The Shock Doctrine

2009
7.6| 1h22m| en
Details

An investigation of "disaster capitalism", based on Naomi Klein's proposition that neo-liberal capitalism feeds on natural disasters, war and terror to establish its dominance.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Also starring Milton Friedman

Reviews

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.
Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!
Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.
Ariana The popularity that Naomi Klein has garnered oddly reminds me of Paolo Coelho...sometimes depth can be very aptly simulated...When the documentary started out by mentioning sensory deprivation I thought it would talk about how lack of real information (or perceived lack of information) can shape the human psyche and how this is used as a means of political control (during the Arab spring, every government that faced upheaval tried to close off its population and muffle the internet). But nooooo.....it conflated sensory deprivation with physical torture thus managing to say nothing new or interesting about either. Then it veers into electric shock therapy because....documentary logic....and then compares it to the economic doctrine of "shock therapy" as envisaged by Friedman. These two things have similar names but are comparable in as much as the Razzies are comparable to the actual raspberry fruit...See, in the world according to this documentary, every time you drink raspberry juice....you taste Halle Berry's tears.And it just goes downhill from there as the documentary meanders in paranoid stupor towards telling us that all sudden political and social change is part of an evil plot and it always ends bad, capitalism is the source of all that is rotten and Friedman is a bad dude.Of course, while it spends some time on Russia (but don't worry, the analysis is not too deep or in any way tries to capture the complexity of the situation there), it neglects to mention what happened to countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic which have successfully used "shock therapy" in their transition to democracy and the free market after the fall of the Berlin wall....because cherry-picking is fun. Also let's not talk about the former Eastern Block countries that adopted Gorbachev's gradual reform route and how that turned our for them....because that would be pointing out that while a sudden switch to capitalism can be risky and painful....sometimes it may just be the lesser or 2 evils. The hell with that, it's far more fun, and easier to get more attention, if you pick an idea that you find "edgy" (someone or something is out to get you), an evil shady boogie man (Friedman) we can all boo at, and then throw everything and the kitchen sink into your version of reality until it somehow starts to make sense, at least if you can't be bothered with nuances or the real complexity of geopolitics and how it's never just one variable that determines an outcome as huge as a country plunging into disarray, but many factors influencing each other in subtle ways. I don't think capitalism is above reproach and there are many fair criticisms of both capitalism as a doctrine and the flavor it has acquired in contemporary times. I also don't think that the idea that crisis situations make us more willing to accept things we would not normally accept is without merit. But the way these 2 ideas are tied in "Shock Doctrine" is painfully contrived and the documentary overall has both the clarity of thought and the logic of your average conspiracy theory flick.
imdb2-556-923983 The question on my mind after seeing The Shock Doctrine was whether ends justify means. Quite possibly, this is the question Klein wanted to be asked, because much of her case regards the distasteful means taken in order to further free market economics, tactics which the very proponents of these dogmas may feel they want to disassociate themselves with. However, my question was about Klein's/Winterbottom's own tactics.The film uses all methods that we've grown used to from modern politics: cherry-picked facts, "proofs" by emotionally-charged metaphors, hinted claims of guilt by association, sound-bite slogans that are repeated incessantly, and, of course, scare tactics. Sad to say, I've come to expect these things from political candidates that need to make their points in a 30-second TV appearance. I've even come to expect them in rating-seeking news programs. But have we stooped so low that these tactics are now par-for-the-course in documentaries, where a film-maker has 90 minutes of canvas to make a clear, compelling, and well-argued case? I happen to agree with Klein's stance that extreme capitalism is dangerous, and I think what we are seeing in both Europe and China in recent years (e.g. the collapse of Chinese nation-wide education and health policies) are just further proofs of the narrative Klein forwards. However, I don't see that there is a well-argued case here that would convince someone claiming that any change, good or bad, rarely happens in a peaceful way, or that the ultimate outcome of privatization is better than the alternative. In fact, only a handful of minutes of this film are devoted to the question of what the final outcome of extreme capitalism looks like, historically, and these minutes are full of unsubstantiated claims thrown into the air in what is exactly the tactic Klein warns against: shock a person for just over an hour, and suddenly that person becomes much more open to suggestion, at which point you can sprinkle some of your favorite dogmas on him.So, perhaps this film does a good job with all those who are willing to be convinced by visceral arguments, the likes of which have, unfortunately, come to dominate the public discourse, but I rather promote those who educate people to think. Scaring people to make the choices you think are right... well, that's what this film is all about. Isn't it?
ermanator_x-1 My 15 year old son came home with this "documentary" yesterday, and I decided that I better keep an eye on what he was watching.While I will credit the tremendous amount of research that went into this movie, I would have to say that it is fiction based on true historical events. The communist spin that was put on this is abysmal. Don't get me wrong, while being a firm believer in an open market system, I do see the pros and cons of both Capitalism and Socialism. However, this story only looks at the dirty underbelly of the free market system while allowing the viewer to believe that living in Soviet Russian or East Germany was as fine as a summer frolic on the beach until evil capitalists defeated the communist way and ruined the whole party. They even make the fall of the Berlin Wall seem like a tragedy that capitalists couldn't wait to exploit. The use of the same propaganda phrases used over and over again in this movie sickened me on more than one level. Comparing Capitalism to shock therapy, which was linked to and compared to torture and interrogation methods. They then made reference to (insert capitalist pig here) using any political, social, or environmental tragedy as "instigating the shock treatment" or simply "the shock" by using it as a way to defeat the will of the people who they are enforcing their capitalist regime on.At the end of the movie, I felt that I had to have a debriefing session with my son and his friend. While many of the unfortunate events that took place in the film were indeed blood on the capitalists hands, there is more blood on the hands of socialism/slash communism than even the Third Reich. I had to explain to him that while there was a rough transition from communism to capitalism in Eastern Europe, it was not unfortunate event that the Soviet Union broke and the Berlin Wall came down. I had to inform him that it was no picnic living in the Soviet states and that many had risked and lost their lives in order to climb the wall or flee other Communist states. It really is a shame that people forget history and that it really is doomed to repeat itself. I would recommend anybody who watched this to balance it out by learning about the bloody rise to power by the Soviets. Watch a documentary about Stalin, or the Chernobyl melt down and how the Soviets mishandled it and allowed their own people to suffer by having too much pride for western help. The bottom line here is that films like this are powerful form of propaganda and should be taken with a rather large grain of salt. It's just too bad that impressionable 15 year olds lack the knowledge, experience, and reasoning that is needed to watch this.2 stars is generous and is only given because the video was well researched and well made.
Java Bean After watching this film with a few friends (one of which was a former World bank employee), we had a rather mixed and somewhat heated conversation in the cinema bar. The film is basically a summary of the book, which talks about the ideas of Milton Friedman and how they have been used to influence world affairs. However, for those of you who may find the film 'superficial' I would recommend the book, as there is much more detail. Regarding the objectivity of the film, I don't believe that it's anti-American or anti-capitalistic (as my world bank friend remarked). Quite the contrary, it is very balanced and in my opinion Klein does not point a finger at a company without first presenting the facts. I think what a lot of pro-capitalists probably find annoying about Klein is that she brings the whole idea of multinational dirty dealings and currents affairs into the spotlight. After all, Halliburton, Shell, BP, the World bank etc. are far from angels when it comes to making money! I for one, commend the producers of this film and Mrs. Klein for a job well done!