- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joel Berger is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Flee the City!
Urban phobia on film, with a stop at ‘District B13.’
This ain't Jude Law's neighbourhood.
Movies about the cities of the future tend to come in two flavours: vanilla or chocolate. Vanilla-villes are gleaming, shining places populated with clones of Uma Thurman and Jude Law. Places where people wear skin-tight suits, and there are no unsightly bulges of any variety, anywhere, EVER! Sexless Star Trek cities (like The Next Generation) are PC places, no fun-zones, where everyone uses their words to solve problems. Chocolate cities, on the other hand, such as those in Road Warrior, or Escape from New York, are filled with guys like Snake Plissken and Mad Max. Everything is dirty, grimy, and generally all fucked up. Or, as they say in the new French free-fall District B13, "This isn't Monaco, this is Baghdad." A statement followed immediately by a huge gun being pointed directly at the camera. Welcome to the future, 2010 Paris.
The future is so terribly familiar. It's like the present, only with more French rap music.
District B13 is a beaten down, mobbed up, fictional arrondissement just outside of Paris. It is a neighbourhood so bad that the Parisian bureaucrats have built a wall around it, closed down the schools and the police stations, and are waiting for the naughty citizens to kill each other off. Perhaps Vancouver will try it with the Downtown Eastside one day? On District 13’s mean streets, some bad guys are chasing one good guy all over the place. Our hero is Leïto, a tattooed lean mean jumping being, who can bounce like a little leaping lapin. He is sweetly tattooed and cute as a bunny -- except when he is stomping peoples’ heads off, and that's only if they really deserve it. All our highly mobile hero wants is a nice place to live, so he steals a million Euros worth of heroin from from Taha, the local drug lord, and flushes it down the bathtub drain. In retaliation, Taha kidnaps Leïto's sister. Whatever you do, don't mess with somebody's sister; that is simply asking for trouble. But c'est la guerre, and off they go.
Le bombe
Meanwhile, in a better part of Paris, another noble warrior named Damien, single-handedly defeats an entire den of iniquity by jumping wildly in the air. Much gunplay and bone-cracking later, he is given a job he can't refuse: to enter District B13 and recover a government clean bombe (say it the French way, it's much more fun) before it make le boom, and les people morts. Damian and Leïto are, of course, paired up and sent on their way to kill bad men and defuse the device. Little do they know, things are not always what they seem. Are they ever? Mais non...
The film makes coy reference to many of the current issues that have wracked Paris, such as the burning of cars, the disenfranchisement of people of different colours, and ethnicities. Despite the cool words -- liberté, égalité, and what's the third one again? Ah yes, fraternité, that's the tricky one, Paris is not all it's cracked up to be. Urban ills are pretty much the same worldwide. But it's the very Frenchness of the film that makes it amusant. Unlike a typical American actioner, the villain is not a megalomaniacal genius, nor a corporate overlord; it's the civil servants that you have look out for. The French civil service is infamous, for bureaucracy gone bananas: a world of paper, grey faced administrators, and more forms than you've ever seen. If you'd like confirm that fact, I'm sorry, you have the wrong form, and you've been standing the wrong line for hours. Tant pis pour vous. In the case of this film, it still comes down to death and taxes. And one is more important than the other.
The film, penned by Luc Besson (La Femme Nikita, The Professional et al) tells a familiar dystopian story en francais. Nouvelle director Pierre Morel is helped along by the film's star, David Belle, who invented Parkour, a movement, quite literally, that is about always moving forward, no matter what type of obstacle is in the way. The same can be said for the film itself; implausibility, narrative incoherence, the laws of physics -- all can be suspended for the sake of a good time. That is the entire point of action films. It looks like a great deal of fun, if you don't fall down and bonk your head, that is.
Dickens meets sci-fi
Still, despite its ham-fisted plot, Jambon-main maybe, District B13 is curious because of its commonalities with the many dystopias that have preceded it. Basically, since people started living in cities, they began making films about how bad cities are; a Dickensian leftover that has picked up the pace more recently, as so many people settle in town. "In contemporary cinema, fantasy is the antidote. From the late 90s on, there has been a marked retreat into the inner world, into childhood and away from dirty, complicated reality," writes David Clement, in an essay entitled from "From dystopia to myopia: Metropolis to Blade Runner." So yes, it's all been done to death, but that somehow matters little, we still want more.
There is something inherently pleasing about the notion of a place where ordinary rule is suspended, where the Old West meets the space age. Simple survival of the snake-hipped quickest on the draw, no more rules and regulations, a teenage haven of good guys, bad byes, urban decay, grit, guns, drugs, gangs, molls -- it's all good clean dirty fun. Back to the future as it were. But at the same time, a great deal of critical thinking and art making has also been aimed at the urban environment. Artists and filmmakers have taken as their subject the built environment, since it is such a large part of human experience. The Infra-structural Image: Urban Projections from the Bay Area and Vancouver, screening June 19 and 20 at the Vancity Theatre in Vancouver, is a collection of some of the more interesting experimental films about the 'Couv. So high or low, the city engages current culture all over the place -- from Arthur Erickson's Retrospective at the VAG to the WUF to more Masters theses than you can shake a stick at -- it gets a little much sometimes, and you can't help but wish for “fin” as the French would say.
To that end, Vancouver's own dystopic future has been imagined by different writers, some good, some very very bad. Even my very own mother has written a book about the drowned downtown of the future. (She gets around that woman.) Her Sunburst nominated novel, The Bone House, envisioned an Al Gore-style planet where global warming has destroyed Yaletown. Many conversations at the family dinner table involve planning for the day when all hell breaks loose. Head for Queen Elizabeth Park, it's high enough to spot approaching enemies, there is fresh water and plenty of squirrels to eat. But stay away, we've claimed this turf already for me and Snake Plissken and our chocolate clan. You vanilla-types can keep your cooperative processes, your committees and your installation-based art projects on the meaning of urban space. Give me the law of the urban jungle and a snake to share it with.
Dorothy Woodend reviews films for The Tyee every Friday. ![]()



7
Login or register to post comments
Fiat lux
5 years ago
Comments on "Flee the City!"
Vancouver was a nice place when we went there in 1955, but by the time we moved out in 1979, it was rapidly becoming a world class dump, enough to turn our stomachs when we see it on the news on TV.
I haven't been back since 1989, when I had to deliver an order, and my wife since 1980, and neither of us want to see that dump again.
The same goes for any city over a population of 1,000. The funny thing was, we were scared to move out for years on account of our business and making a living.
It turned out, we did much better
out here in the bush, where we don't have to listen to a see any neighbours, except when we get together for some reason and when we look out the window we see the sky and trees and water, not commuter traffic and copcars screaming by.
The sordid fact is, something nobody will dare to talk about during this urbanization conference, that the world can not afford the energy and resource inputs required, on a per capita basis, by cities. The larger the cities, the bigger the per capita demands. E.g. The official per capita demand for water in any city in North America is 1,400 US gallons to keep the infrastructure going.
Then the idiot politicians are surprised that the world is running out of water and at the same time, all our governments are working hard to depopulate the countrysides and jam everybody into cities, so that the multinational corporate mafia can take over everything.
Ed Deak, Big Lake.
Fiat lux
5 years ago
Slight error: It should be 1,400 US gallons of water per day, per person.
Cheers, Ed.
Coyote
5 years ago
Sometimes I think maybe it's me, but something has happened to the way I have come to see cities, especially these big out of control, sprawling across the landscape like a thrown up dog's breakfast, runaway, high-density development creations, say like Vancouver or Kelowna. They have across the years become more and more "unhuman" and "unnatural" ways for people to live.
They are connected to and a product of run-away human populations which exceed the real, natural carrying capacity of the land, and one of the particular consequences of capitalist development, its market and labour pressures, especially, in their modern configuration, I understand that. And at some level, and to some scale, they are useful to technological and large scale industrial/economic development-, I understand that too.
But God! Unless you've got huge bucks and exclusive places to live and recreate such as only that extreme wealth can really afford, cities are, or became, to me, depressing, homogonized, strip mall, plunk me down just about anywhere in the world and they are all the same fuking McDonald/Kentuky fried in trans-fat places to live.
In case you can't guess, I hate cities. :-)
Now there may be a scale and a place where and at which level they make sense, indeed I'm sure there are, but large numbers of them, likely most, are an indicator, to me, of runaway human population growth and the serious need of a cull or die off of our planetary, plague level over-population numbers.
My guess is humans across the globe, especially when and as capitalism finally hits the wall of its potential and commences to collapse, for want of its needs exceeding the capacity of the planet, are about to find out an explanation for the pre-Columbian collapse of many of the great Mayan and other past civilization cities of the world, just as an off the top of my head example.
Now my hope is that we can get it together enough to make a more "rational" transition to new ways of human living and interfacing economically with the planet, while taking those steps that are needed to, again humanely, reduce human population levels on the planet. On the other hand, in many parts of the world, it is already too late and the ecological collapse and nose-dive of human numbers has already begun, with many fleeing to our shores. Still, hopefully this is going to serve as a kind of wake-up call.
But if not, my suspicion is, given continued and unchecked capitalist "greed development", the shitt hits the fan anyway, even here in due course. In many ways, the shitt has already begun even here, around issues of water, sewage, and matters of livability, energy and power.
Still, we are likely, or hopefully, within this country, to be one of the last going to get hit by this reality, depending on our own reactions, and hopefully we at least will have an opportunity to learn from it and react in time to make a course correction.
The Neocon$, on the other hand, won't believe it until it actually happens, and they and/or we are all standing in shitt up to their lower lips, with a chorus of murmuring, "Don't make waves. Don't make waves" all around us. Their mind$ are $omewhere el$e, with other greed driven preoccupation$.
And there is guarantee of success out there for bloody sure, that I know of. And it's not really likely Jesus is going really come again and save us.
Coyote
5 years ago
And there is NO guarantee of success... it should be.
jwstewart
5 years ago
I am skeptical that the per capita water consumption is related to city or rural residence.
The water meter in my house would read about the same regardless of where it is located. It reads based on how much water we use.
The per capita consumption recognizes industrial and agricultural consumption as well, so maybe the agricultural use by rural occupants exceeds that of city folk ?
Also, it could be argued that multi-unit apartments and condominiums are sharing energy resources and consume less than the rural single-unit homes.
So until we start seeing isolated rural apartment complexes, I don't think rural dwellers can claim superior resource conservation.
Also, if everyone lived in a village of 1000, there would be millions of villages, too many I think.
flyingfish
5 years ago
It's a little simplistic to posit rural vs urban. Plenty of rural-based nations and communities have collapsed, exhausted their natural resources, polluted their immediate environments and dissolved into sectarian violence and intolerance. It's a big picture.
You also need to be realistic about what it would really mean to not have cities and all that goes with them (good and bad). Being on line up in a remote self-sufficient bush cabin is not quite being off the grid. But we would be unlikely to develop these kind of networks and communities without a critical urban mass.
and yeah, I love the city!
freebear
5 years ago
So why do we plan and design and ultimately build cities that most residents want to "flee"?
I do not agree with the rural is best arguement either. Of course much redesign of cities is required (perhaps after the earthquake in Vancouver's case).
I also think that there are limits (both in rural areas and in cities). A city can not expand forever. A component of a sustainable city would be the recognition of limits, especially limits to physical growth. Rather it should reach a steady state, or equilibrium (with minor up and down fluctuations).
More like the Medieval, or Barouque city. A city that is planned and designed to reduce distance (local energy production and thus local limits), built for humans and not machines (many Paris apartaments are not taller than 6 stories because that was the limit in terms of peoples' physical ability to climb stairs with the days groceries rather than depend on elevators). How valuable would your 14th floor condo be if you had to climb stairs each day?
And the third principle is one of diversity. Your neighborhood should have a mix of peoples, activities, housing, transport and so on
More of the same is not sustainable. We only have one Planet!