ProsackHenry-Flow

=Flow=


 * 1.** **Title, director and release year?**

Flow was released in 2008 and was written by Irena Salina.


 * 2.** **What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

The huge sustainability problem that this documentary film discusses is water. Our water resources are slowly running out, and we are not prepared for what may happen to ourselves in the future. Water has become the third largest industry in the world today, yet it has not been discussed in the media as much. Most people believe in the hydrologic cycle in that water will continue to circulate through the earth and will never be a resource problem. This is an incorrect statement. There are several problems that are involved in an entire matrix of issues that cannot be easily solved. Our current system and way of life is harming ourselves and our environment. The film suggests that we need to be seriously concerned with the sustainability issue of water and how we can solve the problems we face in the future.


 * 3.** **What sustainability problems does the film draw out?**

There are so many sustainability problems associated with water. The first one would be the health of the human race. Over 2 million people die every year to waterborne diseases that can be easily preventable, due to the situations that many groups of people are forced to live in. People will do anything for water. It is estimated that 40% of all stomach viruses etc. are in result from drinking tap water. The pollution of our water systems creates these health problems. Man-made chemicals are introduced into the water supply in which we drink, and these toxins affect our animals and environment. Environmental issues are another sustainability problem as chemicals such as Atrazine contribute to various problems to the world and our health. Several regions of the world are running out of water resources due to the systems we have set in place such as water companies and dams. Corporations in the water industry are extremely detrimental, as they slowly gain control over our water supply. In developing countries, people have to pay for water that is rightfully theirs at a high price. This contributes to a lot of health problems in the area as people cannot afford the water, they will find unhealthy sources. The water companies use bottled water as a means of making a profit. However, these bottles are not recyclable and are equivalent to your local tap water. Legal issues involving the World Bank allow these water companies to gain so much political and economical power in the world because they run the committees and make decisions regarding our future water resources. Law is another sustainability issue because there is little regulation to these water companies. People have risen against these companies, yet the courts support the company’s actions. These are problems that we are facing today, and this film suggests to do something about it.


 * 4.** **What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?**

What I found the most interesting in the entire movie was that it has been calculated that only $30 billion a year would provide safe, clean water to everyone on the planet. However, the world’s citizens pay three times that amount on bottled water a year! This shows that the water companies are not focused on regulating our water and providing water for everyone. They are only looking for a profit. As a $400 billion dollar industry, we can easily provide the necessary water for everyone. Another compelling fact was that the World Bank consists of these water corporations. They force countries to privatize such as Bolivia or they threaten their water supply will be cut off. The World Bank also invests in major land projects such as dams because they make a huge profit. Dams are not sustainable by any means, as it limits the flow of water to other parts of the region. However, you cannot sue the World Bank, so it seems that the water companies have free reign to do whatever they please without being regulated. This is unacceptable.


 * 5.** **What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?**

There weren’t any parts of this film that did not compel me.


 * 6.** **What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?**

As I mentioned in this section to the film Blue Gold, I want to search where I’m getting my water from in the areas that I am living in. I want to know who is controlling my water and how that is affecting our sustainability issues. By knowing these facts, I can take action if necessary instead of laying back and doing nothing. I want to research the World Bank a little more and learn about any possible regulations that may be placed on them in order to reduce the detrimental effects it is having on our water problem. Maybe there can be a way to overthrow the power that the water companies have over the World Bank, so that we can make our water resource decisions without the worry of making a profit off of the population. I want to address the water bottle issue, and hopefully this will reduce its harmful effects on the environment and our water supply.


 * 7.** **What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?**

This film affects everyone and encourages the population to make the necessary changes in order to solve these major sustainability issues. By educating our population at younger ages, the more likely these problems will be addressed. An elementary student started a fund that helped many people across the world. It is this kind of imagination that will save the planet. This film will definitely change the opinions and ideas people have on water, as they will want to make a difference in their regions and the ones surrounding it.


 * 8.** **What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?**

Water conservation techniques were introduced into the film that can help retain rainwater and provide a water supply to the surrounding area without the negative control of water companies. Legal battles were also discussed in the movie, such as the one that took place in Michigan against Nestle. Even though the environmental groups lost the legal war, they made a point. These groups had the power to make a difference, and they did. Governmental power is a necessity that needs to be in support in order to make a change in legal issues, however. Another example was Coca Cola Company in an area impacting the water supply and creating several health and environmental problems. Every day, residents of the region gathered outside and protested. Eventually, they gained enough support to show that the presence of the company was detrimental and Coca Cola was forced to shut down the plant. The film has its own petition to be presented to the United Nations to include water as a human right.


 * 9.** **What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?**

I believe that this movie did a great job in representing the environmental problems that water has been facing and included viable information for the viewer to make a difference in the world, no matter how small.