David Suzuki is or was a popular environmentalist, much revered by countless Canadians, and practically glorified by the CBC, the state broadcaster. For many years he was the host of a nature program on Canadian television and as a naturalist has written some books.
FORCE OF NATURE reflects back on Suzuki's life, from his early years growing up in Leamington, Ontario (where his family re-located to from British Columbia, in 1946), to his time spent working at a research facility in Oakridge, Tennessee, prior to his becoming a celebrity scientist and a somewhat unctuous speechifier.
The documentary is interspersed with clips of this "eco-nut" (as he has been dubbed by some of his critics) speaking to what appears to be a sold-out, transfixed audience inside a regal theater. Here this man of science stands atop the stage, speaking on a wide array of subtopics, from the Big Bang to Big Oil. Did I mention Mr. Suzuki is virtually deified by many a Canadian? Heck, we're talking about someone who's treated to a standing ovation *before* he begins his lecture. Talk about an easy audience!
It's certainly difficult to disagree with David Takayashi Suzuki when he comments on such issues as toxic waste in the oceans, deforestation, and species extinction. Yet, what are we to make of such comments that there are too many people on the planet and that humans of today are living longer than ever? Is he merely stating what he believes are facts, or complaining?
If fish are truly being depleted at an alarming rate, then what smells a little fishy? Might there be a political undertone to this sentimental eco-gospel of his? During this speech, Mr. Suzuki speaks disparagingly of economics and seems overtly critical of capitalism and free enterprise. He describes the economy as an invention, comparable to the myths of dragons and demons. (The former may be true, but so what if it is?) A smooth segue leads into a discussion of manmade climate change, enough to perk up the ears of any critical-thinking climate dissenter out there, listening in from the balcony or the drawing-room.
It's all enough to make some people wonder: Is this wake-up call of his -- reading between the lines -- for limited government, or for government overreach? Does the lecturer speak as an admirable individualist, or as a collectivist, or perhaps even internationalist? Therein lies the very crux of the matter, so it seems to me, as to how seriously this Canadian icon is to be taken.
As a person, Mr. Suzuki comes across as an affable and humble gentleman. Although, some of his critics have described him as egotistical. According to some of what has been written of this environmentalist, he's been known to receive thousands of dollars per talk at public institutions, and his personal property is said to be in the millions, all the while lecturing the rest of us against land ownership. Can someone who is seemingly an anti-capitalist also be a multi-millionaire, or is there not a curious contradiction somewhere in there? Does this man for the most part spout pearls of wisdom or just a lot of hot air? Will Mr. Suzuki go down in history as a sagacious and saint-like "green prophet" or by and large an overpraised and forgettable has-been? Let the polarization of opinions begin.
Some of Mr. Suzuki's more querulous opponents have questioned just how much actual science this pundit has practiced over the years, enough to merit his stature as a revered secular sage of sorts. He's been mocked by some on the conservative side for his once having talked to a river, in which he offered up an apology on behalf of humankind; an act which these ones have interpreted as being anything but rational. He's been labeled a propagandist by some of his non-fans and ... lo and behold, this documentary presents its subject in a favorable light, only.
As a movie, FORCE OF NATURE is a well-put-together and fluidly paced piece of filmmaking -- lyrically composed, with a somewhat warm and cozy feel; quiet and introspective in parts, with a few shots of a solitary Mr. Suzuki fishing or hiking or simply staring out at the water, lost in either thought or reverie. These were the moments I enjoyed the most.
There's also several scenes which incorporate early footage of a young Suzuki, during his years as a labcoat, absorbed in the study of fruit flies. It is here in this early footage that has Suzuki expressing his concerns in regard to viruses used as potential bioweapons. There is certainly a destructive side to science which Suzuki has over the years recognized throughout his work.
As I watched these clips, I wondered who shot this footage and for what purpose these were recorded. Perhaps someone had a hunch that the young man being filmed would one day go onto become famous.
FORCE OF NATURE reflects back on Suzuki's life, from his early years growing up in Leamington, Ontario (where his family re-located to from British Columbia, in 1946), to his time spent working at a research facility in Oakridge, Tennessee, prior to his becoming a celebrity scientist and a somewhat unctuous speechifier.
The documentary is interspersed with clips of this "eco-nut" (as he has been dubbed by some of his critics) speaking to what appears to be a sold-out, transfixed audience inside a regal theater. Here this man of science stands atop the stage, speaking on a wide array of subtopics, from the Big Bang to Big Oil. Did I mention Mr. Suzuki is virtually deified by many a Canadian? Heck, we're talking about someone who's treated to a standing ovation *before* he begins his lecture. Talk about an easy audience!
It's certainly difficult to disagree with David Takayashi Suzuki when he comments on such issues as toxic waste in the oceans, deforestation, and species extinction. Yet, what are we to make of such comments that there are too many people on the planet and that humans of today are living longer than ever? Is he merely stating what he believes are facts, or complaining?
If fish are truly being depleted at an alarming rate, then what smells a little fishy? Might there be a political undertone to this sentimental eco-gospel of his? During this speech, Mr. Suzuki speaks disparagingly of economics and seems overtly critical of capitalism and free enterprise. He describes the economy as an invention, comparable to the myths of dragons and demons. (The former may be true, but so what if it is?) A smooth segue leads into a discussion of manmade climate change, enough to perk up the ears of any critical-thinking climate dissenter out there, listening in from the balcony or the drawing-room.
It's all enough to make some people wonder: Is this wake-up call of his -- reading between the lines -- for limited government, or for government overreach? Does the lecturer speak as an admirable individualist, or as a collectivist, or perhaps even internationalist? Therein lies the very crux of the matter, so it seems to me, as to how seriously this Canadian icon is to be taken.
As a person, Mr. Suzuki comes across as an affable and humble gentleman. Although, some of his critics have described him as egotistical. According to some of what has been written of this environmentalist, he's been known to receive thousands of dollars per talk at public institutions, and his personal property is said to be in the millions, all the while lecturing the rest of us against land ownership. Can someone who is seemingly an anti-capitalist also be a multi-millionaire, or is there not a curious contradiction somewhere in there? Does this man for the most part spout pearls of wisdom or just a lot of hot air? Will Mr. Suzuki go down in history as a sagacious and saint-like "green prophet" or by and large an overpraised and forgettable has-been? Let the polarization of opinions begin.
Some of Mr. Suzuki's more querulous opponents have questioned just how much actual science this pundit has practiced over the years, enough to merit his stature as a revered secular sage of sorts. He's been mocked by some on the conservative side for his once having talked to a river, in which he offered up an apology on behalf of humankind; an act which these ones have interpreted as being anything but rational. He's been labeled a propagandist by some of his non-fans and ... lo and behold, this documentary presents its subject in a favorable light, only.
As a movie, FORCE OF NATURE is a well-put-together and fluidly paced piece of filmmaking -- lyrically composed, with a somewhat warm and cozy feel; quiet and introspective in parts, with a few shots of a solitary Mr. Suzuki fishing or hiking or simply staring out at the water, lost in either thought or reverie. These were the moments I enjoyed the most.
There's also several scenes which incorporate early footage of a young Suzuki, during his years as a labcoat, absorbed in the study of fruit flies. It is here in this early footage that has Suzuki expressing his concerns in regard to viruses used as potential bioweapons. There is certainly a destructive side to science which Suzuki has over the years recognized throughout his work.
As I watched these clips, I wondered who shot this footage and for what purpose these were recorded. Perhaps someone had a hunch that the young man being filmed would one day go onto become famous.
