The Corporation (2003) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
150 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Well Done But Basically Preaching to the Converted: A Lost Opportunity
lawprof3 September 2004
Good documentaries have both a viewpoint and an agenda. They reflect the vision, politics, values and angst of the director(s). "The Corporation" meets those standard criteria and in an overlong movie it's Prosecution Exhibit A for an indictment of a) modern corporations, b) consumerism, c) disdain for the Earth and its bounty, d) globalization, e)sleek marketing and f) dishonest, money-grubbing media, the current Whores of Babylon. There's probably more but I was saturated long before the film ended.

In terms of style, directors Jennifer Abbott and Mark Achbar have made a visually engrossing film with excellent interweaving of archival film with sound bites by noted academics as well as business executives. We get Noam Chomsky and Milton Friedman and many lesser lights. Michael Moore appears enough to seem more a director than an interviewee but some of his remarks, particularly at the end, are more insightful than much of what he opines on in his own films.

Using story boards to announce different themes, "The Corporation" tells - very quickly and, indeed superficially - the history of the legal entity, what we in the law call the "Juridical Person," the modern huge, business creature. Its early history is quickly sketched, the complexities of the Anglo-American societies that spawned this economic model barely hinted at much less explained.

For better or for worse, documentaries best make their argument through striking anecdotes and this movie is no exception. We see corporations engaged in behavior that wreaks havoc on health, deprives poverty-stricken citizens of poor countries of even minimal control of their lives and, of course directs our spending and leisure habits.

But some scenes show corporate strategies as just plain silly as with a couple ambulating down an urban street, one telling the other how great a CD he's listening to happens to be. The idea is that passersby will become curious enough to buy the disc. I doubt this happens much but the use of shills goes back hundreds of years (ample evidence of their employment can be gleaned from Elizabethan literature) and it pales as a menace when juxtaposed to the true evils depicted in the documentary.

Some very complex issues which few viewers are likely to know anything about are presented as proof that corporations are inherently driven solely by profit motives with no regard for other values. Particularly disturbing is the incarnation of the writings of an independent scholar named Black who claims that IBM was in sympathetic and knowing collusion with Nazi Germany to sell them embryonic computers (not mentioned by name but they were the Hollerith punch card machines) which then made expediting millions to their concentration camp murder feasible. This account has been discredited by most historians but the more serious and unmentioned reality is that the U.S. government knowingly permitted some American corporations to prepare to profit from a postwar world by maintaining ties with subsidiaries in Germany (the Bank for International Settlements is never mentioned: now THAT's a subject for a film).

"The Corporation" returns often to the theme that this business entity is a "person" with constitutional rights ( declared a number of times as a sad fact of American law). In fact that's true but what is never explained is that investing corporations with an identity that is juridically recognized means that the entities - AND their assets - are amenable to every form of lawsuit from civil rights violations to environmental law accountability to - you name it. And corporations can be criminally charged and convicted. Yes, obviously they can't be jailed but the entity can be sentenced to remedial action, something that would be impossible if liability was limited to individuals who lack assets sufficient to cure major violations and, in any event, who surely could do nothing from jail or forced retirement.

Where could Ralph Nader's crusade for safer cars have gone if General Motors and other corporations were not amenable to suit as legal persons? How much benefit derived for anti-smoking advocates from being able to arraign Big Tobacco in court (even if losses exceeded wins)? Why are women and minorities working for Big Business (or just trying to get in the door) less likely to be targeted for discrimination these days? You'd never know from this film.

So we have a very mixed bag here - a well constructed polemic that is too one-sided if educating the audience rather than satisfying the converted was the goal. It was fun to sit in a packed theater in an epicenter of affluence - New York's Pleasantville in Westchester County - and note the righteous reaction of an audience of which I'd bet 95% own stock in major corporations.

8/10
89 out of 106 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Compelling
bighamla17 April 2009
The Corporation Corporations have been around for as long as I can remember. Building up businesses and bringing in revenue. But I never personally understood the corporation. Why did they need to throw advertisements at me all the time even though I know their product is out there? Where did the product ultimately come from and why couldn't I see the jobs it was supposedly producing? These thoughts never passed through my brain I guess because I wasn't interested in knowing how it functioned as long as I could see the results and reap the benefits. The documentary The Corporation gave great insight into the questions I wanted answers to.

The Corporation is a documentary by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, and Joel Bakan. It was produced in 2004 and has received many awards, one being the Sundance World Cinema-Documentary Audience Award. The makers of the documentary delve deep into the inner workings of the corporation ultimately defining it as a psychopath. It includes many acclaimed writers and corporate insiders to peel away the shiny venier of what we think the corporation is and what it stands for. Mark Achbar has also done other documentaries such as Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media and Two Brides and a Scalpel: Diary of a Lesbian Marriage. Each of his documentaries go into detail about things that are over-generalized by the media and by what people tell us and he pulls them apart to tell us the true story. Jennifer Abbot has also done a documentary called A Cow at My Table which is about western attitudes towards meat production and this goes a long with the animal health issues brought up in this film.

Many themes are present throughout the film; a basic understanding of the corporation, its overwhelming flaws, its impact on society as a whole, and what has been and can be done to try and combat this monster. Throughout the film, the fact that the corporation is a liar and a deceiver is ever present.

The relation to human society is clear; the corporation does not care. Various cases are brought to attention. For example, a case against the Fox Corporation. Two news reporters researched a story against Monsanto concerning bovine growth hormones and how this can impact human health. The Monsanto Corporation was very very upset about this find and this led Fox to some untimely and unprofessional decisions. Leading us again, to the fact that corporations have no interest in what happens to its consumers as long as they keep consuming. There are cases concerning animal welfare, human interest, the future we have to look forward to if we don't stand up to the big giants around us, and what we can do to prevent our inevitable brain washing.

Editing throughout the film was fantastic. The cutaways used gave the viewer a visual reference to what the speaker was saying whether it be sharks, roaches, or social scenes. They also included scenes from older televised materials. The interviewee, however, was in an awkward position, literally staring at you through the screen while being interviewed. This was effective in drawing the viewer in but it was also a little strange to be staring directly at the speaker with nothing but black behind him or her. The film was divided into chapters with each one leading to the next. Human health cases lead to animal health cases lead to cases that delved into each case. The Corporation was shot in a sort of humorous manner but it also included many serious points, each broken up throughout the film with one another. A serious moment in the film was followed by a less serious, more humorous moment. It also included scenes from other documentaries such as Michael Moore's The Big One to emphasize certain stances in the documentary.

The score of the documentary includes:

"The Love Life of the Octopus" by Yo La Tengo

"Riot" by unspoken

""Frio", Late Night Lovin" by Third Eye Tribe

"Page" by Transmo

"The Sand, The Sea, The Stars", "Opal" by Shawn Pinchbeck

"Frontline" by Sean D. Andrews

"It Can Happen" by Scott Morgan

"Named After the Chorus" by Mitchell Akiyama

"Theme for Great Escapes" , "Lo Moan the Night's Pulse" by The Mazeguider

"Revolutions" by Leonard J. Paul

"Hush", "Johny Bear", "LOUDzilla" by LOUD

"Pressure", "Discrete Entropy", "Vapour", "Gymnote", "Mute 3" by loscil

"The Third Chamber", "Tchengo" by Sam Dodson and John Muddyman

"Sentience", "Static One" by Jeremiah

"We'd Like to Hear From You", "We Trust", "The Perfect Coffee", "This Labour", "Enjoy the Fruits" by intermission

"Narrowboat" by Higher Intelligence Agency & Biosphere

"Talu", "Dover", "What I Don't Know", "Plexus" by Granny 'Ark

"Classic Noodlanding", "Chinatown", "Reitschuie" by DoMakeSayThink

"Bad Apple" by David Wilcox

"Mars Type Beat", "Killer Frogs" by Bugbreeder and Freaky DNA

"Missing", "River Mist", "Bhopal", "Surveillance", "Uprising" by Andy McNeill

"Love Song" by Uzume Taiko Ensemble

"Movin' On", "Rock It!" by Accent Music Productions The music was used throughout the film to coincide with the atmosphere of the scene in which it was used. For the slower, more serious scenes, slower and more dramatic music was used while for the more up-beat scenes, faster music was used. It kept the viewer in tune with what the directors wanted him or her to feel in that certain scene and it kept the viewer generally interested.

All in all, this documentary is very compelling to watch and is full of information not generally produced for the public eye. It picks apart the corporations we thought were there for us and our well being to tell us the exact opposite. It includes interviews that the viewer can depend on as good information. The Corporation is a documentary that should be seen by anyone with questions about big business and what it really means to society.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Essential viewing...
MrGKB7 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
...for anyone interested in the nature of our current planetary economic malaise, and what we might actually be able to do about it. "The Corporation," which illustrates and expands upon writer Joel Bakan's concurrently-written book, makes strong argument for the complicity of that economic entity known as the corporation and its inherent psychotic nature, and remains as trenchant now as it was nearly a decade ago when first made and exhibited/published, perhaps even more so in the light of the current swell of OWS demonstrations and other manifestations of global stress. It ought to be required viewing in high school classes across the land.

Presented in a chapter format, this fascinating (often akin to the hypnotic lure of viewing the aftermath of an automobile accident) documentary details the rise of the modern corporation from its beginnings as a state-sanctified entity intended to fulfill specific public functions, which is to say serve the public good, to its current domination of the global economic engine, i.e. the oligarchical behemoth that President Eisenhower warned us about decades ago. Through the extremely well-edited use of interviews and pointed visuals, the film presents an unnerving canvas of institutionalized rapacity, fecklessness, callousness, perfidy and prevarication, all in the name of the holy grail of maximizing profits; in short, institutionalized psychopathy. It's chilling stuff, quite thought-provoking.

A number of the "usual suspects" are a part of this dissection of trans-national corporatocracy: Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Naomi Klein, Michael Moore, and Vandana Shiva; still, a fair representation of corporate interests are represented as well. Beyond that, it's a cast of multitudes, befitting the subject matter, which ranges across a broad swath of corporate malfeasance: pollution, market manipulation, complicity in war crimes, exploitation of workers, sheer greed, the shrugging off of "economic externalities" on the public, and much else. Anyone who's paid even cursory attention to the politico-socio-economic scene over the past decades will be at least passingly familiar with these topics, but "The Corporation" does a nice job of bringing everything together under one roof, so to speak.

The deluxe DVD edition, which I found at the library, is chock full of additional interviews, commentary, and the like. It's almost a bit of overkill, but then again, it's hard to ignore as well. Like the saying goes, "hold your friends close, but your enemies closer." Need I also say, highly recommended.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A bit overwhelming but compelling, fair and even-handed compared to many such documentaries
bob the moo22 November 2004
Where once we used to shop at our local shop and have bread and milk delivered by the local milkman from the local farms, now we shop in a supermarket that is multinational, eat at fast food restaurants that are everywhere and wear clothes made in the third world by those living in sweatshops. This documentary looks at the Corporation as if it was a person (something that US law says it basically is), charting its development, its character and the effects the concept of profit driven corporations has had on the world we live in.

First of all let me just say that I am fairly liberal in some regards but not to the degree as many of the audience I saw this with, many of whom could not signposted themselves anti-capitalist students if they'd actually carried signs. I should also own up and say that I currently work for an American corporation; in fact one of those who's logo flashes up in the section on the top 50 criminal companies (although I did work for an environmental charity prior to this so that gives you some idea of my muddled politics!). Having read No Logo, Fast Food Nation, seen Michael Moore films and, hey, actually used my own eyes and brain, it came as no surprise to me that the idea of a business that considers no growth to equal failing and must constantly earn more and more to be a bad thing. Nor was I surprised by the sweatshops or pollution that occurs. Neither would any of this be a surprise to the majority of the already tuned-in audience and wisely the film doesn't just rant at us about how terrible things are; instead it takes a fairly compelling look at the wider problems associated with this model. It is consistently interesting, compelling and, sadly, all a bit depressing.

The film's strength is that it never gets personal or preachy. The film allows the CEOs to get a fair chance to present their opinions and it never demonises any of them, the vast majority of them actually come off as very nice guys who seem to genuinely want to be ethical, environmental etc. Not only does this give the film a balanced feel (a refreshing change from Moore's axe-grinding and sermonising) but it also makes the subject more scary – it would be better if the system could be down to careless, evil men but it isn't; it is the system that is the problem and no one person is to blame. The structure of the film jumps around a lot and I'm not sure it entirely works because it is pretty overwhelming although I suppose it was always going to be hard to frame such a large, complex topic – just look at the anti-capitalist protests to get an idea of the multi-issue argument.

The film is not perfect of course and, looking around the audience after the film, it is evident that this film has mostly played to converted rather than winning new converts in the main. Part of this is how overwhelming it is but also the fact that it does run pretty long as well – not a problem once you're into it but perhaps a bit of a turnoff for those not seeking it out. Secondly the lack of answers is also a bit of a problem. I guess I preferred the ending to the alternative of being told to eat mung beans and make our own clothes but it is easy to feel that we just have to accept what we are being told is bad. For me personally this wasn't a massive problem because I do hold a position where I have to work to improve the sustainability of a small part of a big corporation so I left rather hopeful and looking forward to work the next day – but for many viewers I can understand why it feels like a dead end.

Overall though, this is a very good film that allows everyone a fairly balanced crack at the whip even if its agenda and politics are obvious from the start. It avoids demonising, simplifying and making it personal and it is stronger and more engaging as a result. It provides no easy answers but it does provide challenges and plenty to think about with all the talking heads making valid points for all sides and perhaps showing that the answers do lie in the middle – not the extremes of money chasing shareholders or the noisy and brightly dressed street protesters. Regardless of your politics it is worth seeing this film and it deserves to be seen by as wide an audience as lesser documentaries have been (and yes Michael Moore, I'm talking about you).
98 out of 112 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
powerful & compelling
rci25 January 2004
The first time in a long time that I've seen a movie audience launch into applause at the end -- and I was as enthusiastic as everyone else.

While quite long (2 hours, 45 minutes)this film piles detailed examples on top of interviews on top of documentary film clips. Liberally laced with interviews with folks like Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein and Michael Moore, it also includes insightful commentary from a (small) handful of liberated corporate executives.

The sum total is a compelling story of the evil that can be and is done by and in the name of corporations. I say this as one who has worked in a corporate environment my entire career, and who for a very long time has had difficulty getting past the 'but these are almost all nice people -- I don't know any ogres out to intentionally rape & pillage' perspective.

What I'm gradually wakening to is the realization that yes, the corporate structure is very efficient at doing what it's designed to do -- which unfortunately does not include taking social responsibility or the greater good into account. Instead it's ruthlessly focused on the bottom line, come hell (literally) or high water -- or polluted water.

I highly recommend this film. I know I'll be going back for a second viewing -- there's that much content, that I know I didn't absorb it all the first time around.
70 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The Madness King Corporation
marobertson18 February 2004
Our daily lives have come to be so dominated by corporations that we can easily fail to notice it. Most goods, services, information and entertainment now flow from huge multinationals. But what if this dominant player in our existence is certifiably insane?

The Corporation explores this disturbing possibility with mix of wit, opinion and hard facts. It takes us through the visible "personality traits" of these business entities and shows us that, for all intents and purposes, corporations are psychopathic. The film points out that this is not an aberrant state for corporations, but rather an inherent part of their nature. It even portrays high-ranking business executives as people so caught-up in the madness of the corporate world they must act not from their own conscience, but rather from a bottom-line mentality of what is most profitable.

Despite its length and the fact that it features some forty different talking heads (ranging from the former CEO of Goodyear to Noam Chomsky), The Corporation keeps you engaged both visually and intellectually. It is by turns informative, amusing and thought provoking. It does not attempt to present remedies (which would be beyond the scope of a single documentary) but rather challenges its audience to view their world from a different perspective and seek out their own solutions. In this way, it reminds me of Michael Moore's excellent documentary Bowling for Columbine.

I saw this film at the True/False Film Festival and was fortunate enough to hear a Q&A with co-director Mark Achbar after. Many questions seemed to be "Well, what can we do about it." The website for the film has many links available to explore further and learn about actions that individuals can take. Mr. Achbar said half-joking that he may have to bring a handout to future screenings with a list of websites.

Whether you are a longtime activist, or someone who has never thought much about issues of corporate dominance, this film is definitely worth a look.
36 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
if there's any film that you roll out of bed to watch this year, please let this be the one.
aptpupil7922 July 2004
most people who have an interest in progressive causes will be somewhat familiar with the outline of the film - corporate personhood has essentially led to corporations having an insane amount of control over what we see, eat, drink, breathe and consume in general. corporations have become part of our consciousness at an unshakable and unwashable level. they are ubiquitous, single-minded (profit), subversive parasites that erode our society from within. with this in mind you'd think the film was a marxist commercial out to bring capitalism to its knees. you'd be wrong. the film is remarkably even-handed in its approach.

governmental as well as market fixes are proposed by different interviewees. i'm very much into the work of noam chomsky and michael moore (both are interviewed), i've read fast food nation, i'm a big fan of adbusters, i own naomi klein's "no logo" and korten's "when corporations rule the world" so a lot of this stuff wasn't all that new to me, but some of it was and the film is a perfect amalgamation of all this information. archive footage is used extremely well, like a hip-hop artist melding together samples in ways that create an entirely different tapestry of sound. interviews, archival footage, and good old investigative journalism are used to present a solid case about the role corporations have in our global society; as well as how we've gotten to this point and where we may be going. despite the heavy nature and brutal pacing of much of the film, there are a few moments of ironic comedy.

i do think the film would have done well with a few momentary pauses early in the film to allow things to soak in. in feature films a director might cut to an exterior for a beat or two to allow a bit of a cushion from one scene to the next, something similar may have aided the pacing of this film. it's actually remarkable that i wished it had taken a little more time considering its 2 hour and 25 minute runtime. i think it's testament to the film's strength. i also want to note that the long runtime and heavy nature of the film never came off as dry or overly-academic. in other words, it's not a boring film to watch - quite the contrary, it's a rather engaging and almost fun film to watch. i say "fun" reluctantly because learning about the ways in which a corporation is bilking America and the world out of our natural resources and hard-earned money isn't fun, but if you're interested in learning then it is an exciting film. a quick side note - the narrator had a perfect voice for the material and she reminded me a lot of the narrator in the "second renaissance" portions of the animatrix. generally i don't give films i've only seen once anything better than a B+, but this film blew me away from start to finish on so many different levels...A.
52 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The corporation as psychopath
DennisLittrell2 March 2006
This extraordinary documentary is based on the book The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power (2004) by law professor Joel Bakan (see my review at Amazon). Bakan's thesis is that the corporation is a psychopathic entity.

In his book he notes that the modern corporation is "singularly self-interested and unable to feel genuine concern for others in any context." (p. 56) He adds that the corporation's sole reason for being is to enhance the profits and power of the corporation. He shows by citing court cases that it is the duty of management to make money and that any compromise with that duty is dereliction of duty.

Directors Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott bring these points and a slew of others to cinematic life through interviews, archival footage, and a fine narrative written by Achbar and Harold Crooks. The interviews cover a wide spectrum of opinion, from Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky on the left, to Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman on the right. Friedman is heard to agree with Bakan that the corporation's duty is to its stockholders and that anything that deviates from that duty is irresponsible.

What emerges is a view of the corporation as an entity working both for and against human welfare. Designed to turn labor and raw materials efficiently into goods and services and to thereby raise our standard of living, it has been a very effective tool for humans to use. On the other hand, because it is blind to anything but its own welfare, the corporation uses humans and the resources of the planet in ways that can be and often are detrimental to people and the environment. Corporations, to put it bluntly, foul the environment with their wastes and will not clean up unless forced to.

An interesting technique that Achbar and Abbott use is to go down the list of behaviors cited in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders that identify the psychopathic personality and show how the corporation has all of those behaviors including a criminal disregard for the welfare and feelings of others and a complete absence of guilt. Indeed corporations feel no compunction when they break the law. Their only concern is whether breaking the law is cost-effective. The result is a nearly constant bending and breaking of the law. They pay the fine and then break the law again. The corporation, after all, has no conscience and feels no remorse.

Bakan notes that "corporations are designed to externalize their costs." The corporation is "deliberately programmed, indeed legally compelled, to externalize costs without regard for the harm it may cause to people, communities, and the natural environment. Every cost it can unload onto someone else is a benefit to itself, a direct route to profit." (pp. 72-73) We are shown how rivers are polluted, environments destroyed and people placed into something close to servitude by the corporation's insatiable lust to profit.

The answer to this, as presented in the film, is to make corporations pay for their pollution. What many people are proposing is the creation of bills or certificates that would allow the barer "the right to pollute." The cost of these bills would reflect the societal and environmental costs of the pollution. This sounds scary, but what it would do is make those who pollute pay for their pollution instead of having the costs be externalized as they are now. Consequently, to protect their bottom line, corporations would pollute less.

Another problem with the corporation as emphasized in the film is that the corporate structure is essentially despotic. It is not a democracy or anything close. The owners hire officers to exercise control over everyone who works for the corporation. This is in direct contrast to democratic governments whose officers are elected and who are subject to the checks and balances of a constitutional government with shared powers. It is true that if you are a shareholder of a corporation you may be able to indirectly vote for the CEO. However, such a "democracy" is a democracy of capital in which the electoral power is inequitably distributed. Some people have hundreds of millions of votes. How many does the average shareholder have? Bakan, Achbar and Abbott play fair, and give both sides of the case--although that is not to say that the weight of evidence or sentiment is equally distributed. After all, who's in favor of pollution or the destruction of the environment? The pathological corporation doesn't care about such things, but its officers should. Some do, but feel constrained by their fiduciary duty to their stockholders. Consequently it is our responsibility as the electorate to get our government to make the corporation socially and morally responsible. The way to do that is make the fines for breaking the law large enough to change corporate behavior. Furthermore--and this is essential--make management responsible--criminally if necessary--for the actions of the corporation.

This is absolutely one of the most interesting, most compelling, and, yes, entertaining documentaries that I have ever seen. But beware of some graphic footage.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)
24 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good, but Pedantic
HeXetic22 February 2004
Saw this movie on Friday the 20th of February. The Corporation is a pretty good look at the issues and troubles of the modern market/corporate world. The scenes with the CEO of Interface (largest carpet manufacturer in the world) talking about how he's changing his company to be "sustainable" in particular are very uplifting and interesting.

However, the movie does suffer somewhat from a pedantic pace. By the last half-hour of the movie most of the people in the theatre were getting a bit restless as the pacing slows down considerably. The directors do manage to get their point across, but it's not quite as varied and enjoyable as, say, Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine.

Part of the problem probably has to do with the linear ordering of everything - first we hear about the problems of corporations, then we hear about people fighting (and failing) against corporations, then we get the uplifting finale where we hear about people fighting (and succeeding) against corporations. This idiomatic setup works fine for the first parts, but just gets banal at the end.

I also have to draw attention to the large numbers of portrait shots of the various interviewees talking about their ideas - there are just too many. We really only need to *see* people like Noam Chomsky talk just once or twice - why not let him talk over some other video footage? The sheer number of these is a bit ridiculous - and yet we know that the directors are capable of some very interesting shots, notably with the "few bad apples" scene reminiscent of Michael Moore's "Black Male" scene.

Finally, although I liked the overall message, I do have to point out that some of the arguments seem a little poorly "fleshed out". One particular idea, the idea of everything being "owned" by someone, is flaunted briefly but dismissed without being really explored or properly rebutted in any way. The idea may be wrong, but it deserved more attention than the filmmakers gave it - and someone better qualified to talk about it, rather than the somewhat bumbling buffoon the film has.

Still, I did enjoy the film. If you're interested in hearing about the corruption of the corporate world, it's a good movie. Just don't expect to be too entertained - "The Corporation" is porridge, not Captain Crunch, for the soul.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant
jureed2016 June 2005
When I sat down last night to watch "The Corporation" after a long day off working for one, I was thinking I was about to see a documentary that gave me all of the answers. Why are corporations so powerful? Why do we allow them to take so much from us and return so little? Who is the face behind them? These questions were answered, but not in the way I thought they would be. The Corporation is brilliant in that way. As a documentary, the filmmakers take care to use credible information that can be checked, and an edgy style of editing that keeps the viewer enthralled. The film chronicles the history and rise to power of the modern day corporation with surprising honesty. I never felt that corporations were being represented unfairly (often, those who spoke of the most striking aspects of corporations were CEOs and other business leaders.) What moved me most about this film was actually how simple these mega corporations all seem when broken down to their essentials. Quite a feat considering how complex these entities actually are. The filmmakers often use the type of fast-paced editing that commercials use to further execute their point. I had to watch this movie again after I finished it the first time because it was so unbelievable. This is an exemplary film that challenges us to think about the kind of "people" we are allowing to run our lives, and is an example of what all great documentaries should look like. Both a thinking film and one that clearly explains things, I would highly recommend this movie to both future filmmakers/majors and business people alike.
24 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Entertaining and appealing documentary with flaws
eyedunno1126 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Having read a lot of reviews about _The Corporation_ that painted it as a balanced perspective on the institution, I was looking forward to this, but I have to say that I came away from the movie a little disappointed. The movie is slick, to be sure, with cool narration, nice graphics, and smooth editing. But I just couldn't get past the movie's biases.

To be sure, corporations are behind a lot of problems in the world, most of which stem from the lack of accountability that's part and parcel with public ownership. I, for one, am rather in favor of abolition of corporate personhood (and more strict standards for corporate charters). The problem with this movie is that it often goes too far and blames capitalism itself for these issues, when corporations are entities that are dependent on government for their very existence, and they differ fundamentally from privately-held businesses, individual consumers, and other actors in markets.

The movie does interview people from all over the political spectrum, but the most screen time clearly goes to lefties, such as Noam Chomsky (whose academic field - linguistics - is left unstated presumably to give his opinions on this subject more clout), Michael Moore, and Howard Zinn, along with catastrophists like Jeremy Rifkin. Milton Friedman, on the other hand, only gets a few sentences total (in spite of presumably being more qualified to talk on the subject). Some of the interviews even seemed out of place in this movie. A commodities trader goes on at some length about how 9/11 and Operation Desert Storm were seen as opportunities, but the commodities market is not directly relevant to corporations, and I'm betting that if they'd asked stock traders instead, they would have gotten a very different account. Rising oil prices might benefit commodities traders, but most corporations suffer (which is probably part of why the war was fought to begin with).

But ultimately, the worst thing about the movie is that its tone seems to blame capitalism itself for the problems while emphasizing the hypothesis that democratic control over corporations would improve things. Personally, I doubt this. The biggest problem with corporations as I see it is the lack of individual accountability, and putting things to voters to decide has the potential to create a huge mess, since voters are cannot bear full accountability for corporate actions either. Majorities and pluralities can be just as tyrannical as any king.

Having said all this, the movie did raise a lot of good points about the history of corporations and the various issues they introduce to the planet. The presentation was also nice, with its narrator, Mikela Mikael, sounding very much like the voice of a computer from an old sci-fi movie, and with a futuristic-slash-vaguely-ominous look to go along with it. My attention didn't stray from the screen for the entire 3 hours, so I suppose the movie largely succeeded, both as entertainment and as food for thought. Also, I must admit that I got off on hearing a pompous Harvard professor say "usurption" (check a dictionary if you don't understand). I only wish they'd exercised more critical thought and shown a somewhat less biased viewpoint overall.

10/10 for style, 5/10 for substance, 7/10 overall
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Often shocking and hits home
gizmomogwai20 March 2011
Joel Bakan, who served as a clerk for Chief Justice Brian Dickson and advocated for human rights against governments, now takes aim at corporations in this documentary. On the way he gets a little help from friends like Naomi Klein and Michael Moore. The stuff exposed in the final product can be shocking and hits home even if the presentation is fairly one-sided. From stuff little-known like businessmen trying to overthrow Franklin Roosevelt and aiding Nazi death camps, to a reminder of Kathy Lee Gifford's sweatshops. It questions the ethics of applying patents on life and rain water. This is a story that needs to be heard, even if it needs to be balanced.

I first saw most of the movie as part of a sociology course. We considered the concept of a corporation as a person, and how if it were a person it can fit the definition of a psychopath. While it may sound extreme to apply that label to men running businesses, sadly there is some truth to it. Even if this movie doesn't convince me corporations should be banned, it demonstrates why they should not have absolute power and personhood. The stuff about Bolivia having a revolt shows people being pushed can push back, and raises questions of how we may see more of that which is alarming from a security perspective. All of this is helped by use of metaphors and pop culture and the calm, female voice of the narrator. Everyone shaping a national economy should see this movie.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Some camera tricks but hits target well enuf
brian_r_wright28 March 2007
In a continuing quest to determine whether the corporate person is conducive to the life of real breathing human persons, I picked up this 2004 movie from the Netflix queue. It has the look and feel of a Michael Moore movie, and accordingly is a lesser effort for some cheap camera tricks.

Nonetheless, I come away with an appreciation of new information that, along with what our informal tribunal of citizens has already learned, is certainly enough for an indictment of the corporation in extremis...

For my complete review of this movie and for other movie and book reviews, please visit my site TheCoffeeCoaster.com.

Brian Wright Copyright 2007
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Context?
orpheus_sail8 August 2006
Since I did not begin at the same starting position as the makers of this film, I had no chance to go along with what they're trying to say.

Cricisms of wealthy people are as old as people themselves. Saying that the wealth was obtained dishonestly or that the wealthy person is hurting people makes it easier to justify taking the wealth away.

The movie attempts to demonstrate how these companies are hurting people. Its first example is how Nike pays 'slave wages' to those who makes its shoes and clothes. That these wages are far lower than wages in America is inarguable. However, by way of context, I would've liked to have seen what the wages in that country were before Nike arrived. What was the standard of living? I saw no evidence that Nike created the poverty and that people were worse off because of Nike's presence. Is it possible that things have improved since Nike arrived? It would be possible to criticize Nike for its lack of charity, but that burden of charity is not on Nike alone. It is the burden of anyone who believes in the concept of giving to help the people where Nike is. Singling Nike out as harmful because of poor living conditions which they did not create nor have made worse is not fair.

I found this method to be consistent throughout the documentary. Milk manufacturers are criticized for using antibiotics and producing milk when more milk was not needed. What is the standard for too much milk? Perhaps charities could be organized to send the excess milk to the places where the Nike plants were located. Also, no context was given which showed how a consistent supply of milk and other foodstuffs affect the population of the United States. Are people in the U.S. living longer? Are they having a higher quality of life? I believe they are.

This section on milk showed sick cows. Are all cows in commercial dairies sick? Are cows, in general, sicker in a commercial dairy than they might be on a family farm? Then, assuming that the cows are treated poorly and that the cow's life makes it immoral to support a corporate dairy farm, how many people's lives should be damaged for the sake of those cows?

Again, I didn't come in with a preconceived idea that profit-seeking organizations are malicious. So, I found myself playing catch-up throughout the film since the filmmakers appear to assume the viewer started from that position.
24 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I'll never buy Hood's or Shaw's milk again.
alicecbr9 August 2004
So we're getting used to antibiotics because of Corporate America's dairies pumping their sick cattle full of the stuff. I knew it intellectually but never realized it so viscerally as I did while watching these cows with their udders painfully distended and the pus coming out of them. Like a little pus with your milk? You're getting it.

so it's onto soy milk or organic milk for me, from now on. That is but one of the life-changing experiences I had watching this movie. Of course, I already knew what tentacles Corporate America has around every area of our government including the media, but this movie just punched it up.

It should make you angry. If not, your conscience has long been stilled by your big screen TV, your gas-guzzling SUV or your stock options. Probably won't show in most of your towns....too much of a threat to the corporations that are shown up in this show. Monsanto? Won't be buying any of their products anytime soon, and I already boycott Walmark, Penney's and the ubiquitous Barbie Doll. Pretty soon, I'll be eating nothing buy my own garden's products....a good idea, no? See the movie: find out how you're being shilled. You might even decide to take back your government from the corporations writing policy for Cheney and other Congressional prostitutes.
86 out of 110 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Long and Perfect
Cockeymofo7627 May 2008
The Corporation entices the uninterested through a perfect set of narration, visual images and easy to understand logic chain. The more involved person will be left with more than enough to chew on in this documentary that asks just the right questions.

The narrative starts, perfectly, at the beginning of corporations, and goes through their ascendancy to their place in modern society. The interviewees run the ideological spectrum, although the editing does not. The movie goes through and tries to stay as hands off as possible, and for the most part succeeds. The movie shows the evils of modern capitalism and with some efficiency dismisses any notion that modern capitalism is sustainable or good. Everyone interviewed is nothing short of spectacular, from Chomsky to Friedman, Ray Anderson to Naomi Klein, you always get the best.

The Corporation will enrage you, inspire you but most of all it will show you the times in which we live. 10/10 (not for the very young, could be kinda boring for them)
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
superb and dense examination of the rulers of today's world
OldAle122 April 2007
Based on codirector Bakan's book, "The Corporation: A Pathological Pursuit of Power", this compelling documentary is a lengthy (145 minute) disquisition on the place of the corporation in the world today, a brief on its history and the disquieting notion that the profit motive of large transnationals has all but usurped the democratic voting processes of governments. Of course it is largely a left-wing work, but it is much more nuanced and wider-ranging than something like Michael Moore's works and contains long interviews with numerous luminaries from the academic, activist and corporate worlds. I wish that the filmmakers had chosen other, more eloquent and less out-of-touch intellectuals on the right than the sole example we see (Milton Friedman) but on the whole it's a stunning, depressing work with mere glimmers of hope near the end. Those that have read Kirkpatrick Sale (Rebels Against the Future) will be at home in this work.

The film is structured in a multitude of chapters; at first short, terse, more humorous and wide-ranging, but gradually building to a climax of sorts as it gives more detailed views of "case studies" to support its thesis that a corporation, if it really were a person (and, in the USA, it is in many ways a legal human), would be considered pathological in its total disregard for anything other than the profit motive. One great piece involves the whistleblowers who produced a significant documentary about Monsanto's pushing rBGH into milk production and lying about its harmful effects, only to see the powerful corporation for which they worked (FoxNews) rework the film to placate Monsanto, then fire them....an even more awful example of the negative motives of these transnationals is the story of how California-based Bechtel at one point owned the rights to all water in on of the largest cities in Bolivia -- including rainwater -- and forced people to pay up to a quarter of their pay to have the right to drink (and live).

Interviewees, besides Friedman and Moore (much more restrained and thoughtful here than usual) include Chomsky, Zinn, Janet Akre (former FoxNews correspondent), Naomi Klein and several current and ex-CEOs, most notably Ray Anderson the CEO of Interface, the largest commercial carpet manufacturer in the world and one of the few execs who seems to really be looking at the larger, environmental and holistic picture. Other CEOs come off as completely unaware, or uninterested in, anything besides their stockholders, and Friedman makes the cogent (if coldblooded and amoral) statement that corporations only know how to make profit, so why be involved in something they don't understand (like a healthy environmental outlook).

Best new documentary I've seen in years, an absolute stunner. The film's website (www.thecorporation.com) is excellent and a great resource.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good stuff...
regdricos29 May 2006
Well-researched, only slightly biased, informative and 'important' documentary about the fundamental flaw with corporate business and its rather too mordant grasp (some might say 'blight'!) upon all our lives, and upon global power nowadays.

Some come out of this looking distinctly grubby, whereas some, surprisingly, come out shining.

Far from leaving you in despair, however, it'll appeal to the optimist in you.

All the contributors you'd wish to hear from (top execs from Shell, Goodyear, born again exec from some carpet company, as well as Friedman, Chomsky et al.), married with the usual culled background footage.

Seek out and enjoy, then get active...

;0) Ricos. (9/10)
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Worth taking a look
pcechis12 April 2007
The film and the book are definitely worth the time. Even if some of the work is perceived as bias, the main message is that Corporations are legal entities that are required by law to regard profits for shareholders above all else.

If nothing else, I took away the message of how important it is to consider whose products I am buying, because each time I pull out my wallet I am voting in favor of the company I am purchasing from.

If you are really skeptical of the documentary, I suggest you get a hold of the book. Everything covered in the book is well documented, and there is an excellent bibliography.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Corporate Subculture
sol-21 July 2017
Condensed from an apparent 33 hour initial cut, this Canadian documentary about the evolution of corporations in North America tends to ramble at times, but features lots of interesting information, even if one might be skeptical about some of it. The first stretch of the movie is the best as the filmmakers use a checklist of symptoms of psychopathic behaviour to conclude that a corporation operates like a psychopath, which is all the more fascinating when one considers legal precedents that allow corporations to have the rights of a human being, to sue others, buy investments and so forth. After this initial stretch, the film is a bit of a bumpy ride with far too much footage recycled from Michael Moore's 'The Big One' for its own good; Mikela Jay's cold and impersonal voice-over narration is a minus too. The majority of the archive footage here is very well used though, perfectly juxtaposed against dialogue and narration. There are some captivating interviews too, most notably with a Goodyear CEO who simply rules corporations off as an expected "consequence of modern capitalism". There is also an interesting stretch towards the end of the film dedicated to corporations manipulating kids due to their 'pester power' when it comes to pleading for their parents to buy certain items. In fact, the film flies by very quickly for a 2.5 hour documentary.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A balanced look at what is a corporation
Jambo-624 May 2005
Since "The Corporation" is out now on DVD, we decided to watch it last night. I thought that the 2.5 hours would be a drag, but the time went very quickly. About halfway through, I regretted that I was not taking notes. It is a bit like a college lecture, but better because they interviewed so many different people from so many walks of life, and used archival footage and old news reports to support the points they were making. It made us think again about the broader picture of society and the corporate influence on politics in a new light. (I read "The Military-Industrial complex" when I was in college in the 60's) I also was reminded of another book I read by the author Scott Peck called "The People of the Lie" in which he points out that the lack of accountability results in the lack of responsibility and the loss of compassion. The facts in the documentary (and there are facts, not just opinions) support that idea.

Some reviewers seem to think that the writer of the documentary was calling corporations evil. We were able to watch the extras included on the DVD which included interviews and questions and answers. In one interview the author of the book says specifically that he does not believe they are evil, but "they are amoral and dangerous" in their current structure and purpose as defined by legislation, rules and charters in each state. It is important that government, whose mandate is to oversee the public good, provide protections to the public from entities whose purpose is their own good. If this is not clear the way I am saying it, please check out the DVD.

This is an excellent conversation starter- lots of material for thoughtful people to discuss. The extras are as good or better than the documentary so take the time to look at some of those.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Intelligent, mostly balanced, but overlong and plodding
LordXenu15 September 2004
The premise of this Canadian documentary, directed by Mark Achbar (Manufacturing Consent), can be summed up thus: According to the judicial interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the American Constitution, a corporation is a person. But what kind of person is it? Given its disregard for the law, endangerment of life and environment, and refusal to accept responsibility for its actions, the producers conclude that the corporation matches the symptoms found in the DSM-IV for psychopathy.

The Corporation scores a few good points: corporate arrogance, multinational corporations operating outside the law, exploitation of Third World and child labour, the pervasiveness of advertising, patents on life forms and even human genome information, the selling of "terminator seeds" that prevent farmers from saving seed from season to season, and privatization of the water supply. Specially singled out for special attention is Monsanto, which has brought us such fine products as Bovine Growth Hormone (BGH), genetically modified wheat, and Agent Orange.

On the other hand, the overall tone of the documentary is anti-corporation and anti-capitalist. A lengthy segment discusses the suppression by Fox News of an investigative report on Monsanto and rBGH produced by Steve Wilson and Jane Akre. While focusing on Fox's cover-up of a story that was in the public interest to report because it would affect their bottom line, the producers overlook the fact that Wilson and Akre were able to sue the same corporate entity for dismissing them in retaliation. Similarly, "Big Tobacco" could not be sued, nor could polluting oil companies be prosecuted, if it were not for the same legal standing that is the subject of this documentary's criticism. Focusing on the cons while ignoring the pros is unbalanced. A short sequence about Arcata, California's drive to ban chain restaurants from the city also appears to paint even small business owners unsympathetically. While criticizing private ownership and capitalism, the filmmakers fail to make a strong case for any alternatives, apart from some well-placed remarks about government regulation and operation of essential services, such as the water supply or firefighting.

Something like 40 different talking heads appear in this film to give their opinion: CEOs, lawyers, activists, economists, and others. Two people get significantly more "face time" than others. The first of these is linguist-turned-activist Noam Chomsky - not surprising, since he was the subject of Manufacturing Consent, the documentary that launched Mark Achbar's career. The second person was not so wise a choice: Michael Moore, who is not an expert on corporations or economics, but a like-minded filmmaker. His inclusion seems less like informed commentary than incest. Ironically, toward the end of the documentary he cackles in a most capitalistic fashion about using major corporations to distribute his films, which preach against what they stand for.

Overall, for a leftist screed, The Corporation is intelligent and, for the most part, balanced. However, at nearly two and a half hours, it is longer than it needs to be and tends toward the pedantic.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
a harshly critical documentary not because of a bias, but because of the layers it dissects on its ultimate purpose: making money to make more money
Quinoa19849 October 2007
The Corporation has been called (arguably I think) a biased film, a left-wing piece that tries to rally the cause to the choir it preaches to, that corporations are simply bad and that there should be just companies run by the people and for the people without any of the restrictions (i.e. the Central American man who fought with many others to gain control of the water from a corporation that demanded that water shouldn't be free). But there's a lot of density to the Corporation- the film I mean, though obviously I mean the actual subject itself- in how it tackles as many fronts possible to engage the intellectually curious person. And, as well, how humanity becomes an issue in the whole process of a company. Noam Chomsky describes how a person who is a CEO or works at a corporation might be the nicest guy imaginable, as a personable human being. But as a worker in a system that is clogged with the most ultimate of pressures- making the most amount of profit that can be attained- it makes that person in the business sense a "monster." How could it not? Acting against better judgment will make contradictions, even if there really isn't a whole lot on certain issues that the corporate executive will not agree with protesters, like the Englishman shown who describes a group that assembled on his lawn, then got to talking.

It might be almost too long a film, and yet at the same time not long enough. The number of stories that end up on the reels of film bring out some of the most exacting, precisely infuriating material in a documentary this decade. From the story about the Fox News producers (of all people) who end up being the victims of a plot by a manufacturer of a chemical injected in cows for milk who don't want a story about the dangers of the product (taken all the way to court where's it's ruled finally that the news doesn't have to be truthful), to the stock market trader who speaks frankly about the pricing of gold being more prevalent (albeit not the topic of tragedy, which has no place on Wall Street) than the 9/11 attacks, to the blatantly manipulative efforts of advertising psychologists on children, and of course the environment and the intrinsically horrific connection to natural resources of Earth, it's all a well-oiled machine built for the good of the company itself...until it falters with the shareholders.

There's so much that could be analyzed with the film, and while it does towards the end lean towards the preachy (then again, what can really be done when looking at a system that holds in its grip of subsidiaries trillions of dollars), it's main purpose is achieved brilliantly, in a style that seems to skim a line of mockery and in sincerity as a video that corporate businessmen watch about something. Then again, how could it not with the access to footage; a lot of times it reaches lengths of montage that Michael Moore wouldn't try to attempt, bravely. My favorite random bit that gets tossed into the thick of it, when talking about certain rights revered, like the song Happy Birthday being owned by Warner Brothers. Though maybe more staggering is a section where patents are talked about, and how pretty soon human genes can be owned, as well as animals, and just random spaces of land (and what would a movie called the Corporation be without mentioning Disney, this time having created their own town!) It's absorbing all the way, even if you think it'll have something you already know (the collaboration of Nazi companies with American ones, which Michael Moore refers to, is not new news, if not the IBM bit that another interviewee points out). And It's also kind of daring the lengths that the filmmakers take its subject matter: the corporation becomes its own perfunctory organism, on-par if not more powerful than governments, and with so much at stake that no other kind of form of commerce can ever exist.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Well intentioned, but not well executed
jayhawk-187 November 2004
This would have played very well as maybe a series of 6 hour-long TV documentaries, each with a theme. Instead, you get a book's worth of information in a wide-ranging and ill-defined format, little of which is new or illuminating unless you're young or just naive.

I want to read the book on which it was based, especially to learn more about how to stay informed and become more involved. This production didn't fire me up much and didn't offer many ideas or alternatives to offset the all-consuming power of corporate greed and industrial production.

If you're expecting a Michael Moore expose with witty set-ups, character assassinations and the like...forget it. The doco is largely humourless and suffers from not having an on-camera narrator to liven up the proceedings. It's preaching to the choir and won't win over many new supporters to the cause.

If you've read Klein's No Logo or Chomsky's Hegemony Or Survival, or have seen excellent docos on the BBC like Travels of a Gringo, then you might find this a bit tedious.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Unfortunately Biased
mightypossibility5 October 2005
The crux of the Corporation is that corporations are amoral and therefore usually immoral. Unfortunately, this film is not so much a documentary as propaganda. The reporting is unbalanced. There is creepy, bad guy theme music for corporations. The whole thing comes off as a well meaning but amateur college production. Like Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11 (but worse) the Corporation is therefore doomed to attract an audience of only people who already agree and to otherwise fall on deaf ears. (Moore is featured in this film, also Noam Chomsky.)

That said, I did learn a few things. The Corporation introduced me to Ray Anderson, the CEO reconfiguring his corporation for sustainable development. It drew my attention to the human rights issues surrounding the privatization of water rights. It made me reconsider, yet again, which brands of products I as a consumer (don't) want to buy. I considered whether business should ever market to children. And it amused me by psychoanalyzing the corporation (which the United States has granted the legal rights of an actual person) and diagnosing the corporation logically as a psychopath.
23 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed