Streets of Plenty

source: Streets of Plenty

A poorly made mockumentary. A very naive and privileged young man ignores the realities of addiction, mental illness and homelessness, and films himself trying hard drugs for fun and mocking people. Doesn't even last 30 days and learns absolutely nothing.

This documentary is so fake. His "meltdowns" where he was threatening to go home were so staged. He has not future in acting. Adds those bits in for dramatic effect. It started off mildly fascinating and drops off pretty fast. After half an hour I was bored and also irritated by the guys awful acting.

Misha Kleider decided to make a documentary about the plight of Vancouver's homeless. He sets it in the context of Vancouver having been awarded the 2010 Winter Olympics and repeatedly being named one of the best cities in the world to live in. And his goal is to expose the other side of Vancouver - the 10 square block nightmare of the Downtown East Side, where homelessness, violence, drug addiction and prostitution are common. There's some value in pointing out the distinction between the two sides of Vancouver. I'm more familiar with Toronto - living only about an hour from that city - but the cities are in many ways similar. There's a lot of affluence, and there's a lot of poverty. Basically, to live in either you have to be either wealthy or poor, because the middle class is being squeezed out by the lack of affordable decent housing. But I have to confess that I also had a knee jerk negative reaction going into this. Kleider seems to be a relatively affluent white kid who thinks he'll learn about homelessness on Vancouver's Downtown East Side by pretending to be homeless on Vancouver's Downtown East Side. Not really the same thing - since Kleider could choose to call it quits anytime he wanted. And in spending his month on the streets he uses resources that could have actually been used by the real homeless. And I have to confess that I found his ultimate learning from his experience to be underwhelming to say the least - there's a strong connection between homelessness and drug addiction. I probably could have guessed that. I was concerned by the beginning of the film - for a while it looked like it was going to be a "slam the poor" sort of film, blaming them for their own situation and suggesting (as many do) that they actually have life pretty easy. Thankfully, that seems to have been a bit of a set-up, because the tone changes dramatically once Kleider has been on the streets for a few days and really starts to see the situation closer up. He did help shed light on what to many people is a mystery - why do some homeless people choose to stay on the streets even when there are shelter beds available? Turns out Kleider learned that in a lot of ways (especially health-wise) the streets are actually safer than the shelters. Point taken. And there really is no simple answer to the problem of homelessness - the point made by an interview he had with Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, who took office with a promise to end homelessness and then - like so many politicians who make grandiose promises - realized that he wasn't going to pull that off. Kleider also made some questionable and even disturbing choices in the course of filming. I realize he wanted to experience the plight of people living in the Downtown East Side - but actually trying crack and heroin was too extreme for my liking - and, frankly, his brother (who was doing the filming) should have walked at that point and refused to be a participant in Misha's stupidity. In doing the experimentation with heroin, mind you, he did give us a look into what's it's like in a supervised injection site. It's a controversial idea, and I can see both the pros and the cons of the concept - and what I saw here really didn't sway me to either side. This isn't a total waste. It does point out the problem of life on the streets - and it's likely similar in all large cities, and not just Vancouver. But my gut reaction to this was simply not positive. (4/10)

Mildly interesting and could have been so much better. So much naivety throughout the film. They completely ignore mental illness as a factor in homelessness. I do give the main character credit for trying. He certainly had courage to follow through on lots of things. Still, the lack of self awareness and empathy makes this a mostly uninteresting film that misses the point.

The movie pictures well the tough reality of the streets of the downtown east side - a neighborhood few people would dare spend a night in. The story seems a little bit improvised which helps make it more realistic. I would watch it again !

I applaud his attempt at experiencing homelessness first hand to understand these issues in Vancouver. If you are going to explore anything, it's best to challenge yourself with what makes you uncomfortable. But, I do agree with the reviews that call it self indulgent. Or, at least, lacking awareness of his privilege. The very fact that he comes from upper/middle class privilege is a HUGE factor in his experiment. He can go home at any point (and even says he's about to while doing heroin), and knowing he has this safety-net stops him from ever really facing the same dangers and risks as other people on the streets. I suppose it's good he finds some empathy towards the end, but the starting point is (below) zero, with such a callous perspective that these people are just con artists and sub-human. And after having a negative drug experience, this film concludes, overly simplistically, that the problem is entirely drugs. Even the mayor explains what a hugely complex problem it is. I suppose this film might be useful as an eye-opener to others that think like he did, and have no empathy towards the people of the DTES.

I understand why people would think this is narcissistic and not showing the problem properly, but you can't expect that. As a whole the film gave me a better sense of the world of the homeless than I know how to find anywhere else. What I understand better is the curiosity to know what homelessness actually is like and understand where it comes from. I have no idea where to find this kind of information so I'm glad this guy went out and saw that world from his specific perspective. Of course there is more to the problem and of it's not a cinematic masterpiece, but you can't expect that from a regular guy like him. Also, it's not as if this one month of using the homeless facilities is going to change anything in the bigger picture. I can't blame him of doing anything bad before I find a better way of learning about this problem.

All the previous reviews are in fact true. Waste of time. Someone else please make a better one.

It's unfortunate that this has been released. But it does stand a testament to how misunderstood this epidemic is. But yeah. Just unfortunate...