Fast, Cheap & Out of Control

Don't believe the folks who say this film is about the thin line between genius and madness. That may be part of it, but it's far from what's important here. The real loot here is FC&OOC's exploration of the "other", and our attempts to understand, shape and control it. Humans have a fascination with the nature of life and intelligence--whether it comes in the form of wild animals, plants in a garden or robots developing in a lab--and the ways we approach these things reveal as much about subject as object. This film does a beautiful job of highlighting the mystery inherent in living and/or intelligent things, evoking the awe we feel when we regard them, and the questions that arise when we attempt to study, cultivate, contain or "tame" them.

Encapsulated reviews are misleading. I had several times bypassed "Fast, Cheap and Out of Control" on IFC for more lively sounding fare on movie channels. When I finally selected it as the least boring of an afternoon's TV movie offerings, I regretted not having picked it sooner and seen it more often.

This documentary delighted me! Interviews were enhanced by display of the works of four brilliant practitioners, fanatical about the unusual focus of their work or study. We are introduced to naked mole rats, robots as the next stage in evolution, wild animal training and a visionary handicrafter/topiary designer. Each professional provided unusual insights to their efforts and perhaps to our own natures as human beings.

The documentary seemed designed to hold even those with the even shortest of attention spans. Rather than engaging each subject in depth as a single segment, the interviews are presented in approximately one minute scenarios, often with a montage of old film footage relating connections and historical ideas about some of the subject matter. Just as a viewer's mind might start to drift during a segment, it collides with the next subject, often forcing mental connections that may not have come naturally.

After watching this one, I felt compelled to find and view the other productions of Errol Morris, and I shall keep an eye out for his future works. I believe that its audience should comprise anyone with a spark of interest in the world around them and the desire to be entertained. Whether you are fond of documentaries or not, I think this one will offer a pleasant and quickly passing ninety minutes.

Gene Romero gromero001@aol.com

Somehow the Morris mix just doesn't jell this time. I'm normally a huge fan of Mr. Morris's films, especially the truly great Gates of Heaven. But Fast, Cheap & Out of Control is ironically aptly titled. Instead of providing some quirky insight into the human condition, the film only manages to annoy. And our four subjects? Well, they grate on the nerves to be honest. It's hard to say what's missing, maybe a sense of humor, maybe some more directorial involvement. In any event, I wouldn't go out of my way to catch this flick.

Hiding within this movie are four fairly interesting mini-documentaries about four men, each with a vision - perhaps even an obsession - about one particular facet of life. The common thread uniting them is that each of the four is fascinated by the ways in which animals, men, plants, and even machines evolve, learn, and grow. A recurring theme is training or control.

Unfortunately, these four interesting stories are chopped up and interwoven in ways that often seem arbitrary and pointless. Plus, about 25% of the movie is made up of clips from other, mostly bad, movies... and the soundtrack music is often intrusive and annoying. So I'm mystified why a number of critics thought this was the best documentary of 1997. Maybe there were just a lot of bad documentaries that year!

Worth watching if you have nothing else to do, but nowhere near great.

My small survey of documentary types has brought me to this, and what a celebration!

This is complex, meaningful cinema that just happens to be a documentary. It is intelligent, complex, deliberate and deeply thought provoking. I think it communicates something that isn't quite right, but the thing is communicated in the most effective way — by folding the idea being explained into the form of the explanation, the film itself.

The core of this is the work of Rodney Brooks. He is a celebrated researcher in robotics and now the founder of the most promising company making these things. He is smart, articulate and the things he makes work as advertised. I've encountered him and his work professionally over the last 30 years. He makes machines that walk, and have some cognitive navigation skills. Walking is hard.

While there are many research centers working on robotics, there are only two universities working on the underlying theories. MIT is the least shallow of these. Add in the fact that Brooks has manufactured thousands of graduates in his style of thinking, and you may appreciate why he may be one of the most influential thinkers on the planet.

The theory here is that instead of thinking about a single brain, it makes sense to think in terms of a society of collaborating miniminds, agents. As a metaphor, bees, ants, termites are usual. And as usual, the metaphor in most quarters is taken too literally. Brooks does not quite do so, but this is the first compromise made by the filmmaker. Making agents systems that have the behavior you want is impossible without some structure in the society. A promising approach is to go deep and restructure logic. Instead, Brooks structures the agents into "subsumptive" layers. This mirrors special purpose roles of termites and molerats in colonies.

Okay, here is an idea, an interesting one, and one that is already embedded in the general intellectual economy. Around this, Morris builds a film. Nominally, there are four "geniuses." One is our robotics theorist. We have an obsessive expert in molerats, so we have our metaphor made whole. We have a lion tamer. Now he fits into the idea architecture by explaining how he repeatedly risks his life to figure out and superficially control inscrutable animals. And finally we have a guy who reverses the metaphor; he takes living things with their natural agent system that wants to behave one way, and he forces it to look like larger living things. The resemblance is superficial and fragile.

Two of these form the cinematic spine: the circus and the robots. Most of what we see apart from the four individuals themselves is a collage of circus footage and splices from old robot movies. We also have the synthesis of old "circus" movies with robotic influence.

Peppered in are the two other guys and their cinematic expression. With the molerats, we have — well film of molerats. With the topiarist, we have some artistically photographed scenes of him working in the garden. The score is important in Morris films; here the composer tries to build subsumptive music, taking themes from movies and other recognizable sources, assigning them to types of clips we see, and subsuming them into a klezmer- inspired circus score where we are the audience.

This really is a carefully structured piece of cinema, visually conveying ideas much deeper than one normally allows.

The problem is that like the four men we are shown, the approach is still discrete, reductionist. It assumes that great sweeps of life can be logical, explained. We go to the circus and topiary garden to see this narrative. An influential professor treats grad students like so many ants, incrementally evolving "the system." A fellow "explains" the colony, as if observations equals insights.

So here is the quandary with film and ideas. Film is about showing. The best ideas are about abstracting away distracting (and often false) appearances. A long form narrative film takes you places where you can invent your insights, with some guidance. A documentary feeds insights, but has to stick more with the "sight" than the "in."

Still, the structure here and the ambition! It isn't real, but it does not have to be to warm us.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.