An Unreasonable Man

2007
7.9| 2h2m| en
Details

An Unreasonable Man is a 2006 documentary film that traces the life and career of political activist Ralph Nader, the founder of modern consumer protection. The film examines Nader's advocacy for auto safety features, such as federally mandated seat belts and air bags, as well as his rise to national prominence following an invasion of privacy lawsuit against General Motors.

Cast

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 7-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

CommentsXp Best movie ever!
StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.
Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.
Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes
U.N. Owen AN UNREASONABLE MAN - a documentary about Ralph Nader, was made in 2006. Two years after his second run for presidency, two years into W's 2nd term. For those who don't know who Mr. Nader is, he was best known (in the 70's) for helping make mandatory a host of things, including safety belts, which, in an epic battle against G.M., did not want to put into cars - the (minuscule) cost to do so, was deemed 'too expensive.'Mr. Nader took on many fights like this, and in his next incarnation, he ran for President of the U.S., first in 2000, and again in '04.It's the differences in these two campaigns - and, the time since that 2nd campaign ('06), and the repercussions we STILL feel today, and, for years to come - unless we wake up.Mr. Nader's first campaign was seen as almost a continuation of his consumer advocacy - he was a 3rd-party candidate, and his supporters viewed him as someone who'd help bring this nation back to it's senses - help release the elected officials' ties to PAC's, and corporations.At one point, the organization that funds the presidential debates (a private firm) refused to allow any candidates from ANY other parties, other than Democrat Al Gore, and Republican George W. Bush - to attend.This led to a situation, where Mr. Nader was invited to the debates (an off-stage viewing room, specifically), but, was met by police - who barred his entry.The election results were razor-thin, and many felt that W took the election (I'm NOT going to debate that, here), but, what happened to the US -and, the world, in general soon after, would strengthen what many perceived to be a weak, one-term presidency, and give them broad-sweeping powers that would cripple our basic rights;The attack of 11 Sept, '01.While this event is not strongly looked into, it caused ripples that would help W to a second term - and, many of the supporters of Nader's 1st run, not only wouldn't support him, they came out AGAINST him - with such vitriol (watch the difference in Michael Moore's strong convictions in praise of Nader for '00, and the clip right after, in '04, where he compares voting for Nader to the temporary high you get from using drugs!).Many who supported him, we're mocked -or worse - in '04,.As I said, this documentary was made in '06, so, we'd not yet suffered the financial meltdown of '08, and other events. Most of these once-for-now-against Nader supporters mock Nader's second run as 'foolish, egotistical,'As my father says; 'love everybody, trust nobody.' yes, it sounds cold, but, what this about- face of Mr. Nader shows how support can be fickle.At the end, several of the commentators mock Nader - his beliefs, etc. But, Mr. Nader says (I'm paraphrasing) his view has never changed. He doesn't care about his 'reputation' - only what is right. He said (again, this was made in '06) how our rights, our freedoms have been heavily eroded, and, he only wants to once again help work to make the US's founding principals, strong.It's 5 years later, when I saw this, and, the US, and, the world, is getting ever-more blind to these injustices. The finances of the world are in free-fall. A 'third World War' has been fought- without a bullet being fired. I'm referring to the MASSIVE financial clout and CONTROL by China - a country where a 'Mr. Nader' would he jailed - as they manufacture the world's technology, and much, much more.More and more people are in almost a narcotic-haze, of video games, and 'reality shows,' and materialism (Mr. Nader is NOT anti-capitalism, he's against bad, unfair business practices - that affect us ALL) - oblivious to the future. The 'Democratic' and 'Republican' parties grow ever more alike in their platforms, with the Republican party having been co- opted by extremist religious zealots, and the Democratic party practically catatonic, and, afraid to stand up for itself.What Mr. Nader rallied against - in the 70's, the '00 election, and again, the '04 election, is becoming more and more common-place.Mr. Nader states at the end, he's not interested in 'reputation' - he's interested in justice. If anything, I hope that viewing AN UNREASONABLE MAN will wake up Just one person - a person who can help continue to fight against injustices that affect us all.
Tachikoma-2 I'm going to keep this very short.The first time I heard of Ralph Nader was through a friend, eight years a go. Eight years a go when Gore was running against Bush. My friend told me to find information on Ralph Nader, he told me that Nader was something different and something special.I am not an American, so I had very little interest in American politics those days. Regardless I decided to check out this "Nader creature". Well my friend was right. Nader was something different. I felt there was something odd, weird about him. Nader had this monotonous voice and he didn't give these easy to digest political speeches. He didn't promise "change" or talk about "no child left behind" acts. In fact Nader talked about facts.It was then that it dawned me. The reason why I found Naders message to be so weird, was because he was telling the truth! In a messed up, corporate controlled world, what are the odds that the consumer activist actually knows what is going on? Nader is a consumer activist and people all around the world owe Ralph Nader a great deal. Look at what you wear, what you eat, what you drive, where you work, the computer you own and tell me that corporations don't have power over you. Don't tell me that corporations aren't interested in politics. Corporations invest in political personalities.Nader is a man who has fought for the consumer all his life, and that's what we are in the west. We are consumers. So when Ralph Nader speaks, we should listen instead of throwing cakes at him.
hoopi4432 This film explores this fundamental question about democracy; do you vote with your conscious and the future in mind (big picture), or do you vote for the change right now because things are so messed up? My view, and I think the view of the film, is if we vote to change the right now we will only continue the flawed system and it's preconditions that will ensure we never really solve the major problems....just temporarily fix them.What the story of Ralph Nader gives us is an example of how you can fight the system and win. How when you act on what you believe in and look at the world without discrimination you can affect great positive change.Everyone told Ralph he couldn't do this, he couldn't do that. Ralph looked them right in the eye and said F-off I'm doing it because it's the right thing do. And then he would either win the argument or have his predictions proved true.This is the most inspirational film I have watched thus far in my life. If you like justice and fairness, try An Unreasonable Man. You will feel sooooo empowered after watching it.**This comment has been made safer by Ralph Nader**
jogaun "An Unreasonable Man" argues quite persuasively that Nader did the right thing when he refused to drop out of the two most recent US Presidential races. I left feeling completely enamored of Nader the man. However, I would be loath to see the film again due to A) the cheesy, manipulative, "propaganda"-screaming background music and B) the amount of time spent on vile 50-something talking heads with no camera appeal; the film could have been 45 minutes shorter at LEAST. Other than that, it was fine! A very informative biography of a guy who possesses a great deal of personal consistency and integrity. This reviewer urges the filmmakers to post a 60-minute, musical-diarrhea-less version on YouTube.