Crude

** Director: ** Joe Berlinger ** Release Year: ** 2009 ** What is the central argument or narrative of the film? **  The film focuses on the disaster in Ecuador in the areas of the oil facilities operated by Texaco. It follows the court cases through the years and the story of the native people affected by the disaster. The film highlights the struggles of the local people who have to deal with the oil destroying their land and their communities. Also how these local people are ignored by the world, even their own government does not recognize their plight until recent years. In this area the oil industry was seen as bringing prosperity to the nation, people were reluctant to say anything negative about it. ** Who are the key social actors and stakeholders of the film? **  The natives of Ecuador are the main actors, there is one representative in particular who is chosen to travel the world to represent his people. He travels the world trying to gain support for his people who are being mistreated. There is also the lawyer who is representing the natives in the case against Texaco. This is the main focus of the movie, his travels to gain support of this his caused and compiling evidence against the company. The company lawyers and representatives are also shown. However they are never shown to provide valid information to the question asked. There is also a look in to the judicial system in Ecuador, this reveals the rampant corruption in the country. Later in the film the group rallying support for the natives recruits Trudie Styler. She is a prominent supporter of rainforest conservation and a large contributor to other charity organizations. She helps lead the effort to gain worldwide support for the people of Ecuador. This helps put more social pressure on both the government of Ecuador and Texaco. ** What does the film convey about the matrix of the factors that contribute to our dependence on oil? **  In Ecuador Texaco had many practices that cut costs a great deal, these were the same practices that left millions of gallons on the surface of the rainforest to contaminate the water and soil. While doing this they were able to produce very inexpensive oil. This led the people of the U.S. to become reliant on oil. When it was inexpensive it was incorporated into every aspect of daily life. The film does not directly state this correlation but it easy to see the relation. ** What does the film convey about the matrix of problems caused by our dependence on oil? **  The dependence on oil allowed Texaco to take advantage of the people in the rainforest and the natural environment. The drilling practices of Texaco many have extracted oil cheaply, but they have destroyed areas of the rain forest for years to come. Some of the damage may never be repaired. Texaco has been able get away with such crimes because the officials in the government of Ecuador are supported and bribed by the oil company to promote good business in the area. Even years after the drilling began Texaco is fighting the payment of damages when it is clear that they are the cause of the disaster. Texaco took advantage of people who were uneducated about the potential hazards of oil drilling. ** What parts of the film convey about the matrix of affects that would be mobilized by a shift away from oil? **  As with many of these oil disasters it is very easy for people to ignore them, thinking that that only happens thousands of miles away in less developed countries. They think to blame the company or the country it takes place in. It is more the fault of the public for continuing to buy oil products when they know the problems. This type of disaster around the oil industry is not a new thing and yet people continue to buy oil products. People need to take the information presented to them and fully understand the consequences of their actions. With the power of the oil companies over the media and the government it is sometimes difficult to truly know all the facts about such a situation. For there to be a shift away from oil in the economy there would also need to be a shift in power away from oil interest. This would take a great public interest movement. ** What part of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? **  I was amazed to see the images of the open pits of oil that were left behind. I don’t understand how it is possible for anyone to think that that was a permanent solution. There were not even fences around the pits, not that that would have made them much better. It shows a complete sense of apathy on the part of the oil company. There was also the problem of corruption in the government surrounding the oil industry in Ecuador. The amount of resistance from government officials was amazing when the lawyer went to talk with many of the officials. These are supposed to be the people protecting the natives of the rainforest. ** What part of the film did you not find compelling or convincing? **  There was a great deal about the oil company’s arguments and evidence that was not convincing. The first was the film from when they originally began drilling. Their quote was “bringing muscle and machines to untouched places”. They never thought that maybe they should remain untouched. They portrayed an image of improving the lives of the people in the jungle, when in the end they destroyed their entire means to live. When Texaco was doing research into the contamination of the water and soil around their pits they came back with results that there was nothing wrong. It is hard to imagine missing an entire pit of oil, it would be difficult to get past the sight of that much less the smell. They also claimed that the reason of the illness among the natives was only because of poor hinge. There appears to be no logical reason for this false evidence. ** What kind of corrective action are suggested by the film, if the film itself does not suggest a corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective? **  The film was trying to gain support and awareness for the problem in Ecuador. The only way to correct such a situation is to have a great deal of public pressure on those with power in the situation. If there was a massive boycott of Texaco products until they cleaned up the spill, the oil would be clean very quickly. At this time it is less expensive to continue to fight the damages payment than to actually pay them. Until this changes nothing significant will change. The film is looking to continue the fight against the oil industry around the world by showing people the tragic issues involved in the dependence on oil. ** What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out, provide two examples of what you learned? **  This film compelled me to look into alternative fuels, I have always been interested in ethanol. I started looking into converting my car into one which could run on both ethanol and regular gasoline. I found that here were kits to replace several of the key components to an engine for about $400. Even thought it would take a long time to pay back I am still interested in the conversion because of the moral issue of boycotting oil companies. However there are still moral and social issues with using ethanol. With the current production system in this country, ethanol is produced mostly form corn. The more that is used in cars the less people in other countries have to eat. At this time there appears to be no easy answer for fueling a car other than to not drive, which is not always an option.
 * Title: ** Crude