Chavez, Stone, South of the Border

email this story
read comments (35)
post a comment

Last night I managed to attend a hard-to-penetrate screening of Oliver Stone 's South of the Border at Lincoln Center's Walter Reade theatre. Being the ardent lefty that I am and always will be, I was somewhat pleased and even comforted by what I saw. Is Stone's documentary a hard-hitting portrait of South American political realities and particularly the reign of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez? No, but it's a perfectly reasonable and welcome counter-view to the U.S. mainstream-media Kool-Aid version, which has always been reactionary and rightist-supporting and hostile to nativist movements.

Bolivan president Evo Morales, South of the Border director Oliver Stone, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez following last night's screening at Lincoln Center's Walter Reade theatre.

And I was surprised by two things. One was the attendance of the film's leading light, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, as well as Bolivian president Evo Morales. The other was the fact, contrary to certain slanted reactions to a recent Venice Film Festival screening, that South of the Border is a good deal more than just a friendly (i.e., non-condemning) portrait of Chavez. It is actually a group portrait of all the left-leaning South American heads of state whose views represent a political sea change.

All my life (or at least until recently) the leaders of South American countries have been largely run by right-leaning frontmen for the oligarchs (i.e., the upper-crust elite), which have always been in league with U.S. interests and the coldly capitalist, market-driven finaglings of the International Monetary Fund. And the lower classes have always had to eat bean dip.

But since the turn of the century a turnabout has begun to happen with the arrival of a generation of Bolivarian (i.e., nativist, anti-outsider) leaders with skeptical or contrarian attitudes about US manipulations -- Venezuela's Chavez, Bolivia's Morales, Brazil's Lula da Silva, Argentina's Cristina Kirchner (along with her husband and ex-President Nestor Kirchner), Paraguay's Fernando Lug, and Ecuador's Rafael Correa.

So now there are six Latin American presidents of a similar mindset, and seven if you add Cuba's Raul Castro. That's pretty significant considering that much of South and Central America had been under the control of a series of U.S.-supporting, IMF-funded rightist governments for most of the 20th Century.

So it's a pleasure and a relief to see not just a fair-minded, turn-the-other-cheek film about Chavez -- a man I've always admired and sympathized with since seeing The Revolution Will Not Be Televized. And I don't care what the HE right-wingers are sure to say about this because they don't want to get it. Chavez has been at war with Venezuelan right-wing interests (including the TV stations) for most of the last seven years, and if he sleeps with both eyes closed for more than two hours he'll be unseated. He isn't perfect -- who is? -- but at least he belongs to Venezuela and Venezuela alone.

The usual lefty crowd attended last night's screening -- Susan Sarandon, Danny Glover, Doug Liman, Courtney Love, producer Ed Pressman. Wall Street 2 costars Carey Mulligan and Shia Leboeuf were sitting three rows in front of me.

Stone, Chavez and Morales conducted a q & a following the film with Film Society of Lincoln Center chief Richard Pena moderaing. A cocktail gathering happened in an adjacent room. I wasn't invited to that part of the event and I didn't care.

Here's Stone's official statement:

"In January 2009, I travelled to Venezuela to interview President Hugo Chavez. Once we began our journey, however, we found ourselves telling a larger and even more compelling story, which we call South of the Border.

"Leader after South American leader seemed to be saying the same thing. They wanted to control their own resources, strengthen regional ties, be treated as equals with the U.S., and become financially independent of the International Monetary Fund. Based on our experiences in Iraq, Americans need to question the role of our media in demonizing foreign leaders as our enemies. The consequences of this can be brutal.

"This is a continuing story. It is going on right now with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Hopefully, in our film, you'll get to hear a far different side of the 'official' story."

Personality Trumps "Scary"<< previous | next >>Oz Blu-ray Junket

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on September 24, 2009 at 4:09 AM

comment #1

btwnproductions says ...

I assume Chavez and Morales are in tiown for the UN gathering, not to promote Stone's film, but when in NY...

Posted by btwnproductions at September 24, 2009 5:52 AM

comment #2

Michael says ...

You won't need to hear from the righties, Wells. I'm guessing many of the lefties on this board aren't all that jazzed by Chavez...I'll defer to them.

Posted by Michael at September 24, 2009 6:06 AM

comment #3

The Perils of Thinking says ...

As a left-leaning pragmatist, I'd have to say I agree with Wells.

As imperfect and flawed as he can be, Chavez has done far more good for the vast majority of his population than any previous leader of his nation...and far less direct harm to anyone else than his rightist, corporatist predecessors both in Venezuela and the rest of the region.

Agree or disagree with his rants, his political or economic ideologies, or his general demeanor, the outcomes for the people who elected him have been good enough that they keep doing it - even as they reject his attempts to consolidate too much power. Seems like an active, fairly healthy democracy to me...

Posted by The Perils of Thinking at September 24, 2009 6:31 AM

comment #4

Gogocrank says ...

Active, but I'm not sure how healthy. Like a lot of leaders sitting on massive oil reserves Chavez paid for a lot of his popular support, and once the price of oil started to drop, so did his popularity. In many ways he's actually not all that different from the leaders of, say, Saudi Arabia. The difference is that he espouses leftist rhetoric, which despite his best intentions is sort of undone by his frequent attempts to constitutionally mandate his status as president for life. Like all politics, if you move far enough left, who eventually come out the other side (see also Che, who wanted to empower Latin America but also ended up sowing the seeds of its self-destruction, not to mention his fascist leanings). I agree that South America is turning around these days, but I'm unsure how much folks like Chavez have to do with it.

Posted by Gogocrank at September 24, 2009 6:43 AM

comment #5

The Perils of Thinking says ...

Chavez isn't a cause of Latin America's change, he's a symptom of it; he and Morales and Correa and Zelaya didn't come to power by force, but through the work of their own citizens. Which is why he hasn't been able to push through his more extreme constitutional changes: the people who elected him aren't blindly following his every decree, but hemming him in when necessary, as they should.

A comparison to Saudi Arabia is more than a bit absurd, since Chavez spreads oil wealth among many sectors of his own society instead of a small clique of royalty and foreign investors...and also because they actually hold elections in Veneuela ..and because he doesn't ally himself with religious extremists to cover up his lack of social services...and so on.

And as for the complaint that Chavez buys his popularity...isn't that what he should be doing? Using the nation's resources to benefit the nation's population?

The alternative would be sending most of the wealth derived from Venezuela's natural resources overseas and keeping the population under control with a police state and religious manipulation...much like Saudi Arabia.

Posted by The Perils of Thinking at September 24, 2009 7:55 AM

comment #6

Phatang! says ...

Wait a second--am I LEARNING SOMETHING on an HE message board? What's going on? Where's the snark??!!

Posted by Phatang! at September 24, 2009 8:01 AM

comment #7

Gogocrank says ...

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply Venezuela was just like Saudi Arabia. Just similar in the sense that government spending per citizen is high thanks to oil revenue, which buys (or "buys") a pretty happy population. Maybe Sarah Palin awarding every Alaskan oil-derived cash is closer to it? Anyway, he's no iron-fisted dictator, and far from it, but I wouldn't necessarily peg him as a pure man of the people, either. He seems (operative word being "seems") to be the type of populist to turn pretty selfish the second his power is threatened, just like many other despots. Not saying he isn't right for that country or its democracy (still a novelty in South America). But I'd say the jury is still out on his long term efficacy (not that it could ever fairly be judged, thanks to the meddling of, among others, the U.S.).

Posted by Gogocrank at September 24, 2009 8:22 AM

comment #8

Bilge says ...

I'm about as left as they come, but I have to say that the buffoonish Chavez makes a poor, poor poster boy for the independent South American left. Most of the other leaders Jeff mentioned are a lot more responsible, intelligent, and (sorry to say) presentable.

Indeed, the ubiquity of Chavez makes it a bit too easy to demonize these other guys for the other side. It's sort of like how people's feelings about Castro colored their feelings about Allende, even though the two men, despite being friends and being socialists, couldn't have been more different in terms of temperament or approach.

Posted by Bilge at September 24, 2009 8:48 AM

comment #9

SpiderMonkey says ...

Gogocrank you nailed it - as someone who considers himself a progressive liberal, and as someone from New York that is marrying a Venezuelan and has been to Caracas several times, I can say with certainty that Chavez is not just "imperfect" but is a thug and criminal in many ways, despite his outpouting of love for "the people." Firstly, he is a stooge for the oil companies - he may not side with the politics of the USA (frankly, even I don't side with the politics of the USA much of the time), but he is certainly a man willing to hand the control of his nation's economy over to the big oil institutions. Quite simply, the math doesn't add up. Venezuela should be one of the wealthiest countries in the Western hemisphere considering how much oil they have. Companies like Chevron control vast oil deposits that blanket the country (not to mention also in Ecuador, see Joe Berlingers "Crude"). Essentially, Chevron pays Chavez vast sums of money that go straight into his pocket in exchange for him leaving them the fuck alone. He make act like a man who is put off by big money and corporations, but it's just that - an act. In truth, he is getting his massive cut just like all other corrupt bastards out there. If he cared that much for the people, why is none of the wealth trickling down to the country's poor? Don't believe a word of his rhetoric. Since his rise to power, the economy has been relegated to shambles and crime and murder have increased by vast sums in Caracas, making it arguably the most dangerous city in the Western hemisphere. The middle class, which existed in small pockets a decade ago, has entirely disappeared. I'm not educated enough about Morales and the others to make a judgement about them, but I can say with first-hand experience that Chavez is full of shit. Each time I visit his country, the people seem less and less happy. His attempts to consolidate power also speaks to his real motives - I distinctly remember watching busloads of Chinese immigrants being brought into Caracas, having just landed at the international airport. After asking about the presence, it was revealed to me that Chavez was having them brought in and given temporary jobs in order to help fix an upcoming election in his favor - I am well aware of our country's own flaws, but stuff like this is bullshit. I am all for haivng a "man of the people" running a nation like that and bringing out from under the foot of the US, but he's a liar, through and through.

Posted by SpiderMonkey at September 24, 2009 10:14 AM

comment #10

Mowkeka says ...

"Being the ardent lefty that I am and always will be, I was somewhat pleased and even comforted by what I saw."

Oh, wow! Didn't see that coming...

Posted by Mowkeka at September 24, 2009 10:36 AM

comment #11

btwnproductions says ...

Seconding what Bilge wrote.

Posted by btwnproductions at September 24, 2009 10:45 AM

comment #12

The Perils of Thinking says ...

Well said, Gogo. I agree with your assessment, but I also have faith in the Venezuelans themselves to recognize what is or is not working for them.

As for Spidermonkey's charges, Chavez' elections, even being the international pariah he is, have never been seriously disputed by international observers, who probably monitor Venezuelan elections more than most. Certainly nothing as extreme as what we saw in Afghanistan or Iran lately.

Posted by The Perils of Thinking at September 24, 2009 11:12 AM

comment #13

Travis Crabtree says ...

I know the typical liberal, kool-aid drinking media likes to say differently, and maybe it's because I'm being the ardent righty I'll always be, but, thanks to a really moving film I just saw, I firmly believe that the people of Spain never really realized how good they had it under Franco. You see, (transmission garbled, inaudible...)

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 11:38 AM

comment #14

/3rtfu11 says ...

Shut the fuck up Mowkeka

Posted by /3rtfu11 at September 24, 2009 11:55 AM

comment #15

Krazy Eyes says ...

An interesting conversation was forming until Moweka and Travis made their prerequisite appearances. Don't you two have anything remotely intelligent to add to this discussion rather than just hurling self-perceived "zingers" and then retreating?

Posted by Krazy Eyes at September 24, 2009 12:27 PM

comment #16

Travis Crabtree says ...

Okay, Krazy. Chavez is a thug, megalomaniacal tin-pot dictator who predictably, (because of his leftist, anti-American rantings), is a darling of chattering class, "take me seriously"-glasses-wearing American leftist celebrities.
These same people turn a blind eye to his restrictions on civil liberties and free media. (while at the same time acting as if something as benign in comparison as the Patriot Act is nothing short of draconian, fascistic Marshall Law) (I said "in comparison", btw)
So pardon me for not taking the musings of a film journalist on a Hollywood news page seriously enough to suit you. (no offense, Jeffrey...you're great at movies) I didn't realize this was a Fred Friendly hosted, Harvard-sponsored international ethics roundtable.

Besides, the above identified Liberals said it much better than I would have. (talking to you, Gogocrank and Bilge...props to the two of you)
And since I've been more or less scarlet-lettered as one of the "bad guys", (i.e., right of center) would you really care what I have to say anyway?

Besides, Krazy... it's not like by taking the time out to excoriate me and that other guy you've added a whole lot to the conversation yourself.

J'Accuse!

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 1:19 PM

comment #17

Coda says ...

And since I've been more or less scarlet-lettered as one of the "bad guys", (i.e., right of center) would you really care what I have to say anyway?

Right of Center, yes. Though I think your "bad guy" status is based upon your Assholishness.

There are two reasons no one cares what you have to say. Firstly, you're an asshole. Secondly, the information you bring to the conversation is banal doo-doo you could pick up from any lame-ass idiot on the street.

Posted by Coda at September 24, 2009 6:26 PM

comment #18

DeeZee says ...

Perils: "Chavez has done far more good for the vast majority of his [non-Jewish] population than any previous leader of his nation..."

http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Semitism_International/Chavez_Venezuela_Under_Threat.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_2
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4925_13.htm

"the outcomes for the people who elected him have been good enough that they keep doing it - even as they reject his attempts to consolidate too much power."

If they reject his attempts, then he's not that good. Seriously, no man of the people tries to be dictator-for-life.

Posted by DeeZee at September 24, 2009 6:39 PM

comment #19

Travis Crabtree says ...

Ah, Coda. A rose by any other name... (you know what I'm talking about... love the new handle, btw)

Explain why I'm an asshole. Seriously. And just because you disagree with something doesn't make it "doo doo".
I'm pretty certain if someone chimed in today and said something as erudite as "Sarah Palin is a worthless, stinking cunt" you'd praise them as sharp-eyed, thoughtful prognosticators of societal fortunes.

And "right of center" was inaccurate as far as this place goes, I'll grant you. What I meant to say was, I am right of center in the real world. Where most people reside. A Giuliani-supporting, pro-choice, religiously agnostic McCain voter.

However, I realize that in Hollywood Elsewhere World those beliefs make me a Malkin-loving, fascistic, book-burning, Hannity-worshiping, ball of hate and evil. So be it.

Like I said, one of the bad guys.

How's your espresso?

Thank you and suck my balls.

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 6:48 PM

comment #20

Travis Crabtree says ...

Another thing re: Coda...
I'm often amused by people who take the time to read my (plainly-labeled as "Travis Crabtree") posts, then take the time to write bitter retorts about how "nobody cares" what I have to say and my words aren't even worth reading.

I look forward to you reading this and retorting. Asshole.

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 6:52 PM

comment #21

Coda says ...

Point of Clarification, Travis. Comment #17 was in response to the quoted section of comment #16. The theory that Travis isn't liked and highly regarded due to his political leanings countered with an alternate theory. That's all. No bitterness. Most public forums have someone like you posting on them, Assholes trying to get a rise out of people. I generally do skip your comments. At first when I saw the 'Travis Crabtree' name, I would read to see how idiotic the comment would be, whether you would pretzel logic your way out when you over reached as you often did, see if you would raise the call with name-calling/threats, but that got boring. Yes, opinions I disagree with are not by definition doo doo, but yours are. finis

Posted by Coda at September 24, 2009 8:12 PM

comment #22

Travis Crabtree says ...

Oh shit.... Coda doesn't like my posts!

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 8:44 PM

comment #23

Travis Crabtree says ...

Oh, and it's 7 after 9 pm PST.... why aren't you sucking my balls?

(I knew you'd be back, "Coda")

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 8:47 PM

comment #24

Mowkeka says ...

Wow, Crabtree. Just wow.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted by Mowkeka at September 24, 2009 8:49 PM

comment #25

HH79 says ...

Jeff, did you see Chavez's speech at the UN today? Would love to know what you thought about it.

I encourage you also to take some time to read more about the work that other "left" or "center-left" Latin American leaders have been doing to lift people out of poverty and promote their countries' development without resorting to populism, attacks on the opposition and independent media, and overall undermining of democracy. I'm thinking of Tabare Vazquez in Uruguay, and the Socialist Concertacion governments, for example. Lula is a great example too, as is his predecessor Fernando Henrique Cardoso.

I know how tempting it is to support guys like Chavez for being so anti-U.S. and fighting the old Latin American right-wing elites. Trust me, I remember being excited when he first came to power. But I was rapidly disillusioned by his attacks on the media, his arms purchases which have set off an unnecessary arms race in South America, and the fact that he is coddling with Ahmadinejad and the genocidal regime in Sudan, among other things.

I respect your opinions and I agree that it's nice to see more independent and assertive Latin American leaders, but I really encourage you to look more closely and objectively at Chavez.

By the way, I'm a Latin American who considers himself a social democrat. In the US political spectrum, I would place myself squarely on the left.

Posted by HH79 at September 24, 2009 9:41 PM

comment #26

HH79 says ...

CORRECTION FOR ABOVE: In the second paragraph it should have read "the Socialist Concertacion governments IN CHILE."

Posted by HH79 at September 24, 2009 9:43 PM

comment #27

Travis Crabtree says ...

HH79.... great post.

Chavez also refuses to think of FARC as a terrorist organization, and in fact supports them.

Frankly, I thought the U.S. Left admired Chavez primarily because he was so adamantly a thorn in the side of the Bush administration. I figured once Obama took office that support would cool, (that is, they'd see him for what he is). Guess not.

Posted by Travis Crabtree at September 24, 2009 10:03 PM

comment #28

Gaydos says ...

You should read Jay Weissberg's review of the film in Variety. I wanted to paste his succinct, sharp observation about the difference between Stone and Moore here, but I'm getting some sort of typepad error, which is hugely annoying.

Posted by Gaydos at September 25, 2009 11:30 AM

comment #29

Mazoruler II says ...

As always Jeffrey you've got half the facts when it's about Chavez and anything outside your confy little box of a life... and I would like to remind you that in Uruguay (you know about this country, right?) There's also a President from the left, his name is Tabare Vazquez, and is a doctor, and is what a president should be no matter if he is from the left or from the right, a centered person who wants the best for his country. I mentioned he is a doctor in opposition to Chavez, who is a lieutenant coronel, who attempted a coup de etat against a democratically elected president in the 90's... It's strange that Stone does not interviewed Tabare Vazquez, don't you think? Maybe because even though he is a "leftist" , he does not pretend to lead stupid revolutions (that are NOT happening) or because, he is not showy enough, compared to Chavez or to Evo Morales or to Lula da Silva? As always, Hollywood goes for the show, not the realities...

Posted by Mazoruler II at September 26, 2009 12:55 AM

comment #30

petunio says ...

Comming from latin america, as much corruption there might be in the Chavez administration, the reality is that the holier-than.thou right wing alternative is far less democratic in every sense.

South America is just a vessel for both American and European commercial interests, with only a handful of families in each country being the sole beneficiaries of most of the wealth. The division between rich and poor is most times a racial division, with racial slurs being used actively within the population without thoughts of wether or not they are damaging.

Latin America has been raised from the get-go by an unfair oligarchy, active in exploiting everything a country can give to export the vast riches outside, to then squander the little that's left (be this Silver, Gold, Saltpeter, Copper, Guano or Rubber, you name it). It's fairly common to say that latins are lazy, unlike europeans, that this is the reasson why we are still poor nations. An unfair and ignorant comment; most of the riches have already been plundered a long time ago by the european (be this a colonizing nation or a money lendering one, they were all in it)

What to do in time?, let the gringos come and make little documentaries to make them feel a little better. It seems to help much better than USAID.

Posted by petunio at September 26, 2009 2:00 PM

comment #31

jimb12345 says ...

I would not be working with chavez. He is not a good person. HE needs to help his country.
orlando medical malpractice lawyers

Posted by jimb12345 at February 3, 2010 3:35 PM

comment #32

wenwen says ...

ed hardyed hardy

Gucci HandbagsGucci Handbags

Louis VuittonLouis Vuitton

Columbia SportswearColumbia Sportswear

Links Of LondonLinks Of London

Posted by wenwen at February 26, 2010 9:41 PM

comment #33

Stiv says ...

online pharmacy
generic viagra
buy tamiflu online
cialis online
buy levitra now
buy propecia online
buy lasix online
zithromax online
buy cialis soft now
buy clomid
brand cialis
kamagra online
brand levitra
brand viagra
buy viagra soft

Posted by Stiv at April 6, 2010 9:05 AM

comment #34

blue heeler puppies says ...

This is my great pleasure to visit your website and to enjoy your excellent post here. Thank you for sharing with us.theFlat Coated Retriever is not the very best breed to own.

Posted by blue heeler puppies at January 20, 2011 5:13 AM

comment #35