Too much of everything

A Disappointing Continuation

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

The movie starts with what appears to be documentary footage of protests at the 2004 Democratic Convention in Boston.Later we learn Jake filmed the footage and is showing it to Chloe, who works at BCN and is also his romantic interest. They don't have a perfect relationship, though, since Chloe cares about getting ahead and Jake cares about the truth. The Republican Convention is coming up in New York City, and BCN wants Jake to cover the "war" taking place in the streets. Jake has experience with war, having been the first "embedded" journalist in Iraq.Before the convention, though, Jake and his sound man Dexter film some opinions of people in general, including a wacko who thinks Bush caused 9-11, and rapper Immortal Technique, who is angry about the way black people and other minorities are disrespected by cops and others.Jake meets Richie, who raises homing pigeons with his father Cruz, who is serving in Iraq. They become friends, and Jake also develops a relationship with Richie's mother Tina, who explains that her husband was killed but Richie doesn't know it.Soon Jake is learning about the protests and those who are participating, including one group that wears masks so its members will be anonymous. While Jake believes he is doing good, BCN and its president of programming Bob Kramer, who was once a journalist but now considers himself a businessman interested in his company's success, want to help Homeland Security keep track of potential terrorists.The ending is pretty amazing if disturbing.If you are a Bush-Cheney supporter who believes in conservative values, this movie may not be for you. The conservative point of view is presented but mostly to be ridiculed or criticized. Those who served in the military are respected and praised, but why they were serving is another matter.Of course the protesters are more than just lazy people looking for an excuse to make trouble as some of the conservatives think. But they are working hard to take a stand and drive change. If they were lazy they'd just back down from all the adversity. Rosario Dawson does a great job as a mother who is trying to cope and seems reasonably happy considering her circumstances. And she is pushing her son to be more than she is.Nathan Crooker does a good job as an idealistic journalist.The real stars of the movie are the ordinary people. Most appear to be merely actors but they come across as more. And there is a lot of what appears to be real footage.And of course the convention itself was real. According to this movie, though, Bush didn't speak at night, but I guess that's a minor criticism. Maybe it wasn't safe to film that part of the powerful climactic scene during the day. There is some violence, but it's not too bad. I'm so glad I saw this movie cleaned up for TV, because the sound went out a lot.It's not what we would like to see, and it's not necessarily the truth, but it's what we need to see. If only to make us think.

1)Many of them are probably connected to THIS REVOLUTION director Stephen Marshall, who made the unusual effort to provide the summary for his own movie at IMDb. If you look at Marshall's seven directing credits in the three years prior to THIS REVOLUTION, it all sounds like student projects or public access channel filler. The quickest illustration of how sophomoric Marshall's thinking remains can be found in his summary for this film, in which he refers to Rosario Dawson's character as "Seven," an apparent "Black Bloc" code name evidently cut from the finished film. If this is the case, Marshall should have edited his earlier pre-release summary and put in her correct character name, "Tina Santiago." It is the director's lack of an eye for continuity, consistency, and details that sabotages what could have been an interesting film. (Viewers of the "Behind the Scenes" extra on the DVD will clearly see Marshall tried his darnedest to "dumb down" the cast and rest of the crew to his own level.)2)Back when the so-called "best" comments (by people rating THIS REVOLUTION between "7" and "10" on a 10-point scale) were written, I'm sure these same folks would have giving FAHRENHEIT 9-11 director Michael Moore a "9" for farting--or even 10, if it was an especially loud and odorous one! I dare anyone to view THIS REVOLUTION for the first time tomorrow and give it an 8, 9, or 10 with a straight face!

I know we shouldn't expect much from a low-budget indie film. But the idea behind it is sound: an attempt to open America's eyes to the cozy relationship between the government, and the journalists that are supposed to be keeping an eye out against it. But somehow the documentary aspect of it, takes away from its drama. The protests during the 2004 Republican convention in New York were not that compelling to make a documentary about it. Those kinds of compelling protests belong to the era of the 1960's.It would have been better to stick to a drama format. Perhaps a slow build-up where the young journalist's eyes are gradually opened up to the conspiracy.

This movie offers true insight into the plight of the "real" average American. It depicts a hard core reality, and helps to clarify what system is keeping us down and who "The Man" really is! Working in the South Bronx of New York, I can testify that the reality of the situation (as accurately portrayed by "This Revolution") is harsh, and often times something middle America doesn't realize, or is blinded to seeing, either because they reject it, agree with it, just plain don't know.... I gave it a nine because the acting isn't that great at times, but the message more than makes up for it... for those who know, it's powerful, for those who don't know, it might just fly right over their heads....