 | |
List Price: $29.99 | | Label: Oscilloscope Laboratories
Salesrank: 18009
Released: August 18, 2009 |
| Our Price: $17.78 |
| Used Price: $16.69 |
|
MPAA Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
THE GARDEN is an engaging and powerful look at the famous political and social battle over the largest community garden in the U.S (located in south central Los Angeles).
A follow-up to Kennedy's award-winning documentary, OT: OUR TOWN, the film shows how the politics of power and greed (backroom deals, land developing, green politics, money) tragically intersect with working class families who rely on this communal garden for their livelihood. Equal parts THE WIRE and HARLAN COUNTY, USA, THE GARDEN, exposes the fault lines in American society and raises crucial and challenging questions about liberty, equality, and justice for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.
Kenneth Turan of the LA Times said: It's tempting to call THE GARDEN a story of innocence and experience, of evil corrupting paradise, but that would be doing a disservice to the fascinating complexities of a classic Los Angeles conflict and an excellent documentary that does them full justice.
The Garden Reviews:
Must See Documentary 
2009-10-26 - Extremely well made, relevant doc that address class, race, politics and the environment. It will make you relfect on your own actions and then take action.
A quagmire of unmentioned issues 
2009-08-23 - While the film itself is interesting and well done, the biggest problem I have with this film is its lie of omission. At its core, the film is about a simple property rights issue, however the director chooses not to focus on the real issues of the conflict, instead focusing on the plight of the urban poor and painting all others involved as "greedy, evil politicians and developers". Its not mentioned if the people farming the land had ever had any right to do so to begin with, regardless of whether the property was owned by the district, city, or a private entity. Perhaps they should have bothered to secure the right to use the land for agricultural purposes to begin with. But to not do so, and then claim that they have eminent domain over the land because they have put it to use is not a valid argument to seize private or public property.
If the owner of the property happened to be a better cook than any of them, could he make the case that he should seize ownership of their kitchens? If I (and three of my neighbors) can put your back yard to use better than you can, does that give me the right to claim ownership of it?
Its this issue that is not directly addressed by anyone but the owner of the property at the end of the film (complete with "evil" rock music and scenes of crying protesters and bulldozers) which is the core and cause of the situation. The farmers and the filmmaker conveniently decided to omit much discussion of the origin of or ways of property rights upon which our entire society is based. This is not to say I agree with it, but to mostly ignore it is asinine.
Mostly good film, minus the blatant and intentional appeal to emotion rather than the issue itself.
one of the best documentaries i've seen!
2009-08-20 - wow wow wow. i'm an LA resident and was horrified by the injustice i saw between councilwoman jan perry and scumbag land owner ralph horwitz. jan has her hands so deep in the money bag, obliviously on the take, while horwitz is too busy being racist. amazing and so glad this was documented on film. i'm sorry i was not more involved with this movement. rent/buy this film to see what i'm talking about. worth it on all levels. at least it will get you thinking one way or another.
Good Use of Available Documents 
2009-08-17 - I saw this film at an IFC screening in NYC that included a Q&A with the director afterward. People who advocate of the rights of the poor to use under-used urban land almost universally love this film. I suspect the director shares their sympathies. What usually goes unnoticed as far as the story is concerned is that the city took private land through eminent domain and then failed to use the land for any of the public purposes for which land seizures are normally reserved. After the passage of several years, the city then sold the land back to the original owner at the price they'd originally paid him. On the surface, this does not seem 'unfair'. However, in the interim poor immigrants, many of whom were presumably undocumented, began to farm the land. That Hamilton failed to document whether or not these people were undocumented, whether any particular viewer feels this is germane or not, is a minor flaw in the film. Of course, their immigration status would have been a difficult topic to broach with the immigrants themselves and might have changed the filmmaker's access to the immigrant community, but it might also have served to highlight the differences between the immigrant community and the allegedly corrupt city counselors who were elected by the poor Black residents of the area. Be that as it may, Hamilton does a good job with the documents available to present the complexity of the situation, if only in passing. I spoke to Hamilton after the screening. He'd already sold the few DVDs he had with him for $20 and urged me to call or email him for a copy. I've done both, but only get an answering machine or a form email telling me the DVD is available, because of my university affiliation, for $310, even though I have no plans to use the DVD in an educational setting.
loved this doc
2009-07-09 - I saw this movie at Cinema Village in NY and was so impressed by its raw, fly-on-the-wall approach. Being a New Yorker I knew nothing of the plight of these farmers in South Central LA and their attempts to take on greedy developers and city hall to save their community garden, but this story has universal appeal. An enthralling and necessary doc.
