Blue Vinyl

Blue Vinyl captured my attention far more than any other film (do you still call it a film if it was shot on video?) has recently. Helfand and Gold’s film brings careful structure that slowly entrenches the viewer against the vinyl companies. They start by raising very simple questions, yet these questions (like most) simply give rise to more complex ones. As the filmmakers begin with the most basic questions such as “Where is PVC manufactured?” they begin their journey in Louisiana. The twists and revelations take them across the nation, across the Atlantic, and back to Connecticut a few times.

The filmmakers almost always let credible witnesses present their evidence for them. Whether it be the Italian doctor or the dedicated lawyer, why say something yourself when there is someone else who could say it so much more eloquently and irrefutably. Helfand never seems to be too pushy an interviewer, she only asks questions based on facts that she can support with evidence culled. I was impressed with her interview of the PVC spokesman, she didn’t seem to be making much of a dent in the man, but she held her ground. She lets herself become chastising or accusatory in her interviews (at least when she cannot directly back up her claims).

She leads the audience through the movie through acts based around questions. The first begins with “What has gone wrong?” The ugly blue vinyl on her parents house is the first and most basic problem for her. As Helfand gets farther along in her quest she must start asking more deliberate questions, “What are each person’s motives?” This applies not only to those who are ‘against’ her, but also lends credibility to those whose testimony she relies on. Her witnesses are used to their utmost brevity with their cross-examinations in the form of corporate letters and memos – not the most convincing way to argue it would seem.