Welcome to Sarajevo

Rating: 100%

(www.filmclub.org)

Also Known As:

Unknown

Version:

Languages:

Length:

103 minutes: Uncut

Review Format:

DVD

Year:

1997

Countries:

Predominant Genre:

War

Director:

Outstanding Performances:

Premiss:

Journalist gets emotionally-involved with the children at a front-line orphanage - he illegally tries to take one back home with him.

Themes:

Advertising | Alienation | Christianity | Compassion | Corporate Power | Courage | Curative | Destiny | Emotional repression | Empathy | Family | Genocide | Humanity | Identity | Individualism | Loneliness | Love | Loyalty | Materialism | Narcissism | Personal | Personal change | Political | Political Correctness | Redemption | Sadomasochism | Schizophrenia | Self-Esteem | Solipsism | The State | White culture | White privilege | White supremacy

Similar to:

Unknown

Caucasian nightmares in a damaged brain

Summary: Sitting on the fence makes Whites morally-impotent.

Interesting look at the White way of reporting news, which aims for objectivity, but merely results in circulating knowledge - with little or no understanding of the situation being reported.

The journalists here only seek a story that will enhance their popularity with their respective ethnic audiences; meaning: From that audience’s imagined perspective; successfully evading the true significance of events, while presenting only the appearance of them.

Whites do not wish to understand anything but their own preoccupations. When they look at the world outside of themselves, through the medium of journalism, they see only a mirror of their self-indulgence, immaturity & endemic self-regard. Whites kid themselves that no matter how empty their lives, there is always someone else having a harder time. Whites appear to understand the world they fear - but without the necessary hard work of having to directly-experience it, nor any genuine longing to step outside their imaginary gilded-cage.

Here, a particular White journalist crosses the line and becomes so involved in the story he is covering that he becomes a necessary part of it: In so doing, he tries to save his soul. It is clearly impossible to report events without becoming emotionally-involved - the attempt merely proves a vulture-like lack of basic humanity. Journalistic impartiality is really a journalistic myth to keep journalists happy about their actually-existing biases - which they desperately (& rather despairingly) try to conceal behind the pretext of public interest.

It is far better to report using your own admitted biases so that we can know if you are talking shit, rather than the empty pretense of an objectivity regularly disdained by emotional attachments like White supremacy.

This movie also manages to take pot-shots at the generalized inadequacy of the United Nations and an international community that talks a great deal about humanitarian intervention, but offers precious little of it in its disregard of the slaughter of Muslims (while continuing to interfere in the affairs of sovereign states when it suits it).

If this movie does not make you angry, you are already dead. It demonstrates the fallacy of making other people’s problems a means of evading your own, as well as that of thinking that there could ever be involvement without commitment. This is a sincere and heartfelt movie-of-ideas, rather than engaging characters - and none the worse for it since the ideas are so central to human life and living.

---

Copyright © 2015 Frank TALKER.
Permission granted to reproduce & distribute this posting in any form - provided you cite this Blog.
All other rights reserved.