Cowspiracy Proves That Going Vegan Is The Solution To Global Warming

I’m an all-American, good old-fashioned, non-discriminatory meat eater generic cialis jelly. I’ve spent the majority of my life chowing down cheeseburgers, lasagna, hot dogs, sausages, philly cheese steaks, meat loafs, fried chicken, lobster, and pretty much everything in between. My favorite meal, for decades now, has been a nice juicy sirloin steak. It’s delicious, it’s fulfilling and, most of all, it makes me feel like I accomplished something when I finish my plate. Little did I know that every time I eat meat I am helping to deplete the earth of it’s water and destroy the ozone layer. Don’t believe me? Then you should watch Cowspiracy.

When I saw the documentary listed on Netflix, I passed over it and didn’t even give it a second thought. It wasn’t until I got into what I like to call “sponge mode”, where I watch as many documentaries back-to-back as I can, that I ran into this movie again and decided to give it a go. I actually didn’t know what it was about, but I had an idea based on the title, of course. As soon as the movie started it proved, within minutes, that the number one reason for depletion of the ozone layer and increase of global temperatures is animal agriculture, representing 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. Read that again:

Animal agriculture makes up 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emissions

After around 5 minutes into the movie, I was already told the most important thing anyone has ever told me about global warming. The scary part is that nobody in the White House seems to care. I felt like I needed to look up the data to verify it and, sure enough, it checks out. So, I decided that I was going to go vegan. But, after a life of eating meat, how am I going to make this change?

There comes a time in every person’s life when they’re confronted with the reality of their lifestyle and need to make dietary changes in order to ensure they live a longer, healthier life. Usually, cutting down on red meat and butter is the best move you could make if you’re attempting to avoid heart disease, but that still leaves chicken and other poultry, fish, crustaceans, and other seafood, and the idea of “cutting down” is not the same as “cutting out”. At the end of the day, you’re still eating meat. Even one of the people in the movie mentions the fact that going “meatless on Mondays” is still destroying the Earth 6 days a week.

What’s worse is the amount of water and rain forest destruction happening in the name of animal agriculture. If a person eats 3 animal product meals a day, it actually has the most devastating effect on the Earth above fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas, etc), which is everyone’s biggest concern, even environmentalist groups. This is because it takes so much water, grain and land space to raise animals.

Probably the most disconcerting part about this entire issue is the fact that it’s actually against the law to protest or take part in any sort of activism against the animal agriculture business in America. It’s even gotten people killed in South America and caused the creator of Cowspiracy to lose his funding and fear for his life.

I finished the movie recognizing that there was a clear agenda behind it, but that I didn’t disagree and found it hard to even try. The only real reason people eat meat is because it tastes good. But if we want to save the world, it may be time for everyone to go vegan.

Amy: a moving portrayal of the struggle to cope with celebrity culture

Nathalie Weidhase, University of Roehampton

I don’t think I’m going to be at all famous. I don’t think I could handle it. I would go mad.

So said Amy Winehouse, following the release of her debut album, Frank. Asif Kapadia’s documentary Amy goes on to show how wrong she was about the first part of that statement, and how right she was about the second.

Over her short career, Winehouse released two albums, won a range of awards (including five Grammy Awards for her 2006 release Back to Black), and pave the way for a wave of talented female artists, from Duffy and Adele to Lady Gaga. Yet her exceptional talents as a singer and songwriter were regularly overshadowed by photographs of her frail body, condemnations of her public alcohol and drug abuse, and gossip about her volatile marriage to (and eventual divorce from) fellow drug addict Blake Fielder-Civil.

Making Amy

Only a year after her untimely death in 2011, Winehouse’s record company Universal Music approached Asif Kapadia – director of Senna (2010) – with the idea of a film about her life. Kapadia went on to conduct over 100 interviews with Winehouse’s friends, family and colleagues, in order to reconstruct her story and find reasons for her demise.

But amid the chronicles of chaos and suffering, the other aim of this film is to show Winehouse for the extraordinary artist that she was. This is arguably Kapadia’s biggest achievement. This film is worth seeing for anyone interested in Winehouse’s music; not only because of the variety and amount of previously unseen footage, but also because of the way it values her lyrics as poetry. Winehouse’s words roll over the screen whenever she sings, marking the reclamation of Winehouse as a songwriter – not just a remarkable voice.

Although Kapadia clearly admires his subject, Winehouse’s family have distanced themselves from the documentary. Once you’ve seen it, this will come as no surprise. Winehouse’s mother Janice remains largely unheard, while her father, Mitch, seems all too present.

A family feud

According to the film, Mitch left the family when Winehouse was nine but featured heavily in her adult life – and not always in a good way. Mitch himself has publicly criticised the way he was portrayed by Kapadia. In the film, when Mitch speaks about the onset of Winehouse’s alcohol problems in 2005, he appears to say “she didn’t need to go to rehab”. But Mitch claims that the quote has been edited, and that he really said “she didn’t need to go to rehab at the time”. He is portrayed as protective, but also opportunistic.

Winehouse and her father.
Beacon Radio/Flickr, CC BY-SA

One wants to believe that he genuinely cared about his daughter’s well-being. Indeed, he is often depicted guarding her from the paparazzi’s lenses. But one cannot help thinking that any negative impressions of him are not just down to unfair editing. In one particularly uncomfortable scene from 2009, Mitch Winehouse tells his daughter off for not being friendly enough to tourists who ask for a picture with her. In front of the camera, Winehouse is seen pleading with him to be nice to her.

This scene takes place in St Lucia, where Winehouse fled to escape the press attention and drug culture surrounding her in Camden. It seems to capture their relationship perfectly: Winehouse is obviously unhappy about the additional media attention her father brings into her life, but ultimately craves his affection and approval.

Up for grabs

But this film goes far beyond Winehouse’s relationship with her father, offering a harrowing account of contemporary celebrity culture. The avalanche of tributes which followed her death often neglected to address the ways Winehouse was treated by the media. After the release of Back to Black, she was regularly hounded by paparazzi. This is stressful to watch unfold, even from the safety of a cinema seat; it’s hard to imagine what it must have felt like to have them outside the front door every day.

Winehouse was turned into a particularly cruel media spectacle: she became one of the myriad female “train wreck” celebrities, alongside Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan. Her ailing body was ruthlessly mocked, and her personal misery was seen by the tabloids as fair game for public scrutiny.

But what ultimately makes Amy such a moving experience its its ability to show how every aspect of her life – whether professional or personal – was always up for consumption. The cameras never stopped rolling: from footage of a teenage Winehouse singing “happy birthday” to her friend, to the filming of her funeral. A more stable person may have been able to resist this exploitation, but as she herself said, she just couldn’t “handle it”.

The Conversation

Nathalie Weidhase is PhD Candidate at University of Roehampton.

This article was originally published on The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Banned Alfred Hitchcock Holocaust Documentary Finally Released

The Imperial War Museum says the movie had been suppressed for political reasons and that pieces of it were removed for the 1984 viewing in both Berlin and the U.S., but Alfred Hitchcock’s documentary on the Holocaust has finally been restored to its original intended production and will be released in 2015 on British television marking the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Europe.

During the liberation of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in 1945, Hitchcock was asked to put together footage he received by a British army film unit cameraman who shot scenes of the horrible conditions of the camp. The film was to be shown to the German people to shed more light on the atrocities carried out by the Nazis, but was banned due to political unrest in the country after the war.