In the classic horror film Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, we enter the world of a childhood star long after the lights have dimmed and the applause has faded. Played by Bette Davis, Baby Jane is angry, callous, calculating, and cruel. Davis' masterful portrayal personifies the scars of lost fame and the fetid stench of regret. She cackles with delight as she famously abuses her sister time and time again. Baby Jane is no longer a star but rather a lampoon of the worst of what even Hollywood's glitz and make-up cannot hide. She's a star who has faded and she's damned angry. With his latest film South of the Border, Oliver Stone wears the cynicism of a man looking for relevance just as overtly as Baby Jane Hudson wears her grotesque makeup on her vengeful face.
From the moment South of the Border opens we're confronted with sound bites from Fox news lambasting Chavez. Stone is setting us up for his canonization of the highly controversial, and anti-semetic leader. It's unfathomable that the same filmmaker who made Platoon could rub elbows with the tyrant Hugo Chavez but miss the responsibility to turn the camera on the poor and oppressed of Venezuela.
Stone's one-sided Chavez infomercial is selling us negativity. Never mind Venezuela -- with the highest homicide rates in the world, increasing gap between the rich and poor, the food shortages, the unemployment, and the highest inflation rate in South America -- here Stone tells us America is the problem and the our media is to blame.
As a democrat, I get it. Chavez called Bush El Diablo (the devil) at the time when Americans were fed up with the President's shock-and-awe fear mongering against Americans. We watched as the lunatic Pat Robertson announced that the Venezuelan leader should be assassinated. Clearly the enemy of these guys deserved a closer look.
Had Stone gone to South America to expose the regression of Venezuela instead of making a buddy-buddy road show with megalomaniacs, he could have made a few salient points against U.S. media in his favor. Yes, the American media cannot be trusted. You'd be a fool to believe everything you hear read or see. Still too, you'd be an equal fool not to trust the trail that history has left in the wake of all-too-many powerful dictators.
With his entrée, Stone had a great opportunity to turn the cameras on Venezuela -- its decaying infrastructure, human rights abuse, poverty, and skyrocketing crime rate. Instead we are spoon-fed propaganda under the guise of a documentary. The question is why? Is Stone looking to remain relevant? Like Baby Jane does he lament for days gone by, or grown bitter with time -- or has Oliver Stone simply been blindsided by Hugo's political power and private jets? This film is as sour a dish as the rat Baby Jane serves her sister in the 1962 flick. Joan Crawford screamed in anguish as she threw that rat to the side. No one who cares about humanity's progress should take a nibble from the twisted man Stone is trying to sell us in his latest effort -- but don't take my word for it.
Look at Venezuela and judge for yourself.
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/201007/20100702.html
http://www.wan-press.org/article4419.html.....57th World Newspaper Congress in Istanbul--The Administrative Counsel of the Association strongly condemned the repression exercised in Venezuela against the liberty of expression.
http://www.zocalo.com.mx/seccion/opinion-articulo/venezuela-represion-a-prensa/....column by Carlos Ramirez in "Zocalo Saltillo", Saltillo, Coahuila, México, 6/3/2010, criticizes Hugo Chavez for having invoked the Charter of the OAS to intervene in the recent crisis in Hoduras while at the same time violating the OAS Charter by restricting the freedom of the press in Venezuela. Ramirez proposes that, "If the OAS is an instrument invoked by Chavez to 'defend' the democracy in Honduras, then the OAS ought to urgently intervene to impede the approval of la Ley Mordaza de Chavez (the Gag Law of Chavez), because it violates the Democratic Charter."
There are lots of non-USA sources critical of Chavez' abuses against the free press in Venezuela. I believe those who praise his progressive social reform, including Oliver Stone, should be concerned as well.
Apparently Mr. Gregory does not take seriously these words if he preceeds them with these;
"Venezuela -- with the highest homicide rates in the world, increasing gap between the rich and poor, the food shortages, the unemployment, and the highest inflation rate in South America"
And follows with this laughable construction;
"Venezuela -- its decaying infrastructure, human rights abuse, poverty, and skyrocketing crime rate."
I'd like to hear where Gregory gets his information.
Yes, homicdes and inflation are high, but they have always been high. Inflation was over 100% before Chavez was elected. Inflation was much higher on average for all adminstrations prior to Chavez. Homicides are related to drug violence - something that is largely beyond the control of any government (violence has increase much faster in Mexico and Central America, for example). Much of the violence is the result of narcos getting pushed out of other countries, due in large part to US policy.
Bottom line is Chavez and other lefty leaders in LA deserve a fair shake, which they have not gotten in the capitalist US media. Stone tries to correct this and he immediately gets attacked. Why is the HP posting this?
'Over the past year, the statement that poverty in Venezuela has increased under the government of President Hugo Chávez has appeared in scores of major newspapers, on major television and radio programs, and even journals such as Foreign Affairs1 and Foreign Policy.2 (See Appendix for a sample of such statements.) These statements have only rarely been contested or corrected
This paper looks at the available data on poverty in Venezuela, which show a reduction in poverty since 1999, as well as related economic data. The paper also briefly notes how some of the mistakes surrounding the discussion of this issue have been made. Finally, we also look at the impact of the provision of health care to the poor, which has been greatly expanded over the last few years
http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/downloads/ceprpov.htm
SO PLEASE stop repeating lies...it doent help youre case against President Chavez or the Venezuelan people who elected him....esp as real poverty is on the rise in the US.
Corrupting the government of an entire nation using your corporations backed up by your military, the end result of which is millions of people living in squalor and poverty with no hope for the future and no basic social care like access to doctors and medicine.
Our imperialist corruptive actions via our oil companies were the real human rights abuses. We ruined and shortened the lives of millions of innocent people so a hand full of us could make big profits.
They are doing their best to recover from our destructive and criminal actions. Lets let the be. It isn't our country. We have no right to interfere.
I have voted Democrat my whole adult life, but it has always been known and it is now abundantly clear, that the Democratic party is full of very unethical and immoral people.
There are:
Southern conservatives
Wall Street big business financial types
and of course
neo-conservative pro war types
in the Democratic party
There are plenty of closet imperialists, pro establishment, pro big business, free-trade neo-conservatives in the Democratic party.
So calling oneself a Democrat to try and get some standing before making a foreign policy statement is just silly.
Maria is correct on all counts and the interviewer cut right to the point.
I know because I lived in Caracas and have family there now. Chavez ruined a beautiful country that was one of the most democratic in South America. The poor are not doing better - they are so desperate that one puts their life in danger driving the streets of Caracas because of kidnapping and robberies. Chavez is nationalizing whatever he can get his hands onto and is rumored to be benefiting financially from deals with other countries for Venezuelan oil and on the money being made by industries now under his control. He even nationalized a big supermarket chain recently.
Banks a closing down because of attempts to nationalize them causing millions to lose their life savings.
The Jewish population in Caracas is being harassed with synagogues being vandalized. One of Chavez' best friends is Ahmadinejad of Iran and Chavez has made negative comments about Israel in the press. The Israeli Embassy in Caracas had to close because of tension between the two countries.
People are leaving Venezuela in droves because of the deterioration of the economy and dictatorial stranglehold that Chavez has on the country.
This is a great danger to America as he is spreading his socialistic ways throughout South America. We need to watch this situation and support Maria Conchita Alonso! Her passion needs to be heard.
The USA did more harm to Venezuela than all of what they claim Chavez has done.
It is their land, their territory, and their right to live how they want to live. It is also their responsibility to fix whatever needs fixing in their country.
If Chavez ever attacks the USA, then you can defend yourself. But until then, this is more meddling by the USA and it is unwanted by them and by most Americans.
Stop bothering other people and maybe they will stop hating us.
They way our nation is rapidly going downhill, pretty soon we will need the good will of other nations to stay afloat. We need to build some good will because we have none right now.
Comes to my mind when watching the likes of Ahmadinejad, Chaves and the Castros.
Venezuela's food production and distribution system is crumbling. Every week brings news of food companies being taken over and goods being seized, and Chavez's government has demonstrated no ability to competently replace them.
Should famine come to Venezuela, how will Chavez's supporters look themselves in the mirror?
They have been saying that since the first day Chavez got elected President and they have never stopped. All the while statistics show that poverty has decreased.
There were more starving and homeless people before Chavez. Facts are facts.
Venezuela needs lots of work, but it is better than it was under American imperial puppet rule.
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=357223&CategoryId=10717
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/27/venezuela-hugo-chavez-private-retailers
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2541989/posts
Chavez has 'seized' nothing..what he has done is renationalise industries for the benefit of Venezuelans.
What news are you talking about? Your post is short on substance.
Today Venezuela is importing 75% of its food. Power is cutoff constantly. Murder and kidnapping is the worst in the World. Venezuela is the only country in South America whose economy contracted last year and already had a negative deficit of 5.6% in the first quarter of this year. Inflation is rampant, hope is gone, and most importantly, it has a President who has had 2 terms already, extended to 6 years. Chavez tried to pass a law that would allow him to be President for life. Fortunately for Venezuela, Chavez lost the President for life vote last year. Unfortunately for Venezuela, Chavez is still in power and with the 20 billion in Russian tanks and arms that he has purchased he will probably remain in power when his 2nd term expires in 2012.
“Chavistas” are useful idiots to Chavez. They serve at his whim only. If they dare disagree they are cut off in an instant.
venezuela has been importing food for decades, since the farmers were migrated into the cities with the rise of the oil economy.
'Chavez tried to pass a law that would allow him to be President for life. '
rubbish Chavez never triedto pass any such 'law'..what he did was have a referendum(ever hear of those) in which people got to vote to end presidential term limits...IN WHICH if he was voted again he coud be president,.SO the people got to elect him IF THEY WANT...
That called democracy. YOU hate Chavz because he working for all venezuelans esp the poor, and not just the rich.thats why he keeps getting elected.