No Man's Land (2017) Poster

(I) (2017)

User Reviews

Review this title
4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Fatal Delusion
tombuchta12 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
A fascinating and frustrating look at how the federal government has chosen to respond to armed right-wing anti-government extremists on federal lands in the west.

For most of us who treasure and enjoy the federal lands that have been gifted to us to use it was beyond frustrating to see local and federal law enforcement sit back and watch an armed takeover of the Malheur Refuge. The justification given by the extremists for their action was that the State of Oregon not the Federal Government owned not just these Refuge lands, but all federal land in the West. This fundamentally flawed notion advanced by Bundy and others was not examined in the movie. It has been rejected numerous times over the last 150 years and as recently as April of last year when Bundy's continued assertion of state ownership of federal land in Nevada was thrown out by Nevada State Judge Jim Crockett who concluded in part, "It is simply delusional to maintain that all public land within the boundaries of Nevada belongs to the State of Nevada."

The lack of any justification for the takeover leads inevitably to an equally absent plan or strategy for ending their takeover or way to declare victory. Indeed one can feel the impatience and anxiety of the occupiers rising after 41 days and the initial thrill and attention faded, local opposition mounted and roads were blocked and treats stopped being delivered. It apparently was this desperation for attention that drove them to leave the compound and to run a blockade resulting in Lavoy Finicum's death.

The show ends with the uneasy feeling that we have not seen the end of this kind of armed right wing protest. The documentary leaves the question of how to respond especially with a President who seems to openly encourage and defend such behavior. At least in this case it seems like an immediate blockade of the site limiting supplies and media attention would have forced their hand much sooner.

For more a more detailed account of the takeover including what happened at the occupied site you can visit Wikipedia's "Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge". As for Harney County citizens they held a primary election in May 2016 at which voters turned out in large numbers. All of the winning candidates had opposed the occupation.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Your Bias is Showing
ninjawaiter6 July 2020
For a documentary that is overwhelmingly composed of footage and interviews with the occupiers, the "journalist" analysis interviews interspersed throughout and given extra time at the end, as well as the voice over conclusions, are remarkably biased against the occupiers' point of view. In fact, they are 100% antagonistic to the occupiers and their cause, including misrepresenting them at times.

Moreover, the dramatic statements at the end of the film pointedly directed at President Trump and his supporters are not only jarringly out of place, but serve as a very clear statement of the filmmakers' true intent with this piece. Which is a shame, because the incident itself is quite interesting, and the documentary crew got some really great access.

Given all that, it's impossible not to look back through the documentary and assume that the filmmakers chose the craziest and most inflammatory statements of the occupiers in order to paint them in the worst possible light, while excluding whatever footage they thought might reflect well on the occupiers.

While I don't personally agree with the occupiers' actions or believe they ever had any hope of achieving much, and place 100% of the blame for the one man who died on that man himself (not to mention endangering the lives of his family), it would have been nice to see some unbiased interviews and footage from people who didn't go into the project with an obvious agenda to demonize the occupiers.

This subject has been given particular relevance in light of the recent (2020) "occupations" of public, federal, and private property, often armed and also often violent, unlike this group. (For a prominent example see the Seattle CHOP.) This group managed to last several weeks with zero acts of violence in their occupied zone, zero crimes against persons, and the only destruction of property was principled protest against government policy (still a crime). Contrast that with any of the 2020 occupations and the differences could not be more striking, and yet the media coverage of the incidents was completely inverse, treating this incident like a terror cell and the 2020 occupiers as legitimate protest. Obviously it is not the actions they find objectionable, but the actors.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
We Literally Watched Watched Him Gunned Down
Hands in the air, on his way to meet with law enforcement, we see drone footage of the man trying to surrender and is gunned down for NO REASON.

This so-called 'journalist' screeching about Americans complaining because 'Mexico and Venezuela are much worse!!' is like Kamala Harris saying she hasn't been to Europe therefore not visiting the border is irrelevant. In other words, insanely ridiculous.

The filmmakers went out of their way to show the viewpoint of their choice, much like current day journalists insisting on being biased and activists, rather than the actual facts directly related to the activities.

Lavoy Finicum was murdered by a thug with a badge.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
No surprise
theshow-5805527 January 2021
White people do what they want to do. Seems like black people get shot tear gas arrested and charged more harshly. They get to have thier white utopia
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed