ACAB: All Cops Are Bastards (2012)

Top comments

1. 

   demagogo

   For that name you could expect a juvenile anarcho-something narrative like in The Edukators. This movie is not so simple, yet it doesn't want to say something complex either. Because of its aspirations of realism, there is not a good/bad mutually exclusive dichotomy, so some people assume the storytelling here is to traditional good/bad narrative what Newtonian physics is to quantum's. This is not the case.
   
   The plot could be described as the exposition of the lives of a handful of riot cops, both veteran, still active, and a rookie, and their struggles. They are shown thoroughly as racists and fascist sympathizers, yet their nemesis in the movie are boneheads (also fascists, quite obviously). Until now you could think this movie would only be criticized by right-wingers, but there are left-oriented critiques. A Fox News-minded rightist demagogue could say that since cops aren't portrayed as blood-thirsty animals, anyone a bit on the left would think this is fascist propaganda or else. And you know what, that may be partially true, but let me explain why.
   
   I've read that the director claims he's left-wing, but he wants the audience to make up their own minds on the subject since the movie aims to objectivity. Fair enough, but the movie is nowhere objective. You have a lot of humanized portraits of riot cops followed of gratuitous scenes of stylized confrontation, you have a premeditated edition, writing, decisions of what's going in and out, direction, takes, and a lot of things only people alien to art aren't aware of; i.e., if you're not over 40 and/or you haven't been dumbed down your whole life because of an authoritarian upbringing or job, you know there is nothing innocent (say, realistic, objective, wtv) in a movie. Does the director actually want to communicate something? I doubt so. Also, the aim for objectivity in art is futile at best and delusional at worst. For the sake of the example imagine a Hollywood movie trying to portray obectively (if possible) any political figure; it happens all the time. What the rest of the world see as annoying propagandistic films, Americans see as sentimental or "patriotic". What I try to say is even if you think you've achieved a balanced artistic outlook on a subject, there are innummerable connotations defined by a lot of factors out of your reach as an artist and that people see as given more than a product of their own judgement. If the director's on the left, he isn't more than François Hollande or Hillary Clinton (i.e. pretty much nothing on the left). Maybe the guy had good intentions, but the movie overall looks confused and confusing more than "realistic" -- It lacks direction. As with almost every dumb Oscar bait: Why not making a documental instead? Even better: Why making a movie about a subject like police corruption when you don't seem to have nothing to say on your own? Why even bother with this movie? 7 years 8 months ago

See all comments

Friends

Login to see which of your friends have seen this movie!