JessFilmAnnotation1

Annotation #1 9/2/11 //The Blind Spot// 696

1. //The Blind Spot// was directed by Adolfo Doring in 2008.

2. The film focuses on the issues with the Oil Industry and how their desire for immediate gain is causing eventual wide spread environmental loses.

3. The argument is made by showing the shift in the oil industry processes. The film shows many examples of how we use oil and petroleum based products in our everyday lives and then shows evidence of Peak Oil, which is when rate of production reaches a max and then decline occurs. The film presents a decent amount of scientific evidence but did not carry the same emotional weight as some of the other documentaries that we have watched.

4. The film draws out many different sustainability problems including political, economic, technical, cultural and ecological issues.

5. The most compelling part of the film was when they were describing Jevin’s Paradox. This is when you increase efficiency and people then use the product more than ever before. It demonstrates a key sustainability problem: not only do we need products that are more efficient and assembly processes that are more efficient, we need to change people’s mindsets which require a cultural shift. For example, as fuel prices rose, car companies developed more efficient cars and people then started driving more and for longer distances. However, if we developed more sustainable methods of transportation, we could adjust this issue.

6. I was not convinced by the Peak Oil argument since there are many arguments that contradict this theory. The timeline they presented seemed off and the entire argument seemed a bit dated. Also, no counter arguments to the theory were presented which does not strengthen their viewpoint. Even though the film was made less than four years ago, it had the feeling of not being up to current speed.

7. I think the film best addresses an adult liberal audience. There were a lot of references to past methods of production and utilized older and slower methods of cinematography. I think this method was used to emphasize the gravity of the situation and it did maintain power but lost the main stream audience for the same reason.

8. A concluding section that would give us some ideas as to what to do now would have been very helpful in enhancing this film. After raising awareness of a grave situation, people’s first reaction is to go fix it of which the film does not take advantage.

9. The film says that if everyone in the world consumed as much as the average American, we would need three planets. The first type of action we can take is to keep our consumption rate in check. If we monitor our reliance on petroleum based products and use local products instead of ones that rely on large amounts of transportation, then we can help make a small change.

10. The film encouraged me to seek out more information on Peak Oil. I was ready to accept what the film presented by commentary in class told me that the movie did not present the full story. What I discovered was that it was the term of that time in history. It was the political key word and had various agendas and propaganda behind it. Though resources accept that oil will one day peak, it is also no longer the ‘key word’ of the current political agenda. [] I was also appalled by the concept of mountaintop removal and wanted to investigate to see if this was actually true. The film stated that over 470 mountains have been blown up and that it is more cost effective to blow up the mountain than to mine it. One major issue I discovered is that entire towns would develop around mining sites in the valley of the mountain. This provided work and community for citizens. With mountaintop removal, the valleys flood which reroutes the entire area’s water network and eliminates the ideal location for a town for workers. The rerouted water is also typically contaminated from the coal processes and it then pollutes the entire water system of the area. []