BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

usalaa2 The documentary garbage warrior primary focus was based on ecological concern, and sustainable housing for all. It was very important because it will bring affordability of housing comfort to virtually everybody irrespective of societal status. But, due to the fact that its concept went against the normal bureaucratic acceptable standard of the capitalist ideology, the idea was vehemently antagonized. However, what they failed to recognize was the fact that the idea was a genuine movement that was born out of reality by the few who had witnessed it.The outline on the documentary main arguments can be classified as follows: recycling of waste product, ecological friendly environment, bureaucratic attack, and strong visionary attempt. Garbage warrior documentary emphatically proved that recycling of waste product could be useful in another dimension by turning it to remarkable materials for the construction of solid building for the betterment of many which had never been put to practice by any known person before; but architect Reynold was able to push his idea into reality for all to see the visibility of the structures.On creating an ecologically friendly environment; there is no doubting the fact that the world as a whole is highly polluted by many scientific chemical emissions that had created a lot of hazardous health problems for many people throughout the world. But, this innovation has brought up a different approach to the way and manner houses are being built or constructed through the regular conventional ways of doing things that had contributed to the deterioration of health of many, while uncountable souls had also been lost through it.Moreover, the bureaucratic attack that came the way of architect Michael was highly unprecedented in his attempt to push his idea across the bureaucratic conventional ways; because it was more or less an affront and somewhat confrontational to the already established status quo which was not meant to be challenged by not just anybody. But, due to strong visionary mind of architect Reynold, he never relent in his efforts to get things done, as he made his focus the priority of his mission to achieve what he initially set out to do by not allowing all the obstacles that came his way to deter him of his vision. Because he was very convinced that his idea was one of a kind that could change and turn the old concept around for better.The basis of the argument on the issue raised in the documentary could be said to be the durability, acceptability, and comfort-ability of the projected proposed housing idea movement; which came as a surprise to the capitalist bureaucrats who never wanted an alternative view to their already established ideology. But the practicability of eco-friendly housing structure was made possible by architect Michael and his few allies who had built some and had started living in it. The major fact of the matter is that they had succeeded in generating their own solar energy, growing their own food, providing their own water, and supplying their own heat, as well as recycling their waste without the support of any modern technology which is at the cost of cut throat rate. The combination and compilation of many waste products such as plastic bottles, empty beer cans, old tires, and other waste items put together by this genius architect was never thought to be possible, talk less of having acceptance in Andaman Island after the deadly tsunami attack. In furtherance of the set out goal, it was a mission accomplished for architect Michael and his team; but a no go area for the capitalist who never wanted a prospective change that will benefit the mass majority. Because the prospect of its success will be a huge compromise on their part. Although, no institution will like to lose its domineering trend, but the only thing that is constant in life itself is change; hence, sooner or later further research will emerge to give this noble development the authenticity it deserve for the greater advantage of the entire humanity. In evaluating the argument thrown up in the documentary Garbage Warrior; many factors will have to be put into consideration in the sense that there are already established procedures and protocols that must be dully followed before any meaningful housing structure can be erected. However, despite the fact that rules and regulations must be respected to promote a decent society. We should not also forget the fact that it is to the advantage of all to equally give room to positive change irrespective of where it is coming from; because nobody could claim monopoly of knowledge, and the way architect Michael went about his research and idea was never armful to anybody. In fact he was always ready to subject himself to the authority to proof his discovery whenever they are ready to listen to him. This conclusion could be attest to in many of the comments relayed in the course of the argument by various people, due to the prospect it will have on their wellbeing, and it equally shows how worried and concern many feel as it relates to the environment which they knew very well the eventual consequence will be to the detriment of many if the eco-friendly idea is not looked into. The quality of the data had a very good analysis because it was well looked into, and without being biased Reynold himself was a qualified architect that pretty much knew what he was doing. Also the effectiveness of the argument was very catching, and the presentation was equally impressive for adequate understanding of the issue. The missing part was not really visible for many to see, so it cannot be controverted as such. Therefore, without any fear of contradiction, I can convincingly say that the documentary surely added up to my knowledge of understanding on urban planning issue.

bbdavenport I found this documentary online after seeing an Earthship house outside of Taos NM. What the houses represent is compelling - self-contained off-the-grid houses built mostly from local materials. Dozens of these houses dot the high desert blending into the landscape. The movie is about Michael Reynolds, the man behind these novel structures and his thirty year journey. Initially, he is a dreamer, then a designer and experimenter. Over time people join him and his vision starts to spread. He and the people he attracts come across as a little crazy, but in a fun way.There is a bit of real-life problems for the protagonist. The movie shows how he adapts to some serious adversity. This makes the movie even more interesting. Perhaps the forces arrayed against him are simplified and not given a fair shake in the film that approaches the issues firmly from the point of view of Michael Reynolds. That's okay really. Michael and a lot of the people he deals with come from two different worlds, Most of us were born inside the system or 'the box'. Michael Reynolds (and a lot of people) think the system isn't sustainable. He is looking for solutions outside of the box.This is the crux of the movie. If you are worried about where things are headed, the movie should give you a little hope. And that isn't a bad thing.

correcamino The early to mid-2000s have brought us a new genre, the environmental start-over film. Whether it's plastic, trash, food, plastic bags, this waste genre is one that has been crying out for exploration. In keeping with the overall cultural trend, the films are mostly documentaries. They do well raising our consciousness level, even if only temporarily. This film does not quite pull it off in my opinion, but it does have something to contribute. At the beginning of Garbage Warrior we are presented with images of building in progress and, along with the narration, we are meant to see the structures as really impressive. But his houses are not things of beauty from the outside (they are better on the inside). It would have been better to have approached them from a more humble perspective. Meaning, show a leaky sewer system at first, and then build from there - these are impressive houses because they are self-sufficient - lower our expectations and then build them up. Presenting those rather misshapen structures as objects of impressive architecture left me skeptical right from the get-go, and that's not the way you want to start a film. I do come to the end and of it, and realize that the achievement of beauty is actually a lesser point, one perhaps that Reynolds might one day concede. Nevertheless, had his ego permitted, some architect with some taste as well as skill could have come to his aid and helped him produce nice-looking houses from the outside. This would have gone a long way towards furthering his overall goals of sustainable living, especially in the eyes of key decision-makers.Second point: he says that cities are dead - that people are going into the cities to mine the materials. I had to ask myself, having lived in a city for 20 years and that is now adding 1,000 new residents every month, just what he was talking about.I live in the city, and I don't have a car. I ride a bicycle. I live in much less space than those houses, that is for sure. Still, I realize that even American cities are very wasteful when it comes to energy efficiency, and until we take seriously not just per capita output, but also total output of carbon and pollution, we won't really have an honest discussion. What I'm trying to point out is how dishonest and a bit off the charts his notion is of cities being 'dead,' or energy inefficient.What about the prime importance of community? Oh, and what about fossil fuels? It is undeniable that the inhabitants of those earthships have an extreme reliance on the car. What about all the plastic they use and I'm not talking about in the building (drinking out of plastic cups during the b'ball game - plastic containers of liquid soap)? He says his house has lasted 20 years. So what? Big whoop. You're an architect and you're bragging that a house you built has lasted 20 years? Shouldn't it? And so, they become a subdivision. Is that truly sustainable? Starting a new community on land where previously there were no humans? Can we see the sewage system, please??? Can we see how it all works? Heating and cooling? Prove it. We need proof.I'd like to hear more about all the failures. I'm not sure he is a man who inspires a lot of trust.Run in with the authorities - yes the situation around him is worse after he had to "conform." It's only at that point that I began to have a even a small amount of of sympathy for him. And the tsunami and going to Asia? Much more sympathy.Also, I admire his lobbying efforts - more sympathy for him there. What a number this film does! But to be really really radical, retrofit an already existing community. Why do people think building is energy efficient? Retrofit old buildings. The more tastefully and beautifully, the better. Please - let's not leave style, aesthetics, and proportionality out of the picture.From time to time, I see this type of passionate environmental idealist in the city. The problem is, so often these kinds of people get corrupted when they don't get their way and become small-scale dictators. I see it time and again, and what's worse is that they are very ineffective. Michael Reynolds was able to reach and go further and have a degree of success probably because of being in the West and perhaps because of his own integrity (hard to say) - that Baptist background was good for something afterall. There were two concepts that he brought up that were intriguing. The idea of going outside the law to get the information. And the idea of his own personal evolution. I hear what he says and appreciate it. But still, there is a very very very fine line between renegade and ineffective, hypocritical hippie.

gavin6942 Mike Reynolds is the "garbage warrior", an architect who has been designing homes from refuse and natural objects (largely dirt) for roughly forty years. This documentary opens up his world to viewers who otherwise would not consider such living possible, and certainly wouldn't be aware of the potential comfort levels available.I was shown this documentary by a friend who, to say the least, is fascinated by Earthships. She has met Reynolds, been in an Earthship and swears that some day she will live in one -- something I find to be quite plausible. My enthusiasm doesn't come close to hers, which made for an odd viewing experience (her excitement can be overwhelming), but it's a good film that should be seen by more people.Reynolds' ideas of "radically sustainable living" and "Earthship Biotecture" need to be ported out to other communities and get recognition for their amazing achievements. The houses are not perfect -- some leak, some have little or no temperature control -- but they are experimental, and Reynolds and his crew are still learning. Objections aside, the good that can come of these homes is outstanding -- complete "off the grid" power, self-producing food, and a waste system that cleans and filters "black" and "gray" water.I'm somewhat skeptical of how well these ideas would work on a mass scale. However, even if they didn't, it seems fairly safe to say that certain aspects could be adapted into rural or urban settings... and any effort to get energy independence and sewage filtration into the mainstream is welcome. World governments are taking important steps towards renewable energy, but after seeing this film, you may start to think the answers have been here for decades and we're just dragging our feet.My only real complaint with the documentary is that it is by no means objective. Reynolds is cast as the hero and as something of a savior. Now, this is not to say that he's not a hero, because he is. But without hearing from his detractors (aside from some clueless politicians) this film comes off more like an infomercial, which leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could simply be that nothing bad can be said, though.My petty objections aside, Reynolds is an unsung hero and his work really does need to get noticed by more. Even those who are environmentalists may not familiar with his work, which is a shame. The man is almost dead... let's get him some attention before that "almost" is gone.