Saving Nemo-Vanuatu Video Reaction Paper
- Pages: 4
- Word count: 998
- Category: Fish
A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteedOrder Now
The ‘Saving Nemo- Vanuatu’ is a documentary based on the export of crown fish, which became famous since the movie ‘Finding Nemo’ released, is fished from the waters of Vanuatu by a foreign company and exported to other countries such as Australia and United States of America. The names of the cultures represented in the documentary are traditional culture that is shown by the people of Vanuatu, on the island of Nuna, “the magic man declares taboo invoking the spirits to protect sea and whoever defies will face sickness or death”. Another culture that is represented in this documentary monetary culture that is exhibited by the SRS, and the politicians of Vanuatu who have sold their marine ecosystem to SRS for little money, the politicians are given bribe by the SRS to operate in Vanuatu. The third culture that I think is represented in the documentary is the coral reef culture. It shown by the marine biologist who talks about sustaining the coral reef and teaching the children who are not familiar with coral reefs about how to preserve it and familiarizes them with it. The point of view that is reflected through the sound track is that of the narrators.
The way the narrator presents the situation to the audience is interesting. It creates a feel of what is actually happening in the documentary and what are the issues faced by the people there. His voice makes me connected to the situation. The presence of the camera and film crew may have influenced the action of the people presented, because the way the acted during the filming showed that they were not natural, example the magic man was smiling while imposing the taboo. Also the fisheries department had been lying and giving statements such as that statement is false and disagreed with anything brought up by the narrator who asked the question, he may been scared at that point on giving his own views as he might lose his job if he disagreed with the government. The film creates both disgust and empathy. It creates empathy because the marine ecosystem of Vanuatu is being destroyed by foreign people and the government is not doing anything about it but is looking at its monetary value. Young children will not be able to know what they had as their resources and in future these resources may no longer be there.
On the other hand it created disgust for the SRS who did not care about the depletion of the natural resources of Vanuatu but in turn argued that the fish move around so much that it is impossible to count them. It also created disgust for Chief Momo who agreed to get his reef fished for as little as ninety dollars per month which is much less than he and his community deserved. The important theme of this unit is “the land and sea: past, present and future”. The film fits into this theme because it is about our land and sea, about its sustainability. In the film the narrator interviews people with different views on how and what they feel about their resources being exploited by a foreign person who is thinking of his benefits and depleting their fish supply and coral reefs which are mostly depended on the colorful fish that are not eaten, which is its primary builder. The marine biologist is concerned as to how they can save these natural resources, he is also concerned that how the young children can know about their environment and thus he opts to show them the film, “Finding Nemo”, which I feel could be relate to their situation at present and could make them familiarize them with their environment.
During the viewing of this documentary, I had a mixed feeling, I did not know if I should be surprised at what the people of Vanuatu are doing with their resources or be angry at them. The most surprising part in this documentary is the part where Chief Momo declares that he is paid some money for letting the SRS people fish their seas. It was also surprising that the fisheries department was not sure as to how many fishes were exported by the SRS each year and the SRS insider and the fisheries department estimated export was different. It was also surprising that the government took bribe from SRS. After the documentary ended I felt a bit relieved knowing that the children are at least taught about how their coral reef is, and hope for a better future for both the people and the coral reef. The culture shown in the film, which is the monetary culture, is similar to my culture as people here to tend exploit their traditional land and seas for money.
They sell land to the foreign people who make good use of it and paying the locals little to what they deserve. My personal reaction to the cultures, themes and issues represented in the documentary is that we should protect our natural resources because it is what we mostly rely on for our food and income source. If people over fish then the coral reefs are also destroyed, not only does it deplete our resources but can lead to many other effects on the pacific island groups. The three most important things of substances I learned from the film are. Firstly, to be knowledgeable about our natural resources, it is what we are and its sustainability depends on us. Second thing is that the future of our natural resources depend in the hands of our younger generation, they can either sell it to foreign countries or make it more useful to be used by us. Thirdly, that though the future of our natural resources depend on the younger generation, it also has to be protected now so that it is of better used by the people of the pacific as mostly we depend on our natural resources.