Customer Reviews

Punishment Park

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I first saw this film in 1976, my freshman year of college, played and replayed for free in the student union building of the University of New Mexico. Two points about that: one: this was not the usual "entertainment" one would expect to find played for students killing time between classes, and two: this film would not be played at all in any university or college open space today. There is no contemporary counterpart for Peter Watkins that I can think of today--he makes someone like Michael Moore look like a sixth grader with his first camcorder. Watkins is best known for his 1965 film The War Game, a rumination on what would happen if nuclear war struck the UK, shot in his trademark "you-are-there" psuedo documentary style. The film was immediatelty banned by the BBC who had originally commisioned it, for being too realistic and disturbing. (Duh--what were they expecting, The Day After?) Watkins other great film, not available in the US, and as far as I know, never shown in American since it first appeared on PBS, then NET, in 1964, is Culloden, about the battle between the British and Scottish rebels under Bonnie Prince Charlie at Culloden Moor in the mid-eighteenth century. I saw it when it was tv in 64 and images from it still remain with me, 40 years later. Punishment Park proposes a US, circa 1971, where those actively against the Vietnam war, instead of being imprisoned, are set loose in some southwestern desert, pursued by police and National Guard; if they manage to reach the destination set for them by their jailers, they are set free. If not...Implausible? Over the top? Paranoid? Perhaps. But I wonder what Watkins would say about The Patriot Act. About our treatment of Iraqi prisoners. The film shocked me thirty years ago, and I think it will shock me when I see it again. Watkins, as unknown as he is, still is one of the important filmmakers to come out of Britian in the 60s. Perhaps this will signal the availablity of his other rarely seen films.

It took me a few minutes into the film to realize it was shot in the early seventies and, in fact, was about the era of Nixon rather than the era of Bush. The similarities are creepy to say the least.

The film is about the state of national emergency proclaimed by the president of the United States, which gives permission to detain those who may be a threat to national security, who are then detained, often preemptively, judged by the tribunal that disregards constitutional rights of these "criminals," and given a choice between hard time in prison for years or hard time in punishment park for three days. Guess which one is worse? Still, everyone picks punishment park where they are forced to run through the desert in intolerable heat (or cold, at night), without water, toward a destination designated by the American flag. The purpose of the punishment park is to - well, punish - and train the law enforcement officers to deal with dissidents en masse.

The whole thing is so realistically done, including the lack of script for the tribunal scenes, where the actors on both sides of the fence spoke their own invented lines based on their own life experiences, that I had to take another few minutes to remind myself that we don't have punishment parks in America. According to the director's commentary, Danish media was convinced otherwise and protested punishment parks based on this movie, then was forced to retract their protest realizing belatedly the movie was fictional.

It's a visceral picture. There is more than one reason why it had been practically banned (or simply denied distribution) for decades: not only is it pointing fingers at just about every establishment, but it is also difficult d/t the violence and lack of humanity displayed on the screen. Yet, the sheer nerve and vision of this film are undeniable. Though the point of view of the director is unmistakably that the police is bad and the prisoners are decent people, I couldn't even call the film prejudiced. It does give both sides something to say.

It's unlikey that any film released in 2005 will rival "Punishment Park" for its combination of political urgency, blazing moral ardor and formal quile. Peter Watkins is the most marginalized film director of the 20th century. The release of this film is a watershed moment in the history of his career. For the first time America will have the opportunity to see this visionary, earth scorching missive and one of his very best films. If "Fahrenheit 9/11" was released in 1971 it would have been called "Punishment Park"

Regretably, reality is worst than this. Simply watch "The Road To Guantanamo" (Michael Winterbottom, in a similar style) for an example. Peter Watkins does what CNN, Sky and BBC cannot: express the contemporary experience with the use of a fiction (instead, those channels fail to show reality with the use of clips from the real).
Watkins' introduction to the film is excellent and work as one (so watch it before the film). Is also nice to finally put a face to Watkins' name.

I first saw Peter Watkins's Punishment Park the year of its release and I have never forgotten my visceral almost painful reaction to it. At that time the film was a politically charged document with just enough narrative to carry the weight of its polemics through to its disconcerting conclusion. It was 1971, Nixon was in the White House and the Vietnam War dragged on, leaving many of us to feel that the politics of the day had doomed the social revolution of the late 60s. Despite some uncanny contemporary resonances, watching the film now, severed from its original moment in time but with the indelible emotional memory of my first experience of it, Punishment Park feels both distant and nostalgic. Nevertheless, it remains a potent achievement that represents anti-establishment filmmaking as a passion for justice and a commitment to socio-political change rather than entertainment or technological wizardry. This DVD is a perfect transfer of the original film, which was effectively shot on 16mm. The film concentrates its uncompromising message in its documentary style, so thankfully you won't come away distracted by praising the direction or performances, some of which do seem affected relative to today's standards of realism. Punishment Park stands for what it believes and its indictment remains relevant.

In 1971, Director Peter Watkins became one of the unfortunate few to make a prophecy which came true--in this case, in the form of a film. I know not how it was received at the time or how it was reviewed. I suspect not well, since the film virtually disappeared from sight for a number of years. Rumor-mongers even claimed that the government had banned it--whether true or not I have no idea. More likely, the graphic violence and language, which are common enough now but still far from easy to watch, were a bit much for audiences of 36 years ago.

Purporting to be a documentary shot by a British film crew about a controversial Presidential order intended to suppress dissent, "Punishment Park" offers 85 minutes of grainy 16mm footage, usually from a handheld camera, with performances that were to my understanding improvised at least in part. The result is "The Blair Witch Project" set in an all-too-real world, with both actors (some of them thinly-disguised versions of both 1960s radicals and "establishment" figures) and fictional film crew falling into their roles beautifully. We watch as a rigged government "tribunal" summarily hands down verdicts against assorted alleged "conspirators", including a poet, a singer, and an assortment of faces anyone over 40 will easily recognize from old news footage of anti-Vietnam protests. Each is given the choice of a lengthy prison sentence or what seems an "easy out"--a three day trek through "Punishment Park" in what basically amounts to a large-scale version of "capture the flag". The storyline alternates between a group of people being sentenced, and their predecessors, who are making their way through the "park".

It's disturbingly easy to forget the period in which this movie was set--a picture of Richard Nixon shown a couple of times makes it clear that Watkins was not attempting to portray a future society. However, as the story progresses, and one begins to listen to the platitudes offered by the judges as well as the rhetoric hurled by the judged and "jury" (a group of police officers and National Guard personnel), they begin to sound all-too-familiar. What may have seemed over the top in 1971 can be seen on Fox News every day in 2007. Life has imitated art, to a terrifying degree.

A few dated comments (references to Kent State, for example) and a predictable ending (though I've no idea how it could have been otherwise) do not in any way diminish this powerful film. We may not have "Punishment Parks" just yet, but "boot camps" for some convicted criminals have been around for a good long time now, and military tribunals are underway as you read this (of course, we can reassure ourselves, they're only for terrorists). With detention centers under construction at this writing "for the event of a national emergency", it is difficult not to wonder just how far away the full realization of "Punishment Park's" dire warning might be.

While clearly intended as a no-holds-barred slam against authoritarianism, "Punishment Park" almost manages to strike a balance between utterly callous "authority" and book-smart, world-stupid "dissenters". Both sides receive their share of ridicule. So, for that matter, does everyone's favorite enemy, "the media" (I note that a Michael Moore was credited as a sound man--THE Michael Moore?). No matter who you side with in the end, you will rage by the end of this movie. And you will think a bit about the present-day world, a world in which it increasingly seems all-too-possible that the concepts of truth, justice, and the American Way just might be on the verge of obsolescence.

See this film. And keep an eye on it. Should it disappear from shelves, you'll know that the final piece of Watkins' prophecy has indeed come to pass.

Punishment Park (1971) by Peter Watkins is one of the hardest hitting political movies you can see which is to be expected given its low-budget antiestablishment bases which was condemned by the media who did not want any form of "anti-American" propaganda. Punishment Park is the story of two film crews who follow the army and the police in a desert zone, 60 miles long, called Punishment Park. The film is told in non-linear format between a court hearing type political debate were after the defendants are charged set loose and then chased down in the park trying to run to their freedom before being captured, i.e. filled full of hot lead.

The film is set during the actual Vietnam War but in alternative history with a SF feel. Nixon who has bombed the Far East has seen fit to bring in executive powers and privileges. Any form of antiwar movement or objection to the draft is met with a choice between either a long jail term or punishment park.

While low-budget constraints manifest themselves (only 8 people worked on the film) in terms of some production values the documentary feel is there and at times you do question if what you are seeing is real or not. The idea itself is very much a type of "Stanford Prison Experiment" and the cast are all unknowns. In fact most of these people are actually playing themselves and were in real-life dissenters. Some of the cops had worked as cops. There was no script. The result, however constrained by budget, is what makes it is so unbelievably hard hitting. Of course Hollywood refused to have anything to do with it so naturally we want everything to do with it.

Instant cult classic.

This is a masterpiece of agit-prop filmmaking and quite simply one of the greatest films EVER MADE!

Peter Watkins brilliantly uses the style of cinema verite and neo-realism to effectively blur the lines between what is real and what is fake. The set-up is this: the President has declared a state of national emergency to restore order. Those labeled as "dissidents" are charged with federal crimes and face either long prison sentences or three days at the Bear Mountain National Punishment Park, where overzealous cops and national guardsmen are trained in the methods of hunting down anyone found guilty of questioning the government. Terrifying stuff, indeed.

This film should be essential viewing for anyone interested in the future of this country. This is an IMPORTANT film that needs to be widely seen and discussed.

Possibly the most extreme example of 1970s-style "us vs. them"/political radicals vs. the Establishment movie, Punishment Park, directed by notorious social commentator Peter Watkins, uses violence--both verbal and physical--to smash its message home. This is an intense dystopian vision of both the present and the future simultaneously--and whether that future is near or far is hard to say.

Hippie-radical types, all in their late teens/early 20s, are tried and found guilty of conspiracy/treason, blah, blah, by the straight, much older Establishment guys--judges, the moral majority, et cetera. Their sentence is either hard time or three days in a ferocious desert environment cordoned off especially for this purpose called Punishment Park--which is, needless to say, frequented by all kinds of stupid, trigger-happy representatives of said Establishment--cops, National Guard, etc. Of course the hippie-radical types choose the desert. And of course this results in tragic circumstances.

What's interesting here is that Watkins does not really portray the protesters as all shining and pure and good. They're self-absorbed, completely uninterested in how the world really works outside of their view of it, and often very petty among themselves.

But in a sense, that's the whole point here. The real theme of the film is intolerance and while in the 1970s that was in many ways more blatant than it is today, the message still rings true. Intolerance is as American as apple pie and the flag, as American as the shining image of a mother cradling her baby or the bald eagle flying over snow-capped mountains. Intolerance is, in fact, how we live our lives in many ways, even today. So says this film. So it is true.

While admittedly over the top in its execution, Punishment Park is nevertheless difficult to forget. The sight of the radical youths struggling to survive in the desert is one that resonates deeply. This is a unique film by a unique filmmaker.

sometimes people just need to die in order for the world to be a better place. not because one side is better than the other at articulating its principles and convictions, but because there is no other possible denouement to the fiery conflict once words become woefully insufficient. these are the moments when the tree of liberty stands thirsty for its nourishment and only darker days lie ahead. peter watkins' powerful film "punishment park" perfectly captures this pessimistic sentiment.

this pseudo-documentary is set in a dystopian america in the early seventies as the vietnam war raged under president nixon's administration. the battle against communism on the global stage is joined by a homegrown civil unrest, leading the administration to suspend constitutional rights in hopes of quelling the dissent. leftwing critics of the government and of the war are rounded up and tried in special tribunals. after the inevitable judgments of guilt, the dissidents are given the choice between multi-year prison sentences or spending three days in the eponymous punishment parks. perhaps unsurprisingly, all of the condemned choose punishment park.

the story takes place in the southern california punishment park. (the scope of the nation's problems are hinted at by the existence of other punishment parks as far east as chicago.) the dissidents need to cross fifty or so miles of harsh desert terrain in order to reach an american flag planted far away. if they make it in this symbolic struggle, they are set free. the practical aspect of this exercise is to train national guardsmen, army reservists and law enforcement officers to confront the rebellion at home. the dissidents are given a two-hour head start before being pursued by the arm of the authority. if caught, they must serve their jail sentences. the movie follows two groups, one undergoing tribunal and the other fighting for their freedom in the desert.

the tribunal scenes are amazing. the actors improvised most of the dialogue and some of the back-and-forth moments of passionate rhetoric as well as calm eloquence are just stunning. point, counterpoint, slogans, hyperboles and sarcastic quips are exchanged in this clash of ideologies. neither side comes out victorious nor leaves unscathed. there are plenty of illogical arguments and untenable positions taken by both sides. viewers are likely to bring their own political stance into this film when scoring debating points, but this film works largely because it is able to avoid skewing too far in either direction. all we have are opposing principles unresolvable in the realm of ideas and ultimately brought out to bear in an arena of pure naked force.

it seems almost unnecessary to comment on the desert scenes. any cursory glance at human history offers plenty of hints at what happens after the tribunals are over. additionally, director peter watkins masterfully intersperses the events in the desert with those at tribunal. this gives the viewer a sense of continuity as the film wraps around itself in the end, enhancing the pessimistic overtones.

this movie grabs you from the start and pulls you into its horrible world with never a boring moment. it should appeal most to those who are capable and willing to see both sides, those who have read smith's "wealth of nations" and marx's "capital," those who feel respect toward william f. buckley, jr. as well as noam chomsky, in short, those who can live in two worlds. i am conservative by nature, but wildly attracted to radical ideas, and i was so engrossed in this movie that i had to watch it a second time afterward. you should definitely check out "punishment park" if you've ever felt passion for this country.