Born In Flames (1983)

 

Picture: C-     Sound: C     Extras: C     Film: B-

 

 

Director Lizzie Borden has been celebrated as an in comparable female (and feminist to enough of an extent) director, but is she really innovative, just being bold or both?  Looking at her 1983 film Born In Flames, bold would be the more operative word.  The film imagines a near future where a second “peaceful” socialist (and in effect, communist) revolution is taking place in the U.S. where oppressed lesbians unite with other women who are being held behind by “the system” in it all of its institutionalized sexism and oppression as she sees it.  That this is a Second Socialist Cultural Revolution (the kind Right-wingers feared if Carter had been re-elected?) shows that this is being done tongue-in-cheek to be humorous, so it is not dead serious, but it is to the extents the issues are or are not that become the tipping point.  This might not be apparent to some, however.

 

If you follow the dogma of the extreme, reactionary Right, that brainwashing is bound to make the film seem dated outright when that is not the point and Left of center ideology in general is made to be cartoonish.  That the film is satirical could leave it open to that perversion, while just that these issues are being discussed in a film that was made independently, had a low budget and took five years to make can be attacked as not being some A-production as if most of today’s A productions were not usually empty B-movies to begin with.  That thinking comes from the same Right-wing minds who wrote off any political protest as the participants celebrating some kind of 1960s nostalgia when most of the participants were not even born at the time!

 

The argument has been made that what the women are doing here is the pre-Internet equivalent of Blogging, though there were plenty of pirate radio outlets and political publications (even the 1970s Comix cycle) that would be even closer to this than TV broadcasting.  The consolidation of media (likely to prevent this kind of alternate discourse) during the eras of Reagan and Bush has made the film technically dated somewhat (i.e., here comes digital TV, whereas this is analog) but that does not make the film overall that way.  To see the women take over a station in the more highly concentrated era of ownership would arguably have the same effect.  Knowing the Science Fiction and political aspects of such films, I found it ideological predictable in certain ways, but half the fun is supposed to be in getting there, which works if you are in on the joke.

 

All that also makes it interesting and unintentionally amusing.  On one side, they take an old analog pre-cable/pre-satellite TV station by force to broadcast what they want.  The idea is understandable, but the means, execution and the ultimate futility of all that violent effort now seem more in vein than ever, though this is enough of a comedy.  V For Vendetta it is not, especially since the Left are supposedly winning/won in the takeover.  The film is still correct about not enough of a safety net being available for women in trouble and the sexism and misogyny are still with us, but have also not so cleverly transmuted into a phony kind of sheep’s clothing.

 

At the time, this was shocking, but unlike other serious radical works about the U.S. (like say, Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate or Grandmaster Flash’s The Message) this one has not held as much potency since it has humor and that should also make us question the Norman Lear/Bud Yorkin cycle of political TV situation comedies like All In The Family.  Did they have an unintentionally oversimplistic effect that nods approvingly to be too complacent, a slacker and tune out?  This “Forest Gumping” your way through such political success is dangerous, so the film to some extent can stand as a living time capsule about why the Republican Reclamation was possible and why the Extreme Right has been so successful, though the film has more to offer.  When you allow yourself to be this flawed, off guard and even arrogant of course, it could not be easier to be undermined, but the film is not in the clouds as signified by its smart humor.  To say otherwise is to punish the film’s joyous aspects, especially interesting when it is the joy of such a diverse group of women.

 

Borden is more interested in the joy of its dark fantasy than the reality of how this would be workable in real life, though it covers that to some extent in ways that will make you think of such diverse films as James Whale’s Bride Of Frankenstein (1935), Gillo Pontecorvo’s The Battle Of Algiers (1965) and even John Carpenter’s later They Live (1988), all of which reminds us of both its connection to politics, documentary and the Science Fiction genre.  I cannot go into the film more without spoiling it or bringing up spoilers, but with that said, I strongly recommend all serious film fans and thinking adults needs to see it at least once as required viewing.

 

The 1.33 X 1 image is very muddy from a very old NTSC analog video transfer, but the film would look better in real life, as shot in 16mm color reversal film.  The Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono is almost as many generations down, but has good audio for the kind of production it is.  The DVD performance is a bit disappointing, but will pass.  Extras include a DVD-ROM PDF interview with the director and trailers for other First Run titles.  On one last point, the women definitely targets capitalism (especially as practiced by the U.S.) as white male patriarchal, one and the same, without taking other factors into account, which is a fallacy if taken too seriously.  That is further expressed by the conclusion, which I also will not spoil.  Instead, I will follow up this review with an interview with the director soon, so be on the lookout for that.  Catch the film and all of Miss Borden’s work in the meantime.

 

 

-   Nicholas Sheffo