AdamsFilmAnnotation6

"Burning in the Sun" was directed by Cambria Matlow and Morgan Robinson and was released in 2010.

By focusing on the main character, Daniel Demebele, the film argues the point that 3rd world countries and areas around the globe that immersed in poverty can be helped alot by really simple things, like electricity, running water, and solar panels.

The argument is made throughout the film and concludes when the village of Banko received their solar panels and well. The entire process of constructing the modules, locating villagers who need them, and the interaction between Daniel and professors in villages who desire electricity is transferred to the viewer by the end of the film. The argument is not necesarily a verbal one, but rather, a physical one.

This film accomplished alot with a very simple nature and drew out political, economic, educational, and ecological issues. The poltiics of the U.N. and global nations are exposed in the explanantion of how Mali came to be so poor. Social issues include the poverty, economical climate, and culture of Africa. The film also introduced a very interesting issue; wether or not electricty should be viewed as a human right. Economics was also a alrge player in the discussion in the film. Daniel discusses constantly how much it costs for him to provide these services to villagers. He also mentioned how small financing via micro-loans and government stimulation can allow the people to make the change the governments wished they could accomplish.

The scenes toward the end of the movie showcasing the young children bathing themselves in cool running water, and entering the school at night, and specifically their faces and excitement in their voices was extremelly compelling and pursuaded me that small changes can make big differences in peoples lives and that there is a much thinner line between poverty and positive situations.

I was not so compelled by the workers and their attiutdes that they deeply cared about things like ecological, and sustainable issues. Rather it seemed that they were primarily concerned with making money and causing social change.

This film best adresses the viewer who has some concern for the issues of poverty, and the advancement of renewable energy. Also, the film reaches the individuals who are are unsure of the possibility of making change. I think anyone who is concsious of the social problems in the world, and especially Africa, will be moved by the images seen in the film.

A little bit of discussion aurrounding the energy that Africa consumes and how the impovershed can sometimes destroy their environment via clear cutting, poor agricultural practices, and fossil fuel use. I was amazed to have not heard the word fossil fuels uses once. I understand what these types of projects mean in terms of social change, but what does it mean in terms of ecological change?

This film, via Daniel, proposed that government who spend lots of money usually spend it on things that do not help individuals and that money and effort could be better spent if it was given to the people. I applaud this film becuase it showcases a great example of people can actively change their environment and community. This type of philantrophic/ business model is becoming more succesful than others.

[] This is a great article describing how Africa compares to the rest of the world in terms of energy consumption, sustainable energy consumption, and how each aspect of their energy comes from certain sectors. Africa is so less polluting and consuming, but they will face climate change just the same, maybe worse.

Interested in how micro-loans can aid people in Africa, and how they work exactly lead me to this website. [] This site provides some great information and is sparking my own curiosity in starting one of these projects.