THE STORY – Viewers travel around the world, getting a global perspective on the three biggest (and interrelated) problems our species faces – climate change, species loss and soil loss. More importantly, viewers will learn about the multitude of methods in which regeneration is addressing and even reversing these trends on an ecosystem-by-ecosystem basis, all while storing enough carbon in the ground to help mitigate our changing climate.
THE CAST – Demi Moore, Jaden Smith, Adrian Grenier, Jason Momoa & Ian Somerhalder
THE TEAM – Josh Tickell (Director) & Rebecca Harrell Tickell (Director)
THE RUNNING TIME – 94 minutes
There’s a guy named Chris Newman who’s known on TikTok and YouTube for his “Farming While Beige” accounts, which are quickly going viral. Through a series of sardonic responses to cloying clips of health-conscious netizens decrying certain agricultural practices, he systematically steps people through the day-to-day concerns of an actual restorative farming operation, deflating the myths while spelling out the actual challenges and opportunities for reshaping the way that food production can occur in the face of the pressures of industrialization, consolidation, and globalization.
While watching the Cannes-premiering theatrical documentary, “Groundswell,” you can’t help but feel how completely redundant it is. On its surface, Josh and Rebecca Tickell’s celebrity-fueled, activist-aligned call for soil sanctity is a travelogue through the world of changing farming practices, an introduction to the uninitiated for the need to sequester carbon in healthier soil, to avoid monocultural planting practices where possible, and to go for a more “natural” connection to the planet to foster healing and tame the scourge of desertification.
The celebrities in question to help tell the story include recent Oscar winner Demi Moore and multiple Oscar nominee Woody Harrelson. The two members of Hollywood’s elite provide narration in tag-team fashion. They appear on screen in the recording studio, standing in front of mics, a continuation of the podcaster and short-form video aesthetic of showing off the equipment while pontificating to instill a sense of authenticity, belied by the gentle sway of their eyes darting back and forth as they read from a prompter.
This is interspersed with handsome footage from around the globe, showing off various locales where locals are encouraging small changes to elicit larger change, the usual shtick when it comes to enviro docs of this ilk. This particular exemplar leans towards the heavy-handed, literally, as shot after shot shows rich soil cascading down from clenched hands (often from faceless brown and black people), an overt attempt to cup the world’s problems in our collective palms and to make things healthier for all.
Cynicism about the nature of the messaging shouldn’t cloud the importance of the message itself, of course, and those generally oblivious about the push for so-called “restorative” farming practices will find themselves gaining much-needed knowledge. This is a buzzy yet no less important way of shifting discourse around food production, and even the likes of the cantankerous Jeremy Clarkson, formerly of automotive porn fame, have taken up the cause, as seen on his exceptionally watchable “Clarkson’s Farm” series on Amazon.
Restorative agriculture is a catch-all term that dates back at least four decades, but has become much more prominent since about 2010. The idea focuses on the properties of topsoil, tying the health of this layer of earth to larger concerns such as carbon sequestration, long-term crop yields, desertification prevention, and so on. By avoiding chemical fertilization where possible, and allowing more “natural” planting processes to occur with alternative crops and creating diverse patches that are allowed to flourish over time, the benefits to both grower and consumer promise to be vast.
Of course, such seemingly simple solutions break down when scaled to meet the needs of industrialized agriculture, especially for communities long accustomed to foodstuffs provided at highly subsidized costs. Simply because the challenge of change is vast doesn’t make the effort any less plausible, and the intention to draw attention to the cause is indeed positive.
Yet it’s hard to see “Groundswell” in anything other than superficial terms. For one, it’s a pretty dull affair, needlessly repetitive, and feels much more like a corporate presentation than a cinematic event. Secondly, its mix of sullen seriousness and winking wryness makes for a tonally bizarre watch, lingering needlessly on given moments while brushing aside real questions of scalability given the global drive for food from an ever-exploding population.
Heavier topics tied to this population growth are simply brushed aside, as are other issues tied to the complex web linking land use, water reclamation, and the myriad factors that shape agricultural practices across the vastly different regions where foodstuffs are produced. “Groundswell” barely scratches the surface of scratching at the earth’s surface, but, generously, for some, this might be the start of fruitful conversations about what they choose to support with their wallets when it comes to putting food on the table.
Which brings us back to those silly shortform videos, where the self-described beige farmer uses silly voices ranging from Barry White to Golum impersonations to gamely explain the workings of his chicken-raising farm in Virginia. These brief clips are politically charged, entertaining, informative, and provocative, speaking to the attention-span-starved generation accustomed to such messaging, yet managing to be intellectually nourishing as often as they are nonsensical. Sure, there are controversies in some of what he presents, and the “Milkshake Duck”-ness of such a celebrity may well come to haunt his messaging if the internet has its usual way, but in minute-long chunks this silly corner of the internet has spoken to millions about the realties and vagaries of chicken and egg production in ways that makes the almost smug certitude of “Groundswell” feel that much more hapless.
Despite what’s clearly a well-funded production led by experienced filmmakers, the end result is fatuous, trumped by silly yet sophisticated messaging on social media, or by other, more journalistically rich and provocative explorations that genuinely attempt to come to terms with the needs of effecting real change in agricultural production.
For a film advocating for change, we hereby advocate for a change in this kind of midling envirodoc production, focusing instead on a multiplicity of competing voices rather than simply a feel-good survey of cherry-picked stories that buttress a given argument. Soil is dirty by definition, and a film like “Groundswell” would be far more effective if it got a little bit of much under its nails, and wasn’t afraid to illustrate that the toil of working the land inexorably comes with compromises that don’t easily conform to soundbite satisfaction needlessly stretched to theatrical length.
