In this politically charged homage to Medium Cool, a photographer covers the urban guerrilla war on New York streets during the RNC.In this politically charged homage to Medium Cool, a photographer covers the urban guerrilla war on New York streets during the RNC.In this politically charged homage to Medium Cool, a photographer covers the urban guerrilla war on New York streets during the RNC.
Vija Zvers
- Mousy
- (as Vija Brigita Grosgalvis)
Jim Titus
- Music Producer
- (as James T. Williams II)
Juan Carlos Hernández
- Cruz Santiago
- (as Juan Hernandez)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I also saw this film at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival and I nearly walked out, but couldn't not watch, it was so bad. The story was so unbelievable, I felt no real sympathy for the protagonist who is arrogant and cheats on his girlfriend, the storyline that eventually unfolds between Jake and Tina is completely predictable, the footage looks horrible. I should have walked out when the director himself announced before the screening that it was conceived, written, cast, shot, and edited in less than 100 days. Believe me, it shows.
I have no problem with directors putting themselves in their own films - many greats have done it. But it is quite another thing when you're making a film that is arguably propaganda (and yes, my politics are very much to the left) and less satire and you cast yourself as the leader of an underground political action group. Not only that, but you look several times directly into the camera and deliver a barrage of your own personal politics. That's just bad film-making.
Don't waste your time on this film. If you want propaganda, watch Michael Moore. At least his work is documentary and you know what you're getting, and it's not veiled ever so thinly in narrative. If you want satire, watch Dr. Strangelove or Wag The Dog. Maybe Mr. Marshall should, too.
I have no problem with directors putting themselves in their own films - many greats have done it. But it is quite another thing when you're making a film that is arguably propaganda (and yes, my politics are very much to the left) and less satire and you cast yourself as the leader of an underground political action group. Not only that, but you look several times directly into the camera and deliver a barrage of your own personal politics. That's just bad film-making.
Don't waste your time on this film. If you want propaganda, watch Michael Moore. At least his work is documentary and you know what you're getting, and it's not veiled ever so thinly in narrative. If you want satire, watch Dr. Strangelove or Wag The Dog. Maybe Mr. Marshall should, too.
If you are a Bush-Cheney supporter who believes in conservative values, this movie may not be for you. The conservative point of view is presented but mostly to be ridiculed or criticized. Those who served in the military are respected and praised, but why they were serving is another matter.
Of course the protesters are more than just lazy people looking for an excuse to make trouble as some of the conservatives think. But they are working hard to take a stand and drive change. If they were lazy they'd just back down from all the adversity.
Rosario Dawson does a great job as a mother who is trying to cope and seems reasonably happy considering her circumstances. And she is pushing her son to be more than she is.
Nathan Crooker does a good job as an idealistic journalist.
The real stars of the movie are the ordinary people. Most appear to be merely actors but they come across as more. And there is a lot of what appears to be real footage.
And of course the convention itself was real. According to this movie, though, Bush didn't speak at night, but I guess that's a minor criticism. Maybe it wasn't safe to film that part of the powerful climactic scene during the day.
The ending is pretty amazing if disturbing.
There is some violence, but it's not too bad. I'm so glad I saw this movie cleaned up for TV, because the sound went out a lot.
It's not what we would like to see, and it's not necessarily the truth, but it's what we need to see. If only to make us think.
Of course the protesters are more than just lazy people looking for an excuse to make trouble as some of the conservatives think. But they are working hard to take a stand and drive change. If they were lazy they'd just back down from all the adversity.
Rosario Dawson does a great job as a mother who is trying to cope and seems reasonably happy considering her circumstances. And she is pushing her son to be more than she is.
Nathan Crooker does a good job as an idealistic journalist.
The real stars of the movie are the ordinary people. Most appear to be merely actors but they come across as more. And there is a lot of what appears to be real footage.
And of course the convention itself was real. According to this movie, though, Bush didn't speak at night, but I guess that's a minor criticism. Maybe it wasn't safe to film that part of the powerful climactic scene during the day.
The ending is pretty amazing if disturbing.
There is some violence, but it's not too bad. I'm so glad I saw this movie cleaned up for TV, because the sound went out a lot.
It's not what we would like to see, and it's not necessarily the truth, but it's what we need to see. If only to make us think.
This Revolution is a remarkably smart, relevant and timely take on media and personal responsibility in an era of the Patriot Act and fear of terrorism. Shot in a somewhat gritty style, the cinematography and editing offers a front line perspective in a beautiful and effective way. Footage from the actual Republican National Convention is disturbing and effective. It is able to humanize certain aspects of the media. Nate Crooker, as the character Jake Cassevetes, has the ability to take the audience through the ethical challenges that those in the media must face when reporting on highly charged and controversial topics. There is a fantastic dynamic among the cast and the emotions ring true.
This movie offers true insight into the plight of the "real" average American. It depicts a hard core reality, and helps to clarify what system is keeping us down and who "The Man" really is! Working in the South Bronx of New York, I can testify that the reality of the situation (as accurately portrayed by "This Revolution") is harsh, and often times something middle America doesn't realize, or is blinded to seeing, either because they reject it, agree with it, just plain don't know.... I gave it a nine because the acting isn't that great at times, but the message more than makes up for it... for those who know, it's powerful, for those who don't know, it might just fly right over their heads....
10sdnoble
There's a scene in Butterfly, Jose Luis Cuerda's film about the lead-up to the Spanish Civil War, where the teacher removes a book from his bookshelf and briefly considers giving it to the protagonist, a seven year-old-boy. The book is by Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin. It is quickly returned to its place on the shelf.
Is the filmmaker suggesting we aren't ready for such ideas?
The scene in Butterfly provides a metaphor for the way anarchism and politics in general have been treated by filmmakers. With few exceptions, either such topics aren't broached at all, or they are broached in such a way as to leave the viewer completely mystified. "Social Realism", according to the online artcyclopoedia, "is a rather pejorative label in the United States, where overtly political art in general, and socialist politics in particular, are extremely out of favor".
Which is perhaps why I enjoyed "This Revolution" so much. There's nothing shameful about expressing overt political sentiments in art, and there's nothing shameful about going overboard either. Witness John Heartfield, or Josep Renau, or Jean Vigo, or Pier Paolo Pasolini. Better sorry than safe, and better to risk being labeled pedantic than pussyfoot around the issues in the hopes of appeasing the critics.
The film is honest. Marshall may not be in the same league as Pasolini, but as another reviewer pointed out, he's not ending his career but beginning it. There's nothing in This Revolution that can't be forgiven in light of the budget constraints and timetable. If nothing else, it's a lot of fun. Watch for Immortal Technique's piece and the 9/11 rant; watch for the RNC footage, which is electrifying (you won't always be sure what is staged and what isn't); and watch for the reference to Malatesta, who I'm pretty sure has never been mentioned in the medium before.
Get off your high horse and I think you'll find Marshall's film refreshing and timely. We need more of this stuff.
Is the filmmaker suggesting we aren't ready for such ideas?
The scene in Butterfly provides a metaphor for the way anarchism and politics in general have been treated by filmmakers. With few exceptions, either such topics aren't broached at all, or they are broached in such a way as to leave the viewer completely mystified. "Social Realism", according to the online artcyclopoedia, "is a rather pejorative label in the United States, where overtly political art in general, and socialist politics in particular, are extremely out of favor".
Which is perhaps why I enjoyed "This Revolution" so much. There's nothing shameful about expressing overt political sentiments in art, and there's nothing shameful about going overboard either. Witness John Heartfield, or Josep Renau, or Jean Vigo, or Pier Paolo Pasolini. Better sorry than safe, and better to risk being labeled pedantic than pussyfoot around the issues in the hopes of appeasing the critics.
The film is honest. Marshall may not be in the same league as Pasolini, but as another reviewer pointed out, he's not ending his career but beginning it. There's nothing in This Revolution that can't be forgiven in light of the budget constraints and timetable. If nothing else, it's a lot of fun. Watch for Immortal Technique's piece and the 9/11 rant; watch for the RNC footage, which is electrifying (you won't always be sure what is staged and what isn't); and watch for the reference to Malatesta, who I'm pretty sure has never been mentioned in the medium before.
Get off your high horse and I think you'll find Marshall's film refreshing and timely. We need more of this stuff.
Did you know
- TriviaDuring filming of a scene August 29, 2004 a block away from the Republican National Convention, Rosario Dawson, Vija Zvers and director Stephen Marshall were arrested. Dawson and Zvers allegedly refused to yield to police and were wearing bandannas as masks, in violation of local law regarding public demonstrations. When Marshall protested the arrests and showed police the film's permits, he also was arrested. The last 15 minutes of the film were changed to incorporate the incident into the movie including using actual footage of the arrests. All charges were dropped in March 2005 after video showed that the filming did not cause any obstruction and that Dawson and company obeyed all police directives.
- ConnectionsReferences Network (1976)
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $2,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 35m(95 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content