Articles