Angry Inuk

I don't think I could ever kill a seal or a dear or a pig or a cow, but, as mentioned previously, I do eat meat and understand that somewhere down the line the lives of the animals I consume are cut short, that someone else brought their lives to an end, and they may earn their livings by engaging in such activities.

It's different if the species is threatened or endangered, or animal babies are involved, or if people are eating a species with a slow reproductive rate, but husbandry usually doesn't manage species at risk, as far as I know, the inherent cruelty of many aspects of factory farming notwithstanding.

Keep raising your voices and such aspects will change, all you have to do is frustrate a business's bottomline.

Several of the animals I eat are quite cute, however.

They're all quite cute.

I've considered posting pictures of them on my fridge to remind me not to eat them but still haven't gotten around to it.

Man I love steak.

Still, I'm glad there aren't massive industrial entities harvesting seals along with pigs and cows, but if some people in remote areas where there are no alternative economic opportunities want to hunt them, and sell products made from their skin etc., I see no problem with this, since the seals in fact flourish in abundance.

The seal population in Nunavut, for instance, is much higher than that of its human residents, meaning that if such residents want to hunt seals and sell boots and parkas made from their hides afterwards, I can't rationally critique such commerce.

Alethea Arnaqua-Baril's Angry Inuk takes a hard look at the EU's decision to ban the sale of seal products within its domain, and the effects that that decision has had on small communities in Nunavut, Canada.

Before the ban, the communities were earning enough money to support themselves, and people in Europe may not know that a 12 pack of ginger ale can cost as much as $82 North of 60.

After the ban, these communities were still (are still) able to hunt seals for subsistence purposes if they could afford to buy gas for their snow machines, but without markets to sell their seal products, they couldn't afford to do much else, the ban on the import of seal goods having effectively crushed their only economy, and left them dependent on government assistance.

They sustainably harvest a small fraction of the seal population and if allowed to do so can support themselves with dignity and respect.

I therefore support a reversal of the ban.

I find it hard to stomach that the EU props up the veal industry, which is extra revolting, the mass slaughter of baby cows, the systematic mechanized profit based mass slaughter of baby cows many of whom are restrained from birth, and it won't support a handful of Inuit hunters shooting free seals in the wild who have grown to adulthood outside of a cage.

Baffling.

I've heard that centuries ago working people in England desperately wanted to eat meat because the upper classes generally were the only ones who could afford it.

I think that if you transported many of those workers to the 21st century and showed them the unbelievably miserable lives many animals lead in order so that the majority of North Americans and Europeans can eat meat, over a billion deaths weekly according to some sites, they may return to their time(s) lacking their former jealousies.

Or currently, currently send oblivious citizens to a slaughterhouse and have them stay there for a week, invisibly, so they can see how the animals are treated when the workforce thinks no one is looking.

Factory farms can become organic.

It may only raise the cost of a big mac by 35 cents.

Governments could also subsidize the transition.

While subsidizing the cost of food North of 60.

Canada's population North of 60 is around 114, 970.

If the oil and gas industry receives massive government subsidies every year, there must be some money lying around to bring the cost of a 12 pack of ginger ale down to $7 in the far North.

If food costs come down and the Inuit can market seal products again, you've got a thriving aboriginal success story.

That's not only good press.

It's also solid humanity.

Angry Inuk, a must see documentary.

Shame on you Greenpeace.

Shame.

Neighbours 2: Sorority Rising

Ambience.

New beginnings.

The Radner family continues to shed light on erroneous child rearing trials, practices, reflexively adapting to unpredictable circumstances with cohesive charm and salacious whimsy.

But another flock of rambunctious young adults is intent on wantonly expressing themselves next door, a blossoming sorority playing by their own rules to un/consciously break new emancipatory ground, unconcerned with the fact that Mac (Seth Rogen) and Kelly (Rose Byrne) are trying to sell their home, convivially coached by arch rival Teddy Sanders (Zac Efron).

Who's let go shortly thereafter.

Conflicted and forlorn, finding solace on the opposing team.

The result is a rushed collection of combative criticisms, relationship constructs, implausible rationalizations, and bold active dreams, dreams clashing as they seek definitive realization, the film heavy on good intentions, light on aerobic integrations.

Sloppy sequel.

On the one hand, there's a progressive element which depicts young women trying to succeed by asserting themselves using non-traditional means (that's cool), unfortunately relying on a man to start things up, on the other there's the typical sophomoric approach that utilizes tried and true marketable probabilities to sell the film, although sex isn't one of the main selling points.

The opposition doesn't blend well.

Like reading the newspaper on the toilet, Neighbours 2: Sorority Rising doesn't really progress even if moving forward's built into the narrative and it never slows down to encourage reflection, conflicting lifestyles producing some laughs, but still lacking the lubricants that irritably fuelled the original.

Even if it's a carbon copy.

Efron steals the show.

Le Havre

Loved Aki Kaurismäki's Le Havre.

The story follows the bohemian shoe shining Marcel Marx (André Wilms) as he manages his affairs and takes a refugee for whom the police are searching into his care (Blondin Miguel as Idrissa). Idrissa hopes to be reunited with his mother in London but circumstances suggest he'll be shipped back to Gabon. But Marcel, who can't even find enough cash to pay for his daily bread, rallies his friends to come to his aid. Forming an innovative impoverished indelible team, they create a potential working solution and boldly put their plan into action.

As the law rapidly closes in.

There's little pretence in this film as Kaurismäki's long patient shots of his cast showcase their hardened stoic demeanours. It's not trying to glamourize living off the beaten track or accentuate hardship. Rather, it modestly celebrates the crafty designs of a clever group of feisty individuals as they creatively stretch their limited resources in order to generate an emancipated opportunity.

Through the power of unification.

Detective Monet's (Jean-Pierre Darroussin) no slouch and has been ordered to make discovering Idrissa's whereabouts a top priority.

Marcel's wife Arletty (Kati Outinen) falls ill leaving everyone worried as he starts to take care of himself.

If you're searching for heartwarming, cheerful, humble escapes from the dominant discourses that consistently dehumanize underprivileged subjects, Le Havre should be high up on your list. The vitality constituting this wayward band of resilient ontologists temperately coordinates an immaculate sense of freedom.