Customer Reviews

An Unreasonable Man

5 star:		(43)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"An Unreasonable Man" is not a pejorative description in the context of this film. One is reminded that the qualities that make an activist effective, are the same qualities of persistence and refusal to compromise that make such a person infuriating in other circumstances.

Although the first half of the documentary is devoted to Nader's rise as the country's premiere consumer advocate, the crux of the film is Nader's controversial presidential candidacy in 2000 and the personal, public and political ramifications of his decision to continue the race knowing that he may cost liberals a victory of the (arguably) more palatable candidate.

Unlike the reviewer below, I did not see in the film any agenda to trash Nader for running for president. When the movie moves its focus to Nader's effect on the 2000 election and whether he should have run under the circumstances, both sides of the argument get a fair airing. In fact, if anything, I felt the movie makers were inclined to the pro-Nader perspective--that for the politics of corruption to stop, a principled stand must be taken.

Regardless of the side of the debate one might take, the filmmakers did a an admirable job of showing through historical perspective why Nader ran, and why he was unapologetic about staying in the race. His personal history, from his experience with the Carter administration, the debate debacle, and his basic uncompromising personality and dogged pursuit of his goals, illuminate the motivations behind the 2000 Nader candidacy.

Although the filmmakers obviously hold Nader in high esteem, particularly for his crusades on behalf of consumers, this is a documentary in the true sense of the word--it is not a propaganda film, it it does not beat you over the head with the filmmakers' views. While, it is sympathetic to Nader's political positions and would not be considered "balanced" by a hardcore Republican, this is not a Michael Moore type of opus to any particular position. It is an expository film that raises but does not resolve the issue that alienated so many former Nader supporters.

As a plaintiff's attorney I have always been fascinated with the career of citizen advocate Ralph Nader. He has been involved in the creation of some of the most important legislation of the 20th Century: the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Highway Safety Act and on and on. He has been the protector of citizens and consumers with the push for mine safety, safe foods, airbags and seatbelts. It is a shame that his legacy has been tarnished by two unsuccessful runs for President in which he has been called a spoiler by the Democratic Party. If anything Nader always worked within the Democratic arena.

Henriette Mantel and Steve Skrovan's documentary chronicles the life and career of Nader. It is a film that attempts to present a balanced view of the man's life by presenting interviews with both friends and foes. If there is an issue it seems to be that the film makes its character a little too heroic but this is a minor flaw.

The first part of the film deals with the consumer protection work Nader did in his golden years at Dupont Circle. We view a young Nader as he goes after and wins battles with General Motors on auto safety. We witness the drive and idealism of Nader's Raiders as they take on the corporate giants.

The second half of the film starts with the infamous theory that there is not a dime's worth of difference between the modern Republican and Democratic Parties. If there is to be a change in the country for the better it must come from within the democratic process. This part of the film tells of the two failed runs for president and gives itself over to opinions of whether Nader did what he dis for the good of the counrty or whether he simply acted as an election spoiler costing Al Gore the Presidency.

The film allows the viewer to make his or her own choices concerning his legacy and hid role as an unlikely hero.

This is a well made and thought provoking documentary that is well worth a look.

Magnificent documentary about the legendary consumer advocate. A must for your people, who won't know about Ralph Nader if all they've been exposed to is corporate-controlled news and corporate school textbooks. Great extras on Disc 2 explore America's crazy electoral process and how the most qualified candidate in US history - in fact, Nader was overqualified! - was scapegoated by the Democrats and labeled a "spoiler." Are the Democrat and Republican parties the true spoilers, happily handing over the public's interests over to corrupt corporations? Is it a surprise that they try to marginalize America's top corporate crime buster?

I had no idea how many great things Ralph Nader had done for society. Nader's battles against the large corporations which would (and already do) enslave us, were incredible. The man has done more good for the average person than any half dozen career politicians, and I admire him for it. As for the cowardly, whiny Democrats in this film whom crucify Nader, they sicken me. It isn't Ralph Nader's fault that 49% of American's wanted more of the Bush regime. It also isn't Ralph Nader's fault the Florida Supreme Court chose not to count the remaining votes. One day Americans will wake up and realize that both parties are two slightly varying heads from the same snake, and that our "democracy" is already controlled by the elite. The disturbingly fierce opposition to Nader's Presidential runs prove it. Mr. Nader: thanks for your service.

I used to think corporations were run by men who rose through the ranks on merit. I thought our big corporations were run by the best and the brightest our country had to offer. Then came the disasters at Enron and WorldCom. Now we have a sub-prime mortgage melt-down. So I investigated the flip side of the picture: Ralph Nader.

I had not realized he had done so much good for Americans. I had not known that he sued General Motors for harassment and won.

I wondered how John Kerry managed to throw away his chance to defeat Bush, then I saw this documentary and Ralph Nader described what he suggested to Kerry and I found myself saying, "Yes, I would have voted for Kerry if he had done as Nader suggested." The people running the Democratic party are brain-dead. It was amazing to see Nader understanding what it took to defeat Bush while John Kerry was clueless.

This documentary was one surprise after another. The biggest shock was seeing Pat Buchanan, who had worked in the White House for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, saying on camera that "democracy in America is a fraud." Watch this documentary and you will see why Buchanan might say that.

I have been reading the New York Times regularly since I was a teen-ager. I am now middle-aged and finding out that we need to work hard to be well informed. Now I know I cannot trust the newspapers to keep me properly informed, maybe because they are large corporations with an agenda to twist the truth.

If you want to be an informed citizen, see this documentary.

In "An Unreasonable Man" directors Henriette Mantel and Steve Skrovan present a fair and balanced look at the legendary consumer advocate turned pariah. Most people today only know of Nader as the nutty independent candidate who may have cost Al Gore his election. But, as the movie makes clear, Nader has had an incredible legacy above and beyond this: Nader and his followers were responsible for seat belts, air bags, product (including cigarette, toys, etc) labeling, whistle-blower protection, occupational safety, bike helmets, and on and on and on.

Nader, the son of Arab immigrants, grew up in Winstead Connecticut, where he and his two sisters attended town hall meetings, and were grilled at the dinner table on community issues such as 'how can we solve that parking problem." Things really began in 1966, when Nader, an unknown public-interest lawyer, wrote a book "Unsafe at Any Speed" about the Corvair, a GM automobile, skewering its safety record. GM tried to squash him anyway it could, from sending private investigators to dig up dirt on him to sending babes after him in supermarkets to seduce him. All methods failed, a congressional investigation ensued, validating Nader. The modern consumer movement was born.

Since that time, it seems that Nader pretty much worked about 18 hours a day on the modern consumer movement (never having a family, or, it seems, any other interests). He and his associates, "Nader's Raiders" were rock-stars in the 60s and 70s, pushing congress and government official, establishing safety regulations, and muck-racking corporations.

Things started going down-hill in the 1980s, when the Reagan Administration started tearing government regulations, and kept doing down from there. The 1980s was also when Democrats decided to start accepting political contributions from corporations - following a time-honored practice of Republicans. From that point on, Nader strongly believed that the Democratic position became seriously compromised. After all, how can an elected government official work on consumer issues, and community affairs if his or her election depended on funding from corporations diametrically opposed to such initiatives?

Nader states that from 1984 to 2000 election he supported the Democrats, trying gamely to support the party he believed was still interested (although less and less so) in his issues. By 2000, he had had enough of "the folly of the least worst." Deciding that both parties were squarely in the hands of big business, he felt the only alternative to run for President on an independent ticket.

The movie rightfully spends a good deal of time analyzing the 2000 elections and its aftermath, giving air to both Nader supporters and detractors. Nader won around 96,000 votes, but there was only about 500 votes separating Bush and Gore, so one could argue that he 'gave' Bush the election, as his detractors state. However, one could also argue, as his supporters do, that the vote re-count should have continued, that the Democrats should have run on a stronger platform, that they should have (and should even now) get unregistered groups (such as African Americans) registered, as 90% of them would vote as democrats.

Rightly or wrongly, Nader was skewered after 2000 elections, and lost much of his supporters, including some of his closest associates (such as many of the Nader's Raiders). The former superstar had officially become a pariah - he was accused of egomania, blamed for the Iraq war, called expletives, and had pie thrown on his face.

However, Nader, as stubborn as ever, refuses to give up. Former associates fret about his legacy - but, Nader does not care. His concern is to make sure that justice is served, that people are safe, and corporations are put in their place. He will do whatever he can to make this happen - regardless of what others (including his closest associates), and history, may say about him.

I was a Nader supporter before this film, and became much more so after it. Yet, I worry about the future of America. Nader tellingly said around 1965 (during the Covair debacle) "I don't want to have a climate in the country where one has to have an ascetic existence and steely determination in order to speak truthfully, candidly and critically of American industry." Unfortunately, it seems America has become a place today where only ascetics and those with a steely determination are able to speak power to corporations - but we have reached a point where even these people don't seem to have any effect. They are ignored, labeled as 'the fringe' or as nuts. These people of integrity (Nader, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich) are systematically excluded from the electoral process, leaving us candidates who are willing to toe the corporate line - ie, who are approved of by the corporations.

Patrick Buchanan - the ultra-conservative republican who admits he worked in 1980s to tear down gains made by Nader and his colleagues- makes an incredible statement in this film: "Our Democracy is a Fraud. A Consumer Fraud."

Is he correct? If so, what are the ramifications of this? How can we possibly get our democracy back? One can only hope that things turn around, that Nader, and others who are willing to speak truth to power, will be vindicated in history. Perhaps one day, people following their ideals can even become President of the United States.

Having lived through the outrages of the Bush years, one wonders how history will judge these times. And this excellent documentary amounts to a meditation on this subject played out in terms of Nader's own legacy. The documentary starts as an homage to Nader's selfless public advocacy and then rolls up its sleeves and mucks through the question of "Ralph the spoiler." And even though we're often just seeing talking heads, there's something almost operatic about the drama. To see some of Ralph's original Rader's struggling with a deep sense of betrayal, to see the ire of his critics -- it's very compelling. The documentary tries to be even-handed, but ultimately amounts to an apologia. Nonetheless, one is left to make up one's own mind.

This is an amazing film about an amazing man. Contrary to what the first reviewer below claims the film does an excellent job of presenting a case in favor of Nader. Both sides are given time and once the facts are out one can really only come to one conclusion. All Nader detractors are given air time and certainly don't hold back. The film does a great job of covering a man's entire life in 2 hours. I look forward to the extras on this disc.

The frustrating thing with a movie like this is that you know the people that would gain the most from it will never see it. That's what puts it into the circle of futility. After watching it, the rest of us will know more about what we already know, yet nothing changes. When you walk out of the theater, Bush is still president and our government is still lead by a bunch of corporate whores.

This is the same circle of futility which, coincidentally, we watch Ralph Nader spin in during the movie. The voice of reason and sanity, speaking for the people, yet branded as a radical and fringe lunatic. What hope do we have? Do we keep doing the same thing hoping for a different response?

Anyway, I recommend watching this movie - HIGHLY. I wish it was mandatory viewing. Just look at it at as a retrospective of someone who spent his life trying to do right, and managed to have some success. Just be prepared to deal with the futility of it all in the end.

A welcome documentary on an iconic American activist which brings viewers up-to-date on the myriad and varied accomplishments Ralph Nader has brought forth through his political and organizational efforts. It also is a reflection of the times in which this film was produced. Nader has been marginalized by the mainstream media, and for too many, Nader is known primarily as someone who had the both the temerity and tenacity to provide the electorate with a real alternative to the two presidential candidates - candidates who had simplified and dumbed down the national issues. For this he has been roundly denounced for being a 'spoiler.' Ironic, since we live in a country which normally reveres competition as a way to improve both business and politics.
This documentary is a fascinating and informed look at a man who came into prominence in the idealistic 60's and continues to live out his ideals to encourage a too-often complacent and cynical public to get involved and actually participate in making democracy work.
This film serves as a Rorshach test - for those who resent Nader's activism, there are plenty of clips of disgruntled and disillusioned former Nader supporters and employees, who will reflect some viewers' own disenchantment. But for others, the film serves as a great reminder that Nader has not given up his ideals or his non-stop work ethic, even in an age where corporations largely call the shots due to a largely self-centered, compliant, and dumbed-down public.
This 2-DVD set also includes talking-heads featurettes, the best being: 'Profile of a charismatic leader' which explores Nader's unusual and vast intellect and drive; and 'Debating the role of third parties in the US', a look back on how 3rd parties have profoundly influenced the 2 major parties throughout American history and how difficult it is for 3rd parties to successfully run due to rigged election laws.
I also recommend Ralph Nader's recent book on the fine values his Lebanese immigrant parents instilled in their 4 children, and how these values profoundly influenced their activism and commitment in making this world a better place for future generations: The Seventeen Traditions.