Born in Flames

source: Born in Flames

A mockumentary about an ultimate timeline where the US became a socialist state that did very little to benefit the disadvantaged, and a couple of organisations that aim to overthrow the system in an attempt to enact real change. For 1983, this is so radical that it still probably would feel radical to most viewers in 2022. It's pretty bleak, hopeless, and messy, but I think there's a lot of truth here. I think it successfully argues that there'd still be a lot of work to do to make a society healthy beyond making changes within the already established system. If it's a starting point, sure, but Born In Flames says that's not enough. The film's probably right. The US hasn't even gone as far to even be a socialist-democratic country, and if it ever did, they may well deal with some of the problems this film depicts. I wish the movie was overall a little more focused- there's some repetition and a few too man characters, and there's one song they play every 15 or so minutes, which drove me a bit nuts. But I do really love what it's going for and how forward-thinking it is (and how well it's aged), and the execution overall is still pretty solid. Also: that final shot is crazy.

This film has some amazing visuals by virtue of being a time caspule to pre gentrified NYC. The plot is secondary to its actual ideas but still coherent and hits home. The music is brilliant too and and when you add all this up, it gives you something a 100 million studio film would not be able to replicate. Worth watching.

I watched that movie at nobu projects in antalya during feminist movie festivals. It was in june. I tried to remember and i also had notes so i keep writing from them for this review. Women had privileges but when men protested, the women gave up it. Why? It seems they have a black president but not black privilege. Bike protest was not so strong but government made it a big deal. Interesting. We see how people who need to be united can be divided. Workers, feminists. But then feminists go together. Radio and army. And a big protest happens. I think there is only lesbian as LGBTIQ+, not other people. I did not see. We see how media tries to manipulate the people. Media talks about always past. How past was bad and how today is good. Just like in turkey. Media tries to make people sleep. So radio and music becomes powerful. Against that patriarchal media. The songs, those nice funky songs is one of the things that stayed in my mind. Also great music and how women found the answer in violence. Because there were no choices. It is 10 years after revolution, which was supposed to bring equality but it did not change anything for except straight males. There were lots of referrings to real things. Like black panther party - explosion in the end. Florynce Kennedy was great as zella. So does Adele Bertei as isabel. I need to watch this movie again. It is great feminist-revolutionary movie. I give 9/10!

It blows my mind that anyone wouldn't give this ten stars. Even the eponymous song by Red Krayola moves me to tears! I make everyone I care about watch this film, and it takes all my strength not to spoil the ending when I am making my case, but it's worth it just to see the expression of joy wax into its pure glory at that climax. This raw, creative, utopian effort is the type of boldness we hunger for, and need.

I tried to download this movie for a long time but last night, I saw that my friend had a copy of it borrowed from her library, so I watched it and later figured it's also on youtube. This feels like the perfect follow up to stories like l'AN 01 as it starts on the year 10 after a socialist revolution in the united states and shows many of the flaws, which are the same flaws of the mainstream left movement, taking womyn's issues as specifities, or the mainstream feminist movement taking working class womyn of color. As fiction, it lets the criticism sink in more easily.

There's a lot of talking about political ideas in here, but not a lot of movie. It's a mash up of short clips of big talk with amateurish acting and stock footage and poorly shot blips. There are some still valid ideas and messages, but it comes across more like a university thesis than anything that you'd want to watch. Important more than watchable.

Made over six years between 1977-83, this film reminded me strongly of the films labelled the No Wave. These were underground lo-fi movies made primarily in New York in the late 70's / early 80's. They often had political messages and were uncompromisingly uncommercial. I'm not sure but I would think that Lizzie Borden's feature Born in Flames must surely qualify as one, as this is a wilfully challenging and direct bit of underground cinema which is a rallying cry to women generally. It has a sci-fi premise. In the near future, America is celebrating the tenth anniversary of a socialist revolution but despite this, many issues remain the same, such as racism, homophobia and sexism. A militant group called the Women's Army have been formed, they take direct action to fight for women's rights. Their leader is arrested for a minor offense and mysteriously dies in custody in prison, leading to further revolution. I'll come out and admit it straight away that I didn't fully enjoy this one. Not on ideological grounds but merely because I did not find the film fully engaging due to its fragmented experimental presentation. Having said that, I do respect what it was doing and it does have an unmistakable energy to it which I found interesting. It's clearly low-budget as underground films always are but it definitely has ambition for sure. It takes the form of a pseudo-documentary and mixes in some real news footage in with staged material. The actors are all amateur but this does ensure the feel remains more radical and less watered down. It focuses on feminist politics primarily and it does have to be said that many of the issues discussed still exist today so it does still have a relevance in terms of what it is saying. I also enjoyed the punk soundtrack which had a sort of proto riot grrrl feel to it. So, while I cannot pretend to have fully engaged with this one, I do respect it and admit it has a certain unique feel.

Agitational left-wing diatribe or fantasy about a mostly lesbian women's army confronting the compromised "in-name-only" socialist government of the United States (there is a sort of bubbling-under anarchist sentiment in here). Yeah, you know what, it's a little out there, just run with it. My attention kept drifting because I felt this obsessive need to get into the filmmaker's head. I get, I suppose, radical socialism and I get radical feminism. As a straight white...dude...I guess I have trouble understanding radical lesbianism. I couldn't figure out why, given the fairly ludicrous premise for this movie, a women's army such as this would be "mostly lesbian." Is it because the people who conceived of this film were lesbians and this was kind of a political fantasy of theirs, or was it a comment on radical feminism, that only lesbians (for reasons I don't understand but kind of want to - if this is indeed the case) would be militant enough to get it together and get down to business? Or was it that the feminist struggle of the time resembled this in some way? I am, quite obviously, not the audience for this movie, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't find it interesting. The politics here are inescapable and unavoidable - if you can't tolerate the Left's extended cinematic trips (and this is one long one), you're not going to make it through - there's not much else to glom on to. It is impossible to suspend disbelief (or was for me), especially considering this film is really a polemic thinly disguised as a fictional drama. And I don't mean that as criticism. It is what it is. This film is about ideas, and it doesn't equivocate. The movie does have a (genuine) punky, indie, underground feeling to it that might appeal to some who otherwise wouldn't be interested in something this ideological. The soundtrack is interesting and kind of weird. Not *quite* punk but not quite anything else either (which maybe makes it more punk, I don't know.) Oh - I disagree with other comments that this movie is somehow confused or unfocused. It's not. If anything, it is as subtle as a sledgehammer. I mean, I, for one, know *exactly* where the filmmakers stand. The plot seems to be fairly logical, if strangely paced. This film is low budget (and wears it on its shirtsleeve), rough around the edges, and frankly I think this movie would be a complete failure if made with a big budget - if for no other reason than a large budget would sabotage (through overproduction and glossiness) the undeniably radical position the film takes. Possibly the film's most compelling attribute it is that it is wholly uncompromised (for comparison see The Spook Who Sat By The Door - which is not as low budget, but is similar in its revolutionary fervor). In any case, this movie is not for everyone. The summer blockbuster crowd isn't likely to enjoy this, and I doubt those on the right side of the political spectrum are likely to make it through (though I can imagine some of them, maybe, rubbernecking in a voyeuristic way - "so this is how the other half lives, eh?"). Oh, and it ends with the World Trade Center being bombed (well, the transmitter on top), and Eric Bogosian shows up and has exactly one line, and I guess that's worth seeing if you're a Bogosian fan (I am). Anyway -- recommended, with strong reservations. If you like double meat and cheese on your ideological pizza, you'll probably dig this, or at least find it worth your time.

A film with almost mythic status as a feminist dystopian classic. Obviously the point is the politics but as a film its horrible. A cut-up of fake TV news coverage and documentary performance clearly improvised by a non-professional cast. Like finding yourself accidentally trapped in an argument you have no interest in. Fine if your burning interest is 1980's feminist agit-prop. Otherwise a complete waste of time.