An Unreasonable Man (2007)

This starts with a quote "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." That is essentially the movie and the man in a nutshell.Ralph Nader throws his hat into the presidential election in 2004 and the Democrats are up in arms. The movie goes into his life as a consumer advocate starting with the automobile industry. It also digs into his personality and his single-mindedness. Then he runs for president in 2000. It tries to defend Ralph Nader's campaign but even his manager comes off as a political hack who has her talking points. Even his academic Democratic supporter has flaws simply on the surface of his research. Ultimately, every one of his arguments fall flat. They come off as either politically naive (which I don't buy) or politically insular or worst politically self-serving. Ralph needs to show some understanding of the Democratic opposition arguments but that's not the man. He is an unreasonable man. The idea that someone could be his supporter in 2000 and his opponent in 2004 is confounding to him. It's a sort of willful ignorance that his Democratic opponents level on him. It doesn't really go too much into the 2004 election other than Kerry was polite but didn't go along with his demands. In the end, this is a tragedy of an unreasonable man.

AN UNREASONABLE MAN - a documentary about Ralph Nader, was made in 2006. Two years after his second run for presidency, two years into W's 2nd term. For those who don't know who Mr. Nader is, he was best known (in the 70's) for helping make mandatory a host of things, including safety belts, which, in an epic battle against G.M., did not want to put into cars - the (minuscule) cost to do so, was deemed 'too expensive.'Mr. Nader took on many fights like this, and in his next incarnation, he ran for President of the U.S., first in 2000, and again in '04.It's the differences in these two campaigns - and, the time since that 2nd campaign ('06), and the repercussions we STILL feel today, and, for years to come - unless we wake up.Mr. Nader's first campaign was seen as almost a continuation of his consumer advocacy - he was a 3rd-party candidate, and his supporters viewed him as someone who'd help bring this nation back to it's senses - help release the elected officials' ties to PAC's, and corporations.At one point, the organization that funds the presidential debates (a private firm) refused to allow any candidates from ANY other parties, other than Democrat Al Gore, and Republican George W. Bush - to attend.This led to a situation, where Mr. Nader was invited to the debates (an off-stage viewing room, specifically), but, was met by police - who barred his entry.The election results were razor-thin, and many felt that W took the election (I'm NOT going to debate that, here), but, what happened to the US -and, the world, in general soon after, would strengthen what many perceived to be a weak, one-term presidency, and give them broad-sweeping powers that would cripple our basic rights;The attack of 11 Sept, '01.While this event is not strongly looked into, it caused ripples that would help W to a second term - and, many of the supporters of Nader's 1st run, not only wouldn't support him, they came out AGAINST him - with such vitriol (watch the difference in Michael Moore's strong convictions in praise of Nader for '00, and the clip right after, in '04, where he compares voting for Nader to the temporary high you get from using drugs!).Many who supported him, we're mocked -or worse - in '04,.As I said, this documentary was made in '06, so, we'd not yet suffered the financial meltdown of '08, and other events. Most of these once-for-now-against Nader supporters mock Nader's second run as 'foolish, egotistical,'As my father says; 'love everybody, trust nobody.' yes, it sounds cold, but, what this about- face of Mr. Nader shows how support can be fickle.At the end, several of the commentators mock Nader - his beliefs, etc. But, Mr. Nader says (I'm paraphrasing) his view has never changed. He doesn't care about his 'reputation' - only what is right. He said (again, this was made in '06) how our rights, our freedoms have been heavily eroded, and, he only wants to once again help work to make the US's founding principals, strong.It's 5 years later, when I saw this, and, the US, and, the world, is getting ever-more blind to these injustices. The finances of the world are in free-fall. A 'third World War' has been fought- without a bullet being fired. I'm referring to the MASSIVE financial clout and CONTROL by China - a country where a 'Mr. Nader' would he jailed - as they manufacture the world's technology, and much, much more.More and more people are in almost a narcotic-haze, of video games, and 'reality shows,' and materialism (Mr. Nader is NOT anti-capitalism, he's against bad, unfair business practices - that affect us ALL) - oblivious to the future. The 'Democratic' and 'Republican' parties grow ever more alike in their platforms, with the Republican party having been co- opted by extremist religious zealots, and the Democratic party practically catatonic, and, afraid to stand up for itself.What Mr. Nader rallied against - in the 70's, the '00 election, and again, the '04 election, is becoming more and more common-place.Mr. Nader states at the end, he's not interested in 'reputation' - he's interested in justice. If anything, I hope that viewing AN UNREASONABLE MAN will wake up Just one person - a person who can help continue to fight against injustices that affect us all.

'An Unreasonable Man' sure maybe to some or to the sum, however, to badly paraphrase the quote at the beginning of the film, it's going to have to be that way when going against vast popular opinion or a country set possibly in ill-fated contemporary or foregoing ways. The unreasonable man should always be present in time, sound and communal ways: that way we can check ourselves and make sure the emperor has good threads and of course reason, too. That is the way it is has be; or should be. However, I guess it's not that way; and so it goes, but this is not a political diatribe, spread it where they or I may. This documentary, is one of reasonably objective, standard and possible edifying fare; it brings on opponents of the whole 2000/2004 election elicitation, and brings forth the questions or accusations or presumption that Nader had ruined the election for the dems in both respective races. It is a thorough documentary with footage seemingly inclusive of converse thoughts and events, but obviously biased. Even opponents seem to admit not a dime's worth of difference between our two parties. Nader states "and so when people say, 'why'd you do this in 2000?', well I'd say I'm a twenty-year veteran of pursuing the folly of the least-worst between the two parties, 'cause when you do that, you end up allowing them to both get worse, every four years." Very well said. Furthermore, In a supposed free-market, like cheese or milk, let the voter decide. What did Nader owe Gore or Kerry? Let the voter, or the faux-voter, decide, again! Some party's inability to provide the right H'ors deurves might be to blame. Whom did he owe any votes?

I saw this film at a pre-screening in West LA and absolutely loved it. I have researched Nader extensively and there is a plethora of information and accomplishments out there in regards to his life. This movie managed to pack in plenty, though there is never enough to show what Ralph Nader has really meant to the American people. The film was important in that it showed both Nader's critics and followers, along with his betrayers and friends. It was very interesting to learn about his childhood a little since it was the only personal thing I have ever heard about him. Nader simply appears to have had no social life other than that of social reform, which is most likely how he managed to change the country so drastically. The film carries you through the hero he was once portrayed as, to the embarrassment he became and makes you wonder what he really did to deserve the smearing he obtained. Hopefully after watching this movie, he will not be viewed so much as a spoiler. Regardless, even he said, he does not care about his "legacy", he really just cares about the people's interests. We are very lucky to have someone so dedicated to us!