Bridge is a Bridge. Not Really, but it Would Make for a Good Title.

A lot of what I have to say about this film is in a comment I left under Brendan’s post.
On a different note, I think that the idea of not being able to really connect with life from “behind a lens” is very critical to understanding our limitations as human being to truly connect with the world. In an essay by Martin Buber, it is argued that the greatest downfall of humanity is that we all lack to ability to truly empathize with things. He describes the relationship as “I-it, I-thou” where instead of being able to “become” something and understand it for what it is (I-thou), we have an endless drive to label things and inevitably see everything as just a “word” or a “label” or a “thing” (I-it).
The event with the camera man explains this. From behind a lens, we cannot empathize with what we see and experience. Watching a news story about Darfur does not make us understand what the pain and suffering of thousands truly feels like. Not even close. I think we have moments where for an instant we may get close to truly empathizing with something, but I think that these moments only occur when we experience them firsthand. For example, I like to think that if we were all tied to a polar bear and every time we rode on a bus, our polar bear slowly died, we would care a little more about how using fossil fuels for transportation contributes to global warming and the effects of it (dying polar bears, for one).
If we could open-mindedly, see and spiritually experience something firsthand, then perhaps we can empathize with it, “become” it, and have an I-thou relationship. But as long as we are behind a camera lens, we are doomed.