Born in Flames

Somehow or other, the US of A has seen a revolution replace it’s government with a form of left-leaning social democracy that aims to prioritise the needs of just about everyone from feminists to gays but as with any idealistic political system, it is failing to deliver on all of it’s promises. Irritated by these failures, a group of New York women have taken to their radio stations to galvanise the disaffected and mount a counter-revolution to revitalise the original values and bring down the government. Presented in part as if it were a fly-on-the-wall report being given to the likes of J. Edgar Hoover, what now ensues is actually quite relevant in many ways as today’s society deals with arguments about meritocracies, quotas and political correctness. What this isn’t, really, is a very plausible scenario and the idea that an army of militant lesbians could take over a nation of 300 millions is far-fetched. For a start, what would happen to the other, less compliant, women (let’s assume men simply don’t matter here) in the country? A country where religious considerations don’t now feature at all? It must have been quite some coup! The entire concept here reminded me of a student project conceived after a night on the tequila and delivered thanks to the cash they raised during a fresher week thrash. The production is cluttered with thinly veiled allegory, but it’s all so polarising and politically charged that if that’s not your stance then the thing might just end up annoying more than engaging: but the one thing it isn’t is ambiguous. The soundtrack is quite an eclectic mix that at times does much of the heavy lifting which is useful as the dialogue becomes angrily and simplistically repetitious to the point that it labours it’s point just a bit too relentlessly and unrealistically. It is a film that was probably thought-provoking forty years ago, but for me it just comes across now as a bit of an ill-thought out rant.